🚀 go-pugleaf

## Nachricht vom 27.07.97 weitergeleitet
## Ursprung : K.THIELKING@P-KTHI.cl.sub.de
## Ersteller: larris@igc.apc.org


                          ECO NEWSLETTER

                           AGBM7 - BONN
                          NGO NEWSLETTER

                               AGBM7

                          July 28, 1997
                             ISSUE #1

                        TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.            The Cash-free Method?
2.            Monitoring the Monitoring
3.            Giving SUBSTAnce to the TAR
4.            Ludwig
5.            Please Sir?  I Want to Comply...
6.            Contacts
7.            Credits

Eco has been published by Non-Governmental Environmental Groups
at major international conferences since the Stockholm
Environment Conference in 1972. This issue is produced
co-operatively by CAN groups attending the climate negotiations
in Bonn, July-August 1997.

******************************************************************

The Cash-free Method?

by Bill Hare, Greenpeace International

The Work Programme and Budget for the Convention Secretariat for
the period 1998 and 1999 is of critical significance for the
implementation of the convention and of whatever agreements are
made in Kyoto to reduce emissions.

The integrity of inventory methodologies, the quality of the work
on methodological issues and capacity to assess the projections
of emissions are all fundamental to the fulfilment of the
Convention's objectives. Without the highest quality advice in
these areas Parties can have little confidence that emission
obligations are being met. The adoption of legally binding
obligations in Kyoto, as well as the potential for the
introduction of a trading system at a later stage, all add to the
pressure for this area of the convention to be as strong as
possible. All Parties have an interest in this if only to
minimise the potential for "free-riding" on emission commitments
via creative accounting, ad hoc or unilateral methodological
adjustments.

The main area for this essential work is in the Methodology
sub-programme of the Science and Technology division of the
Secretariat: document SBI/1997/INF.1 p8. outlines the proposed
budget in this area.

It is clear, however, that the proposed budget is inadequate to
meet even existing demands, let alone those which can reasonably
be anticipated in the Kyoto process. The budget provides for only
two professional staff in this area, with very limited amounts
allocated for additional expert input. The Limits section of the
budget for this programme also makes clear that without further
resources, work on projections for areas other than energy (such
as transportation, industry, waste, agriculture and forestry)
will not be possible.

In addition, the proposed budget for this area does not appear to
account for the methodologies work programme (SB/1997/INF.2),
which is arranged under five clusters -- Inventorying,
Projections, Mitigation, Impacts and Adaptation, and Cost-Benefit
Analysis. This proposed work programme is to be considered by
SBSTA and passed to the SBI. The latter three clusters are of
lower priority than the methodological work on inventories and
projections in the sense that most of this work can be done by
other competent bodies (UNIDO, IPCC, UNEP).

Of the US$ 1,443,000 total for 1998-1999 identified in
SB/1997/INF.2 as necessary for inventorying and projections work,
only US$836,000 is allocated in the proposed budget. The Parties
need to give priority needs to filling this gap.

No Post-Kyoto Budget

One of the other remarkable features of the Budget proposal is
that no funds are allocated to post-Kyoto work. Either this is a
profound expression of pessimism on the Kyoto meeting or it is an
unwarranted oversight.

The Parties should request that the Secretariat make a reasonable
estimate as to the additional work likely to flow from the
adoption of legally binding emission reductions for Annex I
Parties and from the advancement of the implementation of Article
4.1 at Kyoto. There is little reason to expect that the demands
on the Secretariat will actually decrease following Kyoto -- as
Parties well know, it is highly likely that they will be
substantially increased.

******************************************************************

Monitoring the Monitoring

Cutbacks in funding for monitoring and observation in government
science departments and the academic community are endangering
climate change detection efforts. There is increasing concern in
the scientific community that the quality of basic climatological
data available internationally is declining. These cutbacks are
in contravention of commitments made in Article 5 of the FCCC.

Article 5 -- Research and Systematic Observation -- requires that
Parties "Support and further develop, as appropriate,
international and intergovernmental programmes and networks or
organizations aimed at defining, conducting, assessing and
financing research, data collection and systematic observation."
Article 5(b) commits parties to "support international and
intergovernment efforts to strengthen systematic observation..."

The World Research Climate Program meets this August in Geneva to
discuss monitoring and research and the effects of declining
resources. SUBSTA must reaffirm its commitment to Article 5 at
this sixth session and formally communicate to the World Research
Climate Program at its meeting on the need to strengthen climate
monitoring and assessment programmes.

******************************************************************

Giving SUBSTAnce to the TAR

The Sixth Session of SUBSTA will consider further the structure
and content of the IPCC's Third Scientific Assessment Report
(TAR). Four Parties, China, Egypt, the Netherlands on behalf of
the EU and Switzerland, have submitted views. Issues of timing,
process and content have been raised.

#China would like the TAR to focus on clearing up uncertainties,
to better reflect different views and findings, and to assess the
impacts on developing countries of actions by developed countries
to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Environmental NGOs believe that the SUBSTA should request the
IPCC to articulate clearly for policy makers what is known, as
well as what is not known, particularly as it relates to climate
sensitivity and the carbon cycle. In addition, an assessment of
the relative importance of areas of uncertainty should be
provided, with reviews and assessments of alternative views. In
assessing impacts on developing countries, the TAR should take a
broad view ensuring that the climate impacts of emission actions
by developed countries are included along with economic effects.

Switzerland is concerned that the Second Assessment was not
user-friendly for policy makers, and that the IPCC failed to
provide a real Synthesis Report -- valid points which must be
addressed in the TAR. To ensure a more effective process for
producing Synthesis Reports, only key IPCC lead authors should be
involved in synthesizing the knowledged gained in the TAR process.

In relation the communication of the IPCC TAR to a wider public
SBSTA should request that IPCC work with the Nations Environment
Program (UNEP) to develop a communications plan that meets the
needs of policy makers and the broader interested public.

The Netherlands, on behalf of the European Union, has submitted a
detailed outline of issues the TAR should address. These should
be included in the report of this session of SBSTA for
communication to the IPCC Plenary in September. Of particular
importance is the need to ensure that the IPCC TAR provide an
assessment of the policies required to stabilize CO2 and other
greenhouse gas concentrations.

A further issue which SBSTA should call for the TAR to assess is
the implications of uncertainty over future policy decisions on
long term CO2 concentration stabilization levels for near term
greenhouse gas emission reduction policy. Research published in
this area should be reflected in the IPCC Special Report on
Emission Scenarios and in the TAR itself.

Parties have rightly expressed an interest in seeing the TAR
focus more extensively on the regional impacts of climate change.
It is important however that the need for a better understanding
of regional impacts not translate in the regionalization of the
IPCC itself, or cause a breakdown in the coherence of the overall
scientific assessment exercise.

The IPCC should make progress in understanding regional impacts.
The work should be carried out using global processes where
scientists from all regions participate. Such a process ensures
not only transparency, but allows the scientific community to
learn from each others efforts.

Finally, the TAR must be completed no later than the year 2000.

******************************************************************

Ludwig

A greeting to all friends, old and new, as we find ourselves in
the salubrious surroundings of the Hotel Maritim... those, of us,
that is, who managed to find the front door... Ludwig had always
been under the impression that the front door was normally
situated at the front of the building... but was obviously
seriously misinformed.

He has just returned from a trip to Japan (engaging in essential
research into recreational facilities in Kyoto), and was
fortunate enough to share the entire 12-hour return flight with a
fascinating gentlemen from an appliance sales organisation -- is
now wonderfully well-informed on that most interesting of
subjects. One gem, however, did surface: apparently, the Japanese
now require higher capacity refrigerators, as young ladies now
find it essential to put their silk pyjamas in the fridge to cool
off before going to bed. Ludwig is intrigued by the astonishing
parallels with the cold-start problem in climate modelling as
identified by the IPCC. He is therefore applying for funding for
an in-depth research project into all aspects of this phenomenon,
and will of course keep you posted as to his findings

******************************************************************

Please Sir? I want to comply...

The ripple of brackets that frames the AG-13 text reflects the
continuing reluctance of many Parties to recognize the need for
an effective procedure for reviewing and addressing issues
related to an individual Party's compliance. The Chair has been
able, through logic and patient persistence, to help delegates
identify the main issues and options related to the design of a
"Multilateral Consultative Process" procedure, but even as the
Group approaches its fifth session, fundamental disagreements
remain.

Ironically, submissions to the AGBM process demonstrate an
obsessive interest in compliance from a broad range of Parties.
Parties want to assess compliance in order to accelerate targets,
adjust emissions budgets, fund compensation mechanisms and
support clean development, as well as to determine eligibility
for joint implementation. Each of these proposals, which range
from the practical to the perverse, would require a process and
an institution based on the most progressive elements of the
bracketed AG-13 text: a small standing committee of experts
empowered to review an individual Party's performance and to form
conclusions as to whether it is meeting its commitments.

In a rational world the POALI's parties could build upon AG-13's
work and design an Implementation Committee suitable to new
commitments that emerge from Kyoto. On the other hand those of us
that have so enjoyed the Group's meetings may press for a
paragraph of text in the new POALI, requiring "the first meeting
of the parties to consider, at its first session, the
establishment of a ...".

******************************************************************

FOR MORE INFORMATION:

For enquiries and response to ECO:

Eco can be contacted at:

ECO Editorial Office
Gustav-Stresemann Institut
Langer Grabenweg 68
53175 Bonn
Germany
Tel: +49 (0) 228-373080
Fax: +49 (0) 228-8107197
email: asieghart@gn.apc.org

ECO is available electronically via the following routes:
  World Wide Web      http://www.igc.apc.org/climate/Eco.html
  anonymous ftp       ftp://ftp.igc.apc.org/pub/ECO
  gopher              gopher://gopher.igc.apc.org:70/11/environment/climate
  APC networks        conferences <climate.news> and <climate.forum>
  Usenet              newsgroup sci.environment
  email               by request to larris@igc.apc.org

For information about ECO on WWW or adobe Acrobat files, contact 
Richard Elen, email: relen@igc.apc.org

For information about electronic mail, conference distribution, ftp,
and gopher availability of ECO, contact: Lelani Arris, 
email: larris@igc.apc.org.

A glossary of terms used in ECO can be obtained via anonymous ftp (see
above) or by email from larris@igc.apc.org.

******************************************************************


CREDITS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:

Editorial/Production: Alister Sieghart, Elderon Bartholomew

World Wide Web Edition: Richard Elen

Electronic Distribution: Lelani Arris for EcoNet

North American Distribution: Wes Dowling & EESI

Published by: The Climate Action Network.

THANKS

The Climate Action Network would like to thank the Environment
Ministries of Germany, Denmark and the Netherlands, who have
provided funding for Eco.