|
||
|
TWN
Info Service on Climate Change (Apr21/02) Kathmandu, 15 April (Prerna Bomzan): The Bureau of the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is meeting on Thursday, 15 April to discuss the way forward in the conduct of the climate talks on the road to COP 26, scheduled to be held in November in Glasgow, United Kingdom (UK). The Bureau, is comprised of the COP President (which is currently Chile), representatives of Parties from the five UN regional groups and Small Island Developing States. The Bureau oversees the organization of the sessions and the operation of the UNFCCC Secretariat, especially at times when the COP is not in session. A note has been prepared by the UNFCCC Executive Secretary, Patricia Espinosa on the ‘Approach to work of the subsidiary bodies during the June sessional period’, and is expected to be discussed at the Bureau meeting on 15 April. The note by the UNFCCC Secretariat was sent to Parties last week and was made available to Third World Network. The note stated that “since the June sessional period is scheduled to be held from 31 May to 10 June 2021…, it is necessary that the Bureau provide guidance on the organization of the SB sessions as no in-person meetings are feasible at this time”. While opting for “a number of alternative approaches”, the note provides the “main elements” to be considered as follows: “1. Designation
of formality – 2. Decision-making
– 3. Format
– 4. Outputs
– Following the “overarching principle of maximizing progress and minimizing delay” to guide work in 2021, the note provides “two alternative scenarios”: “1. Formal session of the subsidiary bodies, including a formal opening plenary to consider and adopt agendas and launch work by agenda item, to be followed by informal consultations under each item; or 2. Informal preparatory meetings of the subsidiary bodies, focusing on the mandates for 2020-2021, with no formal adoption of agendas, in which informal work continues.” The note adds that “the first model was used by the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action in the lead-up to the Paris Agreement. The second model corresponds to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) approach that has been followed in light of the delay of its formal 24th meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice (SBSTTA 24) and the third meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Implementation (SBI 3) – both sessions being scheduled on 3 May to 13 June 2021 however still to be confirmed”. The Secretariat note further provides a “recommendation” to opt for scenario 1 – formal session of the subsidiary bodies in which work is organized in informal consultations – by “merging the SB 52-55 sessions” [covering 2020-2021].” The note
also outlines the ‘Modalities for the organization of work’ as follows: • Modalities for the June session/meeting will be made available to Parties and observers at least three weeks in advance of the session/meeting. • The Bureau will meet regularly during the June session/meeting to plan, assess progress and provide further guidance. • The Secretariat will continue to provide the utmost support to ensure full and effective participation, in a transparent, fair and inclusive manner, of all Parties. • To enhance openness, transparency and inclusiveness, effective engagement of observers will be enabled to the extent possible, while respecting the Party-driven nature of the UNFCCC process. • To allow for adequate coordination time during the session/meeting, and mindful of the challenges and constrains that remote participation entail, the June sessional period can be extended for an additional week, hence it would take place from 31 May to 17 June. • Consultations
under the SBSTA and the SBI will be organized in parallel slots, taking
into account current recommendations and practices as well as challenges
of working across time zones. The challenge of working across time
zones should be minimized by, inter alia: • As per previous guidance from the Bureau, and building on experience gained in 2020, mandated events will be organized during the June session/meeting, and summary reports of such events will be prepared as mandated. However, no side events will be organized.” In a separate communication (which was published on the UNFCCC website), the incoming COP 26 Presidency on 13 April, released a letter, addressing “UN climate change negotiations and making effective progress at the June session” to all Parties of the UNFCCC. Amid uncertainties of in-person negotiations due to the continued raging pandemic and with the June sessional period of the Subsidiary Bodies approaching, the letter from COP President Designate Alok Sharma (United Kingdom) sets out “some of the expectations” that he has heard “for the negotiations at COP 26 and the UK’s plans for accelerating progress over the coming 7 months”. The letter states that “in recent months, I have had the opportunity to speak to many countries and stakeholders and I have reached out to all negotiating groups. These conversations have reinforced for me the necessity of arriving in Glasgow in person having done our homework. Ready to agree a negotiated package that is commensurate with the scale of the climate crisis and the opportunities that tackling it with urgency would unlock”. The letter then spells out “the negotiated outcome”, “plan for getting there” and “implications for the June session of the Subsidiary Bodies”. On “the negotiated outcome”, Sharma reveals that he has “spoken with ministers and negotiators from over 80 countries, and briefed all Parties through the UN on a number of occasions. Whilst learning of a diversity of national circumstances I have heard a clear unity of purpose, with some specific priorities for the negotiated outcome coming up repeatedly. There are many important elements for Glasgow but those most commonly referenced include: Paris Rulebook: including taking substantive decisions on Article 6 and common time frames and adopting required transparency tables and formats this year to enable enhanced implementation and increased ambition. Recognising that it is time to resolve these issues to support the full implementation of the Paris Agreement. Adaptation: including demonstrating tangible progress towards the Global Goal on Adaptation with sufficient political attention focused on the GGA at COP26, alongside facilitating a significant increase in the scale of adaptation finance. Loss & Damage: including advancing activities to avert, minimise and address loss and damage in light of the upcoming report of the Executive Committee of the Warsaw International Mechanism. Finance: including delivering on the $100 billion mobilisation goal and starting talks on the post-2025 goal in earnest. Mitigation: including ensuring Glasgow responds to any gap between the collective impact of NDCs submitted by COP26 and what the latest science says is required to keep 1.5°C within reach, whilst also demonstrating our collective commitment to achieving net zero emissions. Inclusive action: including agreeing the next programme of work on Action for Climate Empowerment and an improved Marrakesh Partnership to enhance collaboration between governments and non-state actors and to enable and accelerate action by all. Ambitious implementation of the Gender Action Plan is also critical”. Sharma further states “I am seized of the importance of addressing every mandate given to us and responding to the clear political will of Parties to take forward work on all issues and achieve an ambitious outcome. I am personally committed to facilitating agreement of a balanced negotiated package that leaves no issue and no one behind”. The letter also states that “the UK will coordinate experts to advance technical work underpinning the range of outcomes expected of COP26. We have instigated new monthly meetings of all Heads of Delegation which will continue to enable shared understanding and push for outcomes. Building on discussions at the UK-Germany co-hosted Petersberg Climate Dialogue in May, I hope to welcome ministers in-person over the summer to shape the outcome in Glasgow, and to find solutions to those key issues that can only be resolved at the political level. This is a conversation I will continue through the year in a variety of formats under the auspices of the incoming presidency, building on precedent set in previous years and ensuring no interested party is excluded. As all Parties would expect, I also look forward to ministerial engagement at COP26, ensuring we leave Glasgow with a successful outcome”, the letter reads. Referring to “a significant amount of work taking place and already planned” which is also published on the UNFCCC website, Sharma informs that “in April alone the Subsidiary Body Chairs will review submissions on Article 6 and Transparency; they will convene parties/experts to discuss matters related to Least Developed Countries, the Koronivia Joint Work on Agriculture, the Adaptation Fund, Action on Climate Empowerment, Article 6, the Periodic Review of the long-term goal, research and systematic observation. The Constituted Bodies will continue their important work. The UK and Chilean presidencies will convene discussions on finance, transparency, common time frames and loss and damage”. He further reassures that “in all of the above, we will continue to work extremely closely with Chile, the Chairs of the Subsidiary Bodies and the UNFCCC Secretariat. Importantly, this includes ensuring we lead the process in a transparent and inclusive manner and proactively address the challenges many Parties have raised regarding internet connectivity, working across time zones, and enabling group coordination. I am also committed to working closely with observers, and particularly recognise the leadership and knowledge that youth, women and indigenous peoples bring to climate action”. On “implications for the June session of the Subsidiary Bodies”, Sharma points out that “the approach set out in the ‘Plan for Getting There’ section of this letter is intended to accelerate progress. However, frankly, they are no substitute for formal sessions. Whilst I am the foremost advocate for in-person negotiations given the very human nature of this process and the subject matter it addresses, it is clear to me that we cannot afford to put formal work on hold”. He acknowledges that there are “valid concerns about virtual work” given his extensive consultations, and that the UNFCCC Secretariat are taking the “necessary steps to accommodate those challenges, including connectivity, working across time zones, and group coordination, as already communicated by Executive Secretary Patricia Espinosa, and included in a note to the upcoming COP Bureau meeting”. “With those safeguards for inclusivity, it is my view that a formal session of the Subsidiary Bodies should go ahead in June. This session should be guided by an integrated agenda spanning all mandates that should have been addressed in 2020-21, with an associated mode of work to be set out by the Subsidiary Body Chairs. We should consider an extended sessional period to allow for group coordination and accommodate working across time zones. And we should capture progress in written form for transparency and to inform subsequent discussions. It is also my view that, if it is needed, we should hold an additional sessional period to advance our work ahead of COP26 in November. This should take place in person, should it be feasible to arrange to meet safely and allowing all Parties to participate on an equal footing ”, states the letter. Further, Sharma makes it clear that “such an approach to formal sessions and capturing progress is, in my view, the only way we will make sufficient progress ahead of meeting in person in Glasgow to ensure COP 26 delivers on its mandates and what the world expects of us. I ask for your flexibility and support for proceeding on this basis”. In concluding his letter, he also informs that he looks forward to “discussing this approach with the COP Bureau on Thursday 15th April, where I hope members will provide definitive guidance on the June session”. It must be recalled that at its last meeting in Feb, the Bureau had failed to reach an agreement on the issue of virtual negotiations due to strong divergence of views with developed countries in favour while some developing countries pushing back given genuine serious challenges posed by a virtual format (See TWN Update). As can be expected, the outcomes of meeting of the Bureau on 15 April will be keenly awaited.
|
||
