Уважаемые коллеги!
Как вы, вероятно, знаете, есть новое «структурное изложение» к Парижу, включающее построение работы в целом, базовое решение «номер один» и черновой текст соглашения (оно будет к нему приложением) и то, что уходит в правила.
http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/adp2/eng/5infnot.pdf
Вероятно, главная проблема Парижа – финансы и действия до 2020 г., нужные наиболее уязвимым странам, иначе пост-2020 Соглашение им гораздо менее ценно и проблематично.
Это всеми понимается. В свете этого в документе есть, вероятно, самый новый и интересный раздел по WS2
Мы (WWF) предприняли попытку сделать краткое резюме именно по WS2, что и посылаю, надеюсь как то пригодится.
При всех слабостях это шаг вперед.
Удачи
Алексей
Overall impression:
· No mention of gap: mitigation gap, ambition gap, or other.
· Acknowledges pre-2020's significance for post-2020, but does not attempt to build any kind of mechanism or architecture to drive ambitions up (ambition mechanism, or beginning of the ratchet).
· Opportunities to "urge" or "request" where they rather write "invites".
· Invites parties to enhance ambition, but there's no process and no differentiation between developed and developing, and no focus on accelerated implementation by developed countries in particular (a win for developed countries, if it survives).
· Opens WS2 up to go beyond mitigation: mitigation and adaptation and the MOI to support both (a win for the developing countries, if it survives).
· 10 paras dedicated to enhancing the TEP, without managing to go beyond examination and identification of opportunities.
· Only bit of new substance is the TEM on adaptation from 2016 (a win for the developing countries, if it survives).
· High-level engagement: leaves it to the COP presidents, but will provide annual space to announce new actions, though without criteria for selection.
· Direction to Convention bodies: all party groups had content on this, including specific mentions of the TEC and CTCN, in their June submissions, yet there's nothing here beyond asking the Secretariat to support a strengthening of inter-convention cooperation and coordination.
Content of the paragraphs summarized:
1. Invites KP ratification (why not "urges"?).
2. Invites parties with mitigation commitments/pledges to consider enhancing them (why not "urges"?) ß this does not differentiate between developed and developing, as many developing countries also have pledges, will it stand?
3. Recognition of need for MOI for developing countries' efforts.
4. Requests developed countries to "enhance the quanti and quali elements of a pathway" for scaling up finance in 2016-2020 (really unnecessarily vague formulation).
5. Standing Committee on Finance.
6. Further enhance the TEP, focus on accelerated implementation of actions (I suppose paras 7-15 are supposed to represent this enhancement)
7. New institutional home for WS2 under the COP or the "Intergovernmental Preparatory Committee for the entry into force of the Paris Agreement" ß is this established in the WS1 text?
8. Developing country experts' participation in TEP/TEMs.
9. Encourages involvement of non-state actors in implementing policies.
10.Requests Secretariat to update tech paper, prepare SPMs, and strengthen inter-convention cooperation and coordination.
11.Acknowledges the LPAA and BKM summit.
12.Agrees to:
a. Provide a space during the COPs to announce new actions and initiatives including by non-state actors.
b. Provide opportunities for non-state experts to engage.
13.Invites COP president to further strengthen the high-level engagement on implementation of policy options identified in the TEP (I suppose they mean all future COP presidents?).
14.A TEP on adaptation from 2016 (will likely get massive push back from developed countries, like it did in Bonn, due to duplication concerns).
15.Periodic assessment of the TEPs on both mitigation and adaptation.
---------------------
