Raising ambition through cooperation : using article 6 to bolster climate change mitigation

This JIKO Policy Paper explores how Parties using Article 6 can increase their mitigation ambition. Building on a broad definition of ambition raising which puts the intensification of climate change mitigation targets and actions by Parties at its centre, eight different ambition raising options are identified. The analysis shows that these options are associated with different technical, institutional and political challenges, calling for a combination of different ambition raising options

Caught in between : credibility and feasibility of the voluntary carbon market post-2020

On the one hand, a large number of companies have committed to achieve net zero emissions and many of them foresee to offset some remaining emissions with carbon credits, suggesting a surge of future demand. Yet, the supply side of the voluntary carbon market is struggling to align its business model with the new legal architecture of the Paris Agreement. This article juxtaposes these two perspectives. It provides an overview of the plans of 482 major companies with some form of neutrality/net zero pledge and traces the struggle on the supply side of the voluntary carbon market to come up with a viable business model that ensures environmental integrity and contributes to achieving the objectives of the Paris Agreement. Our analysis finds that if carbon credits are used to offset remaining emissions against neutrality objectives, these credits need to be accounted against the host countries' Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) to ensure environmental integrity. Yet, operationalizing this approach is challenging and will require innovative solutions and political support. Key policy insights: There is a growing mismatch between the faith placed in carbon credits by private sector companies and the continued quest for a common position of the main suppliers of the voluntary carbon market. The voluntary carbon market has not yet found a way to align itself with the new legal architecture of the Paris Agreement in a credible and legitimate way. Public policy support at the national and international level will be needed to operationalize a robust approach for the market’s future activities

Achieving overall mitigation of global emissions under the Paris article 6.4 mechanism : discussion paper

Article 6.4 of the Paris Agreement establishes a new mechanism for Parties to cooperate in achieving their nationally determined contributions (NDCs). One key innovation of the Article 6.4 mechanism is its objective to "deliver an overall mitigation in global emissions" (Art. 6.4(d)). This report develops recommendations on how to implement this objective. A key difficulty lies in the fact that even basics of how the mechanism is supposed to function have so far not been clarified by the Parties. The report therefore first sketches out what has so far been agreed and discussed on the mechanism’s activity cycle. Second, as the concept of overall mitigation has so far also not been clearly defined by Parties, the report derives a working definition from the language that was agreed in the Paris Agreement. In the next step, the report provides a survey of the options to achieve overall mitigation that have so far been discussed in the relevant literature and in the Article 6 negotiations. Many of these options were developed in the context of the Kyoto mechanisms. The report therefore discusses to what extent the options are also applicable under the Paris Agreement or whether adjustments need to be made. In the following, the options that are applicable under the Agreement are assessed on the basis of a number of criteria. The report concludes with a summary of the main findings and recommendations

Potentials for offset approaches in selected sectors post 2020

This report develops an evaluation framework that policymakers can use to identify whether offsets can add value and uphold environmental integrity of a compliance scheme. It uses a scoring framework on factors to: (1) identify which sectors have hard-to-abate emissions that can justify demanding offsets as cost-containment measures for ambitious climate policies; and (2) identify mitigation activities that are otherwise inaccessible, fosters sustainable development, and the extent to which it enables transformative sectoral action to be eligible to supply offsets. This evaluation framework identifies the optimal conditions that make factors successful in either having sectors demand offsets, or specific mitigation activities supply offsets. Sectoral emissions that are hard-to-abate are those that are technically unavoidable due to a lack and maturity of technologies, and therefore should be allowed to have cost-containment measures - such as offsets - to avoid adverse economic ramifications such as carbon leakage. Mitigation activities that can supply offsets are those that are currently inaccessible to local actor’s due to lack of access to technology, finance or capabilities. Allowing these mitigation activities to be eligible to supply offsets allows to pilot such activities and realize mitigation outcomes outside the original scope of the compliance scheme. This report has chosen selected sectors and mitigation activities to illustrate how this framework can be applied at the global level. It recognizes that country-specific factors can change the assessment of whether the offset approach will add value and uphold environmental integrity to proposed compliance schemes of a country. The report further proposes practical steps policymakers can do to undertake an evaluation at the national level

Global climate

This report lays out the major developments in Durban and assesses the main outcomes. It is structured along the Bali roadmap for a future climate agreement that was agreed at the Bali climate conference in 2007. The Bali roadmap comprises negotiations under two tracks. First, the Ad Hoc Working Group on Further Commitments by Annex I Countries under the Kyoto Protocol (AWG-KP), established at the conference in Montreal in 2005, has been negotiating future emission targets for developed countries (listed in Annex I of the United Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and hence called Annex I countries). As the Kyoto Protocol's first commitment period expires in 2012, the AWG-KP is to agree on new targets for a second commitment period post-2012 as well as associated rules for accounting emissions. Second, the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention (AWG-LCA) has also been negotiating commitments for Annex I countries, intending to cover those that have not ratified the Protocol - that is, the USA. In addition, the LCA negotiates "Nationally appropriate mitigation actions" of developing countries, which are to be supported by Annex I countries with technology, financing and capacity-building. Both the actions and the support are to be "measurable, reportable and verifiable". The LCA also negotiates how such support for developing countries' mitigation actions may be delivered as well as how developing countries may be supported in adapting to the impacts of climate change

Sands are running out for climate protection : the Doha Climate Conference once again saves the UN climate process while real climate action is shelved for later

This report analyses the international climate negotiations at the UN climate conference in Doha in December 2012. The report is structured along the three main tracks of the negotiations: the agreement on a second commitment period under the Kyoto Protocol, the closure of the Ad-hoc Working Group on Long-Term Cooperative Action under the Convention, and the start of negotiations on a new comprehensive climate agreement that are to be concluded by 2015

Suitability and success factors of offsets post-2020

Offsetting enables countries and companies to meet part of their climate change mitigation obligations by using mitigation outcomes generated elsewhere - in lieu of own emission reductions. This report explores the future role of offset approaches and how they could be successfully integrated into a post-2020 climate regime by focusing both the supply and demand side. For this purpose, the report develops a conceptual approach that derives a normative vision of what should be considered a successful offset use in a top-down manner to then link this vision to specific factors on the ground in sectors and jurisdictions where offsets will be generated and used. It explores how these factors influence the successful operationalisation of the offset approach and how they can inform its design. In addition, the report also explores six conceptual design aspects to providing recommendations on how to take these factors into account during the design of the offset approach. Based on these findings, the authors derive overarching policy recommendations on the integration of offsets into carbon pricing schemes

Offset approaches in existing compliance mechanisms : adding value and upholding environmental integrity?

The objective of this report is to use historical analysis to identify conditions that determine when offsets add value to compliance schemes while upholding environmental integrity. The indicators of success include: increased acceptance of introducing compliance schemes; raising ambition in subsequent compliance periods; the possibility to drive emission reductions outside the compliance sectors; promoting investments in sustainable development; and avoiding perverse incentives that undermine the stringency of the compliance scheme or compliance actors’ efforts in reducing their own emissions. Through undertaking in-depth case study analyzes on the effects of offsets in the European Union, Alberta, Australia, Colombia and Japan, the report identifies common conditions that explain why offsets were successful (or not) in achieving individual indicators. The report further identifies two common conditions that can help explain when offsets achieve all five indicators of success. The first is that policymakers need to be willing to design the compliance scheme to set and maintain a strong compliance price signal that justifies the need for incorporating cost containment measures, such as offsets, to avert negative political and economic ramifications. Relatedly, the second condition requires institutions, processes and infrastructure that govern both the compliance scheme and offsets to be well developed so that they can ensure offsets uphold the principles of environmental integrity, achieve sustainable development benefits, and act as a reliable cost containment measure to high compliance prices. The findings also highlight how difficult it is to achieve both conditions, as both domestic and international political economy factors determine whether policymakers and voters are willing to introduce and maintain compliance schemes that deliver effective action on climate

Klimaneutralität in Unternehmen : zehn Empfehlungen für die Umsetzung

Immer mehr Unternehmen verkünden, klimaneutral sein zu wollen und zahlreiche Firmen bieten bereits klimaneutrale Produkte oder Dienstleistungen an: Von der klimaneutralen Paketzustellung bis zur Flugreise. Doch was bedeuten die Neutralitätsziele der Unternehmen genau? Ist das gesetzte Ziel ambitioniert? Und welche Rolle spielt Offsetting, also der Ankauf von Klimaschutzzertifikaten und deren Anrechnung auf das eigene Klimaschutzziel? Die hinter den verkündeten Zielen stehenden Ansätze sind häufig nur schwer nachvollziehbar. Vor diesem Hintergrund gibt der vorliegende Zukunftsimpuls zehn Empfehlungen für die Festlegung und Umsetzung von Neutralitätszielen. Die Autorinnen und Autoren sprechen sich dabei unter anderem für die Nutzung einer robusten Datenbasis als Grundlage für Neutralitätsziele aus, betonen die Bedeutung einer transparenten Kommunikation und zeigen auf, welche Rolle Offsetting spielen sollte. So sollten angekaufte Klimaschutz-Zertifikate einen möglichst begrenzten Beitrag zur Zielerfüllung leisen und ausschließlich zum Ausgleich von Emissionen genutzt werden, die nicht reduziert oder vermieden werden können. Insgesamt sollten Neutralitätsziele nicht zum alleinigen Kriterium für ambitionierten Klimaschutz von Unternehmen gemacht werden, sie stellen vielmehr ein Baustein einer weitaus umfassenderen unternehmerischen Klimaschutzstrategie dar

Using results-based finance for climate action : existing initiatives and the role of the CDM

Results-based finance is receiving increasing attention, being considered as a potential key funding mode in climate finance. The Clean Development Mechanism has been cited to potentially contribute to this goal. Against this background, the policy brief outlines the rationale of the concept and analyses six climate change mitigation initiatives that build on the results-based finance approach. The analysis puts a special focus on the role of the CDM