{"word_count": 1123, "character_count": 7768}
Communicating Progress in National and Global Adaptation to Climate Change / Takayoshi Kato and Jane Ellis. Paris : OECD, May 2016, 47 p. (Climate Change Expert Group Paper No. 2016/1) http://www.oecd.org/environment/cc/Adaptation-Communication-CCXG-paper-2016(1).pdfExecutive summary : The Paris Agreement, adopted by the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), reinforces the international framework for adaptation action by establishing a global adaptation goal of enhancing adaptive capacity, strengthening resilience and reducing vulnerability. Under the Paris Agreement, countries have also agreed to an enhanced transparency framework for action, including adaptation, with built-in flexibility. However, adaptation reporting is not mandatory, as the Paris Agreement states that Parties “should”, as appropriate, submit and update an “adaptation communication” (Article 7.10). Decision 1/CP.21 states that this information “shall” be submitted biennially for all countries other than Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and Small Island Developing States...Unpacking Provisions Related to Transparency of Mitigation and Support in the Paris Agreement / Gregory Briner and Sara Moarif. Paris : OECD, May 2016, 40 p. (Climate Change Expert Group Paper No. 2016/2) http://www.oecd.org/environment/cc/Unpacking-transparency-provisions-Paris-Agreement-CCXG-May2016.pdfExecutive summary : The agreement of an enhanced transparency framework was a key outcome of the COP 21 climate change conference in Paris. This enhanced transparency framework will play an important role in tracking progress towards individual and collective goals, and in understanding achievement of nationally determined contributions (NDCs) under the Paris Agreement. There will be flexibility in the scope, frequency, and level of detail of reporting and the scope of review that takes into account the widely varying capacities of different Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).This paper unpacks the transparency-related provisions within the Paris Agreement and Decision 1/CP.21 relating to mitigation and support. The aim of this exercise is to facilitate a shared understanding of the transparency-related provisions agreed at COP 21, and analyse the extent to which the information requested will be sufficient to meet the stated purposes of the enhanced transparency framework...La forme juridique du futur accord de Paris sur le climat : enjeux et principales options / Sandrine Maljean-Dubois, Thomas Spencer, Matthieu Wemaere. Cahiers, Droit, Sciences et Technologies, CNRS éd (imprimé) / CERIC (en ligne), 2015. &#60;halshs-01311785&#62;Résumé : La réduction des émissions de gaz à effet de serre constitue le cœur des négociations, lancées à Durban en 2011, qui doivent aboutir à l’adoption d’un accord à Paris, lors de la 21e Conférence des Parties à la Convention-cadre sur les changements climatiques de 1992, en décembre 2015, lequel accord sera aux fondements du régime international du climat à partir de 2020. En effet, à cette date, la deuxième période d’engagement du Protocole de Kyoto sera terminée, sans que soit envisagée/négociée une troisième période. Les promesses de réduction des émissions faites dans en application de l’Accord de Copenhague, dans le cadre plus inclusif de la Convention, ne vont pas non plus au-delà de 2020. Les États ne sont donc pas internationalement engagés à réduire leurs émissions de gaz à effet de serre au-delà. À Durban, les États sont convenus d’« élaborer au titre de la Convention un protocole, un autre instrument juridique ou un texte convenu d’un commun accord ayant valeur juridique, applicable à toutes les Parties ». La question de la forme de l’accord de Paris n’a donc pas été tranchée. Elle ne l’a pas davantage été depuis lors. Mais les négociations ont avancé en substance. Dans le cadre d’un accord qui devra être « applicable à toutes les Parties », les Parties sont toutes « invitées » à préparer leurs « contributions prévues », fruits de « préparatifs internes » et « déterminées au niveau national ». Il reste ainsi à déterminer quelle sera la forme juridique de l’accord de Paris mais également quelle sera la portée de ces « contributions nationales ». Cette question de la forme juridique du futur accord est bien plus complexe que ce qu’il n’y paraît à première vue. D’une part, elle ne se résume pas au choix binaire entre un traité ou un instrument non obligatoire. D’autre part, elle soulève à son tour de nombreuses questions, dont les réponses détermineront la capacité du futur accord de Paris à limiter les changements climatiques et le réchauffement global de la planète. Elles tiennent à la nature et portée des engagements ou promesses de réduction des émissions, au suivi des émissions, à un éventuel contrôle international des réductions, voire à une sanction du non-respect. Ces différents paramètres sont liés et méritent d’être examinés ensemble, pour avoir une vision globale des différentes options juridiques et de leurs conséquences.Towards a science of climate and energy choices / Paul C. Stern, Benjamin K. Sovacool &#38; Thomas Dietz, Nature Climate Change, 9 May 2016 http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate3027.htmlThe linked problems of energy sustainability and climate change are among the most complex and daunting facing humanity at the start of the twenty-first century. This joint Nature Energy and Nature Climate Change Collection illustrates how understanding and addressing these problems will require an integrated science of coupled human and natural systems; including technological systems, but also extending well beyond the domain of engineering or even economics. It demonstrates the value of replacing the stylized assumptions about human behaviour that are common in policy analysis, with ones based on data-driven science. We draw from and engage articles in the Collection to identify key contributions to understanding non-technological factors connecting economic activity and greenhouse gas emissions, describe a multi-dimensional space of human action on climate and energy issues, and illustrate key themes, dimensions and contributions towards fundamental understanding and informed decision making.The Kyoto Protocol and Beyond: Pareto Improvements to Policies that Mitigate Climate Change / Graciela Chichilnisky and Peter J. Hammond. University of Warwick, April 2016, 20 p. (working paper n° 287) http://econpapers.repec.org/paper/cgewacage/287.htmAbstract: Article 17 of the Kyoto Protocol allowed emissions trading; Article 12 defined a Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). In a simple theoretical model we adapt standard gains from trade results to demonstrate that, relative to any status quo with specified worldwide aggregate emissions: first, emissions trading with a suitable international distribution of permit rights generally allows each nation more consumption while aggregate emissions remain constant; second, the CDM generally adds to these efficiency gains by reducing further the total cost of achieving any target worldwide emissions level. The provisions of the 2015 Paris Agreement that grant credit for carbon removals allow even further potential gains. Contrary to some claims, the Kyoto Protocol is not “defunct”; instead, retaining its key provisions of emissions trade and the CDM while including credit for carbon removals could make emissions reductions much more affordable. Yet an essential part of the institutional background required to make international trade in emissions permits function well has been destroyed by the Paris Agreement, since it lacks mandatory limits of the kind that the Kyoto Protocol imposed.