UNFCCC and International and National
Commitments

1

Training Programme for Bhutanese Policymakers and Researchers
Dr. Yasuko Kameyama
National Institute for Environmental Studies, Japan
7 February 2018

Contents

1. History of Climate Change Negotiation at Multilateral Level
2. Categorization of Climate Policies, and Implementation in KeyCountries
3. Climate Policy Developments in Japan
4. Prospects for the Future2

1.

History of Climate Change
Negotiation at Multilateral Level

3

Three types of responses towards climate change• Mitigation : Actions to minimize additional global warming tooccur in the future. This is equal to actions to reduce GHG
emissions.

• Adaptation: Actions to minimize damages that are likely to occur
due to adverse impact of climate change• Loss & damage: Actions to support countries that weredamaged by adverse impact of climate change

45

Source: Ministry of the Environment

5Source: Ministry of the Environment 6
6

UNFCCC

Kyoto
ProtocolParis
Agreement

7

UN Framework Convention on Climate Change（adoption:1992 enter into force:1994）
Article ２ Objective
To achieve stabilization of GHG concentrations in the atmosphere at a level thatwould prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.
Article ４ Commitments
1. All Parties shall develop national inventories, and formulate programmes
containing measures to mitigate climate change.
2. Annex I countries (developed countries) shall adopt national policies,
recognizing that the return by the end of the present decade to earlier levelsof GHG emissions would contribute to modifying longer-term trend.
Annex I countries: Developed countries and countries in transition to a market
economy (ex. Russia, Ukraine, Latvia, etc. )8

Kyoto Protocol(adoption:1997 (COP3), enter into force 2005)
Article ３.１
Annex I Parties shall ensure that their aggregate GHG emission do not
exceed their assigned amounts, with a view to reducing their overall
emissions by at least 5% below 1990 levels between 2008 and 2012.
EU 8%, United States 7%, Japan 6%
Articles 6, 12, 17
Use of Kyoto Mechanisms (joint implementation, Clean Development
Mechanisms, emissions trading scheme)
Article 3.3, 3.4
Inclusion of removals by land-use changes
Such as afforestation and reforestation.

9

Legal nature of institutions / legal bindingness ofemission targets
Text(adoption year )(target year)

Legal nature of
institution

UN Framework Convention
on Climate Change

Legal bindingness of emission targets
Scope of countries

International treaty

Not legally-bindng.
Annex I countries onlyInternational treaty

Legally-bindng.
Annex I countries only

Cancun Agreement(2010: COP16)(2020)

COP decision

Not legally-bindng.
Developed countries set absolute emission
reduction targets.
Developing countries plan implementation ofemission mitigation policies

Paris Agreement(2015: COP21)(post-2020)

International treaty

Not legally-bindng.
All countries(1992)(2000)
Kyoto Protocol(1997: COP3)(2008-2012)

Inclusivenessv.s.

Bindingness v.s.

Ambitiousness of emission targets

10Paris agreement and COP21 decisions
Paris Agreement

COP decision

Element
Long-term goal (Art.
2)

・Holding the increase in the global averagetemperature to well below 2ºC above preindustrial
levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature
increase to 1.5ºC (Art. 2)Grouping of Annex I
and non-Annex I

Deleted

Mitigation (Art. 4)・Achieve a balance between anthropogenic
・Urges Parties whose NDC
emissions by sources and removals by sinks ofcontain a time frame up
GHG in the second half of this century
to 2025 to communicate
by 2020 a new NDC.
・ Each Party shall prepare, communicate andmaintain successive nationally determined
contributions (NDCs) that it intends to achieve.
・Invites Parties tocommunicate, by 2020,
・Each Party’s successive NDC will represent a
progression beyond the Parties’ then current NDC mid-century, long-termand reflect its highest possible ambition.
low GHG development
・Each Party shall communicate a NDC every 5 years. strategies
・All Parties should strive to formulate long-term
low GHG emission development strategies.

Deleted11

Paris agreement and COP21 decisions
Paris Agreement

COP decision

Adaptation(Art. 7)・Establish the global goal on adaptation tostrengthen resilience.
・Each Party shall engage in adaptation planning
process and implementation of actions.
・Each Party should submit and update anadaptation communication

・Requests the Green Climate Fund to
expedite support for least
developing countries foradaptation

Loss anddamage (Art.
8)

・The Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss
and Damage associated with Climate Change
Impacts shall be subject to the authority andguidance of CMA・Agrees that Art. 8 does not involveor provide a basis for any liability
or compensation.

Finance (Art.
9)

・Developed country Parties shall provide
・Developed countries intend tofinancial resources to assist developing country
continue their existing collective
Parties.
mobilization goal through 2025.
・Other Parties are encouraged to provide orcontinue to provide such support voluntarily.
・Prior to 2025 the CMA shall set a
new collective financial goal from a・Developed country Parties shall bienniallycommunicate indicative information related tofloor of $100 billion per year
financial support.

Element 8

12

Paris agreement and COP21 decisions
Paris Agreement

COP decision

Transparency（Art. 13)・Transparency framework is established to build mutual
trust and confidence and to promote effective
implementation.

・Requests the working
group in developing
modalities andguidelines for reporting
and transparency

GlobalStocktaking（Art. 14）

・CMA shall periodically take stock of implementation toassess the collective progress towards achieving the
purpose of this agreement and its long-term goals.
・CMA shall undertake its first global stocktaking in 2023
and every five years thereafter.

Enter into
force
（Art. 21）

・This agreement shall enter into force on the 30th day
after the date on which at least 55 Parties to theConvention accounting in total for at least an estimated
55% of the total GHG have deposited their ratification.

Withdrawal(Art. 28)

・At any time after 3 years from the date on which thisAgreement enter into force for a Party, that Party may
withdraw from this Agreement . Any such withdrawal
shall take effect upon expiry of 1 year from the date ofreceipt by the depository of the notification ofwithdrawal.

Element

13

After Paris … in 2016
April: Signatory ceremony
May: Analysis of NDCs… not enough to achieve the 2 degrees goal.
Declaration at the Iseshima G7 summit… Heads of states declare that they would
strive to have Paris Agreement enter into force as soon as possible, and calls on all
Parties to do so striving for a goal of entry in to force in 2016. and also to communicate
ambitious mid-term low carbon development strategies well ahead of the 2020
deadline.

September: China and the United States ratified the Paris Agreement.
October: EU and other major countries ratified the Paris Agreement
November: Paris Agreement entered into force.

COP22
Decided schedules for future works, including ways tomake effective assessments in 2018, and to enhance funding
mechanism particularly onto adaptation projects.
14

Global temperature rise continues （WMO)

15

UNEP Gap Report Nov. 2017 ) NDCs not sufficient to reach the 2ºC goal16

2. Categorization of Climate Policies, andImplementation in Key Countries

17Determination of national emission targets
There are basically two ways to determine emission targets at national level.
• One way is to determine by a top-down approach.
Determination of emission limitation at global level  emission sharing among
countries based on equity principles  national emission target
The top-down approach allows countries to understand how much emission
reduction is necessary to avoid the risk of climate change. In a sense, level set
by the top-down approach is a “level that should be achieved by the country”

long-term target such as “80% reduction by 2050” or “2 degrees C”• The other way is to determine by a bottom-up approach.
Each sector will be analyzed to see how much emission reduction could beachieved if certain technologies or measures are introduced. All the emission
reduction potentials are added up to reach a national level emission reduction
target.
The bottom-up approach allows policy makers to see how much emission
reduction is achievable by introduction of policies and measures. In a sense, levelset by the bottom-up approach is a “level that could be achieved by the country”
1818

Categorization of climate mitigation policies
Countries’ climate mitigation policies are not independent of other national agendas. Countries
could become ambitious or unwilling to take actions to reduce GHGs.
• Energy policy: coal, oil, natural gas, renewable energy, nuclear• Economy policy: energy-intensive industry (iron&steel, cement, aluminum, etc. )• Social policy: Tax neutral policy by using revenue of carbon tax into social security• Foreign policy: Countries’ willingness to be involved in UN activities, etc.
Countries’ climate mitigation policies can be categorized by sectors in which GHG emissions
occur:• Energy sector• Industry and business sector• Commercial and residential sectors• Transportation sector• Agriculture and land-use sectors

Countries’ climate policies can also be categorized by type of policy tools.
• Regulatory measures (standards, setting limitations, etc. )• Economic measures (taxes, subsidies, emissions trading, etc. )• Information measures (labeling, education, etc.)• Technology innovation (R&D, public-private partnerships, etc.)

19

Climate mitigation policies by types of goals
GOAL I: Decarbonization of energy* Promotion of renewable energy* Use of CCS for fossil fuel fire power plants* Electrification of transportation sector
GOAL 2: Improvement of energy efficiency* Energy efficiency improvements in industry sector* Energy efficiency improvements in buildings and products* Energy efficiency in transportation sector (hybrid car, etc)
GOAL 3: Minimizing demand for energy service* Resource efficiency improvements in industry sector* Change of lifestyle in households* Wise use of public transportation and virtual meeting* Low carbon cities
GOAL4: Sequestration by forests and non-CO2 GHG gases* Forest conservation* Reducing emissions of methane (agriculture, natural gas sites, etc.)* Reducing emissions of F-gases (CFC, HFC, HCFC, etc)20WorldJapan
United States
CanadaUnited Kingdom
FranceGermany
Italy
Spain
Belgium
Netherlands
Switzerland
Iceland
NorwaySwedenFinlandDenmark
China
Taiwan
Korea
Thailand
VietnamSingapore
Indonesia
Malaysia
Philippine
India
Iran
Egypt
Saudi Arabia
TurkeyAustralia
RussiaSouth Africa
MexicoBrazilEnergy sources,
2013

Coal
Oil
Gas
Nuclear
Hydro
Geothermal
Solar PV
Solar heat
Wind
Wave
Biomass
Waste
Others

出典：資源エネルギー庁
Source：Ｊａｐａｎ ｆｏｒ ｓｕｓｔａｉｎａｂｉｌｉｔｙ ＨＰ

21

The United States

NDC: 26-28%
reduction by 2025
from 2005

22

Climate policy in the United States• Have had a great contribution in accumulation of scientific basis on climatechange. Many IPCC authors are from the United States.
• On the other hand, climate policy in the United States has made little progress.
This is mainly due to strong objection from coal and oil industries, lobbying theCongressmen to act against any meaningful climate policies.
• United States once supported the Kyoto Protocol during Clinton administration,
but Bush administration in 2001 withdrew from the Kyoto Protocol.
• Changes were made under the Obama administration. President Obama utilizedadministrative authority (Clean Air Act) to regulate CO2 emissions fromautomobiles and electricity power sector. President Obama also proposed Clean
Power Plan, which regulates CO2 emissions from coal fire power plants.
• The United States initiated since 2013 a bilateral dialogue with China, whichdeveloped into bilateral cooperation to lead the UNFCCC negotiations up to Paris
Agreement.
• In 2017, President Trump shifted away from climate change policies. He used todeny scientific knowledge of climate change, but how emphasizes economic
burden of reducing GHGs.
23

COP23 (Nov. 2017)

Two Americas#We are still in#Wearestillin consists of more than 2500 sub-national actors, including 20
states,110 cities, over 1400 companies.
The group as a whole covers more than half of American citizens andeconomic activities.

June 2017: Mr. Trump
announced willingness toleave the Paris
Agreement.

24

European Union

NDC: 40% reduction
by 2030 from 1990

25

European Union’s climate policy towards
2020 target

26

Long-term strategy
Some EU member countries have developed long-term goals, such as GHG emission
targets for 2050, and use them to evaluate level of stringency of short- to mid-termtargets.
<-

FranceUnited Kingdom

27

China

NDC: improve CO2
emission per GDP
33.8% lower than2005; share of nonfossil fuels 11.2%,
Forested area
increase by
21.6million ha

28

29

3. Climate Policy Developments in Japan30

Climate policy developments in Japan
Japan has set emission reduction targets periodically, but emission reduction policies
have extensively been focused on improvements in energy efficiency.
Japan’s emission targets for GHGs
Year ofdecisionTarget year / baseyear

Level of target/ conditions

Result1990

2000 / 1990

Stabilization of emission per capita / stabilization ofemission if technology innovation occurred

7% increase

1997

2010 / 1990

5% reduction, with differentiation according to percapita and per GDP efficiency level1997

2008-2012 / 1990

6% reduction (with utilization of emission trading)

20092020 / 2005

15% reduction (=8% reduction from 1990)20092020 / 1990

25% reduction (all major emitters take meaningfulcommitments)

20132020 / 2005

3.8% reduction (no nuclear power)

2015

2030 / 2013

26% reduction (nuclear 22%)

1% increase,but met 6%
Kyoto target

31

Japan’s GHG emission by type of gases

Source: Ministry of the Environment

32

Japan’s GHG emission by sector(categorization by final demand)

Source: Ministry of the Environment

33

34

34

July 2015 Long-term Energy Demand & Supply Outlook
Demand side of Electricity

Supply side of Electricity

Improvements in energy
efficiency to reducedemandGeothermal

Economic
growth
1.7%/year

Biomass

Renewables

Wind
Solar

Nuclear

Hydro
LNG

Coal
Oil

2013
Source: Gov. of Japan

2030
35

Use of coal fire power plants in Japan is increasing

Source： E3G (2015)G7 Coal Scorecard Report

36

37

38

Source: Ministry of the Environment

38

39

Source: Ministry of the Environment39

4. Prospects for the future

40

GHG emission （GtCO2 eq/year）

Carbon Budget
Total cumulative global
GHG emission since 1870
needs to be limited to
800Gt to achieve the 2℃goal, but the world has
already emitted 531GtC.

Amount alreadyemittedIn order to use theremaining carbon budget of
269GtC in the mosteffective manner to transit
to low-carbon society, howmuch should the world
reduce its GHG emission by
2050?

Amount that canbe emitted in the
future2050

Source：IPCC AR5 WG3 Fig. TS-8

Carbon budget→2050 target→targets for 2030 and 2040 to achieve the 2050 target

41

Net-zero GHG emission by end of the 21st century
Message sent out by the Paris Agreement is that much of coal and oil reserves must stayunderground. The notion “stranded asset” has been widely shared among stakeholders
that fossil fuel – based assets might become worthless.

Source：Carbon Tracker

Carbon budget→End of carbon bubble→Stranded assets→Divestment from fossil fuel projects

42

Development of divestment movements
2010 Students at Swarthmore College in the United States started a divestment movement. Students inother colleges, including those in Syracuse and Stanford Universities followed. Local governments
such as San Francisco and Seattle also followed.
2012 Oxford University in the United Kingdom intiated Stranded Assets Proｇramme
HSBC publicized a report: “Coal and Carbon: Stranded Asset Risk Assessment “
2013 Standard & Poors publicized a report on oil companies’ future under climate change
2014 The World Bank supported divestments from coal and oil extracting projects
2015 Norway’s pension fund （GPFG), Bank of America, etc., determined divestments from fossil fuel projects
Sep. Speech by Mark Carney, Governor of Bank of England “Breaking the Tragedy of the Horizon –climate change and financial stability
Oct. OECD’s publication on divestments, 50 billion USD in 2014 increase into 2.6 trillion USD in the firsthalf of 2015. Further increased to 3.4 trillion by COP21 in 2015.

Engagement is a way to change companies’ behavior by stockholders and investors before they startdivesting from the company. Movements of engagement is said to have started from California. By
COP21, more than 106 companies from more than 20 countries declared that they would facilitate
engagements. （Caring for Climate (UNEP etc.）, 2015）43

Carbonpricingaround theworld

Source：World Bank and Ecofys(2016) Carbon Pricing Watch

44

Coverage by
carbonpricing

Source：World Bank and Ecofys(2016) Carbon Pricing Watch

45

Carbon tax
rates

Source：World Bank and Ecofys(2016) Carbon Pricing Watch

46

Conclusions• Impact of climate change, such as extreme weather, is increasing around theworld. Paris Agreement was a turning point for international community tovoluntarily change the direction of development towards decarbonization. The
trend will not change, but needs to speed up in order to meet the long-term goalof 2 or 1.5 degrees C.
• Countries have their respective national circumstances to implement climate
mitigation policies. Thus, the best mix of policies differ from one country toanother. Nevertheless, the policy package should include variety of measures
such as regulatory measures, economic measures, and information measures.
• Role of non-state actors is increasing. Actions taken by local governments, cities,
and business and industry sectors, should be well recognized.

47

Thank you!

48

Yasuko Kameyama, Ph.D. , is responsible for the content of this presentation. For
any questions, please contact ykame@nies.go.jp