El 18º período de sesiones de la Conferencia de las Partes (CP18) de la Convención Marco de las Naciones Unidas sobre el Cambio Climático (CMNUCC) celebrado en Doha (Qatar) concluyó con objetivos poco ambiciosos en lo que respecta a la reducción de las emisiones y al financiamiento.

Las divergencias conceptuales entre estos dos grupos de países fueron muy evidentes durante las dos semanas que duraron las negociaciones de Doha. En las horas finales de la Conferencia, los delegados debieron disimular estos desencuentros para evitar que la Conferencia fuera un sonado fracaso.

Informe sobre políticas climáticas número 9, febrero de 2013

La conferencia anual de las Naciones Unidas sobre el cambio climático que se llevó a cabo a finales de del año pasado en Doha concluyó el 8 de diciembre de 2012 con bajos niveles de compromiso por parte de los países desarrollados en dos áreas fundamentales: la reducción de emisiones y la provisión de financiamiento a los países en desarrollo.

Climate Policy Brief, November 2012

Developing countries have long been at the frontlines of climate change and bearing the brunt of its impacts on sustainable development prospects and even, in many cases, physical survival and territorial integrity. These underscore the need for global cooperation and action on climate change.

Los países en desarrollo hacen frente ahora a una disminución del crecimiento del producto interno bruto (PIB) y de las exportaciones y a un endurecimiento de las condiciones crediticias, provocados por la crisis en la zona del euro y la desaceleración económica de los Estados Unidos.

El escándalo del LIBOR, que sigue dando de qué hablar,constituye el más reciente y duro golpe a la credibilidad de los grandes bancos y sus organismos de reglamentación.

El escándalo, que no pudo haber ocurrido en un peor momento para el sector bancario sumido ya en numerosas y graves crisis financieras, aumenta considerablemente la pérdida de confianza en el comportamiento de los banqueros y en la credibilidad del sistema bancario que ya en los últimos años han sufrido duros golpes.

SouthViews

No.23,              24 July 2012 SOUTHVIEWS is a service of the South Centre to provide opinions and analysis of topical issues from a South perspective.  Visit the South Centre’s website: www.southcentre.org   Equity is the Gateway to Environment Ambition: South Centre statement in UNFCCC Below is the statement by Martin Khor, Executive Director of the South Centre, which was presented at the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Ad-hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action (AWG-LCA) Workshop on Equity in Bonn on 16 May 2012. ……………………………………………………………… In the quest for an international climate agreement on actions to address the climate change crisis, three aspects have to be the basis simultaneously: the environmental imperative, the developmental imperative, and the equity imperative. This EDE formula requires that the different pieces of the climate negotiations be seen and addressed as a whole, in a holistic way. In particular, setting the global goal for emission reduction has to take account of the environmental imperative, and also deal with the emission reduction of Annex I and non-Annex I Parties. Equity is the element and principle that cements the link between environment and development. Indeed, equity is the gateway to environmental ambition.     For example, fixing of a temperature target and of a global emissions reduction goal must be done within a paradigm or framework for the equitable sharing of the atmospheric space and the development space.   The sharing of the mitigation efforts, and the support (finance and technology transfer) that must accompany this sharing is a most critical piece of the jigsaw puzzle. The UN Climate Convention recognises the equity principle; that developed countries take the lead in emission reduction, and that developing countries have development imperatives, and their ability to undertake climate actions depend on the extent of support they receive from the developed countries. Annex I countries will also meet the agreed full incremental costs of implementing developing countries' mitigation measures, as well as providing financing on adaptation and technology.  There are competing claims on a national budget or a family budget. The trade-offs and dilemmas are more acute for the poor. A poor family would put greater priority on feeding the children and on health care, and also on adaptation action such as preventing floods and rain from occupying the house, ahead of spending on mitigation. Thus, financial assistance is required if changing to more environmentally sound cook stoves is to be done by the family. So too regarding a typical budget making exercise by developing countries. Thus the provision of finance to support mitigation in developing countries, which is oprerationalising the equity principle, would be a necessary piece of effective global migitation action. Recognising the gateway role of equity to higher environmental ambition is not a rhetorical but a logical and realistic way of getting to a successful mitigation framework.    Between 1850 and 2009, about 1,280 Gigatons of CO2 were emitted, thus adding to the stock of CO2 in the atmosphere. To achieve a 67% probability of limiting temperature rise to within 2 degrees Celsius, CO2 emissions in 2010-2050 must be kept to below 750 Gt; a 75% probability requires a 600 Gt budget. Of the cumulative global emissions Annex I countries accounted for 72% of the total compared to their share of population of about 25%. Developing countries accounted 28% of the total. The over-utilisation by Annex I was 568 Gton, the same as the under-utilisation by developing countries. In terms of annual flow, Annex I is still exceeding its fair share.   In sharing the remaining carbon space in 2010-2050 two concepts are needed: (1) The allocation of carbon space as according to rights and responsibilities; (2) The actual carbon budget (and related physical emissions reduction schedule) that countries eventually put forward as what they can physically undertake. There could be a difference between the allocation of responsibilities and rights, and the actual emissions reduction or related budgets. Therefore: Countries that cannot meet their allocated budget or emission cut can compensate for this unmet part of their obligation and countries that do not make full use of these rights, can obtain the funds for their actions. The equity approach has implications for the various topics under LCA. In shared vision, the setting of a global goal for emission reduction should be accompanied by a clarification of the roles of developed and developing countries. For example, a proposal of a global goal of 50% and an Annex I goal of 80% proposal raises some issues. Firstly, the 50% global cut is environmentally not ambitious enough, as it would correspond to a carbon budget above what is required. Secondly, the implied distribution of the carbon budget gives Annex I countries a budget share of 30-35 per cent, compared to their 16% share of world population in this period. Thirdly, acceptance of this proposal means accepting not only an unfair distribution of the 2010-50 carbon budgets, but also writing off the cumulative debt of developed countries. Fourthly, accepting these figures (50%, 80%) implicitly accepts specific emissions cut target for developing countries, and locking in this whole distribution of carbon budget and set of emissions cuts.   It implies that in 2050, Annex I total and per capita emissions would be cut by 80% while developing countries’ per capita emissions would be cut to 1.5 ton or about half below 1990 levels and compared to 2005 levels it would be around 40% below in absolute terms and 60% below in per capita terms. The cuts would be even more compared to business as usual in 2050. It is doubtful that developing countries can meet this implied target for them, unless decoupling between emissions and economic growth takes place through a miraculous mechanism. For this decoupling, massive infusions of finance and technology, coupled with institutional and human capacity building is required.   This is why equity is also embedded in the finance and technology issues. The enormity of the problem was not lost on the economist Nicholas Stern who has said : “If the allocations of rights to emit in any given year took greater account both of history and of equity in stocks rather than flows, then rich countries would have rights to emit which were lower than 2 tonnes per capita (possibly even negative). The negotiations of such right involve substantial financial allocations: at $40 per tonne CO2e a total world allocation of rights of, say, 30Gt (roughly the required flows in 2030) would be worth $1.2 trillion per annum”. On estimates on mitigation funds needed, the World Bank estimated that: “In developing countries mitigation could cost $140 to $175 billion a year with associated financing needs of $265 to $565 billion. A study in India (by the CSE) of six sectors to determine India's low carbon growth options concludes: “There is no real way we can reduce emissions without impacting growth once we cross the current emissions-efficiency technology threshold...It is for this reason that India (and all other late entrants to the development game) must not give up on their demand for an equitous global agreement.”   For the power generation sector, a low-carbon strategy could reduce emissions in India cumulatively by 3.4 Gton by 2030-31. The additional cost of generating power from renewable technologies is estimated at US$203 bil or about $10 bil a year or $60 per tonne of CO2 emissions avoided. On adaptation financing needs, the World Bank estimates up to $100 billion a year, higher than the UNFCCC's financial flows report (at $27 to $66 bil a year). The most comprehensive estimate is a IIED-Imperial College study led by Martin Parry which found the adaptation cost for developing countries may come up to $450 billion annually. Financing for technology cooperation and transfer: The UNFCCC's expert group on technology (EGTT) estimates the total finance needs are $300-1,000 billion a year; with developing countries' additional funding needs of $182 – 505 billion a year, for deployment and diffusion of technology. This does not include research and development or demonstration costs in developing countries. IMPLICATIONS FOR NEGOTIATIONS (a) Shared Vision: In the negotiations on shared vision, developing countries have argued that a decision on a global goal (whether temperature limit or global emissions reduction) should be in the context of equity and to be preceded by a paradigm for the equitable sharing of the atmospheric space or resource. This should also be the case for the wording on a global peaking year.   This is a correct position because the global goals for temperature and emissions reduction have implications for the responsibilities of developing countries or for their options in their emissions and thus their economic pathways. This principle of equity in the sharing of atmospheric space has to be operationalised with the use of carbon budget and debt concepts. The data on fair shares and actual emissions and thus on debt/surplus also have major implications for the sharing of the carbon space in the 2010-2050 period, and thus of the allocation of emission obligations and rights as would be expressed in the shared vision's important element of “global goal for emissions reduction.” (b) Mitigation: The concepts and figures on cumulative emissions and carbon debt/surplus make it clear that Annex I Parties must continue to “take the lead” in emissions reduction. If developed countries undertake only weak targets for the next commitment period and their emissions are only reduced a little (or even increases), then there is even less carbon space left for developing countries. The present pledges made either in the Copenhagen Accord or Kyoto Protocol are far from adequate. Various analyses show that the Annex I (including the US) pledges add up collectively to only a 16% reduction (by 2020 compared to 1990) at best and if loopholes (through LULUCF and AAUs) are taken into account there can even be a 6.5% increase in Annex I emissions.  (c) Finance: One way in which the historical carbon debt that developed countries hold may be discharged is through payments into the Green Climate Fund. Besides this, the developed countries have obligations under the UNFCCC to meet mitigation, adaptation and capacity building expenses. The quantum of funds for discharging the carbon debt and for meeting the additional costs are large, but this is to be expected since the financial requirements of adaptation, mitigation, capacity building and technology are massive. The amounts so far announced ($10 bil a year from 2010, and $100 bil by 2020) are inadequate. (d) Technology Transfer: To play their extremely ambitious and difficult role, developing countries need technology at the most affordable rates. The following measures are proposed: (1) They must have the maximum access at least cost to the best technologies; (2) Barriers to technology transfer must be addressed, including the issue of IPRs; (3) Developing countries must be assisted in the development of endogenous technology and to undertake their own R and D and develop innovation, with international support; (4) R and D activities should be financed by UNFCCC funds, and the products from these should be in the public domain; (5) Sufficient funds should be provided for technology development and transfer to developing countries.; (6) A Technology Policy Board or Council should be set up under the UNFCCC to address the technology issues. FOLLOW-UP PROCESS The   workshop   on   equity   in   the AWGLCA on 16 May 2012 is an important opportunity to discuss the role and importance of equity in the UNFCCC and its outcomes and future negotiations. The paper above attempts to show how pervasive the implications of the equity principle are. The workshop is a good start, and it should be followed up by a process, in order to contribute to progress in the negotiations in various structures of the UNFCCC.  It is thus proposed that a work programme be established in the UNFCCC under the COP and which would have effect in its bodies and working groups. The objective should be to examine the various aspects of equity as a principle in UNFCCC and how it is to be operationalized in various issues (mitigation, adaptation, finance, technology, shared vision) and various bodies and working groups of the Convention. The recognition and operationalizing of the equity principle will be a major gateway for the raising of environmental ambition, including in facilitating that the means of implementation can be provided in adequate amounts and appropriate forms to developing countries so that they can contribute more to the global mitigation effort as well as to meeting their adaptation needs.                            Contact: director@southcentre.org. This article was published in the South Bulletin (11 June 2012). To view other articles in SouthViews, please click here. For more information, please contact Vicente Paolo Yu of the South Centre: Email yu@southcentre.org, or telephone +41 22 791 80 50.

Del 13 al 22 de junio tendrá lugar en Río de Janeiro (Brasil) la Conferencia de las Naciones Unidas sobre el Desarrollo Sostenible (Río+20). A continuación presentamos un análisis de las cuestiones más controvertidas por resolver y de cómo podría Río+20 producir resultados satisfactorios.

Es casi imposible que Río+20 logre ser un hito en la solución de las crisis económicas y medioambientales mundiales, pero todavía puede ser un éxito si se reafirman los antiguos compromisos y se ponen en marcha nuevos procesos para fortalecer las instituciones y establecer nuevos objetivos y planes de acción.

Los ciclos de auge y colapso de las corrientes de capital y sus efectos en los países en desarrollo

El auge actual de las corrientes de capital hacia los países en desarrollo está teniendo efectos desestabilizadores sobre las monedas, amenaza con crear burbujas de activos y terminará en un colapso perjudicial. Los mercados de los productos básicos son objeto de especulación lo que genera fluctuaciones y volatilidad en los precios de estos productos y hace necesarios tanto los controles de capital en el plano nacional como la reglamentación de las corrientes de capital y de los mercados de los productos básicos a nivel internacional.

A Transition Committee under the UNFCCC is discussing the design of a Green Climate Fund to operate under the Climate Convention. The South Centre is taking part in the Committee's meetings as an Observer Organisation. In June 2011, the South Centre made four written submissions on the themes of the four Workstreams of the Committee. The following are the submissions:

Documento de investigación número 34 (resumen únicamente) noviembre de 2010

Este documento señala la importancia de las obligaciones internacionales en materia de derechos humanos a la luz de las numerosas restricciones que el cambio climático impone al desarrollo sostenible en los países en desarrollo. Estas obligaciones jurídicamente vinculantes han sido convenidas por los Estados desde la creación de la Organización de las Naciones Unidas (ONU) y han sido incorporadas en tratados relacionados con los derechos humanos ratificados por un gran número de países.  

Analytical Note, August 2009

This Analytical Note examines flexibilities in the Agreement on Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) of the World Trade Organization (WTO) and possible technology transfer approaches under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) as among the possible modalities that developing countries can use to obtain access to and affect transfers of climate-relevant technologies. It looks at the possibilities and challenges that need to be addressed in this regard.

Documento Analítico SC/GGDP/AN/ENV/7

En el presente Documento Analítico se estudian los niveles necesarios de financiación relacionada con el cambio climático y los conductos de gestión de la financiación pública destinada a alentar la adopción medidas relativas al cambio climático en los países en desarrollo procedente de los países desarrollados parte en la Convención de las Naciones Unidas para el Cambio Climático (CMNUCC), es decir, las Partes comprendidas en el Anexo I de la Convención. Se aduce que la financiación pública procedente de las Partes listadas en el Anexo I es insuficiente respecto de las necesidades existentes y refleja una preferencia por conductos externos a la CMNUCC. Se afirma también que dichas Partes cuentan por partida doble la asistencia oficial para el desarrollo y la financiación relacionada con el cambio climático a la hora de demostrar el cumplimiento de sus compromisos en la materia. Concluye que las modalidades existentes mediante las que los países desarrollados proporcionan financiación para contrarrestar el cambio climático menoscaban la CMNUCC en términos de su función como vehículo de financiación relacionada con el cambio climático que guarda conformidad con los objetivos de la CMNUCC y los refuerza.