COP28 notes: Global Stock Take 6/12/23

[this is one in a series of notes of negotiations at COP28 - in this case under the Global Stock Take, which aims to assess progress towards the goals of the Paris Agreement and what needs to happen next. A new text had dropped at 5am that morning: https://unfccc.int/documents/635015 and the Contact Group convened to discuss it at 3pm. Later informal consultations commenced at 7 and went late into the night.]

GST Contact Group 5/12/23

?

Cochair – we’ve tried to produce something manageable for the Ministers to work with. We can give parties another go through the text but we have been told to close the Contact Group by tomorrow afternoon.

There are lots of options and we want parties to engage each other and come forward with proposals that parties think can command support of the wider group. If so we can bring back to Contact Group tomorrow, put it up for discussion and forward it.

So we want reactions – is this tool useful – is Inf Inf productive? Some have said that yesterday was productive. We were hoping to receive proposals today but have not received any yet.

Do parties wish to go through the whole 22 pages through another round? Despite the lack of sleep we are willing to give it a go, thogh we cannot promise to stay awake – the Secretariat were with us there all night.

The tool is our judgment, but we are in your hands and are here to help. We don’t have much time, let’s get broad guidance, and then we’ll close the meeting

Philippines for G77: from conversations with colleagues on how to move forward, knowing full well that direct textual negotiation would take too much time. Suggest that we recess the joint Contact Group, give all the parties and groups an hour or so to discuss a bit more and finalise comments and messages, reconvene later this afternoon for 1 hour time bound consultation, then come back to work on a further iteration ready for procedural conclusion and handoff to ministers

?

Cochair: notes and hope all others have noted and will suggest views. We have the room til 5 but don’t want to prolong – you need time to discuss within and between your groups on how to organise ourselves in limited time.

?

United States – there are some errors in the text, we leave it in the cohairs hands to retain the careful balance, I don’t think we should split this into constituent pieces but have one intervention each on the whole thing so as to force us to prioritise. We can support the G77’s proposed approach to our work.

Colombia for AILAC – thanks Cochairs for text with clear options that captures many many reflections. Important that the text captures our recent consultations and longer term discussions too. We need to ensure that sections do not proceed at very different paces. We would suggest that there be clarity on when the Way Forward section will be discussed.

Malawi for LDC:? thanks cochairs, support G77, welcome work on second iteration, appreciate it as basis for our work, concerned that text is getting bigger, the length and options will not serve our purpose if they expand so let us make progress. The GST should take stock and provide a way forward and guidance on bridging the gaps, esp on cooperatie efforts to reduce emissions to hit 1.5C, mobilise adaptation finance and address loss and damage. We need to use time to balance the text. There’s only one section still in bullets – very important – guidance and way forward. We want to expand these bullets into text, via InfInf and mandating cochairs to expand this. We know you understand us and our positions, and can keep it at manageable size.

Switzerland: THANKS and conscious of the work representing so much input. Happy to work on the basis of this tool. We see elements to strengthen – the GST is a central pillar for Paris. Concerned that one important section is bulleted – confident we can work together over the next hours on joint proposals to take this forward. The success of the GST hinges on what happens after the SBs conclude, would want text here. But you have our support.

EU : Congratulate the cochairs. Some areas are not yet complete or fully reflected The last section on the way forward is not as developed but is very important. We’re flexible to go with either the cochair approach or the G77

Trinidad and Tobago: support G77 and thanks cochairs & sec. Like others we can work on this text basis, and welcome Philippines suggestions on more discussion. AILAC is right on need for further development of the Way Forward section before closing. In your hands on mode of work but stress further engagement needs to be on the entirety and not just on bullets in Way Forward.

Canada: we agree with general direction of the room. Worth having one final restrained kick at the can to get the text as far advanced as possible. My best suggestion for a slogan is “Do Androids Dream of the GST?”

Brazil: Like others we welcome amazing work in such a short time, very reassuring to see that we are in very good hands. Provides a very good basis for us to get together and make most use of the time remaining. Agree with G77 and that Way Forward needs to be developed much more. We see options but with some gaps. Keen to make minor adjustments re some language. Some ideas very important for Brazil are not here at all, would be great if we could have some more time to further consult. But overall considering this as something that provides us a vision of what the GST can be. Thank you, very impressed

Ghana for African Group: A text that reflects all options should still be our goal. We see missing priorities for our group. You’ve tried for a delicate balance but we will benefit from surgical insertions on key issues, then we can have a product we can submit.

Saudi for LMDC: align with G77, reiterate thanks and appreciation for truly very difficult task to iterate a document that doesn’t completely not make sense. We see a lot of our views reflected as well as others, we reiterate views on things that need to be added for next iteration but we’re going in right direction for a good basis for text negotiations. A recommendation: we’ve heard the desire to add but also discuss; we propose to reconvene in an hour or so to do a short informal to express same surgical views as Ghana and US mentioned, things that need to be there to proceed, then go away and discuss informally the bulleted elements in way forward and what would be useful. Express flexibility, open to suggestions.

Pakistan: join G77 and LMDC comments, thanks at relentless efforts. Initial observations: this GST is an inventory taking exercise. This document is voluminous and needs to be concise to be actionable. Of course there are elements that others will wish to discuss to make doc structured, coherent and predictable. The Paris element on climate finance is crucial. That element is largely missing here. We’ll also focus on compliance and implementation and interested in firming up action plan to make it more predictable.

Holy See: As the first time we are taking the floor, we note that an offense against the environment is an offence against God. We welcome the new text as an outstanding progress. We suggest the GST should be comprehensive in looking backward and forward, with actions recommended to fill gaps. L&D should be met with equity and CBDR, recognising that the poor have done the least to create this crisis. Only moving from a culture of self interest and consumerism can achieve the change we need. The Holy See will submit proposals on lifestyle change and education

Kyrgyzstan: there is much to welcome here. We would like to include mountainous areas in the text as a separate ecosystem.

Bhutan: Support LDC and G77. Acknowledge urgency of action in this decade and that none be left behind.

China: Align with G77 and LMDC. Congrats for your intellectual and physical efforts and see some of our proposals reflected, but some critical ones are not. Let’s keep all the options and issues on the table, then streamline. Happy and ready to work with colleagues. Procedurally: do you have plans for a third iteration?

Bolivia: support G77 and LMDC. Critical to create a very balanced approach in GST. We need more time to introduce elements to create that balance. This text is addressing an imbalance in the Paris Agreement – we’ve been trying to balance market and nonmarket approaches. There is no reference at all to the importance of nonmarket approaches. We can’t proceed with text that only sees markets as the solution. Also we need to address Art 5 of Paris on deforestation – ignored in this proposal – two critical things to address. We need a balance between 6.2 6.4 6.8, not reinterpret Paris.

Cochair: I will confer with my cochair and we’ll get back to you in a few minutes.

[they decided to reconvene 7-9 for informal on surgical, limited, high priority additions, then move to inf-infs on Way Forward especially, then reconvene at 10am tomorrow]

?

LATER – 7PM INFORMAL CONSULTATIONS

Cochair: remember we’re here for some surgical edits. Please focus on the things that matter most to you, we want to keep this short. We will be mindful of the balance of the text. Keep interventions focussed. There will be an editorial process on the text, don’t feel the need to raise editing issues. Also we will need to add budgetary implications to the text where relevant.

Philippines for G77: We brought our scalpel and a kitchen knife and some plaster casts to make sure the document we forward is balanced. Thanks for the work. We highlight there are some ideas we’ve suggested which need to be here:

-????????? Clearer differentiation of efforts between developed and developing countries – re finance esp

-????????? Stronger references in the context part to the challenges we are facing – eg biodiversity

-????????? Stronger reference in preamble or elsewhere to developed countries taking the lead including re negative emissions and below net zero

-????????? Reference to Art 3 of the Convention in principlles

-????????? Reference to unilateral measures – contextualise them in re Art 3.5 of the Convention

-????????? Put up front in preamble a clearer stress that sustainable development and equity are at the heart of climate response and increase effectiveness

-????????? Need to address implementation gaps through enhanced means of implementation

-????????? Cross-cutting: reference to transformational approach linked to means of implementation

-????????? Art 2.1.c references – framing should reflect scientific framing from IPCC regarding the stock and flow of finance

Par 10 and 33 – refs to sustainable economic development – suggest replace with sustainable development, we know what that means

?

Par 65 (adaptation) – needs to recognise means of implementation are key at each stage of the mitigate/adapt/loss cycle

Technology – thanks for good evidence here – our priority is the tech program, excellent section

Capacity building section – references to gaps should be strengthened. Reference insufficient financial resources for capacity building. More qualitative paras needed to talk about lessons learned. Need para with call for developed countries to provide adequate, sustained, systematic support.

Loss and damage section – excellent section – para 156 option 1 mentions ‘regularly’, want that changed to ‘annually’

Par 164 – reference to existing methodologies – change to ‘developing’

Para 171 Option 1 (UTM) – reference should clearly refer to the idea of unilateral measures in re Convention 3.5, sustainable development and poverty eradication

Need para on Paris implementation being integrated, holistic

Para 192 – para on ACE to be strengthened – 4 year action plan with 4 priority areas

“in the light of 3.5 of Convention and in light of SD and PE”

Somalia: Concerned that the text lacks reference to displacement. [proposes several places to add ‘refugees and displaced people’.] ?

Australia: Heard G77 on need for stronger emphasis on challenges – we can support that. Need sense that we’re committed to addressing challenges and closing gaps. It’s hard to see a lot of hope in this text – good to upgrade verbs to emphasise the urgency of action.

Second preambular paragraph – minor text correction needed – ‘the Paris Agreement will be implemented to reflect”

Para 2 – like flow but after need to emphasise we are going to decide to do something about the problems identified.

Para 26 – see language about ‘sizable difference to global GHG trajectories”, add “sizable GHG reductions are needed to align trajectories”

Par 30 – emphasise urgency of action

Par 35 – chapeau to options – good to be decisive about need to take action here

Par 53 – good to have alt words “recognise significant investments and efforts of developing country parties in implementing their plans”

Say notes with concern public and private finance gaps

Par 151 – important, missing something – drawn from L&D, but misses a footnote that needs to be reinserted into the text

Guidance and way forward, appreciate your work, clarify one thing: create an item under SBI to create space for reflection on how we’re using the GST, for review at COP29.

Bolivia: support G77. Huge imbalances need to be corrected in the text.

-????????? Para 30 – emphasises just 6.2 and 6.4 of PA, not 6.8 as well. So add paragraph “emphasises the urgent need to strengthen and iterate wholistic and balanced non-market approaches in accord with Art 6 of the PA”.

-????????? Para 38 – proposes specific text

?

USA: long list of edits to propose here so as to maintain balance.

Para 2 – recalling 2.1 – accept but spell out integrity including long term goal

Par 3 – agree with Australia

Par 6 – remove ref to implementation of Convention

Par 2 – insert idea that despite overall progress parties are not yet on track to long term goals – positive signal – prefer not to get into thamtic areas here “despite overall progress, parties are not yet on track.’

Par 7 – option2 ?- intsert idea that efforts to keep 1.5C in rech are core to equity, esp for vulnerable

Human rights language – good, but we prefer ‘HR respecting’ approaches

Add Par 15bis – include positive elements of Art 2.1a and what it has led to

Par 30 – split into 3 and move first part up to around 15

Par 18 – we guess this references Gap report but our science people can’t find the underlying document

Par 24 – “not yet′in line with the Paris temp goal”

Par 28 – ref implementation gap and the need to address such

Par 26 – pluralise just energy transitionS

Para 37, 38, 39 are best as sub paras beneath Par 35

Par 37 – add ref to methane

Par 34 – missing ‘ad’

Par 47 – move to above 45

Adaptation - par 52 – Ack importance of adaptation and multiple cross sector benefits

83: add a bis on communication vehicles

Propose para or sentence referring to mainstream adaptation.

Par 57 – evaluation of outcomes critical to quality and awareness

Par 58 – focus solely on provision.

Par 60 – remove reference to Art 9 – we don’t oppose concept but the reference is incorrect.

Par 70 – secretartiat is required to prepare a report, we suggest nationl institutions.

Para 79 – would like to emphasise importance of innovative sources of finance

Note about finance goals – delete

Par 86 option 3-? can go along so long as there are minor edits

Guidance to operating entities matters

Par 99 option 1 – propose to remove

Par 92 – duplicative

Par 93 – remove word ‘governance’

Par 106-7 – welcome progress, don’t just reiterate efforts

108 – stop sentence after ‘development’. Add in 108 bis

109 – option 1 is not reflecive of proposals heard – Point is to accelerate implementation

119 – remove word ‘equitable’

129 – engage effectively with UNFCCC

Par 135 – recognise not revognition

139 – after anticipatory efforts, add ‘displacement and land reloction models

Par 148 – insert measures related to displacement, relocation, etc

Par 151+ - delete reference to the COP decision

Par 150 – welcome pledges to funding arrangements

Calls to ‘remain united’ not ‘to unite’

Add text on ocean climate change dialogue

184 – can work with Option 1 – don’t want to note with appreciation carbon pricing initiatives

Par 188 –

[ this list is generally quite minor but it goes on and on and on]

Philippines on a point of order: raising that we were told to be surgical, bt what the US just did was using a broadsword. Not what we were told to do. More going in to the substance. Urge colleagues to heed the chairs’ call to be surgical and use a scalpel

Cochair: yes, we expected surgical edits – to keep that balance, please provide surgical edits

Japan: thanks for text, it’s becoming ready for ministers decision.

In cross cutting section, need positive message about GST – we propose a par before 2 “emphasise that there has been progress towards the goals. In mitigation we are targeting towards the 1,5C goal and actions should be consistent with 1.5C.

Par 12 – end of sentence – add “towards 1.5C”.

Delete par 15 and begin 16 with ‘affirm its resoltuon to pursue efforts towards 1,5

To vehicles text option 1 add ref to ‘ZEVs and associated infrastructure, and sustainable drop in fuels”.

Towards Way Forward section we need to show ideas and link to thematic areas. A space for mitigation action discussion through 2030 is missing and should be added.

Tech implementation plan etc are very new ideas and recommend discussing them in their workstreams. Happy to work continuously

[list EU, Norway, Trinidad, Malawi, Pakistan, Russia, Singapore, Bhutan, Iran, Saudi, China Turkiye, Iraq, India, Nepal, Fiji]

Cochair: remember we have the close of SBs tomorrow. If you do want a third iteration, please be brief and surgical.

EU: Preamble – ref to 4.9 is missing. Invitation to scientific community should mention pillars of Paris. Gender reference needs to be strengthened, and support human rights mention. Sttengtehn reference to Technical Dialogues.

Mitigation – need more emphasis on how benefits of necessary transformation outweigh the costs. Fossil fuels reference needs to reference energy generation and consumption. Cannot support vague language of ‘accelerating efforts towards’

SD will require total phaseout of fossil fuels and a peak of consumption early this decade. Energy sector needs to be free of fossils well ahead of 2050 and substantially decarbonised in the 2030s. Many measures are widely available already with cobenefits.

Also in para 35 – cannot live with the same language on coal power and inefficient fossil subsidies that we already have. “Fossil subsidies that do not address energy poverty or just transition”. Recognise critical role of all major economies in limiting temperature in this decade and beyond.

Adaptation – overall ?good – short suggestions.

EU strongly supports work program on 1C in way forward, it’s critical for us. Cannot agree to establishing a new capacity building fund, its well covered already. Stress in a general way that references to means of implementation should be contained.

Loss and damage – make sure when listing pledges we use names not numbers. Could improve with references to specific initiatives. We don’t see a reference to efforts outside the UNFCCC.

Reporting – unnecessary to refer to developing common metrics etc.

Need reference to ICAO and IMO and generally to cooperation with relevant institutions and organisations through high level dialogues.

Curcially we need a vision of outcomes between now and 2025, and work for the UNFCCC bodies to take forward.

Support Australia on agenda item about how to use GST outcomes in NDCs.

We need a general call to science to continue providing relevant info to the next stocktake.

Also do not need a no text option on references to unilateral options throughout the text.

?

Norway: text in cross cut has become weak on human rights. Need options with clean text on HR and vulnerability of children.

Par 10 – want ot include workers and consideration of labour rights, encouraging parties to encourage quality jobs including through social dialogue.

Fossil language – no ‘accelerating efforts towards’

On adaptation enablers we provided several points and suggest adding decision type language on NAPs and enhancing them with aim of ensuring all countries have NAPs and are implementing by 2030.

Happy to see children and youth text. In par 77, include children

Par 188 – delete option that weakens Paris

Way forward – wording on followup through MWP should be clearer. High level roundtables on mitigation could be a place for followup, especially if continued beyond 2030.

New Zealand: comments on strneghtening Call to Action; linking action and science; land sector.

Support calls to include 4,9 ref in preamble. In context and cross cutting sections, add purpose to achieve Paris agreement and its long term goals.

Add 18bis ‘decides to pursue efforts to limit warming to 1.5C’.

30: call on parties to immediately undertake deep rapid and sustained emissions reductions.

38: nature and land sector – various references

41 – weak formulation of what we asked for – urge parties to update their NDCs including to peak emissions by 2025 and reduce by 2030

Absolute economy wide targets to be encouraged

Strongly urging parties to address 1.5C aligned pathways when developing next NDCs

[at this point I had to leave – parties only had the room for another 25 minutes, allegedly, but there were 20+ on the list to speak]

?

?