Download presentation by Andrew Gilder and Olivia Rumble

South African Climate
Change Policy Trajectory
in light of the
Paris Agreement
Andrew Gilder and Olivia Rumble
SAIIA | 1 March 2016
Outline
• Paris Agreement – introductory remarks, context and formal outcome
• Implications of Paris for South African climate change policy
development.
• Elements of climate change policy development, their inter-relationship
and implications for business:
– Mitigation.
– Adaptation.
Limitations
• Paris Agreement:
– Long-standing issues: mitigation / adaptation / capacity-building /
finance / technology transfer.
– More recent issues: Intended Nationally Determined Contributions /
Loss and Damage / response actions prior to and post-2020.
• Intention is to consider the implications of Paris for South African
climate change policy – therefore slides address this consideration.
High level notes
• The Paris Agreement (December 2015):
– Third in the stable: United Nations Framework Convention (UNFCCC)
on Climate Change / Kyoto Protocol.
– A “treaty” as defined in the Vienna Convention on the Law of
Treaties: “an international agreement concluded between states in
written form and governed by international law”.
– Potential to align politics and science.
– Administration:
• Ad Hoc Working Group on the Paris Outcome (APA - the
renamed Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform)
• UNFCCC Conference of the Parties (COP) serving as the Meeting
of the Parties (MOP) to the Agreement (CMA)
UNFCCC COP21
• Twenty-First Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC (COP21), Paris,
France, November and December 2015.
• Main purpose was to define the future trajectory of international
climate change governance.
• COP21:
– only the scene-setter for the next five years’ of climate change
negotiations; and,
– beginning in 2020, the worldwide implementation of their collective
outcome.
Did COP21 succeed?
• An exercise in equivocation:
– By comparison to what it could have been, it’s a miracle. By
comparison to what it should have been, it’s a disaster” (G.
Monbiot, The Guardian).
– Wuppertal: Paris Agreement is a phoenix from the ashes.
• Global realpolitik:
– “Politics is the art of the possible, the attainable – the art of the next
best” (Otto von Bismarck).
• Paris Agreement:
– No more or less than what was possible to be agreed upon in light of
the status quo of international geopolitics.
Year
Instrument
Mandate
Assembly
Resolution
A/RES/45/212
process … for the preparation… of an effective framework
convention on climate change…”.
(UNFCCC: 1992 and 1994)
Berlin Mandate
Strengthen UNFCCC “…through the adoption of a protocol or
another legal instrument…”.
(Kyoto Protocol, 1997 and 2005)
Bali Action Plan
“an agreed outcome” and adopt a decision by COP15
Copenhagen
Accord
“The Conference of the Parties, takes note of the Accord of
18 December 2009”
2011
Durban
Platform
the COP decided to “…launch a process to develop a
protocol, another legal instrument or an agreed outcome
with legal force under the Convention applicable to all
Parties…” by COP21
2015
Paris
Agreement
Concludes the work of the Durban Platform and is an
international treaty
1995
2007
2009
Increasing developing country
emissions / decreasing
developed country ambition
UNFCCC
Negotiation
Mandates
1990
UN General
“…to establish a single intergovernmental negotiating
A most peaceful revolution
• French Presidency and procedure:
– Prior to COP21 (with COP20’s Peruvian Presidency) and during COP21.
– Early high level meeting (provided “guidance to officials at the beginning
instead of hoping for ‘deus ex machina’ effect at end” (Axel Michaelowa).
– Continuation of the Indaba method.
• French President Francoise Hollande - waxing poetic:
– “the most beautiful, most peaceful revolution…a climate revolution”
• Earth Negotiations Bulletin:
– an evolution in climate governance, and a revolution in the UNFCCC COP
process
• Wuppertal:
– “Climate Change Diplomacy Masterpiece” (Wuppertal).
Two instruments
The legal framework –
a constitution
UNFCCC
Draft
Decision /CP.21
Paris Agreement
The first set of rules
which flesh-out
the framework
(Annex to
Decision)
The Paris balancing act
• Binding & non-binding
elements
“The Paris approach
establishes legally binding
obligations of conduct but not
of result” (Bodansky)
“Shall”
(Example:
Transparency
Framework)
• Top-down (Kyoto
Protocol) & Bottom-up
(Copenhagen Accord )
“Should”
• Hybrid approach
(Example:
Nationally
Determined
Contributions)
Legal nature
• Dan Bodansky:
– “What the Paris Agreement does is tie a treaty ribbon around key
elements of the Copenhagen Accord”.
• US politics and the legal nature of the Paris Agreement.
• Todd Stern (Obama Administration Climate Change Envoy:
– “Paris as an agreement has such broad acceptance and support around
the world from countries of every stripe and region and Paris itself was
seen as such a landmark - hard-fought, hard-won - deal that for the US to
turn around and say ‘we are withdrawing from Paris’ would inevitably give
the country a diplomatic black eye”.
(The Guardian 16 February 2016)
Ambition
• To enhance the “….implementation of the UNFCCC and to strengthen the
global response to climate change, in the context of sustainable
development and efforts to eradicate poverty, including by:
– Holding the increase in the global average temperature to well below
2°C above pre-industrial levels (IPCC - 50% margin for error)
– Pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above preindustrial levels.
– Increasing the ability to adapt to the adverse impacts of climate change.
– Fostering climate resilience and low greenhouse gas emissions
development, in a manner that does not threaten food production.
– Providing finance flows consistent with a pathway towards low
greenhouse gas emissions.
Timing
• To reach global peaking of GHG emissions as soon as possible.
• Peaking will take longer for developing country Parties.
• Thereafter to undertake rapid reductions:
• in accordance with best available science
so as to achieve
• a balance between:
• anthropogenic emissions by sources; and,
• removals by sinks of greenhouse gas in the second half of this
century
Net zero emissions
INDCs and the 15 gigatonne gap
• Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) - submitted prior
to COP21 in accordance with the Lima Call for Climate Change Action.
• Decision - identifies weakness in submitted INDCs:
– Estimated aggregate emissions = projected absolute level of
emissions of 55 gigatonnes in 2030.
– To achieve the long term temperature goal = reduction to 40
giggatonnes in 2030.
• Ambition + Timing + INDC weakness = clear 15 giggatonne statement
(Winkler).
• Wuppertal - the Agreement’s formulation of absolute levels of emissions
reductions implies:
– an extension of the UNFCCC’s objective of avoiding “dangerous”
anthropogenic interference with the climate system; and,
– that any global warming is dangerous.
Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs)
• Each Party:
– prepare, communicate and maintain successive nationally determined
contributions; and
– pursue domestic mitigation measures with the aim of achieving the
objectives of such contributions.
• NDCs:
– Communicated every five years.
– Informed by the outcomes of the global stocktake – first assessment in
2016.
– Successive NDCs: must represent a progression beyond the current.
– Reflect the highest possible ambition in accordance with common but
differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities, in the light of
different national circumstances.
– Devised in accordance with internationally determined criteria.
– Submitted no later than date of ratification, accession, or approval.
– INDCs become NDCs upon ratification, accession, or approval.
Adaptation
• In recent years a number of initiatives have sought to place adaptation
more firmly on the international agenda – Kyoto is mitigation focussed.
• INDCs have also included adaptation components.
• Global goal on adaptation:
– enhancing adaptive capacity
– strengthening resilience and reducing vulnerability
– with a view to contributing to sustainable development and
ensuring an adequate adaptation response
• Modalities and procedures and “adaptation communication” (5yr
review)
Adaptation (2)
• Recognises need for balanced funding of adaptation and mitigation
• Need for public and grant based resources
• No quantified goal on adaptation finance
• Technical Examination Process on adaptation 2016—2020: to identify
concrete opportunities for strengthening resilience
• Climate risk screening of national development strategies
• Technical Needs Assessments and National Adaptation Plans
• Adaptation Committee: methodologies to assess adaptation needs
Finance and Support
• OECD: USD 52 billion in 2013 and 62 billion in 2014- mobilisation of
climate finance by developed countries
• Developing countries encourages to provide financial assistance
• Agreement has no reference to the USD 100 billion goal
• US senate concerns relating to finance in the Agreement
• COP decision to continue with existing collective mobilization goal
through 2025,
• To set a new goal with a floor of USD 100 billion a year prior to 2025.
Ratcheting mechanism
• Wuppertal: Transparency of Action and Support + Global Stocktake +
Facilitating Implementation and Compliance = ratcheting mechanism.
• Transparency of Action and Support
– Objectives:
• clear understanding of climate change action;
• clarity on and tracking progress towards achieving NDCs;
• inform the global stocktake;
– Parties obliged regularly to provide a national inventory report on
greenhouse gas emissions prepared using good practice
methodologies accepted by the IPCC and subjected to a technical
expert review
Ratcheting mechanism (2)
• Global Stocktake:
– To “take stock” of the Agreement’s implementation.
– Commencing inn 2018 and thereafter every 5 years.
• Facilitating Implementation and Compliance:
– A committee to facilitate implementation and compliance.
– Expert-based and facilitative in nature; and, transparent, nonadversarial and non-punitive in function.
– (Kyoto comparative).
International and national climate change policy and legal interaction
South African climate change policy
•
National Climate Change Response Strategy (September 2004)
•
National Climate Change Conference (November 2005)
•
Long Term Mitigation Strategy Scenarios (LTMS, 2006 and beyond)
•
ANC Polokwane Declaration (December 2007)
•
Climate Change Policy Summit (March 2009)
•
Green Economy Summit (May 2010)
•
National Climate Change Response Green Paper (November 2010)
•
National Climate Change Response White Paper (November 2011)
•
Long Term Adaptation Scenarios (LTAS)
•
South African Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (2015)
[]
• []
LTAS Phase 1 and 2
• DEA, SANBI & GIZ developed the Long-Term Adaptation Scenarios
Flagship Research Programme (LTAS).
• Phase 1 2013:
– water,
– agriculture,
– human health,
– marine fisheries
– biodiversity sectors.
• Phase 2, 2014: Socio economic considerations, eg for the SADC, food
security, settlements, disaster risk management.
Implications for policy development
• South African climate change policy development has been informed by
the international legal regime = we are in the ballpark.
• Timing of implementation and review of policy – framed by
internationally agreed periods:
– First review: 2018, thereafter every 5 years.
– Carbon tax in January 2017?
• Prior to 2018 stocktake:
– Review national climate change policy in light of the Transperancy
Framework - ensure compliance = this is the legal obligation
• Implement policy and review every 5 years, taking account of need to be
increasingly ambitious.
Contact details
Andrew Gilder
[email protected]
+27 82 382 6279
Olivia Rumble
[email protected]
+27 82 788 0864
thank you
March 2016