top of page
Color logo - no background.png

Policy Pulse

Thanks for subscribing

Join our readership of thought leaders and policy makers by subscribing to Policy Pulse, an update on trending policy issues in climate change, international conflict economics and infrastructure. 

Policy Pulse - George Anjaparidze - 2 April 2020

On 1 April 2020, the UN climate change agency announced its plans to postpone indefinitely the 26th Conference of the Parties (COP). In most years, such an announcement would be surprising or it might even be dismissed as an April fool’s joke of a computer hacker. But this year, given the raging COVID-19 pandemic, a decision to postpone the event was expected.

The Conference of the Parties (COP) is an annual meeting of signatories to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), which has near universal membership (197 countries and territories are members). It is under the framework of this convention that governments negotiate climate deals like the Kyoto Protocol and Paris Agreement.

Put simply, the COP is the annual conference that brings together governments to negotiate and take decisions on how to address the climate challenge. However, the COP is much more than an intergovernmental negotiation. It is the premier global climate change event that gathers a wide range of stakeholders, including companies, international organizations, journalists, non-governmental organizations, activists and other concerned civil society stakeholders. Participants come from all corners of the world and can number in the range of 10 to 30 thousand.

There was also a postponement of the mid-year negotiations, usually held in June, now to be held 4-12 October of 2020.

The UN climate negotiations are extremely complex. Negotiations occur in different governing and subsidiary bodies across dozens of agenda items. At certain points in time, you can have as many as 5 bodies launched with over 50 items under negotiation. Each negotiator will attest that their item is the priority issue for the conference. To make matters even more complicated, there are interlinkages between items and a negotiations culture that prides itself on the moto “Nothing is agreed, until everything is agreed.”

That said, it is time to prioritize. For two consecutive years, UNFCCC negotiators have failed to agree on the rules for international cooperation on climate action (also known as Article 6 negotiations). These rules are a prerequisite for properly functioning international carbon trading. Not having these rules in places increases the cost of climate mitigation actions and hinders financial flows to developing countries. It also makes it likely that other actors, outside the UNFCCC, may try to define carbon trading standards, as was recently done by the International Civil Aviation Organization.

Patricia Espinosa, the UNFCCC Executive Secretary, is a masterful diplomat, with an almost magician like touch at finding political consensus. She was one of the key leaders that helped piece together the climate negotiations a decade ago and delivered the Cancun outcome, which paved the way for the Paris Agreement. However, to improve the chances of unlocking the stalemate on Article 6 negotiations, political astuteness may need to be combined with technical analysis of options under negotiation.

The postponement of COP 26 is a blessing in disguise. It allows time for technical analysis and further consultation on the options being discussed for rules on international cooperation on climate action. An interactive approach between technical analysis and consultation could be used to help unlock the stalemate. The leadership should consider using this pause in the UNFCCC calendar to focus more efforts on advancing the Article 6 negotiations.


____________________


About Veritas Global: Our vision is to have a positive impact on the world through truthful advice informed by robust analysis. We are a premier provider of tailored solutions on climate change, international conflict economics and infrastructure


 
 
 

Policy Pulse - 16 December 2019 - George Anjaparidze


Veteran negotiators say that more time is rarely a recipe for better outcomes. That is certainly true for this year’s annual UN climate talks, which concluded in Madrid on 15 December 2019. The negotiations ran 2 days into overtime, setting a new record for the longest session since the start of the UN climate convention 25 years ago. Despite the extra time, the talks delivered very little in terms of tangible outcomes.


Most disappointing was failure to agree on the rules for international cooperation on mitigating climate change – known as Article 6 negotiations. These rules are a prerequisite for properly functioning international carbon trading. Not having these rules will impact the climate agreement on international aviation – known as the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA), which addresses CO2 emissions above 2020 levels. The absence of clear rules will likely delay implementation of the aviation climate agreement or worse partly “nationalize” CORSIA. Both developments would have negative consequences for the airline industry.


A delay in implementation of CORSIA will erode confidence in the scheme’s ability to stabilize net CO2 emissions from international aviation. This may prompt some ambitious states to impose measures not envisioned under CORSIA. Another danger is that in the absence of international offsetting rules, states may require airlines to purchase national carbon offsets. Requirements for sourcing offsets nationally will hinder the development of a global carbon market and lead to competitive distortions in the airline industry.


In response to these risks, the aviation industry should:

  1. Deepen collaboration with leading institutions that have policy expertise in designing carbon markets. The aim should be to pilot approaches that will demonstrate how CORSIA compliant offsets could be generated under prevailing policy uncertainty. Existing carbon market catalyst programs, such as the one managed by the Asian Development Bank, can be used to support such initiatives with technical assistance.

  2. Scale-up climate action within the sector. About 20% of CO2 reductions, needed to achieve net carbon neutral growth from 2020, can be generated cost-effectively from within the aviation sector. However, these opportunities are not being realized because of “non-price barriers” or non-financial factors. Industry needs to support interventions that target the barriers that are preventing the implementation of these measures (See op-ed: Change of CORSIA).

___________________________


About Veritas Global: Our vision is to have a positive impact on the world through truthful advice informed by robust analysis. We are a premier provider of tailored solutions on climate change, international conflict economics and infrastructure


 
 
 
bottom of page