CCIM Stakeholder meeting, 1 February 2011 Climate Change: Looking back at the Belgian presidency & perspectives for 2011 CCIM Stakeholder meeting, 1 February 2011

Overview EU priorities/approach in run up to Cancún Key developments in 2010 Assessment of Cancún Some points of attention for 2011 2

1. EU priorities/approach in run up to Cancún Workshop Spa (6-8 July): presentation 4 overarching BE Presidency priorities Continue to take the lead for an ambitious and comprehensive agreement in line with 2°C objective and on climate change financing Define a clear EU view on a balanced Cancún package, elaborate this package and promote it in outreach Improve negotiation dynamics Outreach to rebuild/maintain trust Position and communication on KP and 2nd Commitment Period Link formal negotiations (bottom up, preparing decisions) and informal consultations (top down, defining a possible package) 4) Refine EU positions on particular issues such as MRV and institutional questions related to finance, adaptation and technology 3

1. EU priorities/approach in run up to Cancún Main EU political messages based on Council Conclusions 14 October Need for positive outcome: failure would impact multilateralism and public support climate policy Limiting climate change to a 2°C remains EU overall objective Cancún should deliver a significant intermediate step Building on Kyoto Protocol & integrating political guidance Copenhagen Accord Paving the way towards an ambitious global and comprehensive legally binding framework and avoiding gap after first CP EU aims in Cancún for a balanced package, across and within both tracks Address the concerns of Parties (balance of interests) Capture the progress made in both tracks (no cherry picking; not limited to low hanging fruit) All building blocks (comprehensive) Should contribute to establishment of post 2012 regime (substance + roadmap for future regime) Operational decisions on architectural issues & decisions for immediate action on the ground (realism) 4

1. EU priorities/approach in run up to Cancún EU’s willingness to consider a 2nd commitment period under Kyoto Protocol As part of a wider outcome engaging all major economies Need for progress on market mechanisms Kyoto Protocol should be improved in particular with regard to its environmental integrity Need to anchor proposed mitigation targets & actions into the negotiations All countries proposals Clarify, mobilise support, options for strengthening Not pledge and review Confirmation differentiation developed and developing countries MRV is cornerstone and need to be enhanced for all Different responsibilities and capabilities and different nature of commitments for developed and developing countries Stepwise approach (guidelines, link with review 2015) Finance, technology, adaptation: confirmation commitments Copenhagen Accord. Focus on institutional architecture EU remains strongly committed to and is delivering its fast start commitment of EUR 2,4 Billion yearly until 2012 5

1. EU priorities/approach in run up to Cancún Main elements of EU approach Encouraging Mexico and Chairs of AWG’s to take initiative - > general support and also providing strawmen decisions Intensive outreach agenda both during sessions (daily bilaterals) as intersessional (MEF and Mexican informals and also issue leaders country visits) Outreach activities seeking broad coalition and with strong focus on developing countries (Africa, LDC’s, AOSIS, ALBA, BASIC countries); presenting EU as bridge builder Efforts to make outreach as tangible as possible by making use of ‘EU balanced package paper’ and ‘strawmen decisions’; importance Cartagena group Crunch issues: early EU reflection on possible compromises within a balanced package Communication: use of narratives, main political messages doc, brochure and side event on fast start finance, diplomatic channels (GDN) 6

2. Some recent key developments in 2010 Mexican ‘diplomatic’ (non substantial) approach did succeed Internal US situation: perspective of federal US legislative action vanished Political 17% objective seems to be ceiling; acceptance international framework and rules became more complicated Impact on other UG countries both internal (few new developments) and international (Japan 2nd CP) Initially risk for strong polarization with China (see Tianjin) Climate change no longer evidently part of top of international agenda Fear for collapse of multilateral approach on climate change as important driver particularly for DC’s More realism AOSIS, LDC’s and Africa: acceptance of stepwise approach Constructive play by India (Ramesh), South Africa and Brasil. China avoiding to be blamed. Strong internal dynamics on energy efficiency, forests and renewables in BASIC countries Bolivia isolated within ALBA group with Venezuela and Cuba seeking for results 7

3. Assessment of Cancún Re-establishment of credibility UNFCCC process Copenhagen Accord is effectively integrated in multilateral UN agreement. Is clearly framed in a vision where 2°C objective is central Anchoring of pledges for developed countries both within Kyoto and Convention tracks Clear reference to 2°C goal and reduction scenario’s IPCC AR4 Need to strengthen objectives Neutral on eventual inscription within Convention instrument or Kyoto Protocol Decision on 1990 base year under Kyoto track Anchoring of pledges for developing countries enlarges Kyoto approach Aimed at achieving a deviation from BAU in 2020 Workshops to increase understanding actions Decision to set up registry to record NAMA’s seeking support 8

3. Assessment of Cancún Incremental steps for all building blocks BAP: principles, institutional architecture, and process forward are defined. Mandate to develop guidelines MRV; ICA in context of SBI Establishment of Green Climate Fund, design governance structures Fund Substance Adaptation Framework & establishment Adaptation Committee Redd+ Mechanism established but no reference biodiversity objectives Principles on market mechanisms Technology mechanisms including Technology Executive Committee and Climate Technology Center and Network Clear process for review to be concluded in 2015 Missing elements: No decision on LULUCF accounting No signal to ICAO/IMO on aviation and maritime transport No signal to Montreal Protocol on HFCs No decision on establishment of new market mechanisms Core issues on level of national mitigation ambition and sources of finance are still to be solved Legally binding outcome remains on the table, but different options are open 9

3. Points of attention for 2011 With exception of issues such as LULUCF the Cancún package has included almost everything that was ‘negotiation wise’ within reach Many issues will demand for implementation in 2011 e.g. : Operationalization of Adaptation Committee Definition work programmes adaptation (loss and damage) Workshops mitigation proposals and work to convert pledges into QELRO’s (KP) MRV and ICA Activities REDD+ mechanisms Establishment Transitional Committee on Green Climate Fund and Standing Committee on financial mechanism Technology : TEC and CTCN and work program technology Some issues deferred to 2011: market mechanisms, forum response measures Continuation AWG’s AWG KP: shall aim to complete its work pursuant to decision 1/CMP.1 & have its results adopted as early as possible and in time to ensure there is no gap between CP 1 and CP 2 AWG LCA: extended for one year and present the results to COP 17 10

3. Points of attention for 2011 Central question legally binding framework will dominate run up to Durban Unlikely that polarization between demandeurs for 2nd CP and those that reject inscription in 2nd CP can be solved by political power play Possibly need to look at hybrid formulae (two instruments intertwined? track neutral objectives and actions?) Otherwise default option will likely be postponing Approach chosen by S. Africa will highly define expectations & profile Durban - Within EU also discussion on stepping up ambition level (30% discussion) e) Need to reflect on expectations with respect to US (standstill legislative initiatives) and China (a more proactive role once economic lead on energy efficiency and renewable energy has been established?) f) EU has gained influence in negotiations by trying to build bridges between North and South. Important to maintain this and to continue dialogues and to present our proposals g) EU stills tends to underestimate the huge negotiation and expert capacity it has compared to other delegations _________ 11