22nd sessions of the Subsidiary Bodies (SB-22) of the United 
Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change  -  Issue #6 

EARTH NEGOTIATIONS BULLETIN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR 
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (IISD) <http://www.iisd.org>

Written and edited by:

Alexis Conrad 
Peter Doran, Ph.D. 
Mar�a Guti�rrez 
Miquel Mu�oz 
Chris Spence 

Editor:

Lisa Schipper, Ph.D. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Director of IISD Reporting Services:

Langston James "Kimo" Goree VI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


Vol. 12 No. 267
Wednesday, 25 May 2005

Online at http://www.iisd.ca/climate/sb22/ 

UNFCCC SB 22 HIGHLIGHTS: 

TUESDAY, 24 MAY 2005

On Tuesday morning, delegates convened for a SBSTA round table on 
policies and measures of Annex I Parties. Contact groups and 
informal meetings were held throughout the day. SBI contact groups 
and informal meetings were held to discuss the programme budget 
for 2006-2007, non-Annex I communications, arrangements for 
intergovernmental meetings, the internal review of the 
Secretariat's activities, and LDCs. SBSTA contact groups and 
informal meetings were held on various issues, including 
technology transfer, mitigation, adaptation, registry systems 
under the Kyoto Protocol, research needs in relation to the 
Convention, and the CDM as it relates to other environmental 
treaties.

SBSTA

On Tuesday morning, a SBSTA round table was held on Annex I 
Parties' policies and measures (P&Ms). The event, which was 
mandated by SBSTA 20, involved presentations and discussions aimed 
at sharing information and exchanging experiences in implementing 
P&Ms. The meeting was divided into three parts: domestic aspects; 
international aspects; and cross-cutting issues. Jonathan 
Pershing, World Resources Institute, facilitated the meeting.

DOMESTIC ASPECTS OF ANNEX I POLICIES AND MEASURES: Artur 
Runge-Metzger, European Commission, stressed the EU climate 
programme's focus on cost-effective measures to meet the Kyoto 
targets, and cooperation with stakeholders. Toshiyuki Sakamoto, 
Japan's Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, drew attention 
to the Top-Runner Programme, which sets high energy efficiency 
standards. 

Franz-Josef Schafhausen, German Federal Ministry for the 
Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety, reported on 
his country's climate protection policies. Gregory Picker, 
Australian Greenhouse Office, reflected on Australia's experiences 
in developing approaches to energy efficiency and synthetic 
greenhouse gases. He highlighted the "suite of approaches" taken 
and industry involvement. 

Chris Leigh, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, 
UK, spoke about his country's experiences with P&Ms, focusing on 
the greenhouse gas levy and the UK's emissions trading scheme. 

In the ensuing discussion, BRAZIL stressed the need to focus on 
results and monitoring and evaluation plans. CHINA expressed an 
interest in Japan's programme, tax incentive policies, and 
Germany's job creation.

INTERNATIONAL ASPECTS OF ANNEX I POLICIES AND MEASURES: 
Presentations: David Fuss, Natural Resources Canada, presented on 
Canada's P&Ms, emphasizing flexibility and fungibility of trading 
schemes. Artur Runge-Metzger, European Commission, presented on 
the EU Emissions Trading Scheme, highlighting its openness.

Toshiyuki Sakamoto, Japan, reported on demonstration projections 
for enhancing energy efficiency in Asia, promotion of energy-
related CDM projects, and new climate-friendly technologies. 
Daniela Stoycheva, Ministry of Environment and Water, Bulgaria, 
spoke about her country's climate change strategy and the design 
of a green investment scheme.

CROSS-CUTTING ISSUES: Participants discussed Annex I Parties' 
efforts to implement P&Ms in such a way as to minimize the adverse 
effects on non-Annex I Parties. NIGERIA noted a lack of progress 
on this issue. SAUDI ARABIA called for financial compensation and 
tariff concessions. 

CONTACT GROUPS AND INFORMAL CONSULTATIONS

PROGRAMME BUDGET FOR THE BIENNIUM 2006-2007: At this SBI contact 
group, delegates discussed Chair Ashe's revised draft SB 22 
conclusions and COP 11/MOP 1 decisions. The RUSSIAN FEDERATION 
said he could not support a budget increase of 22 percent. The EU, 
opposed by the US, reiterated that the budget should be fixed in 
Euros. Nigeria, for the G-77/CHINA, said the documents must 
reference funding for four annual meetings of each expert group, 
as mandated by the COP. Chair Ashe will consult informally with 
delegations.

INTERNAL REVIEW OF THE SECRETARIAT'S ACTIVITIES: Chair Dovland 
convened this contact group on the internal review of the 
activities of the Secretariat (FCCC/2005/6) to review his revised 
draft. On the draft recommendations of the SBI to COP 11, a 
paragraph proposed earlier by the EU on cooperation and 
communication with other relevant international organizations, was 
opposed by the US. The paragraph was deleted. India, for the 
G-77/CHINA, introduced a reference to the biennium budget document 
(FCCC/SBI/2005/8).

ARRANGEMENTS FOR INTERGOVERNMENTAL MEETINGS: This contact group 
considered the Chair's revised draft conclusions, including a 
number of items in brackets. Saudi Arabia, for the G-77/CHINA, 
objected to a reference to building on SBI guidance in a request 
to the Bureau of COP 10 to participate in finalizing details of 
the high-level segments at COP 11 and COP/MOP 1. The reference was 
deleted. Regarding future sessional periods, SAUDI ARABIA objected 
to an IPCC request that COP 13 be postponed for three to four 
weeks to allow time for preparation of a synthesis report of the 
Fourth Assessment Report. The EU, with AOSIS, NORWAY, the AFRICA 
GROUP and JAPAN, supported the IPCC request. 

On the organization of intergovernmental meetings and the 
recommendations of a workshop held during SB 21, the G-77/CHINA 
opposed specific references to giving further consideration to the 
clustering of agenda items and longer-term cycles for agenda 
items. The references were deleted. Reference to the workshop 
report (FCCC/SBI/2005/2) was inserted in an introductory 
paragraph.

NON-ANNEX I COMMUNICATIONS: Informal consultations on national 
communications from non-Annex I Parties (FCCC/SBI/2004/L.27) were 
convened in the morning and evening to discuss a draft decision. 
The EU, US, CANADA, JAPAN and AUSTRALIA proposed text stating that 
non-Annex I Parties would make all efforts to submit their second 
and, where appropriate, third national communications, within four 
years of the initial financing, on an agreed full cost basis "for 
the three year project preparation period." They also proposed 
that, if necessary, non-Annex I Parties could have a one-year 
extension for submission. The G-77/CHINA, questioned by some GEF 
donor countries, argued that there was no basis for stipulating 
the three-year period for the preparation of second or third 
communications. The US noted that donor countries do not wish to 
increase their funding of this activity.

A proposal that any extension of the submission period should not 
imply additional financial resources from the GEF was qualified by 
the G-77/CHINA, which sought to stipulate a submission period of 
four years. However, there was no agreement on this. Consultations 
may reconvene on Wednesday morning after talks with the SBI Chair.  

RESEARCH NEEDS RELATING TO THE CONVENTION: During informal 
consultations on this issue, delegates agreed to a draft decision 
based on conclusions from SBSTA 17 and 20. Co-Chairs Cigar�n and 
Castellari will hold discussions on draft conclusions in the 
contact group on Wednesday.

TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER: Delegates met informally in the morning, 
afternoon and evening to consider Co-Chairs' draft Terms of 
Reference for EGTT and draft conclusions. Negotiations were 
stalled in the morning on whether EGTT should "be requested" or 
"consider" the proposed tasks. Delegates considered EGTT tasks 
paragraph-by-paragraph in the afternoon, without reaching 
agreement. Contentious issues included the evaluation of COP 
decisions since COP 1, the assessment of implementation of the 
framework, and who should take action for the involvement of the 
private sector. 

SMALL ISLAND DEVELOPING STATES: Informal consultations facilitated 
by SBSTA Vice-Chair Amjah Abdulla were held Tuesday afternoon. 
Delegates considered a revised Chair's text, but were unable to 
agree language requesting submissions by 19 August 2005 on how the 
COP could further implement the Mauritius Strategy. CANADA 
expressed concerns that there was no end point to the process. 
TUVALU suggested setting COP 11 as a concluding date. 

Two additional paragraphs proposed by the EU also caused some 
disagreement. The US, CANADA, INDIA and others objected to 
EU-proposed text linking climate change and sea-level rise to the 
Millennium Review in September 2005. Delegates also discussed text 
proposed by the EU that would link the prioritization of energy 
efficiency and renewable energy with the Commission on Sustainable 
Development's fourteenth and fifteenth sessions in 2006-2007. A 
further meeting is expected Wednesday.

ADAPTATION: Delegates met in a contact group to discuss 
scientific, technical and socioeconomic aspects of impacts of, and 
vulnerability and adaptation to, climate change. Co-Chair Shevlin 
presented a draft annex on elements for the SBSTA programme of 
work on adaptation, with Parties providing general comments. 

Samoa, on behalf of the G-77/CHINA, called for specific, 
action-oriented language. The US suggested identifying a single 
objective. SOUTH AFRICA, with the COOK ISLANDS, called for 
reference to the most vulnerable Parties. The EU, with CANADA and 
the US, proposed using language from Decision 1/CP.10. SENEGAL, 
supported by MICRONESIA, called for reference to capacity 
building. SOUTH AFRICA highlighted the need for parallel rather 
than sequential approaches.

MITIGATION: In a contact group meeting co-chaired by Kok Seng Yap 
and Tashiyuki Sakamoto, delegates focused on reporting on "lessons 
learned from the mitigation workshops...and any future steps under 
this agenda item," and on how to report the outcomes. The EU 
proposed holding a pre-session workshop. China, for the 
G-77/CHINA, proposed requesting the Secretariat to prepare a 
concise report of what has been done to date. The US said it was 
"skeptical" about workshops, and questioned the value of spending 
one week of negotiations to agree on terms of reference for a 
three hour workshop. The G-77/CHINA asked if the workshop was 
intended to exchange views on lessons learned from previous 
workshops or on next steps under this agenda item. The Co-Chairs 
will prepare draft conclusions and consult informally.

CDM AND OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL TREATIES: Chair Georg B�rsting 
presented draft conclusions. CHINA and the US preferred limiting 
invitations for submissions to Parties, while the EU favored also 
inviting submissions from admitted observers and relevant 
intergovernmental organizations. The EU requested additional time 
for consultations. Chair B�rsting said that if no comments are 
received by midday Wednesday, he will consider the text agreed.

MATTERS RELATING TO THE LEAST DEVELOPED COUNTRIES: Delegates at 
the contact group agreed on the importance of ensuring equitable 
access to the LDC Fund. Much of the debate centered on the role of 
full-cost funding and funding for priority actions. The EU noted 
the need for funding to address the adverse effects of climate 
change rather than climate variability. UGANDA, for the LDC Group, 
noted the difficulty in making such a differentiation. JAPAN 
stressed the need to ensure that funding is used for the highest 
priority items from the NAPAs. Several LDCs noted that the NAPA 
process itself identifies such priorities. Discussions ended at 
10:00 pm without a final resolution.

IN THE CORRIDORS

Memories of COP 9 and COP 10 plenary exchanges on the LDC Fund 
returned to the corridors Tuesday as delegates began to suspect 
that they were about to relive the inconclusive negotiations, in 
the style of the "Groundhog Day" Hollywood film about someone 
fated to repeat the same day again and again. Since COP 8's 
decision that further guidance for the operation of the LDC Fund 
would have to be developed for the GEF, negotiators from both 
sides seem to feel they have been starting over at each day of 
each session. Some attributed the sense of d�j� vu to a rushed 
decision at COP 9, and handing over the initiative to the GEF 
Council at the expense of LDC delegates. 

Likewise, there were signs the budget negotiations could also take 
a repetitive turn.



This issue of the Earth Negotiations Bulletin � <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> is 
written and edited by Alexis Conrad, Peter Doran, Ph.D., Mar�a 
Guti�rrez, Miquel Mu�oz, and Chris Spence. The Digital Editor is 
David Fernau. The Editor is Lisa Schipper, Ph.D. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
and the Director of IISD Reporting Services is Langston James 
"Kimo" Goree VI <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. The Sustaining Donors of the 
Bulletin are the Government of the United States of America 
(through the Department of State Bureau of Oceans and 
International Environmental and Scientific Affairs), the 
Government of Canada (through CIDA), the Swiss Agency for 
Environment, Forests and Landscape (SAEFL), the United Kingdom 
(through the Department for International Development - DFID), the 
Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Government of Germany 
(through the German Federal Ministry of Environment - BMU, and the 
German Federal Ministry of Development Cooperation - BMZ), the 
Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the European Commission 
(DG-ENV), and the Italian Ministry of Environment. General Support 
for the Bulletin during 2005 is provided by the United Nations 
Environment Programme (UNEP), the Government of Australia, the 
Austrian Federal Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Environment 
and Water Management, the Ministry of Sustainable Development and 
the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Sweden, the Ministry of 
Environment and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Norway, the 
Ministry of Environment and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of 
Finland, SWAN International, the Japanese Ministry of Environment 
(through the Institute for Global Environmental Strategies - IGES) 
and the Japanese Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (through 
the Global Industrial and Social Progress Research Institute - 
GISPRI). Funding for translation of the Earth Negotiations 
Bulletin into French has been provided by the International 
Organization of the Francophonie (IOF) and the French Ministry of 
Foreign Affairs. Funding for the translation of the Earth 
Negotiations Bulletin into Spanish has been provided by the 
Ministry of Environment of Spain. The opinions expressed in the 
Earth Negotiations Bulletin are those of the authors and do not 
necessarily reflect the views of IISD or other donors. Excerpts 
from the Earth Negotiations Bulletin may be used in 
non-commercial publications with appropriate academic citation. 
For information on the Bulletin, including requests to provide 
reporting services, contact the Director of IISD Reporting 
Services at <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, +1-646-536-7556 or 212 East 47th St. 
#21F, New York, NY 10017, USA. The ENB Team at SB-22 can be 
contacted by e-mail at <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.

---
You are currently subscribed to enb as: [email protected]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Subscribe to Linkages Update to receive our fortnightly, html-newsletter on 
what's new in the international environment and sustainable development arena: 
http://www.iisd.ca/email/subscribe.htm
- Archives of Climate-L and Climate-L News are available online at: 
http://www.iisd.ca/email/climate-L.htm
- Archives of Water-L and Water-L News are available online at: 
http://www.iisd.ca/email/water-L.htm

Reply via email to