[vc_row type=”in_container” scene_position=”center” text_color=”dark” text_align=”left” overlay_strength=”0.3″][vc_column column_padding=”no-extra-padding” column_padding_position=”all” background_color_opacity=”1″ background_hover_color_opacity=”1″ width=”2/3″][vc_text_separator title=”WHAT DOES THE FINAL TEXT SAY? ” title_align=”separator_align_left”][vc_column_text]You can see the final text here.
Last week the IPCC report on 1.5 degrees of warming was all over the news, for the inability of the negotiations to link it to the work of its technical bodies, and was postponed until June.
The final COP decision found a weird compromise: it “welcomes the timely completion” of the report. There is nothing better than punctual scientists, isn’t it?
Talanoa Dialogue and Just Transition
The Talanoa Dialogue concluded at COP24, with a call for countries to update their climate pledges and increase finance flows.
However, the conclusions of this year-long process are only “noted” in the final decision text, and countries are “invited” to look at them.
It does exactly the same with the Just Transition Declaration, which is “noted” into the text.
Mitigation and common timeframes
Common rules for communicating mitigation actions will only enter into force in the second period of the NDCs, which will be from 2030 onwards, and are not compulsory.
COP24 created the Forum on the Impact of Implementation of Response measures. It will meet twice a year starting next June, and work on economic diversification and transformation and just transition issues. Something Saudi Arabia was pushing for a lot.
The text provides a good structure for the revision mechanism, which includes information gathering, a technical assessment and the consideration of the outputs.
The thematic areas include mitigation, adaptation and means of implementation and support. But also can consider issues related to response measures and loss and damage.
Developed countries will have to communicate in advance how much finance they are planning to give every two years, starting in 2020. Developing countries who are donors are invited to do it too.
The details of the communication include the balance between mitigation and adaptation, how that finance is new and additional, or details such as gender responsiveness.
Furthermore, the decision establishes that in 2020 a process to define a new higher financial goal will start, which was a very important demand for developing countries.
WHY DID WE END THAT LATE?
The negotiations where delayed because of the active blocking of two countries.
First of all it was Brazil over carbon markets, whom it could benefit a lot due to the Amazon. The country wanted to include an amendment into the text that could create double counting of emissions. Finally, the whole Article 6 on markets was postponed and is to be closed at COP25.
After that, and already with 36h of delay, Turkey raised again their “special issue”, asking to be removed from the list of developed countries, so it could receive funding and have more flexible reporting. Finally this was not accepted by the countries.[/vc_column_text][divider line_type=”No Line” custom_height=”30″][vc_text_separator title=”WIDER NEWS” title_align=”separator_align_left”][divider line_type=”No Line” custom_height=”30″][vc_column_text]The Guardian has some good wrap-ups already out. Including this quick read for beginners and this longer read with some minor details about Brazil’s attempt to hold up the talks around flexible market mechanisms, and Turkey’s desire to be counted as a “developing country.”[/vc_column_text][divider line_type=”No Line” custom_height=”40″][vc_column_text]Photo: Kiara Worth, ENB
Subscribe to our newsletter to receive these daily updates by email.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][vc_column column_padding=”no-extra-padding” column_padding_position=”all” background_color_opacity=”1″ background_hover_color_opacity=”1″ width=”1/3″][/vc_column][/vc_row]