1. Common but differentiated responsibilities in a post-2012 period : different commitments and actions of the countries Julia Dobrolyubova Expert on Climate Change and Kyoto Protocol REC Workshop 5-6 March 2009 13, bld.2, 1 st Volkonsky lane, Moscow, 127473 Russia phone/fax: +7 495 737 6448 e-mail: dobrolubova@rusrec.ru www.rusrec.ru

2. What is the RREC? RREC is a part of regional environmental centres network acting in Central and Eastern Europe, Moldova, Ukraine, Russia, Caucasus and Central Asia. RREC was founded in 2000 by European Commission and Russian Academy of Civil Service Our mission Promotion and introduction of advanced ideas, policies, standards and best practices by providing information dialogue and implementing practical actions to ensure environmental quality and sustainable development of Russia. Climate change and energy efficiency activities: assistance in implementation of the UNFCCC and Kyoto protocol provisions (policy analysis, consulting, capacity-building, awareness-rising activities); assistance in implementation of the UNFCCC and Kyoto protocol provisions (policy analysis, consulting, capacity-building, awareness-rising activities); Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Partnership (REEEP) regional secretariat. Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Partnership (REEEP) regional secretariat.

3. Current UNFCCC/KP differentiation of countries Principle of ‘common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities’ of countries’ Annex I – OECD member countries in 1992 + countries with Economies in Transition - 40 countries Annex II – AI Parties with additional commitments to provide finance and facilitate transfer of technology to developing countries – 24 countries non-Annex I – countries not included in Annex I (developing countries) Annex B – AI Parties with quantified emission limitation or reduction objectives under the Kyoto Protocol (except Belarus, Turkey and the USA) Countries with Economy in Transition – 14 countries Least Developed Countries – 49 countries

4. Current UNFCCC/KP differentiation of countries level of economic development of countries in early 1990s as a basis auto-identification of the Parties (either directly or through membership in a political/economic organization – OECD, EC, etc.) -> differentiation was not based on common and objective criteria reflects 1992 realities -> outdated inefficient procedure for changing status by a Party non-Annex I major emitters do not have mitigation commitments

5. Bali Action Plan (BAP) The Bali Action Plan (BAP) was adopted at COP-13 (Bali-2007) and is aimed at the adoption at COP-15 (Copenhagen-2009) of an agreement to enable “full, effective and sustained implementation” of the UNFCCC up to and beyond 2012. Para 1b of the BAP on mitigation calls for: (i)Measurable, reportable and verifiable nationally appropriate mitigation commitments or actions, including quantified emission limitation and reduction objectives, by all developed country Parties, while ensuring the comparability of efforts among them, taking into account differences in their national circumstances; (ii) Nationally appropriate mitigation actions by developing country Parties in the context of sustainable development, supported and enabled by technology, financing and capacity-building, in a measurable, reportable and verifiable manner.

6. New differentiation of countries Basic principles: common approach new objective criterion/criteria differentiation based on the national circumstances of countries update is necessary according to current socio-economic situation ( South Korea, Mexico are OECD member-states, but are not in AI, Malta is a EU member-state, but non-AI Party ) differentiated commitments and actions relevant to status of a country progressively greater flexibility in the types of mitigation actions as countries go down the differentiation scale easy procedure for changing status by a country

7. New differentiation of countries The target is to ensure: broader participation of countries in global efforts to achieve the ultimate objective of the Convention ( six of the top 15 major emitters, namely Brazil, China, Iran, Korea, Mexico, and South Africa are non- Annex I Parties and hence do not have binding mitigation commitments ) ; fair burden sharing ( 46 developing Parties have a GDP per capita higher than that of Ukraine, which is an Annex I Party ) comparability of mitigation efforts It will show to climate policy-makers: The appropriateness of different types of mitigation commitments or actions in a post-2012 climate change regime; and The eligibility of different countries to various types of support for mitigation actions.

8. Possible indicators for differentiation Emissions-related indicators Total emissions Share of global emissions Cumulative emissions Projected emissions Emissions per capita Emissions per GDP Energy balance Export quota of carbon- intense goods Socio-economic indicators GDP per capita OECD membership Stages of economic development Human Development Index Climate vulnerability indicator Institutional/ Organisational indicator Mitigation potential Mitigation effort Mitigation costs and benefits

9. Emissions profile of different countries Source: Jiahua Pan, Research Centre for Sustainable Development, Beijing China

10. Possible types of commitments Absolute GHG emission reduction targets (in relation to a base year in all economic sectors or for specific economic sector) Relative GHG emission reduction targets (more flexible, e.g. energy or carbon intensity of GDP, energy and carbon intensity per capita). Such commitments may be applied either to the whole country or to specified sectors Commitments based on implementation of national policies and measures (e.g. development of a national emissions trading system by sector with further access to the external carbon market, introduction of a tax or price policy to promote energy saving and deployment of new technologies) Commitments based on development, deployment and expansion of low-carbon technologies

11. Possible differentiation of countries and commitments/actions Developed countriesDeveloping countries Annex II Parties (EU-15, USA, Japan, Canada) Strong national and international commitments, funds for mitigation action, adaptation, technical assistance and technology transfer Newly industrialised countries (South Korea, Singapore, Mexico) National mitigation commitments + limited international mitigation commitments Emerging economies (China, Brazil, Saudi Arabia, South Africa) Sectoral mitigation commitments (binding emission reduction targets per GDP, per capita, etc.) Economies in Transition and other Annex I Parties that are not in Annex II (Poland, Latvia, Russia, Ukraine) + countries with similar socio-economic development level, countries wishing to be treated as AI Parties Substantial national and limited international mitigation commitments Other developing countries SD-PAMs, adaptation actions Least Developed Countries (Bangladesh) No commitments

12. Negotiating a new differentiation of countries The idea of the Parties’ regrouping is generally supported by Annex I Parties: USA – differentiation between the developing countries that are major emitters and those that are not (US MEM process) Canada – binding commitments to be extended to all major emitters economies EU – ‘fair and effective contributions’ to climate efforts by economically advanced developing countries Russia – ‘without a new sight on the differentiation of countries it is impossible to develop further long-term cooperative measures under the Convention’ + Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Turkey, etc. … but is strongly opposed by non-Annex I Parties.

13. Issues for further consideration differentiation criteria? ( GDP or emissions per capita criteria keep China, India and Indonesia off-board ) procedure for differentiation (definition, list, auto-election of countries)? platform for discussion: AWG-LCA, new track? graduation of some of non-Annex I Parties to the Annex I list or additional lists? amendment to the UNFCCC or new differentiation within a new agreement? Differentiation of actions rather than countries? Opposition of non-Annex I Parties – how to negotiate the issue

14. Thank you for your attention! Julia Dobrolyubova Phone/Fax: +7-495-737-6448 e-mail: dobrolubova@rusrec.ru