The hardest issues left to last

The next draft Paris Outcomes text was released on Wednesday at 3pm, with hoards of interested parties flooding the document centre to obtain a copy of the much-anticipated text. The culmination of many days of closed door negotiations, the text represents significant and timely progress by the hosts, in particular COP president Laurent Fabius, who has been credited with maintaining momentum in the negotiations. Parties were given 5 hours to digest the draft and then shared initial reactions between 8pm to 11.30pm on Wednesday night. Most parties were broadly supportive of the text, but disagreement was drawn across the same boundaries – differentiation, finance and ambition. Negotiations in ‘indaba’ format, which Fabius called for heads of delegation to attend, was set to continue into the night. Consultations in the committees set up earlier in the week on co-operative approaches (a draft market mechanism), REDD+, loss and damage also carried on into the night concurrent to the ‘indaba’ meeting. A further streamlined draft was due out Thursday afternoon at 3pm but has slipped to 7pm today. All are hopeful this does not mean the kind of breakdown in negotiations that scuppered negotiations in Copenhagen in 2009.

Transparency

‘Accounting’ and ‘information’ provisions in the draft text are certainly less glamourous than other familiar issues and, broadly speaking, transparency has not been explicitly discussed as a key issue of the Paris negotiations. However, the final negotiated positions on these points and indeed, whether they appear in the final text at all, may determine whether we have a strong or weak Paris agreement. The current text offers two options, that the Parties will ‘track progress towards’ or ‘account’ for their domestic action. There are also square-brackets around the requirement of parties to provide the information necessary for clarity and transparency. High levels of ambition and commitment are less meaningful if there is no mechanism to ensure that parties are actually accountable, even if commitments are non-binding.

Ambition

The agreed level of ambition is still up for grabs, with the text including options of an aiming to hold the increase in global temperatures to below 2°C or 1.5°C. Many countries most vulnerable to climate change will push hard for the 1.5°C target. Many other negotiators continue to argue that it is unrealistic and cannot be included.

Ratchet up and Global Stocktake of Commitments

The process to ratchet up both climate finance contributions and emission reduction goals is taking shape, and there is an option in the text for a global stocktake of national contributions in 2018/2019, with regular five-year reviews starting 2024/2025. The text provides options for overall ambition, as well as long-term goal, which ranges from the strong (95% reductions by 2050) to the weak (long-term decarbonisation).

Markets aka Co-operative Approaches

‘Co-operative Approaches’ or effectively market-based mechanisms by another name, as currently proposed, would permit parties to internationally transfer (or trade) Mitigation Outcomes to promote sustainable development and environmental integrity. Such approaches would require sufficient accounting standards that prevent double standards. This text represents a compromise positions reached between Ministers on Tuesday evening and was viewed as a real win for market mechanisms supporters who had previously worried market mechanisms may be excluded entirely.

Sustainable Development Mechanism

A new sustainable development mechanism (the 'SDM') is proposed, which will support enhanced mitigation in addition to countries’ pledged contributions to emissions reductions, (likely to be known as nationally determined contributions after Paris). The SDM may provide support widely, or specifically to developing parties only, depending on the negotiated position. Remember that the Clean Development Mechanism which has accounted for the reduction of 2.9 billion tonnes of CO2 had similarly humble beginnings. To the relief of REDD proponents, REDD-plus is also still in the current draft.

Carbon Pricing

Also of note is a single line entry in the ‘Decisions to give effect to the Agreement’ section which is an acknowledgement of the important role of carbon pricing in providing incentives for emission reduction activities. Many side events to the COP have noted the absence of language in the text which mentions carbon pricing so this inclusion is a positive outcome, albeit that it is only included in the decisions area and not the agreement itself.

Friday looms

Despite generally positive sentiments to date, negotiations in previous years have fallen apart at this point and some have predicted that negotiators may dig their heels in over the final and hardest points to settle. Delays in the hosts’ timetable are starting to seep into the process and with the Friday deadline looming, time and complexity are the enemies of a strong Paris agreement.