TWN_update11

7/28/2019 TWN_update11

1/6

122

Response measures: North-South divergencecontinues

Bonn, June 8 (Hilary Chiew) Parties differed intheir views on the treatment of the issue ofunilateral measures under the forum and workprogramme on the impacts of theimplementation of response measures.

Developing countries call for a workshop todiscuss the matter under the forum at the year-end United Nations climate conference in

Warsaw, Poland was rejected by developedcountries led by the United States and theEuropean Union.

The United States strongly opposed the proposalsaying it had firm views on this matter and wouldnever agree to any discussion on unilateralmeasures in the forum nor at any other fora of

the United Nations Framework Convention onClimate Change (UNFCCC).

The exchanges took place in all three workshops,operating as a contact group, at the 38 th sessionsof the Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI)and Subsidiary Body for Scientific and

Technological Advice (SBSTA). The forum isconvened under the SBI and SBSTA.

Developing country Parties also expressedconcerns that the workshop discussions were

losing focus, particularly in the area ofassessment and analysis on impacts and themodelling work generated, which they felt failedto take into account the special provisions of theConvention on the obligations of the developedcountries and the special needs of developingcountries.

On June 4, Parties exchanged experiences anddiscussed opportunities for economicdiversification and transformation. On June 5,Parties engaged in the workshop titled Justtransition of the workforce and the creation ofdecent work and quality job. On June 6, Parties

discussed the assessment and analysis of impacts.The forum closed with an expert meeting oneconomic modelling and socio-economic trends

which was held on June 7. All the meetings werechaired by Richard Muyungi (Tanzania) who is

chair of SBSTA and co-chairs the forum with theSBI chair, Tomasz Chruszczow (Poland). (Thelatter was preoccupied with the wrangling overthe SBI agenda that is still not adopted; afriends of the chair setting was set up onFriday June 7 to resolve the impasse.)

Argentina representing the Group of 77 andChina pointed out that the mandate from theDoha decision allowed Parties to discussunilateral measures in the forum, citing

paragraph 54 of Decision 1/CP.18.(Paragraph 54 of 1/CP.18 adopted in Doha,Qatar in 2012 reads: Welcomes the progress made inthe work of the forum on the impact of the implementationof response measures being convened under the SubsidiaryBody for Scientific and Technological Advice and theSubsidiary Body for Implementation and invites Partiesto continue to participate in the forum, including thesharing of views on policy issues of concern, such asunilateral measures; )

Argentina said in this context, unilateralmeasures should be discussed as a cross-cuttingissue in the forum in the different areas of the

work programme and proposed that a workshopbe conducted in Warsaw.

It stressed that G77 and China supportsmultilateralism and is in opposition to unilateralmeasures that undermine the spirit of multilateralcooperation and that could be contrary to theprinciples and provisions of the UNFCCC, inparticular Article 3.5.

(Article 3.5 reads: The Parties should cooperate topromote a supportive and open international economic


2/6

TWN Bonn Update No. 11 10 June 2013

2

system that would lead to sustainable economic growthand development in all Parties, particularly developingcountry Parties, thus enabling them better to address the

problems of climate change. Measures taken to combatclimate change, including unilateral ones, should notconstitute a means of arbitrary or unjustifiablediscrimination or a disguised restriction on international

trade.)

China in supporting the idea of the workshopsaid it noticed that from the presentations ofParties (on the different areas of the workprogramme) this issue is faced by manydeveloping countries and stressed that thediscussion is to find solutions to those problemsarising from implementation of unilateralmeasures.

Referring to paragraph 54, the United States

concurred that the decision from Doha meantthe issue can be discussed in the forum but notto give it specific status and it wanted itsintervention to be reflected in the workshopreport later.

Supporting the United States, the EuropeanUnion said Parties had lots of discussion ofunilateral measures in the Ad Hoc WorkingGroup on Long-term Cooperative Action underthe Convention (AWG-LCA) and although the

wordings were there, it is against having aseparate debate on the issue. Australia alsodisagreed with the workshop proposal.

On June 5, Argentina on behalf of G77 andChina, said as there will only be one workshopunder the forum in Warsaw and as there is amandate to discuss the issue further, it reiteratedits proposal for a specific workshop for unilateralmeasures. It asked those countries that opposedthe idea to give substantive explanations on theirconcerns.

The United States said the AWG-LCA(decision in Doha) has absolutely no mandate fora workshop in Warsaw but is clear that the issuecan be discussed in the forum. It asked

Argentina to share its view. In response,Argentina said it would consult the G77 andChina members on this matter.

Assessment and Analysis o f ImpactsAt this June 6 workshop, India focused itspresentation on unilateral measures. It lamentedthat although Article 3.5 provides the protectionagainst unilateral measures, the talks on imposingthose measures on developing countries are

continuing. It listed five reasons why Partiesmust refrain from taking unilateral measures:

The UNFCCC and its Kyoto Protocol, andCOP/CMP decisions - is and must remainthe principal forum for fashioninginternational climate policy. The climate

regime with near-universal membership,sophisticated multilaterally agreed principles,rules and institutions to draw on, andfrequent negotiating opportunities offers thebest chance of arriving at an equitable andeffective solution. Unilateral measures takenby countries and the retaliatory actions theyspawn can only lead to sub-optimal climatepolicy;

Climate policies crafted nationally/regionallyand imposed beyond borders are unlikely to

accurately reflect the principled balance ofobligations in the climate regime. It maystand in violation of the UNFCCC and notrespect the principles of CBDR (commonbut differentiated responsibilities);

Whilst multilaterally agreed policies developed through negotiated compromisesbetween consenting states implicitlycommand legitimacy, unilateral measuresthat seek to govern actors beyond their

borders raise serious legitimacy concerns; Unilateral measures, if taken, show a

disregard for multilaterally negotiated regimeand in fact it is an indirect threat thatmeasures will be taken by them unlessothers comply with their wishes.Consequently, unilateral measures lendthemselves to a perception of partiality andare therefore affects the confidence buildingthat is central to the multilateral climatenegotiations;

It is also worth bearing in mind that ifnations are allowed to engage in unilateralmeasures, they will have little incentive toparticipate and reach compromise solutionsin the multilateral process. Far fromfurthering the fight against climate change,unilateral measures chip away at themultilateral process and the principles on

which the climate regime is built.

Instead, India said, it is of the strong view that

the UNFCCC process should expand on Article3.5 and agreed that Parties completely eschewunilateral measures and have a way to takecorrective steps in case it happens. It stressed


3/6


3

that developed country Parties shall not resort toany form of unilateral measures on any groundsrelated to climate change.

In conclusion, India said, it is important tounderstand that the threat of unilateral measuresis not a theoretical discussion but is very, real

citing the example of the EU-Emission TradingScheme to curb emissions in international civilaviation. These measures were not restricted tothe EU only but all airlines from all countriesfrom the point of departure. Consequently,several countries sent their voice of protest, after

which the EU has decided to stop the clock. Inother words, they have suspended but not

withdrawn these measures and the threat remainof it being revived.

It further raised its concern over the discussion

of market-based measures in the InternationalCivil Aviation Organisation but fortunately,discussion is now going on in a multilateralsetting.

Presenting on behalf of the G77 and China,Argentina said the assessment and analysis ofthe impacts from response measures had to beseen in the broader context of the achievementof sustainable development, in accordance withnationally defined priorities for developing

countries.It said the results of the Rio+20 conference last

June (UN Conference on SustainableDevelopment in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil) should betaken into account as an overarching framework.

Twenty years after the landmark 1992 EarthSummit in Rio, the international communityreaffirmed sustainable development as thecentral paradigm in its three pillars(environmental, social and economic) as well asthe Rio principles, in particular common but

differentiated responsibilities.

It said Parties need to avoid and minimisenegative economic and social consequences inthe context in which all developing countriesface those consequences in different ways,research and assessment of those impacts is anew field, and the UNFCCC is the mandatedfora to discuss the issues including unilateralmeasures.

It urged developed countries to undertake an

assessment in the design and implementation oftheir response measures, including unilateralones, of those socio-economic impacts on, interalia, employment, income, economic growth

rates and living standards in developingcountries.

The assessment needs to be undertaken both inquantitative and qualitative terms and ex anteandex postas well as taking into account the specificnational conditions of developing countries and

their priorities, needs and circumstances.It further said such assessments will help topromote understanding about the nature andmagnitude of the socio-economic consequences;help developing countries in identifying andaddressing the impacts of response measures;and explore ways to avoid and minimise thesenegative impacts.

The assessment should be consistent with theprinciples and provisions of the Convention, in

particular the principle of common butdifferentiated responsibilities, Articles 3.5, 4.8and 4.9 of the Convention and Articles 2.3 and3.14 of the Kyoto Protocol.

It should also include consideration of thespecial socio-economic conditions of developingcountries (and their first and foremost over-riding priorities in terms of economic and socialdevelopment and poverty eradication) in thedesign and implementation of responsemeasures.

Furthermore, Argentina said, the assessmentshould provide information about consultation

with potentially affected developing countryParties, include scientific basis of the measure,and analysis if the measure is the most effectivemeans to achieve the objective of combatingclimate change.

It also said the fulfilment of developed countriesobligations related to the provision of specificsupport to developing countries, in terms of

transfer of technology, financial resources andcapacity building should be included.

These, Argentina stressed, could assist in thedevelopment of endogenous capacities indeveloping countries, in order for them to meetthe agreed full incremental costs ofimplementing measures in accordance to Articles4.3, 4.5 and 4.7 of the Convention.

However, developing countries expresseddissatisfaction with developed countries

reluctance to engage substantially in assessingand analysing the impacts of the implementationof response measures.


4/6


4

Argentina said while the G77 and Chinawelcomed the mitigation efforts of developedcountries in combating climate change, especiallyin the domestic actions that they had taken, but it

would like to see more focus on how developedcountry Parties are striving to minimise thenegative impacts and how they are fulfilling their

obligations to developing countries.

In support, Venezuela said it agreed that thecost of inaction is greater than actions inaddressing climate change, but the point is notabout actions but the impacts of the actionstaken by developed countries on developingcountries in compliance with the provisions ofthe Convention.

China said there were major differences in thepresentations by Parties at this particular

workshop and reminded Parties that they need tofocus on specific actions at this stage ofnegotiation. It agreed with India, and also viewedthe implementation of unilateral measuresseriously as its economy will suffer. It hoped tohave dedicated time to discuss the matter with a

view on how to resolve and better implementthose actions.

The presentations of developed country Parties(the European Union and Australia) focused on

the environmental and economic co-benefits ofresponse measures. The EUs presentation saidthe range of co-benefits far out-weighed theinvestment costs in low carbon infrastructure butnot all climate policies have obvious co-benefits,and there can be conflicts or trade-offs betweendifferent objectives. It said the bottom-line ispromising with sensible policies design. Later, inresponse to the reactions of developing countryParties, it said it is inevitable that measures takento combat climate change are in a sense unilateral

but noted that policies do not stay forever andare subjected to review and update.

Australia said a modelling by its Treasuryshowed that the Australian economy willcontinue to grow strongly while cuttingemissions and moving to a clean energy future. Itfurther said reducing emissions can deliverbenefits, particularly to vulnerable developingcountries most at risk of climate impacts, addingthat sustainable development can helpdeveloping countries build social and economic

resilience. It said Australia provided funding forvulnerable developing countries to adapt to theimpacts of climate change accounting for over50% of the countrys A $599 million in fast-start-

finance besides its efforts in developing anddeploying low emissions technologies.

Manuel Montes of South Centre said responsemeasures are already affecting developingcountries yet there is no reporting of actions by

Annex 1 (developed) countries to minimise the

negative impacts of their response measures intheir national communications. He said it isunclear how much of the burden of themitigation measures has been passed on todeveloping countries without their consent. Hesaid that to avoid and minimise negativeeconomic and social consequences ondeveloping countries, response measures must beassessed during design and before deployment.Montes also said as developed country Partiesresponse measures affect multiple Parties in a

variety of ways, response measures should beevaluated in a multilaterally-based body and theassessment should be undertaken with theparticipation of all parties affected.

Economic modell ing and socio-economic trendsSimilarly, in the expert meeting on modelling(June 7), developing countries registered theirdissatisfaction with the lack of studies andattention on analysing the impacts of responsemeasures by developed country Parties on

developing countries.Modelling experts from the World HealthOrganisation, Tyndall Centre, Global E3Modelling and the International Centre for Tradeand Sustainable Development presented theirfindings.

Speaking for G77 and China, Argentinareaffirmed that Parties are losing focus in thisforum which should be in relation to theprinciples and provisions of the Convention andto give full consideration for actions to meetspecific needs of developing countries from theconsequences of response measures.

It stressed that developing countries want tolearn more from the modelling process but isdisappointed that not much was accomplished,but would like the work in this area to continue.Noting that the expert analyses have a hugefocus on fossil fuel subsidies, it reminded thataccess to energy is critical to achievingsustainable development for developing

countries and the modelling should take thisconcern into account.


5/6


5

Saudi Arabia emphasised the context of thework programme and expressed concern that thediscussion was not relevant to the topic. Itunderstood that the forum is not about actions

versus non-actions but to understand howresponse measures undertaken by developedcountry Parties will affect developing countries.

China agreed that the modelling work presenteddid not address the concerns of developingcountries. It suggested cooperation betweenmodelling experts from both developed anddeveloping countries to ensure a higher qualityof results. Indonesia, Venezuela, Egypt andthe United Arab Emirates supported thedeveloping countries interventions.

Opportunit ies for economic divers i f i cation andtransformationArgentina presented on behalf of the Group of77 and China hoped that the workshop wouldpromote the understanding of development anddissemination of measures, methodologies andtools among experts and Parties to assistdeveloping countries in economic diversification.

It also sought to improve its knowledge on howeconomic diversification can be integrated intosustainable development plans, especially thosethat promote social and economic development

and poverty eradication. However, it noted thateconomic diversification entails high adjustmentcosts for developing countries economies whichare generally characterised by a low economicdiversification. They have traditionally reliedheavily on the production and exports ofcommodities that are particularly vulnerable toclimate change.

Argentina said there are still serious developmentchallenges in developing countries while thecosts of clean technologies remain prohibitivefor those countries. It is also important toconsider the role of barriers implemented bydeveloped countries such as agriculturalsubsidies, standards and tariffs, as they canhinder economic and social development ofdeveloping countries and therefore theirpossibilities for economic diversification.

Response measures such as standards andlabelling related to carbon content of goods andservices pressured developing countries to

undertake a structural economic transformation,thus transferring the burden of the mitigationobligations of developed countries to developing

countries, without the adequate support, andwhich is inconsistent with Article 3.5.

Saudi Arabia said economic diversification is atool for alleviating the negative impact ofresponse measure but will not be sufficient on itsown.

The European Union said it carried outeconomic diversification for many reasons andnot just as response measures to climate change,adding that it has decoupled economy growth

with an emission cut of 18.4% from 1990 to2011.

Venezuela reminded Parties of the decisions ofvarious COPs of UNFCCC that have committedthe Annex I countries to assist those non-AnnexI countries whose economies are highly

dependent on income generated from theproduction, processing and export, and/or onconsumption of fossil fuels and associatedenergy-intensive products, to diversify theireconomies.

It said the relative extent of the potential impactsof response measures suggested that economicdiversification issues affects most significantlythe least developed countries and oil exportingcountries due to the lack of economicdiversification. The lack of diversification

increases these economies vulnerability tofluctuation in primary commodity markets andreduces their adaptive capacity to climate change.However, Venezuela is sceptical that adaptivecapacity and long-term prospects can beeffectively addressed by economic diversification

without the sustainable development perspective.

Mohamed Hamel, senior advisor of theOrganisation for Petroleum ExportingCountries (OPEC) said these countries facelarge and disproportionate adverse impacts ofthe implementation of response measures buteconomic diversification could help if it issupported by adequate means ofimplementation, in particular technology andcapacity building.

Job transit ion of the workforce and thecreation of decent work and quality jobArgentina representing G77 and Chinareminded Parties of the inclusion of justtransition in the Cancun (COP 16) decisionsunder shared vision and response measures(agenda items of the two subsidiary bodies) andin Durban (COP 17) Parties were urged to


6/6


6

promote just transition of the workforce in theimplementation of their policies and measures

which were reaffirmed in Doha (COP 18).

It reiterated that barriers implemented bydeveloped country Parties such as agriculturesubsidies, standards and tariffs could hinder

workforce in developing countries. It pointedout that workforce in developing countries isamong the most vulnerable social group due tothe rapid growth of a young population in thosecountries, with the pressure of educating themfor the labour market.

It stressed that the fulfilment of developedcountries obligation to provide finance,technology transfer and capacity building is alsoimportant to ensure support for workers thatmay be affected by social and economic

consequences of response measures.

Saudi Arabia said its predominantly youngnation with 48% of population below the age of19 is exceptionally vulnerable to the adversesocial and economic impacts of responsemeasures. To a question from the representativeof the International Labour Organisation (ILO)on whether assessment had been made on howto prepare its huge youth population foremployment, it said despite policy changes in

labour training, it is constrained by itsdependence on the petroleum industries and lackof other economic sectors.

South Africa said its millions of workers areemployed in its energy-intensive industries andmining which are underpinned by abundance of

coal, mineral and industrial policy legacy andcautioned that the process of transition must bejudiciously managed.

Marek Harsdorffof the International LabourOrganisation (ILO) said transition policies areneeded and net employment gains in greeningeconomy is possible; and climate actions can bepathway for reduced inequality and more socialinclusion. He estimated green jobs contributingto 0.5% to 2% of global workforce in 2030,adding that jobs in renewable sector doubled

from 2.3 million in 2006 to 5 million in 2010 andtransition to a green economy in developingcountries will leapfrog.

South Centres Manuel Montes questioned theadequacy of the 2% job increment in the greensector. To this, the ILO representative repliedthat transition to low carbon development willachieve net job creation while non-action will bemore costly.

TWN_update11

Documents

Transcript of TWN_update11