leverje
anderlv
2005-04-07T11:41:10Z
European Commission
11.9999
13035
19035
0
60
False
False
Towards a comprehensive and ambitious post-2012 climate change agreement |
1. Background information |
I reply: |
On behalf of an organisation or an institution
|
I reply on behalf of |
NGO (international, national, regional or local)
|
Full name of organisation and Register of interest representatives ID number |
KWIA, Flemish Support Group for Indigenous Peoples 590-7473625-92 |
What is your country of residence/country where your organisation or institution is based? |
Belgium
|
2. The climate change challenge - a shared vision for the 21st century development |
Would this aspirational long term goal be appropriate in the light of the 2007 IPCC reports and latest scientific knowledge? (max 4000 characters) |
The IPPC, in it’s own “climate change 2007 synthesis report. Summary for policy makers” notes that emissions should reduce by 50 to 85% (compared with 2000) to end up with a warming of 2 to 2,4°C (above the target). In a footnote it further mentionnes “The emission reductions to meet a particular stabilisation level reported in the mitigation studies assessed here might be underestimated due to missing carbon cycle feedbacks”. The Report also under-estimates some of the risks because it is based on published research only up to the middle of 2006. Many new studies since then show that greenhouse gas emissions, climate change and sea-level rise are happening faster than the climate models so far have indicated. The global 50% goal is therefore a very optimistic and risky target to reach the 2°C goal. In fact, with a 50% chance of failure the goal is insufficient. Any reasonable policy maker who really wants to avoid a 2°C warming should go for higher reductions. Recent research has shown that a global reduction of minimum 60% is in fact needed to reach the 2°C goal. |
Is there a need for other elements to be part of the shared vision in order to ensure the transition to a sustainable low carbon economy? (max 4000 characters) |
|
3. Mitigation commitments by developed countries |
What should be the criteria for allocating emission reduction efforts among developed countries, considering also the need to ensure the "comparability of efforts" as agreed in Bali? (max 4000 characters) |
One logical approach comes from the concept of ecological debt. Today it’s possible to calculate the historical CO2 debt for a country. How much more CO2 has a country produced, during its whole history, then a sustainable level allows it to do? For Belgium the carbon debt from 1990 till 2003 lies in between 4234 and 5787 million tons of CO2. This would be a much fairer starting point then Kyoto, which starts at actual polution levels thereby favouring big polutors with bigger emission rights. Kyoto was a first step, let’s take the next towards a truly fair and durable approach. Since Kyoto, the seriousness and urgency of the problem has increased on such a scale that a revolution in our goals is equally urgent. Another reasonable, fair and durable approach is the one from contraction and convergence. Each citizen on earth should have an equal right on the amount of CO2 it can emit. The amount can be calculated on the basis of what the IPPC sees as a sustainable level. The date of convergence should be at the earliest possible. 2050 is the usual and a realistic proposal, if the political will is there. The European Parliament has time and again repeated that on the long run the principle of equal rights for every citizen of the world should count. It is time the EU goes from ‘the long run’ to now, with a detailed plan to contract and converge by 2050. Therefore, the EU should be ambitious enough not just to take the lead but to aim for what all scientists agree should be the aim: a 80% reduction or more. The 60 to 80% target will not be sufficient. The real lead is given by countries like Sweden, who aims for higher reduction targets then what the EU gives them. |
4. Mitigation actions by developing countries |
What type of mitigation actions should developing countries undertake? How should these be measured, reported and verified? What should be the scale and legal nature of these actions? How should differences in responsibility and capability of different developing countries be taken into account? (max 4000 characters) |
Mitigation actions have to be consistent with the international human rights standards, including the UN Declaration on the rights of Indigenous Peoples and the ILO Conventions, the recommendations of the World Commission on Dams and the Convention on Biological Diversity. Mitigation actions should result in real measurable CO2 reduction while contributing to overall sustainable development. Local populations in general and indigenous peoples in particular should be involved in the design, implementation, monitoring and verification of these actions. Results have to be published regularly. |
To what extent and how should those actions be supported by technology and financial assistance from the developed countries? What kind of supporting tools could be developed at the international level to support domestic action and should there be respective roles for the public and private sector, including the carbon market? (max 4000 characters) |
Developed countries should support developing countries in their transition to a carbon friendly economy and help them to avoid deforestation and forest degradation. The UNFCCC report estimates that 46% of mitigation costs will be necessary in developping countries by 2030. The EU should fund these costs based on their share of emmissions compared to all Annex 1 countries. At the EU level, the financial equivalent of 15% EXTRA emissionreductions (above the 30% inside the EU) should be made available to invest in both adaptation and mitigation efforts in developing countries. Public finance is needed for: research and development for trialling new technologies; guarantees to leverage private investment; building local capacity to develop, adapt, and maintain technology; and licensing fees in cases where intellectual property rights act as a barrier to technology transfer. |
How should technology and financial assistance by developed countries to developing country mitigation and adaptation actions be measured, reported and verified and should they be compared? (max 4000 characters) |
|
5. Carbon market |
How should the existing Clean Development Mechanism and Joint Implementation be improved in order to increase their environmental integrity and effectiveness? (max 4000 characters) |
CDM/JI project have to be consistent with international human rights standards, including the UN Declaration on the righjts of Indigenous Peoples and the ILO Conventions, the recommendations of the World Commission on Dams and the Convention on Biological Diversity. The CDM/JI projects have to yield real, ADDITIONAL reductions in global emissions as well as real benefits for sustainable development. The money spend on CDMs should be additional to the money for aid and should not count in the ODA figures. At present, The Netherlands is the only country who recognises this. It’s almost usual to let projects that would have been done anyhow count as emission reductions. Currently the CDM market is highjacked by large companies, global consultants, traders and brokers uninterested in durable development. Not even one solar energy project or public transport project figures in the current CDM list. African countries and the MOL countries hardly benefit from CDMs, while they need the benefits the most. A better regional distribution is needed. Therefore the GCCA seems like the best option. Their focus is on the poorest countries. Initiatives like the Climate Change Investment Funds from the Worldbank should be abandoned. They only lead to fragmentation of funds and their top-down approach including loans is not in the real benefit of the most vulnerable sectors of population nor the poorest countries. Better technology is not equal to less CO2 and durable development, it depends on how, where, by who and for who the technology is used. The problems mentionned can be exemplified by looking at dams. In Nepal for example, locally build micro hydro dams with relativly simple technology maintained by local people produce electricity 10 times cheaper and much more reliable then the megadams build elsewhere. The potential for micro hydro systems is huge, but donors and government focus on megadams who are beneficial for both of them and megacompanies, but not for the people nor the environment. Transfer of clean technologies should not lead to new dependence on multinationals but increase the capacities of local communities. In the current system the rich can use the natural resources of the poor to tackle their own emission problem. To avoid all these problems, CDMs should first be strictly additional to obligatory and high emission reductions on own soil. Without such system, the trade in emissions resulting in carbon credits will continue to lead to unequal property rights to the atmosphere. As mentionned before, the contraction and convergence model where every citizen of the world has the right on the same amount of CO2 output should be the goal. Another issue is pricing. A ton of CO2 is currently worth 5$ in India but 27$ in the EU. Non-transparency causes an unfair market in the interest of the rich buyer. There is very little public accountability, verification, and transparency. Obligatory transparancy would reduce misuse. |
What new market mechanisms could be developed to improve the effectiveness of carbon market? (max 4000 characters) |
|
6. Carbon leakage |
How could the delocalisation of emissions from developed countries with binding emission caps to other parts of the world be minimized? (max 4000 characters) |
A solution for this problem and a guarantee that even carbon intensive industries in developing countries that are not tied to emission reductions, will have to do efforts, is to impose a carbon tax on products. According to the study “Spillovers of Climate Policy. An assessment of the incidence of carbon leakage and induced technological change due to CO2 abatement measures”, a possible policy would be “to implement import and export taxes for the international trade of CO2-intensive products with non-abating countries. It is commonly believed that such a form of trade discrimination would not be allowed under the rules and disciplines of the WTO, but there are precedents by the way of multilateral environmental agreements with (discriminating) trade provisions that have not (yet) been challenged before the WTO.” |
7. Sectoral approaches |
What type of sectoral approaches could effectively contribute to global emission reductions? (max 4000 characters) |
|
8. Emissions from international air and maritime transport |
How could emissions from international air and maritime transport be effectively addressed? (max 4000 characters) |
|
9. Emissions from deforestation and forest degradation |
What should be sources of financing emission reductions from deforestation and degradation? (max 4000 characters) |
|
How financing of emission reductions from deforestation and degradation should be monitored taking into account non-permanence, leakage and liability issues? (max 4000 characters) |
|
10. Adaptation needs and support for most vulnerable countries |
What mechanism should be used to finance cost-efficient adaptation action in the most vulnerable countries, in particular LDCs, SIDS and African countries? (max 4000 characters) |
It’s possible to calculate the share of a country or region in the total global CO2 polution. Oxfam (2007) calculated that the adaptation needs run into 50 billion US $ a year. Currently, rich countries contributed only 92 million US $. The % of EU polution should be used to calculate the % of the sum to pay for adaptation. This amount will of course be a multitude of the current amount, but it will represent a fare share. |
How should the effectiveness of adaptation measures be monitored and assessed? (max 4000 characters) |
States must ensure effective and transparent governance of national and international adaptation strategies and funds. They must ensure that the most affected peoples and communities, in particular indigenous peoples, participate in, and have ownership of, the design, implementation, monitoring and verification of adaptation initiatives in order to safeguard their rights. |
What should be the catalyst role of the UNFCCC, considering notably the role and contribution of other relevant international organisations addressing the impacts of climate change on their area of competence? (max 4000 characters) |
There are too many different funds needing different administrations and leading to a lack of coherence. The first fund to be scrapped is the Climate Change Investment Fund from the WB, the least democratic and least beneficial for the most needy. The EU should consider the possible overlap of it’s own GCCA with the LDCF and other UN funds. It should focus on a complimentary role to the UN funds, who should remain the central focal point of climate funds. |
11. Technology cooperation |
Is there a need for specific support schemes for the development, demonstration or deployment of certain technologies? If so, for which ones and how should these be structured? (max 4000 characters) |
Nuclear energy projects should be excluded from these schemes. |
How to strengthen enabling environment for the deployment of the many existing clean technologies? (max 4000 characters) |
|
12. Finance and investment |
How should additional public support be organised and which should be the three top priority areas for financial support in developing countries? (max 4000 characters) |
The Netherlands is the first country to accept that public support should be additional, the EU should follow this example and make commitments. From the additional public support for policies to mitigate and adapt to climate change withing developing countries, the top priority areas should be renewable energy, avoided deforestation and water. The first two are crucial for mitigation, the last two (again avoided deforestation) for adaptation. Renewable energy is totally lost in the current CDM setup. There should be minimum targets for CDMs on renewable energy. Measures against deforestation and forest degradation have a huge potential for both mitigation and adaptation and are cost efficient. And almost a billion people could face water shortages in Asia by the 2050s due to melted glaciers. |
How could private sector be involved in mobilising additional finance? (max 4000 characters) |
|
13. Compliance and enforcement of the new agreement |
How should it be ensured that countries will comply with their commitments? (max 4000 characters) |
|
14. Other suggestions |
Please enter any other suggestions that were not covered by previous questions (max 4000 characters) |
|
By responding to this consultation you automatically give permission to the Commission to publish your contribution on the Internet. It is important to read the specific privacy statement at the begining of this questionnaire for information on how your personal data and contribution will be dealt with. |
I / We accept this reply to be published with my personal data
|
3
57
R58:R64
False
False