Interlinkages kato(oecd) ccxg gf sep2014

Climate Change Expert Group www.oecd.org/env/cc/ccxg.htm

CCXG Global Forum17 September 2014

Streamlining and enhancing inter-linkages for

Means of Implementation

Takayoshi Kato, [email protected]

Based on the discussion paper “Options for Streamlining the UNFCCC Process and Enhancing Inter-linkages in the Post-2020 Period”

by Gregory Briner, Takayoshi Kato, Susanne Konrad and Christina Hood

2 Climate Change Expert Group

Outline

BackgroundWhy streamlining and inter-linkages are important

for Means of Implementation?Where do opportunities for streamlining and

enhancing inter-linkages exist?o Outlining three “strawman” models

Discussion questions


Background:Means of implementation

Means of Implementation (MOI): Finance, technology, and capacity building (CB)

All are needed to support developing countries to implement mitigation and adaptation actions.

Finance is directed to: mitigation and adaptation actions, and projects/programmes for CB and technology.


This presentation focuses on streamlining and enhancing inter-linkages among mechanisms and arrangements for MOI.

Focus


Why streamline and inter-link?

Efforts for MOI are cross-cutting in nature.MOI involves a number of arrangements and

mechanisms both inside and outside UNFCCC. Risks that their work can be

duplicated/fragmented.Discussion on streamlining and inter-linkages is

necessary and already on-going (e.g. at SCF and GCF).Finance

Technology

Capacity Building

(e.g.) GCF, GEF, SCF, Adaptation Fund(under KP)

(e.g.) TEC, CTCN, Poznan Strategic Program on Technology Transfer

(e.g.) Durban Forum on CB, Doha Work Programme on Article 6, Framework for CB in developing countries and EiT.

Exam

ple

s

un

der

UN

FC

CC


Opportunities for streamlining and stronger inter-linkages? Three “strawman” models for streamlining and

enhancing inter-linkages of institutional arrangements under UNFCCC.

There may also be “middle course” between those models.

Model 1: Status quo plus

Model 2: Three sister mechanisms

Model 3: Nested windows under GCF


Model 1: Status quo plus

No significant change to the existing mechanisms and arrangements, but potentially greater role of the SCF.

Could lead to smoother translation.May risk continuing the current fragmentation of work for MOI

(UNFCCC, 2014g).

KP

TEC

CTCN

CMP

LEGAC

COP

Durban forum on CB

GCF Doha Work programme/ dialogue on

article 6

GEF

SCF

AF

SCF


More symmetrical arrangements with the FM, the TM and a “Capacity Building Mechanism” whose focus could be to reduce fragmentation of efforts for CB by multiple actors (rather than creating more work-streams).

Establishing a new institution might lead to greater costs.

Model 2: Three sister mechanisms for finance, technology and capacity

building

The Financial Mechanism

COP

The Technology Mechanism

(A Capacity Building Mechanism)

LEGDurban forum

TECSCF (A Capacity Building Committee)

Doha work programme/di

alogueAF

GCFGEF

CTCN

CTCN


Seeking a greater opportunity for streamlining by centralising decision making in the GCF Board (with the support from other arrangements/mechanisms).

The Board might be imposed excessive burden, which might lead to greater fragmentation of support.

Model 3: Nested windows under GCF

COP

SCFGCF

GCF Board

Mitigation

(CB)

(Tech-transfer)

(LDCs / SIDS)

GEF

PSF(Thematic windows)

AC

LEG

Durban forum on CB

TEC/CTCN

Input

Adaptation

Doha work programme


Discussion questions

How could the 2015 Agreement help to streamline the arrangements and mechanisms for finance, technology and capacity building?

How could greater co-ordination and stronger inter-linkages be forged between arrangements and mechanisms relating to finance, technology and capacity building?

Interlinkages kato(oecd) ccxg gf sep2014

Environment

Transcript of Interlinkages kato(oecd) ccxg gf sep2014