|
|
PDF Format |
Spanish Version |
French Version |
Japanese Version |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Published by the International Institute for Sustainable Development
(IISD)
Vol. 12 No. 305
Friday, 26 May 2006
SB 24 & AWG
HIGHLIGHTS:
THURSDAY, 25 MAY 2006
On Thursday, SBI reconvened in
plenary, concluding its work and adopting the report of the session. SBSTA met and adopted
conclusions and/or draft decisions on many items, including several
methodological issues, research and systematic observation, and reducing
emissions from deforestation in developing countries. However, discussions
on the five-year programme of work on adaptation continued late into
Thursday night, and will be taken up in the SBSTA plenary on Friday. The
AWG concluded its work
very late on Thursday night after lengthy informal consultations by
agreeing on text outlining the “planning of future work.”
SUBSIDIARY BODY FOR IMPLEMENTATION
ADMINISTRATIVE, FINANCIAL AND INSTITUTIONAL MATTERS:
Delegates adopted SBI conclusions prepared by SBI Chair Becker on
budget performance for the biennium 2006-2007 (FCCC/SBI/2006/L.3) and on
Implementation of the Headquarters Agreement
(FCCC/SBI/2006/L.5).
UNFCCC
ARTICLE 4.8 & 4.9: On matters relating to the least developed
countries (LDCs), Samuel Adejuwon (Nigeria), who co-facilitated the
informal consultations, reported agreement on the LDC Expert Group’s work
programme, and delegates adopted the conclusions
(FCCC/SBI/2006/L.2).
CAPACITY
BUILDING (CONVENTION): Contact group Co-Chair Crispin D’Auvergne (St.
Lucia) summarized discussions. CHINA noted that the proposal by some
parties to integrate monitoring with the comprehensive review would mean
that the results of regular monitoring would only be seen every five
years. Parties then adopted the conclusions
(FCCC/SBI/2006/L.15).
FINANCIAL
MECHANISM (CONVENTION): On the Special Climate Change Fund, contact
group chair Bubu Jallow (Gambia) reported progress on understanding what a
staged approach to support various economic development issues could mean,
noting that the SB 22 text would be the basis of deliberations at SB 25.
The G-77/CHINA said the phased approach is really only one stage.
Delegates then adopted the conclusions (FCCC/SBI/2006/L.6).
On the third
review of the financial mechanism, contact group Co-Chair Marcia Levaggi
(Argentina) noted that the annex to the draft SBI conclusions is a
compilation of views expressed and could be used as the basis for
negotiations at SBI 25, but that it is still open for further input.
Parties then adopted the conclusions (FCCC/SBI/2006/L.4).
ARRANGEMENTS
OF INTERGOVERNMENTAL MEETINGS: Parties adopted conclusions addressing
arrangements for COP 12, COP/MOP 2 and future sessional periods, and
review of arrangements for COP 11 and COP/MOP 1 (FCCC/SBI/2006/L.9).
Contact group Co-Chair Sandea de Wet (South Africa) noted that the
SBI, SBSTA, AWG and UNFCCC Dialogue will all take place in the next
sessional period, and that meetings will close by 6:00 pm unless
“exceptional circumstances” arise.
Richard Kinley,
Officer-in-Charge, UNFCCC Secretariat, said these conclusions on meeting
arrangements were “quite revolutionary” for this process. He said the
Secretariat would discontinue the current practice of scheduling evening
meetings, and that the decision on what constitutes exceptional
circumstances would be left to elected officers. He noted the significant
implications of restricting the negotiating time available at meetings,
given that there are about 36 substantive items or sub-items on the
various agendas to be addressed in Nairobi. Describing the changes as
“shock therapy,” he expressed his “deep anxiety” that such an approach
could lead to process “paralysis” unless parties prioritize issues.
CAPACITY
BUILDING (PROTOCOL): Contact group Co-Chair Anders Turesson (Sweden)
reported that there had been no resolution of this issue, and parties
adopted conclusions that forward the matter to SBI 25
(FCCC/SBI/2006/L.16).
COMPLIANCE:
After debating and finally accepting a proposal by SAUDI ARABIA to add
that the SBI Chair will report orally to the COP/MOP 2 “based on the
conclusions on this agenda item,” delegates adopted the conclusions
(FCCC/SBI/2006/L.1/Rev.1) as amended.
INTERNATIONAL
TRANSACTION LOG: Delegates adopted the conclusions (FCCC/SBI/2006/L.8)
without comment.
PRIVILEGES
AND IMMUNITIES: Chair Paul Watkinson (France) explained that the
Secretariat is requested to continue examining different options for
protecting individuals in constituted bodies under the Protocol. Delegates
adopted the draft conclusions (FCCC/SBI/2006/L.10).
NON-ANNEX I
COMMUNICATIONS: Delegates adopted conclusions on the non-Annex I
national communications consultative group of experts
(FCCC/SBI/2006/L.12/Rev.1), and conclusions on compilation and synthesis
of initial national communications (FCCC/SBI/2006/L.13/Rev.1) with a minor
correction. On provision of financial support, delegates adopted
conclusions (FCCC/SBI/2006/L.7).
BASE YEAR OF
CROATIA: Jim Penman (UK) reported on informal consultations. Delegates
discussed conclusions and a draft COP/MOP decision on the level of
Croatia’s base year emissions. Parties were unable to reach consensus on
the draft texts and decided to refer the matter to SB 25
(FCCC/SBI/2006/L.17.Rev.1).
ANNEX I
COMMUNICATIONS: On the synthesis of Annex I demonstrable progress
reports under Article 3.2 of the Protocol, SBI Chair Becker reported on
informal consultations. The RUSSIAN FEDERATION and UKRAINE, opposed by the
G-77/CHINA, proposed considering the matter at SB 26 instead of SB 25.
Delegates were unable to reach consensus on the text and decided to refer
the matter to SB 25 (FCCC/SBI/2006/L.14/Rev.1).
FINANCIAL
MECHANISM (PROTOCOL): Adaptation Fund: Following a contact group
meeting in which delegates were unable to reach consensus on language on
inviting institutions that may manage the Fund, discussion continued in
plenary. The Philippines, for the G-77/CHINA, proposed that reference to
institutions include “all those contained in the annex,” while the EU,
CANADA, and NORWAY said they could not support inclusion of the word
“all.” Following informal consultations, delegates agreed on the text
contained in the draft conclusions proposed by the SBI Chair, which states
that “the SBI invited relevant international institutions, including,
among others, those contained in the annex…without prejudice to any
institution,” and adopted the conclusions (FCCC/SBI/2006/L.18). The
G-77/CHINA, the EU, NORWAY and SWITZERLAND then made statements on the
aforementioned text. Following a procedural debate on how to reference
these statements, it was agreed that each statement would be recorded in
the report of the session.
EXPERTS GROUP
MEETING: SBI Chair Becker reported on the outcomes of a meeting of the
three expert groups (CGE, EGTT and LEG), noting that they will explore the
possibility of a joint meeting on adaptation.
REPORT OF THE
SESSION: Delegates agreed to the report of the session
(FCCC/SBI/2006/L.1) and SBI Chair Becker closed SBI 24 at 7:24
pm.
SUBSIDIARY BODY FOR SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL
ADVICE
AGENDA/MAURITIUS STRATEGY: SBSTA Chair Kumarsingh reported
no progress on informal consultations on inclusion of the Mauritius
Strategy on the SBSTA agenda, and suggested including the item. TUVALU
stated that only two countries had opposed consideration of this agenda
item, and expressed extreme disappointment on this issue. The US and
AUSTRALIA reiterated their opposition to creating a new agenda item, and
parties adopted the provisional agenda.
RESEARCH AND
SYSTEMATIC OBSERVATION: Co-Chair Sergio Castellari (Italy) reported on
contact group consultations. SBSTA then adopted conclusions on this issue
(FCCC/SBSTA/2006/L.7).
METHODOLOGICAL ISSUES (CONVENTION): Bunker Fuels: Noting
that conclusions on this agenda item were purely procedural, José Romero
(Switzerland) suggested that the lack of substance was due to a perception
of this being related to other issues under discussion by SBSTA. The EU
and NORWAY expressed regret at the lack of action, and JAPAN called for
enhanced collaboration between IMO, ICAO and IPCC. SBSTA then adopted the
conclusions (FCCC/SBSTA/2006/L.5).
Brazilian
Proposal: Co-Chair Jaekyu Lim (Republic of Korea) reported on
consultations on this issue. SAUDI ARABIA, opposed by various parties,
proposed asking the IPCC for a technical paper. SBSTA adopted the
conclusions (FCCC/SBSTA/2006/L.13).
Deforestation: Co-Chair Audun Rosland (Norway) reported the
successful completion of work, including defining the scope of an upcoming
workshop on this issue. SBSTA then adopted conclusions
(FCCC/SBSTA/2006/L.8).
IPCC 2006
Guidelines and Harvested Wood Products: Riitta Pipatti (Finland)
reported on discussions, noting the need for more time to consider these
issues. SBSTA then adopted conclusions reflecting this need
(FCCC/SBSTA/2006/L.10).
Reporting,
review and training of experts: SBSTA adopted conclusions
(FCCC/SBSTA/2006/L.4).
METHODOLOGICAL ISSUES (PROTOCOL): HFC-23: Chair Georg
Børsting (Norway) noted that no agreement had yet been reached on guidance
to the CDM Executive Board and that submissions on practical approaches to
address this issue would be requested. CHINA expressed disappointment at
lack of progress. Delegates then adopted conclusions on this matter
(FCCC/SBSTA/2006/L.15).
Numerical
value inscribed for Italy: Thelma Krug (Brazil) explained that
agreement had been reached, and delegates adopted conclusions and a draft
decision (FCCC/SBSTA/2006/L.6 and Add.1).
POLICIES AND
MEASURES: Normand Trembley (Canada) reported lack of agreement on a
second roundtable and said discussion will be postponed until SBSTA 28.
Delegates adopted conclusions to this effect
(FCCC/SBSTA/2006/L.11).
PROTOCOL
ARTICLE 2.3 (ADVERSE EFFECTS): Chair Kumarsingh reported that informal
consultations did not result in an agreement. SAUDI ARABIA expressed
disappointment that no progress was made. Delegates adopted conclusions
(FCCC/SBSTA/2006/L.2).
COOPERATION
WITH RELEVANT INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS: Parties adopted brief
conclusions on the IPCC Special Report on the ozone layer and climate
system (FCCC/SBSTA/2006/L.9) and on cooperation with other
conventions, scientific organizations and UN bodies
(FCCC/SBSTA/2006/L.14), with SBSTA Coordinator Halldor Thorgeirsson noting
overlap between CSD 15 and SB 26.
OTHER
MATTERS: Delegates adopted conclusions on the “greenhouse gas data
interface” (FCCC/SBSTA/2006/L.12) and on the training programme for expert
review team members under Protocol Article 8 (review of information)
(FCCC/SBSTA/2006/L.3).
AD HOC WORKING GROUP
The AWG plenary
convened shortly before midnight. This followed informal consultations
that had extended throughout Thursday in a small group setting, with
several delegates and AWG
Chair Michael Zammit Cutajar working on a text on planning of
future work distributed in the morning (FCCC/KP/AWG/2006/L.2).
Opening the late
night plenary, Chair Zammit Cutajar outlined the revised text resulting
from the informal negotiations, including paragraphs that he said:
describe the focus of AWG; add momentum to the process; describe work that
needs to be done for commitments; address the review of implementation of
the first commitment period; describe the workshop to be held in Nairobi;
set out the organization of the workshop; and explain that the workshop
will meet during 2007 regular sessions and that AWG’s work plan will be
further elaborated in the next session. The text also includes a Chair’s
indicative non-exhaustive list of topics that may be relevant to the
further work of the group. He indicated that the text would be part of the
report of the session.
SWITZERLAND
proposed adding text to ensure that that AWG’s future work is transparent
and open to all parties. SAUDI ARABIA proposed that it should be open to
all UNFCCC parties. Chair Zammit Cutajar proposed addressing those
questions at AWG 2 and delegates adopted the draft report without
amendment (FCCC/KP/AWG/2006/L.2/Rev.1). Delegates then adopted the report
of the session (FCCC/KP/AWG/2006/L.1) and Chair Zammit Cutajar closed the
session at 12:20 am.
CONTACT GROUPS
ADAPTATION: Informal consultations on the five-year
programme of work on adaptation were held during the day and late into the
night. The results are set to be reported back to SBSTA on
Friday.
IN
THE CORRIDORS
A sense of
relief was apparent among many participants shortly after midnight on
Thursday night as the AWG finally completed its work. After lengthy
informal consultations, AWG Chair Michael Zammit Cutajar successfully
steered the first session to a close after a compromise was achieved that
included new language on working “expeditiously” towards agreement on
further Annex I commitments. Many delegates seemed satisfied at the
result, and those not involved in the final small group negotiations that
finalized the deal will likely be poring over the document Friday morning.
According to the late night talk in the corridors, that small group did
not include the major non-parties to the Protocol, but did include other
big emitters from both Annex I and non-Annex I.
ENB
SUMMARY AND ANALYSIS: The Earth
Negotiations Bulletin summary and analysis of SB 24 and the AWG will be available on Monday, 29 May
2006 online at: http://www.iisd.ca/climate/sb24/
This issue of the Earth
Negotiations Bulletin © <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> is written and
edited by Alexis Conrad, María Gutiérrez, Kati Kulovesi, Miquel
Muñoz, and Chris Spence. The Digital Editor is Francis Dejon. The
Editors are Lisa Schipper, Ph.D. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and Pamela Chasek
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 for the Environment and Territory
General Directorate for Nature Protection. General Support for the
Bulletin during 2006 is provided by the United Nations
Environment Programme (UNEP), the Government of Australia, the
Austrian Federal Ministry for the Environment, the New Zealand
Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, 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 24 can be contacted by e-mail at <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | | 