Building on the Building Blocks:
Possibilities and Pitfalls on the Road to Durban
Andrew Light
Director, International Climate Policy, Center for American Progress
&
Associate Director, Institute for Philosophy and Public Policy,
George Mason University
1
Building on the Building Blocks
1. Climate Diplomacy
to Cancun
2. Paths to Governance?
Kyoto vs. Copenhagen
3. An Agenda for Durban
2
1. Climate Diplomacy to Cancun
3
Climate Diplomacy
to Cancun
• The first Climate Treaty:
UNFCCC, 1992/1994. 194
parties – consensus model.
- “Common But Differentiated
Responsibilities” (CBDR)
• Kyoto Protocol, 1998/2004.
- Annex 1 (5.2% below 1990 by
2012) vs. Non-Annex 1.
• July 1997, US opts out. ByrdHagel Resolution on KP, 95-0.
• Bali Action Plan, 2007
- NAMAs. Emission reductions
from emerging emitters in
exchange for finance
and technology.
4
- Creation of AWG-LCA.
Climate Diplomacy to Cancun
• Dec. 2009: The Copenhagen
Accord.
- First part of intended “two
step” proposal by Danes.
- Aspiration to limit
temperature increase to 2C.
- $30B fast start climate
financing, 2010-2012;
$100B annual fund by 2020.
- Outline of an agreement on
Measurement, Reporting,
and Verification (MRV).
5
- Requirement that parties
associated with accord submit
emission reduction plans by
end of January 2010.
The Cancun Agreements
• Dec. 2010: Against all
expectation achieve political
consensus on building blocks
from Copenhagen Accord
expanding agreements on
mitigation, adaptation, MRV,
technology, forestry, finance.
- Creation of “Green Climate
Fund.” Specification on
transitional committee.
- Agreement on MRV for nonsupported developing
country actions: “International
Consultation and Analysis.”
- Creation of “Climate Technology
Center” -- hub and spoke model.
6
- Showdown with Bolivia
challenges consensus process –
extended to Mexico-PNG proposal
on ¾ voting rule.
2. Paths to Governance?: Kyoto vs. “Copenhagen”
7
Presumed Open Paths to Governance
Kyoto Path
- Build out from existing
treaty architecture.
8
“Copenhagen Path”
- Build out from alternate
path in AWG-LCA.
Presumed Open Paths to Governance
Kyoto Path
“Copenhagen Path”
- Build out from existing
treaty architecture.
- Build out from alternate
path in AWG-LCA.
- Focus on legally binding
mechanisms (expectation
of low ambition).
- Legally binding or
not.
9
Presumed Open Paths to Governance
Kyoto Path
“Copenhagen Path”
- Build out from existing
treaty architecture.
- Build out from alternate
path in AWG-LCA.
- Focus on legally binding
mechanisms (expectation
of low ambition).
- Legally binding or
not.
- Treaty obligations drive
mitigation goals.
- National interests drive
goals (savings, energy
security, etc.).
10
Presumed Open Paths to Governance
Kyoto Path
“Copenhagen Path”
- Build out from existing
treaty architecture.
- Build out from alternate
path in AWG-LCA.
- Focus on legally binding
mechanisms (expectation
of low ambition).
- Legally binding or
not.
- Treaty obligations drive
mitigation goals.
- National interests drive
goals (savings, energy
security, etc.).
- Enforcement through market
exclusion.
- Enforcement through
“shame and blame.”
11
Deadlock from Bonn intersessional negotiations over
past two weeks:
Focus on second commitment period for Kyoto or
focus on building out Cancun building blocks.
12
Presumed Open Paths to Governance
Kyoto Path
Copenhagen Path
- Build out from existing
treaty architecture.
- Build out from alternate
path in AWG-LCA.
- Focus on legally binding
mechanisms (expectation
of low ambition).
- Legally binding or
not.
- Treaty obligations drive
mitigation goals.
- National interests drive
goals (savings, energy
security, etc.).
- Enforcement through market
exclusion.
- Enforcement through
“shame and blame.”
- Covers ~35% of emissions.*
emissions.
- Covers ~80%
13
3. An Agenda for Durban
14
15
16
Problem: While emission commitments go to 2020, finance
commitments only go to 2012, resuming in 2020.
17
Copenhagen Pledge
(billions)
Minimum
Gap
Additional $60 billion Assume doubling in real terms (includes
Ramp-up
urgentlyemissions permit auction revenues)
Internationa
over
three years
needed
Assumes delay of non-EU
carbon markets
l Offsets
Midpoint
Maintain “Fast Start” level
(includes inflation)
Traditional
Increase Climate
Climate
Foreign Aid
Foreign Aid
Fast Start
Funding
“Ramp-up” Period
No traction without finance – more important up
to 2020 traction than new emission pledges.
19
No traction without finance – more important up
to 2020 traction than new emission pledges.
But this won’t happen unless South Africa sets
an aggressive agenda from the COP presidency.
20
No traction without finance – more important up
to 2020 traction than new emission pledges.
But this won’t happen unless South Africa sets
an aggressive agenda from the COP presidency.
Opportunity: US-EU dispute over extension of
ETS to air travel in January 2012.
Next step: July 5th hearing in Luxembourg in
suit by three US air carriers against EU.
21
22
23
24
25
26
27