Preparing for new climate accord in Paris 2015 Medrilzam  ;  A climate policy researcher at the CarbonLab, the University of Queensland, Australia. He was a former Indonesian negotiator at the UN Framework on Climate Change Convention 2005-2008

JAKARTA POST, 30 Desember 2014

                                                

                                                                                                                       

The 20th Conference of Parties (COP20) of the UN Framework on Climate Change Convention (UNFCCC) in Lima, Peru ended in mid-December. The Lima talks aimed to prepare a road-map to a new climate-change regime that requires parties to the UNFCCC to conduct ambitious efforts simultaneously to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions and slow the global average temperature increase to below 1.5 to 2 degrees Celsius above the pre-industrial level. This new climate-change regime will be decided at the COP 21 UNFCCC in Paris next year. As usual, negotiations in Lima were tough and complicated, mainly in the adhoc working group on the Durban Platform on Enhanced Action (ADP). Two opposing poles of argument from developed and developing countries on who should bear the major responsibility for reducing emissions were a focus of debate on top of other issues such as adaptation, financing, technology transfer, capacity building and loss and damage. Although a climate deal in November 2014 between China and the US as the two biggest polluters in the world raised optimism in the early stages at Lima, tension between both developing and developed countries surged toward the end of the negotiations. Developing countries, including China, Brazil and India, keep arguing that a differentiation principle should be applied to global efforts in reducing emissions. That means that they wished to do less in reducing emissions. This is in line with the convention principles: common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities. On the other hand, developed countries continued to stress the importance of total maximum efforts from all countries to reduce emissions if the target on the maximum temperature increase of 2 degrees Celsius above the pre-industrial level is to be fulfilled. All countries should bear the same responsibility. Certainly, both positions have their own stakes; however, one implicit bit of progress was that all countries agreed to take action to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions. After going into injury time on Dec. 12, the negotiators finally concluded the text of an agreement early on the morning of Dec. 14 entitled “Lima Call for Climate Action”. The text comprised at least two important outputs: first, the instruction to each country to submit its intended national determined contribution (INDC) to the COP secretariat prior to COP 21, and second, the draft text of the Paris Agreement. The INDC is the information provided by each party on its current efforts and future plans to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions. The submissions must be made at least a few months before COP 21 to allow the secretariat to recapitulate the total global efforts on emission reduction by all countries. The recapitulated aggregate amount of emission reduction will be used as the basis to determine the new climate-change regime next year. In Lima, the parties negotiated the detail of INDC information to be submitted by the parties. This was quite tricky as developing countries were initially pushed to submit their efforts and be reviewed by the COP on the accuracy and transparency of the information submitted — which particularly worried developing countries. On the other hand, developed countries were pushed to submit in their INDC information on financing support for mitigation and adaptation for developing countries. Certainly, this could influence the position of developed countries that have already played hide-and-seek in their financing commitments to support developing countries as mandated in the convention. Finally, all parties agreed to provide only general information in their INDC according to their own needs without any ex-ante review by the COP, and there is no requirement for developed countries to explain financing commitment and support in their INDC. This compromise agreement is rather weak when it comes to the spirit of reaching the convention target. In Lima, the draft text for the Paris negotiation shows a great disparity of opinions among UNFCCC parties regarding issues such as mitigation, adaptation, finance, technology transfer, etc. As it would be impossible to agree on all aspects of the negotiating text in a meeting of only two weeks in Paris next year, it seems that inter-session UNFCCC meetings between Lima and Paris will become important milestones in narrowing the gaps. Developing countries in particular should prepare their readiness to anticipate any domestic consequences of those decisions. How then should Indonesia react to this? Indonesia has been well known as “a good boy” in the eyes of developed countries as it pronounced its mitigation policy by aiming to reduce emissions by least 26 percent by 2020. This decision was controversial among other developing countries, as Indonesia was seen as “betraying” other developing countries’ efforts to put the burden of emission reduction on developed countries. Although it is still unclear on what basis the figures for Indonesia’s emission-reduction target were made, Indonesia succeeded in showing its leadership and provided an example that developing countryies could also implement emission reduction without depending upon the support of developed countries. Indonesia’s climate-change mitigation stipulated in a 2011 presidential regulation has been implemented these past four years. Along with the submission requirement under the UNFCCC related to the INDC, this is a good moment for Indonesia to review its national plan on reducing emissions (RAN-GRK) and to streamline this review with its INDC submission. As climate change is a development issue, Indonesia’s INDC should also be reflected in the new Mid-Term Development Plan (RPJMN) 2015-2019 developed by the National Development Planning Board (BAPPENAS) in coordination with line ministries. Both the development plan and the RAN GRK should become the basis of Indonesia’s mitigation policy. In anticipating dynamic negotiations at the UNFCCC, Indonesia should also better prepare its negotiation team. Other countries’ negotiation teams consist of senior diplomats, lawyers and are backed-up up by technical experts from line ministries that consistently follow climate change issues. Some countries send fewer than 20 people to the COP but they work effectively to secure their own national interests in negotiations. A credible Indonesian state institution should take a lead in building up the negotiation team that can promote Indonesia’s interests at the next COP negotiation table. Furthermore, this team should also become an information bridge that provides feedback information to the Indonesian government to anticipate any dynamics decisions made in the UNFCCC negotiations. Time is limited and well-coordinated actions are required for Indonesia to prepare its INDC and a fully equipped negotiation team. Failing to do so will put Indonesia in a weaker position and subject to strong criticism in the international community.  ●