Peraturan & Dokumen - Direktorat Jenderal Pengendalian Perubahan Iklim laporan delri bonn

(1)

DELEGASI R

PADA

UNI TE

CHAN

44 TH

SBI ,

AND I TS PRE

Bonn, Jerm

Ja

UNI TED NATI ONS CLI M

Bon

LAPORAN

I REPUBLI K I NDONE

I TED NATI ONS CLI M

ANGE CONFERENCE

I , 44

TH

SBSTA, 1

ST

AP

REPARATORY MEETI

rman, 14 – 26 Mei 2016

Jakarta, Mei 2016

I MATE CONFERENCE,44

SBI , 44

SBST

onn, Germany, 16- 26 May 2016

ONESI A

LI MATE

E

APA

TI NGS,

2016

(2)

LAPORAN DELEGASI REPUBLI K I NDONESI A

PADA

UNI TED NATI ONS CLI MATE CHANGE CONFERENCE

44 SBI , 44

SBSTA, 1

APA AND I TS PREPARATORY MEETI NGS,

Bonn, Jerman, 14 – 26 Mei 2016

I . PENDAHULUAN

Sesi perundingan ke-44 Badan-badan Subsider dari United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) yang terdiri dari 44th Session of the Subsidiary Body for I mplementation (SBI ) dan 44th session of the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA) telah berlangsung di Bonn, Jerman pada 16 – 26 Mei 2016.

Selain itu, untuk menindaklanjuti Decision 1/ CP.21 mengenai Adoption of the Paris Agreement, juga telah dilangsungkan the 1st Adhoc Working Group on the Paris Agreement (1st APA) pada waktu dan tempat yang sama. Sebagaimana diketahui, Para Pihak UNFCCC pada Sesi Pertemuannya ke-21 (COP-21 UNFCCC) di Paris, Perancis, 30 November – 12 Desember 2015 telah sepakat untuk mengadopsi kesepakatan baru, Paris Agreement, yang akan diberlakukan paska tahun 2020. APA dibent uk dengan serangkaian tugas, antara lain mempersiapkan masa pemberlakukan (entry into force) Paris Agreement, menyelenggarakan the first session of the Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Paris Agreement (CMA-1), dan melaksanakan sesi pertama perundingan APA pada tahun 2016 bersamaan dengan sesi perundingan Badan-badan Subsider UNFCCC, yakni SBI -11 dan SBSTA-44.

Alur persidangan secara lengkap terdiri dari:

1. The G-77 and China Preparatory Meeting,14-15 Mei 2016;

2. The Forty-Fourth Sessions of the Subsidiary Body for I mplementation (SBI -44),16-26 Mei 2016;

3. The Forty-Fourth Sessions of the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA-44),16-26 Mei 2016;

4. The First Session of the Ad- Hoc Working Group on the Paris Agreement (APA-1), 16-26 Mei 2016.

Selain itu terdapat beberapa mandated eventsberupa in session workshop diantaranya: 1. Workshop to Support the I mplementation of the Doha Work Programme on Article 6 of

the Convention (27 Mei 2016); 2. Workshop terkait Agriculture;

3. Workshop terkait Gender and Climate Change; 4. Workshop terkait REDD+ ; dan

5. Workshop terkait Clean Development Mechanism (CDM).

Pertemuan ini merupakan sesi perundingan pertama setelah diadopsinya Paris Agreement (PA) pada COP-21 di Paris, Perancis, bulan Desember 2015, dan setelah penyelenggaraan High-level Signing Ceremony of the Paris Agreement yang diselenggarakan oleh Sekretaris Jenderal PBB, Mr Ban-Ki Moon di New York pada 22 April 2016, yang dihadiri perwakilan 175 (seratus tujuh puluh lima) Negara Pihak termasuk I ndonesia.

(3)

Delegasi Republik I ndonesia (DELRI ) dipimpin oleh Direktur Jenderal Pengendalian Perubahan I klim Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan (KLHK) selaku Head of Delegation.

DELRI secara keesluruhan berjumlah 45 (empat puluh lima) orang yang terdiri dari berbagai wakil kementerian dan lembaga yaitu, Kementerian Luar Negeri, Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan, Kantor Utusan Khusus Presiden untuk Pengendalian Perubahan I klim, Kementerian Koordinator Bidang Kemaritiman, Sekretariat Kabinet, Kementerian Energi dan Sumber Daya Mineral, Kementerian Pertanian, Kementerian Perindustrian, Kementerian Agraria dan Tata Ruang/ Badan Pertanahan Nasional, Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum dan Perumahan Rakyat, Kementerian Pemberdayaan Perempuan dan Perlindungan Anak, KBRI Berlin, Badan Meteorologi, Klimatologi, dan Geofisika, Badan I nformasi Geospasial, dan organisasi non-pemerintah. Susunan lengkap DELRI dapat dilihat pada Lampiran.

I I I . PERSI DANGAN

3.1 G-77 and China Preparatory Meeting,14- 15 Mei 2016

Dalam pembukaan, Mr. Manasvi Srisodapol, selaku the Special Representative of the G77 and China Chair for Climate Changemenyampaikan beberapa hal penting sebagai berikut:

a. Tahun 2016 merupakan tahun implementasi

b. Prinsip yang diutamakan dalam perundingan adalah tidak ada satu isu pun yang akan dilewatkan dan tidak ada satu negara pihak mana pun yang ditinggalkan

c. Tujuan pertemuan untuk mengidentifkasi harapan dan target G77 & China yang akan dicapai pada Sesi Perundingan Bonn ini dan COP-22 di Maroko

d. Terdapat 2 (dua) I nformal Consultation Meetings sebelum COP-22 yaitu: Paris (15-16 april 2016) dan Tokyo I nformal Consultation Meeting.

e. Sense of urgency dalam rangka implementasi sehingga perlunya penekanan terhadap, tidak hanya komitmen post 2020, namun juga ambisi pre 2020.

f. Perlunya selalu mengingat keterkaitan antara UNFCCC dengan beberapa perjanjian atau kesepakatan global lainnya seperti United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (UNCBD) dan Sustainable Development Goals(SDGs)

Pada agenda mengenai Update on I ntersessional Consultations prior to SBs-44, Koordinator G-77 and China menyampaikan hasil pertemuan konsultasinya dengan Chair SBI dan SBSTA yang mengenai isu-isu untuk diangkat pada pertemuan SBI -44 dan SBSTA-44 dan proses pembahasan nya. Beberapa isu yang perlu diusulkan diangkat pada SBI -44 dan SBSTA-44 karena belum masuk dalam agenda yang disampaikan Sekretariat UNFCCC diantaranya:

a. I su Loss and Damage yang disuarakna oleh Maldives (AOSI S/ SI DS), Kongo (African Group) dan Timor Leste (LDCs), mengingat keterbatasan waktu untuk dapat menghasilkan keputusan konkrit di COP-22, jika tidak dimulai pembahasannya di SBI -44 dan SBSTA-44. b. I su Financial Supports, mengingat peran pentingnya untuk mendukung implementasi PA

khususnya pelaksanaan NDC.

c. I su Facilitative Dialogue disuarakan oleh Kuwait dan Arab Grup, perlu kejelasan mengenai isu-isu yang akan di-address pada Pertemuan tersebut dan outcomes yang diharapkan.

(4)

SBSTA-44 (Joint Process SBI -SBSTA).

Dalam pembahasan Nomination of APA Co-Chair from the Non-Annex I parties, Koordinator G-77 and China menyampaikan kandidat APA Co-chair dari Non-Annex I (NAI ) Parties akan diwakili dari region Asia Pasifik, dimana proses konsultasi dan penjaringannya telah berlangsung dan dikoordinasikan oleh Arab Saudi. Arab Saudi menyampaikan dalam proses penjaringan telah terdapat 2 kandidat yang memenuhi persayaratan, namun masih perlu konsultasi lanjutan dengan parties di region tersebut untuk dapat memutuskan siapa yang akan ditunjuk untuk menjadi Co-Chair APA dari negara non-Annex I . Selanjutnya, Koordinator G-77 and China memberikan kesempatan pada Arab Saudi selaku koordinator region Asia Pasifik untuk melanjutkan proses pada tanggal 14 Mei siang hari, sehingga diharapkan pada tanggal 15 Mei 2016 saat Plenary Group G-77 and China sudah dapat diputuskan Co-Chair yang mewakili Non-Annex I Parties. Pada akhirnya, G-77 dan China menyepakati bahwa representative dari Arab Saudi, Ms. Sarah Baashan, dinominasikan mejadi APA co-chair dari NAI .

Pada pembahasan agenda Confirmation of Thematic Coordinators, Koordinator G-77 and China menyampaikan perlunya koordinasi dan pengawalan terhadap isu-isu atau tema-tema penting guna menjaga koherensi kepentingan bersama sebagai grup. Oleh sebab itu, perlu ditunjuk koordinator untuk mengawal isu-isu tersebut selama persidangan dan memfasilitasi diskusi bersama G-77 and China pada isu-isu tersebut. Beberapa koordinator dari periode sebelumnya masih bersedia melanjutkan tugasnya, namun sebagian lainnya memberikan kesempatan bagi wakil Negara Pihak lain untuk menjadi koordinator sehingga perlu dicari penggantinya. Beberapa isu-isu tematis yang diperlukan untuk dikoordinasikan yaitu: isu Adaptasi dan Loss and Damage, I su Technology, isu APA – NDC, isu Transparency, isu FVA, NMA, dan NMM, dan isu Finance. Pada kesempatan tersebut, Koordinator G-77 and China menyampaikan bahwa I ndonesia melalui Dr. Nur Masripatin diharapkan dapat mengawal isu-isu terkait element Transparency. Delegasi I ndonesia pada kesempatan tersebut menyampaikan pada prinsipnya I ndonesia siap membantu Koordinator G-77 and China dalam menjalankan tugasnya, khususnya dalam mengawal isu-isu transparency.

Secara umum, beberapa isu utama yang menjadi perhatian utama dari Group 77 dan China yaitu:

a. Percepatan pelaksanaan kegiatan pre 2020 meliputi mitigasi, adaptasi dan dukungan pendanaan, teknologi dan peningkatan kapasitas. Termasuk dalam penekanan tersebut adalah badan-badan adhoc untuk operasionalisasi Paris Agreement harus efektif melaksanakan tugas termasuk Standing Committee of Finance, Adaptation Committee, Executive Committee of Warsawa I nternational Mechanism (terkait adaptasi) dan Technology Committee.

b. Transparancy Framework merupakan kunci sukses pelaksanaan mandate Paris Agreement. I su transparansi sangat erat kaitannya dengan pelaksanaan upaya mitigasi melalui Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC)dan program adaptasi serta berkaitan dengan portfolio multilateral assessment di bawah I nternational Consultancy and Assessment (I CA). Selain itu kegiatan utama dari transparansi adalah registry yang dapat menyajikan upaya mitigasi negara lain, tidak ada backsliding dan future ambition. c. Penyusunan modality, procedure and guideline (MPG) dari review dan pelaporan seperti

review program adaptasi, teknologi, pelaksanaan pendanaan iklim dan peningkatan kapasitas.

(5)

Agreement harus tetap menjalankan prinsip Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities. Pelaksanan Peris Agreement di negara berkembang harus memperoleh dukungan dari negara maju.

e. Negara berkembang mengusulkan agar agenda peleksanaan persidangan di SBI dan SBSTA memerlukan amendment untuk mengoptimalkan persiapan COP 22 di Marrakesh-Maroko di 7 – 18 November 2016.

3.2 The Forty- Fourth Sessions of the Subsidiary Body for I mplementation ( SBI -44) ,

16- 26 Mei 2016

SBI -44 membahas agenda terkait dukungan teknis dan pendanaan untuk penyusunan biennial update reports (BUR), pengembangan sistem registrasi mitigasi dan adaptasi perubahan iklim, reviu prosedur dan modalitas Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), National Adaptation Plans (NAPs), pendanaan adaptasi, lingkup dan modalitas untuk pengkajian berkala mekanisme teknologi, peningkatan kapasitas, Doha Work Programme(DWP) dan pengarusutamaan gender. SBI -44 dapat menyepakati sejumlah rancangan keputusan, yaitu tentang dukungan teknis dan pendanaan untuk penyusunan Biennial Update Report (BUR), NAPs, kerangka acuan untuk pengkajian pendanaan adaptasi, lingkup dan modalitas untuk pengkajian berkala mekan isme teknologi, keanggotaan Paris Committee on Capacity Building (PCCB), tindak lanjut DWP, serta pengarusutamaan gender pada isu perubahan iklim. Sementara itu, isu modalitas dan prosedur CDM, sistem registrasi dan reviu kerangka kerja peningkatan kapasit as masih memerlukan pembahasan lebih lanjut. Dalam kaitan ini, para negara Pihak diminta untuk menyampaikan submisi menyangkut isu-isu tersebut. Matriks status perkembangan negosiasi dan daftar permintaan submisi untuk masing-masing isu daptdilihat dalam Lampiran.

3.3 The Forty- Fourth Sessions Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice ( SBSTA-44) , 16-26 Mei 2016

Pada SBSTA-44 dibahas isu-isu terkait adaptasi Nairobi Work Program (NWP), teknologi framework, pertanian, sains dan reviu (riset dan observasi sistimatik), kajian I PCC (I ntergovernment Panel on Climate Change), metodologi baik dalam konvensi (terkait GRK dan common metrics), metodologi KP (LULUCF terkait revegetasi), serta hal-hal terkait market dan non-market (artikel 6 Paris Agreement).

SBSTA-44 dapat menyepakati langkah implementasi NWP. Sementara itu, berbagai isu lainnya masih memerlukan pembahasan lebih lanjut, termasuk permintaan kepada para negara Pihak untuk menyampaikan submisi menyangkut beberapa isu. Matriks status perkembangan negosiasi dan daftar permintaan submisi untuk masing-masing isu dapat dilihat dalam Lampiran.

3.4 The First Session of the Ad- Hoc Working Group on the Paris Agreement ( APA-1) , 16-26 Mei 2016

(6)

(enam) agenda substantif, yaitu : 1) Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs); 2) komunikasi adaptasi; 3) kerangka transparansi untuk aksi dan support; 4) global stocktake; 5) compliance; dan 6) persiapan ratifikasi dan entry into force Paris Agreement.

Secara substantif masih terlalu banyak perbedaan tajam antara negara maju dan negara berkembang terkait : (i) perbedaan definisi featuresdan informasi NDC; (ii) tujuan dan elemen komunikasi adaptasi; (iii) isu fleksibilitas dan penggunaan prinsip CBDR-RC dalam transparansi; (iv) kesamaan elemen, metodologi dan waktu pengukuran dalam global stocktake serta kaitannya dengan facilitative dialog yang akan diadakan Tahun 2018; (v) operasionalisasi prinsip-prinsip non-advesarial, non-punitivedan facilitative untuk compliance; dan (vi) berbagai implikasi hukum dan politis jika Paris Agreement berlaku lebih cepat dari yang diperkirakan. APA-1 telah menyepakati modalitas kerja untuk sesi selanjutnya, meminta submisi pandangan negara pihak terkait berbagai macam perbedaan dalam agenda pembahasan, serta usulan technical papers dan workshop. Draft kesepakatan yang dicapai dalam persidangan APA-1 sebagaimana terlampir

I V. PERTEMUAN LAI N- LAI N

4.1 Pertemuan Ketua DELRI

Dalam kesempatan sela-sela perundingan, Ketua DELRI telah mengadakan pertemuan ataupun menghadiri undangan pertemuan yang dipandang strategis, yaitu:

a. Dengan didampingi Staf Ahli Menteri Energi dan Sumber Daya Mineral, Ketua Delri mengadakan pertemuan bilateral dengan Ketua Delegasi New Zealand, Duta Besar Sinclair. Delegasi New Zealand meminta I ndonesia bergabung dan mendukung Komunike terkait Fossil Fuel Subsidy Reform, yaitu forum negara-negara yang telah berniat secara bertahap menghilangkan subsidi terhadap penggunaan bahan bakar fosil untuk kepentingan pembangunan berkelanjutan. Menindaklanjuti hal tersebut, perlu dilakukan konsultasi internal dengan Kementerian terkait antara lain Kementerian ESDM dan Kemenlu sebelum bergabung ke dalam komunike dimaksud.

b. Ketua DELRI juga menghadiri High Level Dinner tentang implikasi Paris Agreement terhadap masa depan REDD+ , yang mengundang negara-negara REDD+ (Brazil, I ndonesia, DRC, Colombia, Peru dan Mexico), negara donor dan sektor swasta. Dalam pertemuan tersebut dibahas tentang kemungkinan REDD+ masuk pasar dibawah Artikel 6Paris Agreement. I ndonesia bersama Brazil menyampaikan bahwa pembiayaan REDD+ oleh negara maju adalah insentif bagi pengurangan emisi dari Deforestasi dan Degradasi di negara berkembang, tanpa memberikan kredit kepada pemberi dana (Artikel 5 Paris Agreement).

4.2 Mandated EventsdanSide Events

Dalam kesempatan beberapa mandated events dan side events, beberapa delegasi I ndonesia menjadi presenter pada workshop terkait isu pertanian, gender and climate change, LULUCF

(7)

Programme on Article 6 of the Convention. V. PENGAMATAN DAN TI NDAK LANJUT

Secara umum proses perundingan berlangsung dalam suasana yang relatif kondusif, walaupun terdapat perdebatan serius khususnya dalam proses penyusunan agenda APA-1, sehingga agenda tersebut baru dapat disepakati pada minggu kedua.

Pemerintah I ndonesia (Pemri) memerlukan koordinasi intensif untuk memenuhi permintaan submisi dan mengantisipasi kelanjutan perundingan pada COP-22 di Marrakesh. Sejumlah isu yang memerlukan perhatian khusus Pemri antara lain NDC, transparansi, global stoctake, compliance, proses ratifikasi dan entry into force PA. Selain itu, Pemri juga harus menyiapkan posisi terkait isu-isu teknis di bidang adaptasi serta lost and damage, khususnya pertanian, pendanaan adaptasi, NWP, LULUCF, serta isu market dan non-market.

Beberapa elemen dari isu-isu penting yang perlu tindak lanjut di dalam negeri antara lain: a. Land Use, Land Use Change, and Forestry (LULUCF) :restorasi dan perbaikan tata

air lahan gambut, serta persiapan modalitas, prosedur dan guideline.

b. Pertanian: identifikasi elemen mitigasi dan adaptasi untuk ketahanan pangan.

c. Nairobi Work Program ( NWP) : pengumpulan informasi terkait adaptasi di sektor kesehatan, pemukiman, ekosistem dan sumberdaya air dan diversifikasi ekonomi, sebagai bahan penyiapan submisi sesuai jadwal yang disepakati negara pihak.

d. Nationally Determined Contributions( NDC) : target penurunan emisi GRK, asumsi kunci, kontribusi masing-masing sektor kunci, definisi dan pembatasan scope-features, sertaaccounting NDC dan elemen lain yang dianggap penting misalnya adaptasi.

e. Transparansi aksi dan dukungan: perlunya penyusunan modalities, procedure dan guideline (MPG) yang mencerminkan fleksibilitas penggunaan data, metodologi dan tata waktu pelaporan. Dalam kaitan ini, sebagai koordinator G77& China untuk isu transparansi, I ndonesia dapat secara intensif memonitor keterkaitan isu transparansi dengan isu lainnya di artikel PA.

f. Global stocktake: identifikasi elemen stocktake, metodologi, waktu pelaksanaan, timeframedan ruang lingkupnya.

g. Compliance: perlu penyiapan posisi terkait isu jalan tengah prinsip universalitas dan pembedaan (diferensiasi) yang bersifat lebih fasilitatif, isu pendanaan, pengembangan kapasitas dan kemampuan teknologi. Submisi I ndonesia terkait compliance harus mencakup elemen mitigasi, adaptasi dan means of implementation.

h. Aw al Berlakunya PA: terdapat kecenderungan negara Pihak untuk mengantisipasi percepatan berlakunya PA dengan segera melaksanakan CMA-1 dengan prinsip inklusivitas yang menjamin partisipasi semua Negara Pihak Konvensi UNFCCC dan memberi mandat APA untuk menyelesaikan tugasnya. Dalam kaitan tersebut, I ndonesia perlu segera mempercepat proses ratifikasi dan menyampaikan pandangannya melalui submisi berbagai elemen Paris Agreement.

(8)

MATRIK LAPORAN DELEGASI REPUBLIK INDONESIA

PADA

THE FORTY-FOURTH SESSIONS OF THE SUBSIDIARY BODY FOR IMPLEMENTATION (SBI-44),

SUBSIDIARY BODY FOR SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL ADVICE (SBSTA-44),

THE FIRST SESSION OF THE AD- HOC WORKING GROUP ON THE PARIS AGREEMENT (APA-1)

BONN, JERMAN 16-26 MEI 2016

NO

AGENDA

PROGRESS DAN HASIL PERSIDANGAN

CATATAN PENGAMATAN

* THE FORTY-FOURTH SESSIONS OF THE SUBSIDIARY BODY FOR IMPLEMENTATION (SBI-44) 2 Organizational matters

2(a) Adoption of the agenda Agenda adopted as presented in FCCC/SBI/2016/L.2 2(b) Organization of the work of the

session

2(c) Facilitative sharing of views under the international consultation and analysis process

Pada persidangan SBI agenda item 2(c) tentang facilitative sharing of views under the international consultation and analysis process, disampaikan presentasi Biennial Update Report (BUR) oleh Azerbaijan, Bosnia Herzegovina, Brazil, Chile, Ghana, sesuai dengan format BUR dan technical assessment yaitu National Circumstances, Inventory, Mitigation and their effect, support need and received. Brazil menyampaikan Annex mengenai REDD+ dan capaian serapan GRK yang dicapai serta pelaksanaan result-based payment.

Memberikan gambaran process ICA melalui Technical Analysis bagi BUR I Indonesia mulai bulan Juni 2016. Diskusi lebih bersifat umum terkait kelembagaan, peningkatan kapasitas dan support needs and received.

Tidak ada diskusi mendalam mengenai pengukuran inventarisi GRK penurunan emisi GRK

2(d) Other mandated events

2(e) Election of officers other than the Chair

Consultations on the nomination of the rapporteur are continued

3 Reporting from and review of Parties included in Annex I to the Convention

(9)

3(a) Status of submission and review of second biennial reports from Parties included in Annex I to the Convention

SBI took note of the status

3(b) Compilation and synthesis of sixth national communications and first biennial reports from Parties included in Annex I to the Convention

Conclusions adopted as presented FCCC/ SBI/2016/L.1

3(c) Outcome of the first round of the international assessment and review process (2014–2015)

Membahas hasil First Round International Assessment and Review (IAR) Process dan tindak lanjut umtuk memformulasikam Draft Conclusion. Disepakati Draft Conclusion disusun oleh SBI. Persidangan agenda item 3(c) menghasilkan Conclusions sebagaimana tertuang dalam dokumen FCCC/SBI/2016/L.12 dan FCCC/SBI/2016/L.12/Add.1

Memberikan masukan proses transparansi di dalam melaksanakan menurunan emisi GRK. Memberikan masukan proses transparansi di dalam melaksanakan menurunan emisi GRK

3(d) Revision of the “Guidelines for the preparation of national communications by Parties included in Annex I to the Convention, Part II: UNFCCC reporting guidelines on national communications”

Pembahasan tindak lanjut dari workshop yang dimandatkan SBI 43, yang hanya melibatkan negara-negara Annex I. Agenda ini membahas perubahan penggunaan IPCC Guideline 1996 ke IPCC Guideline 2006. Terdapat kendala dalam pelaksanaannya mengenai perubahan kategori IP menjadi IPPU proyeksi yang memasukkan indirect CO2 emission. Kedua hal tersebut berkaitan dengan konsistensi penetapan data historis dan proyeksi khususnya dengan data sebelumnya menggunakan IPCC GL 1996. Diskusi juga membahas Pedoman berdasarkan Dec 24/CP 19.

Pertemuan focus membicarakan area yang memerlukan klarifikasi (dari Revision of the NC guidelines), yaitu:

• Harmonisation of the category names of IPPU in the NCs (the issues of dealing with the IPPU). --> Parties seems to agree on this, and propose changes from IPs to IPPU, accordingly.

Membandingkan pengalaman Indonesia dalam menyusun Inventarisasi gas rumah kaca (GRK) dengan menggunakan IPCC Guideline 2006.

(10)

• Clarification if projections include indirect CO2

emissions.Ooptions available are: either include the CO2 emissions, or leave without CO2 emissions in the Table format. Norway prefers to add footnote to table 2,3 and 4 if indirect emissions CO2 emissions aee inlcuded in ihtorical and projected GHG emissions

• Clarifying if mandatory and non-mandatory reporting success or failure in technology development and transfer, (as in para 57), serta Parties may also provide information on success and failure stories (where feasible, report activities related to technology transfer, including success and failure stories, using Table 9.

Selain itu terdapat beberapa tambahan informasi mengenai research and sytematic information, yaitu ada pada: (i) para 61. changes of [..] to using future earth, (ii0 para 62, correct reference, (iii) adding to para 66.a with ’including global and regional climates models’, (iii) adding para 66.c ’approaching including technologies, (iv) adding para 67.c by a phrase of ‘ cryophere climate observing systems’. Hasil informal consultations untuk agenda ini sebagaimana tertuang dalam dokumen FCCC/SBI/2016/L.22

4 Reporting from Parties not included in Annex I to the Convention

4(a) Information contained in national communications from Parties not included in Annex I to the Convention

Held in abeyance. SBI Vice-Chair to conduct consultations on the way forward

(11)

4(b) Provision of financial and technical support

Chair to prepare draft conclusions in consultation with interested Parties FCCC/SBI/2016/L.11

4(c) Summary reports on the technical analysis of biennial update reports of Parties not included in Annex I to the Convention

SBI took note of the summary reports

5 Development of modalities and procedures for the operation and use of a public registry referred to in Article 4, paragraph 12, of the Paris Agreement

Informal consultations co-facilitated FCCC/SBI/2016/L.18

6 Development of modalities and procedures for the operation and use of a public registry referred to in Article 7, paragraph 12, of the Paris Agreement

Informal consultations co-facilitated FCCC/SBI/2016/L.19

7 Matters relating to the mechanisms under the Kyoto Protocol

7(a) Review of the modalities and procedures for the clean development mechanism

Conclusions adopted as presented FCCC/SBI/2016/L.13

7(b) Review of the joint implementation

guidelines/implementation of the draft joint implementation

Conclusions adopted as presented FCCC/SBI/2016/L.8 FCCC/SBI/2016/L.8/Add.1

(12)

modalities and procedures 7(c) Procedures, mechanisms and

institutional arrangements for appeals against decisions of the Executive Board of the clean development mechanism

Informal consultations facilitated FCCC/SBI/2016/L.23

8 Matters relating to the least developed countries

Conclusions addopted as amended FCCC/SBI/2016/L.6

9 National adaptation plans Konsultasi informal SBI dilaksanakan secara intensif sejak tanggal 16 Mei 2016. Negara berkembang memberikan pandangan bahwa pelaporan National adaptation plans (NAPs) diharapkan tidak menjadikan beban tambahan bagi negara dan perlu diintegrasikan dengan kerangka kerja pelaporan yang sudah ada. Informasi yang termuat dalam laporan antara lain adalah tingkat kerentanan negara, kesenjangan yang dihadapi negara dalam meningkatkan kapasitas nasional, serta kebutuhan dan prioritas adaptasi

Perlu dilakukan penguatan kapasitas negara pihak dalam penyiapan NAPs, termasuk penerjemahan landasan ilmiah ke tataran

perencanaan dan pelaksanaan agar tidak terjadimal adaptation. Negara berkembang perlu memiliki kemampuan dalam menyiapkan informasi untuk mendapatkan dukungan dalam

mengimplementasikan rencana adaptasi. Hal penting yang diperlukan negara berkembang adalah bagaimana agar

perencanaan adaptasi yang telah disusun dapat diimplermentasikan secara konkrit.

Negara G77/China mempunyai pandangan bahwa elemen kunci pembahasan adalah penguatan pelaporan NAPs dan keterkaitan NAPs dengan mekanisme pendanaan untuk mendukung implementasi. Pembahasan mencakup aspek tujuan pelaporan

Proses perumusan dan pelaksanaan NAPs dipandang penting dalam meningkatkan kapasitas adaptasi, memperkuat resiliensi dan mengurangi kerentanan terhadap perubahan iklim yang berkontribusi kepada pencapaian tujuan global adaptasi sebagaimana tertuang dalam Pasal 7Paris Agreement.

(13)

NAPs, elemen pelaporan serta pengelolaan laporan. Proses penyusunan dan pelaksanaan NAPs diarahkan untuk meningkatkan kapasitas adaptasi, penguatan ketahanan dan pengurangan kerentanan terhadap dampak perubahan iklim yang akan memberikan kontribusi terhadap pembangunan berkelanjutan sebagaimana yang dimandatkan dalam Paris Agreement. Proses penyusunan dan pelakanaan NAPs diharapkan dapat membantu negara pihak untuk terlibat secara efektif dalam merencanakan dan mengimplementasikan aksi adaptasi seperti identifikasi gaps, kebutuhan dan prioritas, serta penguatan pembangunan.

Elemen-elemen hasil pembahasan telah dituangkan dalam kertas kerjaconclusion,sebagaimana tertuang dalam dokumen

FCCC/SBI/2016/L.9. 10 Third review of the Adaptation

Fund

Terkait dengan Agenda item 9 SBI-44, dilaksanakan pertemuan Koordination Grup G-77 dan China, untuk membahas posisi bersama Grup G-77 dan China terhadap beberapa elemen dari draft TOR untukThird Review of the Adaptation Fundkhususnya terkait objectives, scope of mobilizationsertacoherence and

complementary dari program/ proyek AF dengan pendanaan lainnya.

Koordinator G-77 dan China menyampaikan perlunya ditambahkan referensi Dec 1/ CP-21 pada pendahuluandraft conclusionyang disiapkan Co Chair, mengingat perlu ada ‘hook’ untuk Adaptation Fund (AF) ke Paris Agreement (PA) kerena nantinya AF akan melayani/ bekerja di bawah PA. Terkait denganobjective, Grup-77 dan China berpandangan perlu ditambahkan juga isu ketercukupan dan keberlanjutan dana untuk AF, mengingat selama ini dana AF diperoleh dari mekanisme under CDM.

Terkait dengan Scope Grup G-77 dan China juga sepakat agar ada

Indonesia perlu menyiapkan bahan Submisi pandangan Indonesia terkait Third Review of the Adaptation Fund sesuai dengan TOR yang disepakati. Bahan Submisi harus dikirimkan paling lambat 30 April 2017 agar bisa dijadikan referensi dalam penyiapan Technical Paper oleh Sekretariat dan nantinya akan dilaporkan pada SBI-47 (November 2017). Indonesia perlu juga memperhatikan interlinkage antara AF dibawah APA dengan AF dibawah SBI.

(14)

penekanan pada sumber pendanaan dan mobilisasi pendanaan untuk membiayai program-program adaptasi yang lebih konkret. Terkait dengan Koherensi dan Komplemen dari program/ proyek AF dengan pendanaan lainnya, Grup G-77 dan China menambahkan koherensi dan komplementari dari institusi adaptasi yang lain. Persidangan SBI-44 untuk agenda item 10 dilaksanakan melalui Informal Consultation dengan Co-Chair SBI untuk isu Finance. Pertemuan membahas Draft Conclusion yang telah disiapkan oleh Sekretariat terkait Agenda Item 9 SBI-44 yang sudah diperbaiki oleh Sekretariat sesuai dengan masukan dan pandangan dari parties dari pertemuan sebelumnya.

Dalam draft tersebut ada beberapa poin yang didiskusikan, yaitu: (i) Terkait dengan penambahan referensi Dec 1/ CP-21 sebagai hook untuk AF bekerja melayani PA; (ii) Terkait dengan Objective, Diskusi mensepakati penambahan frase ketersediaan dan keberlanjutan pendanaan AF sesuai usulan grup G-77 dan China; (iii) Terkait dengan Scope, khususnya isu koherensi dan komplementari diskusi terpolarisasi antara penggunaan term ‘other financing adaptation institution’ (Grup EU) atau ‘other adaptation institution’ (G-77 and China), dan sebagai langkah kompromi digunakan term ‘other institution funding Adaptation Projectsand Programs’.

Pertemuan informal akhirnya dapat mensepakatiDraft Conclusion yang sudah disiapkan oleh Sekretariat untuk selanjutnya dibawa pada PertemuanContact Group.

Persidangan dalamContact GroupAgenda Item 9 SBI-44 membahas hasilInformal ConsultationterhadapDraft Conclusion yang telah didiskusikan dan diperbaiki oleh sekretariat sesuai masukan dariParties. Pada pertemuanContact Group tersebut akhirnyaDraft ConclusionuntukAgenda Item9 SBI-44Third Review

(15)

of the Adaptation Funddapat disepakati olehPartiesdan selanjutnya Sekretariat akan memuat hasil tersebut di website UNFCCC. Selain itu, dilaksanakan pertemuan konsultasi informal untuk membahas TOR review Adaptation Fund ke-3. Pembahasan difokuskan untuk mencermati ruang lingkup TOR dan sumber informasi yang dapat digunakan dalam melaksanakan review. Persidangan SBI-44 untuk agenda item 10 telah menghasilkan conclusion of Chair, sebagaimana tertuang dalam dokumen FCCC/SBI/2016/L.10

11 Scope and modalities for the periodic assessment of the Technology Mechanism in relation to supporting the implementation of the Paris Agreement

Sesuai mandat kepada SBI 44, COP 21 memutuskan untuk melaksanakanperiodic assessment terhadap efektivitas dan kecukupan dukungan pengembangan dan alih teknologi melalui Technology Mechanismdalam rangka pelaksanaanParis Agreement. COP meminta SBI 44 untuk mengelaborasi lingkup dan modalitas periodic assessment, dengan mempertimbangkan review yang dilakukan olehClimate Technology Centre and Network(CTCN) sebagaimana dicantumkan di dalam decision 2/CP.17, annex VII, paragraf 20, dan modalitas untukglobal stocktakeyang tercantum di dalam Artikel 14 Paris Agreement, untuk dipertimbangkan dan diadops pada COP 25.

Persidangan mengenai pengembangan dan alih teknologi dilakukan untuk dua hal tersebut di atas, melalui pembahasan di lingkup G77 and China, serta SBSTA dan SBI consultation meeting. Dalam negosiasi, sejumlah isu penting yang muncul dalam pembahasan antara lain: (1) Justifikasi mengenai pentingnya proses yang akan dilakukan.

Keseluruhan artikel 10 yang baru mencerminkan sistem yang komprehensif bagi pelaksanaan aksi nyata; dan (2) Periodic

assessment perlu disesuaikan dengan jadwal assessment yang sudah ada dalam mekanisme sekarang. Hal ini untuk menghindari duplikasi

(16)

kegiatan.

Hasil pembahasan SBI mengenai scope and modalities for the periodic assessment of the Technology Mechanism (Agenda item 10). Dalam negosiasi, sejumlah isu penting yang muncul dalam pembahasan antara lain: (a) Justifikasi mengenai pentingnya proses yang akan dilakukan. Keseluruhan artikel 10 yang baru

mencerminkan sistem yang komprehensif bagi pelaksanaan aksi nyata; (b) Periodic assessment perlu disesuaikan dengan jadwal assessment yang sudah ada dalam mekanisme sekarang. Hal ini untuk menghindari duplikasi kegiatan

Chair menyampaikan draft text mengenai agenda item 11 scope and modalities for the periodic assessment of the Technology

Mechanism in relation to supporting the implementation of the Paris Agreement. Draft tersebut terdiri atas empat paragraph yang berisi: (i) mengacu dan menyetujui laporan lisan Ketua TEC dan Direktur CTCN; (ii) lingkup dan fokus periodic assessment Technology Mechanism; (iii) perlunya informasi yang bersumber dari proses-proses yang saat ini dilaksanakan di bawah Konvensi; dan (iv) permintaan untuk menyampaikan pandangan negara-negara mengenai lingkup dan modalitas periodic assessment paling lambat tanggal 25 Januari 2017.

Draft conclusion agenda item (11) sebagaimana tertuang dalam dokumen FCCC/SBI/2016/L.5

12 Capacity-building in developing countries

12(a) Third comprehensive review of the implementation of the framework for capacity-building

Pembahasan mengenai 3rd comprehensive review menghasilkan hal-hal berikut ini. Disampaikan presentasi mengenai “Main findings contained in the technical paper on the third comprehensive review of the implementation of the framework of capacity-building in developing

(17)

under the Convention countries”, yang berasal dari kerangka technical paper dan mencakup: Description of capacity-building programmes and activities, Areas mostly addressed, Areas with key results and impacts, Information on capacity-building programmes and activities submitted by United Nations organizations and other institutions, Emerging capacity-building needs and gaps, Financial resource, Capacity-capacity-building priority areas, Stakeholders involved in and benefiting from capacity-building activities, Availability of and access to resources and effectiveness of their, deployment, Annex II Parties, GEF, GCF and AF, Non-Annex I Parties, Further implementation of the capacity-building framework, dan Baselines and performance indicators for capacity-building. Dalam persidangan agenda item 12(a), Sekretariat lebih bersifat menampung pandangan umum. Dalam pandangan para parties, sejumlah negara menyatakan bahwa dalam decision nanti dinyatakan keinginan kuat dari setiap negara untuk mendukung Capacity Building dalam Paris Agreement, terlebih karena CB merupakan isu yang bersifar cross-cutting. Indonesia menyatakan bahwa dalam pelaksanaan CB perlu ada inovasi inovasi baik dalam campaign, public awareness dan juga outreach, sehingga

pelaksanaan CB dapat lebih bervariasi.

Persidangan agenda item 12(a), menghasilkan conclusion sebagaimana tertuang dalam dokumen FCCC/SBI/2016/L.21 12(b) Third comprehensive review of

the implementation of the framework for capacity-building under the Kyoto Protocol

FCCC/SBI/2016/L.20

12(c) Terms of reference for the Paris Committee on Capacity-building

Sejumlah negara mengusulkan agar agenda 12.c yang terlebih dahulu dibahas (keanggotaan PCCB), termasuk komposisi anggota komite. Sejumlah besar aspek dijadikan pertimbangan dalam PCCB

(18)

yaitu: (i) Objectives and aims; (ii) Composition; (iii) In case of resignation or unable to complete term; (iv) Term in Office/ No terms; (v) Chairmanship; (vi) Gender; (vii) Cooperation with other

Convention bodies; (viii) Cross-Membership Rules; (ix) Cooperation with other institutions outside the Convention; (x) Transparency; (xi) Min no of meetings/timing; (xii) Agenda and documentation; (xiii) Decisions by consensus; (xiv) Reporting; (xv) Secretariat functions; (xvi) Working Language; (xvii) Participation of Observers/ experts; (xix) Panels of working groups allowed; (xx) Annual workplan area or focus-who decides; (xxi) Quorum; dan (xxii) Rules of Procedure. Usulan yang tampaknya akan disepakati hampir serupa dengan usulan Indonesia, yaitu 16 anggota dengan komposisi sebagai berikut: (i) Dua anggota dari masing-masing kelima UN region, yaitu: The African Group (54 member states), The Asia Pacific Group (53 member states), The Eastern European Group (23 member states), The Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC), 33 member states; dan The Western European and Others Group (WEOG), 28 member states; (ii) Satu anggota dari LDC; (iii) Satu anggota dari SIDS; (iv) Dua anggota dari Annex II Parties; dan (v) Dua anggota dari Non-Annex I Parties.

Persidangan akhirnya menyepakati 12 anggota Paris Committee on Capacity Building (PCCB). yang terdiri dari: i) masing-masing dua anggota dari kelima UN region; ii) satu anggota dari least developed countries; dan iii) satu anggota dari small island developing

countries. Di samping itu terdapat enam orang perwakilan yang berasal dari organisasi di bawah Konvensi, termasuk unit operasional Financial Mechanism.

Persidangan agenda item 12(c) menghasilkan conclusion sebagaimana tertuang dalam dokumen FCCC/SBI/2016/L.24 dan

(19)

FCCC/SBI/2016/L.24/Add.1 13 Review of the Doha work

programme on Article 6 of the Convention

Dalam SBI Informal Consultation terdapat beberapa butir pembahasan:

a. Views on the next session on the Dialogue. Terdapat dua opsi, yaitu (a) untuk melanjutkan Dialog berikutnya (5th_Dialogue

on the Action for Climate Empowerment /ACE) pada sesi SBs ke-46 di bulan Mei/Juni tahun 2017, dan (b) untuk

mengorganisir Dialog berikutnya setelah COP-22 di Maroko. Parties menyepakati bahwa Dialogue on ACE berikutnya akan diselenggarakan pada sesi SBs ke-46 di tahun 2017.

b. Rekomendasi perlunya institutional mechanism danuniversal stakeholder dialogue. Civil Society Organization (CSO) merekomendasikan kepada Secretariat untuk institutional mechanism dan perlunyauniversal stakeholder dialoguedalam rangka mengaddress barriers and gaps dalam upaya

melibatkan youth people untuk dapat menghubungkan antara apa yang terjadi di konferensi/sidang dengan hasilnya ke masyarakat.

c. Kepastian pendanaan terkait penyelenggaraan Dialogue. Parties meminta kepada Maroko selaku host country of COP-22 untuk memastikan adanya pendanaan untuk penyelenggaraan kegiatan terkait ACE selama di COP-22.

d. Usulan penyelenggaraan untukEducation Day during COP-22

dari Maroko. Maroko mengusulkan untuk penyelenggraan Education Day sewaktu COP-22. Parties menyambut baik usulan penyelenggaraan Education Day, namun meminta Maroko untuk melakukan sesuai prosedur dengan

mendistribusikan pengumuman/informasi ke negara-negara lainnya. Parties akhirnya menyambut usulan Maroko tersebut dan selanjutnya penyelenggaraan Education Day pada setiap COP menjadi usulan dalam draft conclusion.

Pembahasan item ini secara umum berjalan dengan kondusif, penuh kemufakatan, dan jarang terjadi perbedaan pendapat antara negara maju dengan negara berkembang pada hampir seluruh isu.

(20)

Dalam pembahasan disepakati bahwa negara-negara diminta untuk terus meningkatkan sistem pengintegrasian pendidikan, pelatihan, peningkatan kesadaran masyarakat, peran masyarakat serta akses publik terhadap informasi ke dalam semua aksi mitigasi dan adaptasi yang dilaksanakan di bawah Konvensi.

Facilitator meminta mandate member of G77 & China untuk mendevelop draft of conclusion dan draft of decision.

Parties menyepakati agar Facilitator membuat draft text tersebut. Hasil informal consultations sebagaimana tertuang dalam dokumen FCCC/SBI/2016/L.15 dan FCCC/SBI/2016/L.15/Add.1

14 Impact of the implementation of response measures

Pembahasan yang berjalan adalah SBI/SBSTA informal consultations on impact of the implementation of response measures: Improved forum and work programme.

Berdasarkan 2 pertemuan yang berlangsung dengan pandangan dan posisi Negara Pihak serta presentasi dari Sekretariat, co-facilitators menyampaikan proposal mengenai workprogramme untuk improved forum hingga SB49, dengan fokus: (i) Just transition of the work force; (ii) Economic diversification; (iii) Economic transition and sustainable development; dan (iv) list of activities yang diusulkan Negara Pihak.

Dalam pertemuan ketiga pada umumnya Negara Pihak memandang perlu dilakukan pembahasan lebih lanjut dan menyampaikan beberapa masukan. Proposal akan direvisi dengan memasukkan berbagai pandangan.

Isu response measures merupakan isu yang selama ini tidak secara menerus diikuti oleh Indonesia. Dengan berbagai topik dan juga usulan aktivitas yang ada dalam proposal, sudah waktunya Indonesia mengikuti isu ini dengan lebih terfokus sebagai bentuk antisipasi paska 2020.

14(a) Improved forum and work programme

FCCC/SB/2016/L.2/Rev.1

(21)

functions under the Paris Agreement of the forum on the impact of the implementation of response measures

14(c) Matters relating to Article 3, paragraph 14, of the Kyoto Protocol

14(d) Progress on the implementation of decision 1/CP.10

15 The scope of the next periodic review of the long-term global goal under the Convention and of overall progress towards

achieving it

The long term global: menahan laju kenaikan suhu di bawah 2°C dibanding masa pra-industri dan apabila memungkinkan menekan kenaikannya menjadi 1.5°C.

Keputusan COP 2010 adalah melakukan kajian secara periodik mengenai:

(1)the adequacy of this long-term global goal in the light of the ultimate objective of the Convention, and (2) overall progress toward achieving the long-term global goal, including a consideration of the implementation of the commitments under the Convention.

Proses tersebut telah dimulai sejak tahun 2012 dengan membentuk structured expert dialogue(SED). Laporan terakhir SED termuat dalam dokumen FCCC/SB/2015/INF.1. DecisionCOP21 di Paris memberikan mandate untuk melakukan review tersebut secara efisien dan menghindari duplikasi kerja di bawah sesi SB maupun sesi terkait KP.

1st_{Informal Consultation}_{menghasilkan beberapa point pembahasan.} Parties menyampaikan bahwa review sebaiknya tidak boleh lebih cepat daripada sesi SB48 (sesi SB pertengahan tahun 2018)

Usulan tindak lanjut: Indonesia dapat mengidentifikasi secara lebih rinci mengenai scope of next periodic reviewini yang diambil dari pembelajaran penyusunan dokumen-dokumen terdahulu yang telah disampaikan.

(22)

mengingat sampai saat ini belum terkumpul informasi danclarity yang diperlukan untuk melakukan review yang mencakup 2 fokus utama tersebut di atas. Beberapa Parties menyampaikan bahwa sebaiknya awal pembahasan difokuskan pada scope review itu sendiri, sehingga apabila scope of review telah disepakati maka akan lebih mudah untuk menyesuaikan timing dari review tersebut Draft conclusion mengusulkan agenda mengenai cakupan periodic review ini tidak dibahas dalam SBSTA45 di Maroko dan hanya akan mengadopsi apa yang sudah disusun dalam sesi SBSTA44. AOSIS mengusulkan untuk menyelenggarakan workshop di COP22. Hal ini akan direkomendasikan kepada SBs44, dimana hasil workshop ini (diselenggarakanback to backatau setelah COP22) akan dipertimbangkan dalam pelaporan. Hal ini perlu

dipertimbangkan kembali mengingat belum adanya kejelasan addedd valuesdari workshop ini dibandingkan, misalnya, dengan pendekatan pembahasan dalam informal consultation atau

pembahasan dalam agenda lain sepertiagenda itemResearch anda Obeservation.

Draft conclusion telah selesai dibahas dan siap untuk diadopsi sebagai salah satu hasil sesi Bonn Mei 2016 (dokumen FCCC/SB/2016/L.1). Draft tersebut memuat penjadwalan pembahasan lanjutan agenda tersebut yang ditetapkan pada sesi SB46 di Bulan Mei 2017. Selain itu, usulan Negara berkembang untuk menyelenggarakan satuin-session workshoppada sesi SB46 tersebut telah diakomodir dan akan dipertimbangkan pengaturannya. 16 Gender and climate change Persidangan Gender dan Climate Change pada Bonn Climate

Conferece (SBI 44; SBSTA 44; APA 1) di bawah SBI diawali dengan SBI Workshop on gender-responsive climate policy 17 dan

pertemuan Women and Gender Constituency yang dimaksudkan

Beberapa implementasi kebijakan responsive gender dan aksi Indonesia yang disampaikan pada pertemuan dimaksud di atas diantaranya adalah mainstreaming gender pada kegiatan adaptasi

(23)

untuk penyampaian pandangan dan juga share pembelajaran dari masing-masing negara. Pandangan dan pembelajaran yang diperoleh akan dikompilasi oleh secretariat sebagai bahan untuk informal consultation yang akan dilaksanakan pada minggu ke -2. Pada SBI 44 Workshop on Gender-Responsive Climate Policyhari pertama, moderator George Wamukoya, Kenya menyampaikan tujuan workshop yaitu untuk meningkatkan pengertian dalam hal: gender-related terms; steps and processes of gender mainstreaming; synergies of relevant bodies and mechanisms under the Convention; and good practices. SedangkanVerona Collantes-Lebale, UN Women, menyampaikan overview mengenai bagaimana isu gender dicakup dalam keputusan-keputusan UNFCCC, areas kerja serta organisasi (di bawah UNFCCC).

Selanjutnya, berlangsung tiga sesi untuk mendiskusikan, antara lain: good practices(subnational), menyusungender-responsive policies (di level national dan regional); sertatraininguntuk delegasi perempuan UNFCCC (di level internasional). Dalam diskusi hari pertama juga tercetus beberapa isu terkait gender yaitu bagaimana menghubungkan dukungan terhadap kebutuhan di tingkatgrass root, dan kurangnya pengalaman di negara berkembang dalam

mengintegrasikan gender dan penerapan kebijakan.

Pada hari kedua workshop (19 Mei 2016), peserta dibagi menjadi empat kelompok, dengan tugas untuk menyusun rekomendasi-rekomendasi, sesuai tema yang dibagi. Adapun diskusi masing-masing kelompok menghasilkan sebagai berikut:

a. Kelompokthe UNFCCC policy makers and implementers merekomendasikan peningkatan kapasitas dari delegasi pria serta meningkatkanengagement(delegasi pria tersebut) dalam isu gender dan perubahan iklim;

b. KelompokFinancemengusulkan untuk mengembalikan hasil–

perubahan iklim melalui intervensi perencanaan program dan anggaran pada Kementerian/ Lembaga dengan terbitnya Instruksi Presiden No 9. Tahun 2000 tentang Mainstreaming Gender. Peraturan ini juga diimplementasikan sampai dengan kabupaten di bawah koordinasi Kementerian Dalam Negeri. Intervensi

penganggaran dilakukan melalui Inisiasi Gender Responsive Budgeting (GRB). Kementerian PPPA juga mengembangkan panduan untuk pemerintah daerah untuk pengintegrasian gender dan pemberdayaan perempuan dengan ressilent plan, rencana pembangunan jangka menengah dan annual budgeting pada tahun 2015.

Indonesia juga focus pada pengembangan kelembagaan yang beranggotakan anak-anak dan orang-orang dengan kebutuhan khusus untuk membangun ketertarikan dan pengembangan kapasitas terhadap pembangunan daerah terkait resilience strategy di tingkat sub nasional.

Indonesia juga telah meratifikasi Konvesi Hak Anak (Child Right Convention) dan telah

mengimplementasikan di 250 kabupaten (sekitar 50%) dari 34 provinsi telah mendeklarasikan sebagai kota yang ramah terhadap anak. Salah satu indikator yang diterapkan kepedulian anak terhadap lingkungan melalui partisipasi anak dalam isu perubahan iklim. Indonesia juga

mengintegrasikan lingkungan ke dalam kurikulum pendidikan formal menengah. Sekolah juga didorong untuk mengembangkangreen school.

(1)

. . .

A Reporting Service for Environment and Development Negotiations

Online at http://www.iisd.ca/climate/sb44/

Published by the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD)

Vol. 12 No. 674 Wednesday, 25 May 2016

Earth Negotiations Bulletin

#9

This issue of the Earth Negotiations Bulletin © <[email protected]> is written and edited by Jennifer Allan, Beate Antonich, Rishikesh Ram Bhandary, Alice Bisiaux, Mari Luomi, Ph.D., and Virginia Wiseman. The Digital Editor is Kiara Worth. The Editor is Pamela Chasek, Ph.D. <[email protected]>. The Director of IISD Reporting Services is Langston James “Kimo” Goree VI <[email protected]>. The Sustaining Donors of the Bulletin are the European Union, the Government of Switzerland (the Swiss Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN)), Italian Ministry for the Environment, Land and Sea, and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. General Support for the Bulletin during 2016 is provided by the German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety (BMUB), the New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, SWAN International, the Finnish Ministry for Foreign Affairs, the Japanese Ministry of Environment (through the Institute for Global Environmental Strategies - IGES), the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), and the International Development Research Centre (IDRC). Funding for translation of the Bulletin into French has been provided by the Government of France, the Wallonia, Québec, and the International Organization

of La Francophonie/Institute for Sustainable Development of La Francophonie (IOF/IFDD). The opinions expressed in the Bulletin are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of IISD or other donors. Excerpts from the Bulletin may be used in non-commercial publications with appropriate academic citation. For information on the Bulletin, including requests to provide reporting services, contact the Director of IISD Reporting Services at <[email protected]>, +1-646-536-7556 or 300 East 56th St., 11D, New York, NY 10022 USA. The ENB team at the Bonn Climate Change Conference - May 2016, can be contacted by e-mail at <[email protected]>.

BONN HIGHLIGHTS:

TUESDAY, 24 MAY 2016

On Tuesday, the Bonn Climate Change Conference continued with the APA meeting in open-ended informal consultations throughout the day. A TEM on enhancing the implementation of adaptation action convened in the morning and early

afternoon. Informal consultations under the SBI and SBSTA met throughout the day.

APA

FURTHER GUIDANCE IN RELATION TO THE

MITIGATION SECTION OF DECISION 1/CP.21: Co-Chair

Jo Tyndall encouraged parties to focus on: whether and how the features and information on NDCs should be tailored to the type of NDCs or on some other basis, and lessons from INDCs; and whether and how the existing guidance on accounting should be taken into account, and the required level of detail.

On guidance in general, many countries called for reflecting the diversity of NDCs with some guidance common to all NDCs and some guidance specific to types of NDCs. Many stressed the aim is to enhance understanding of NDCs, including for tracking progress towards individual and collective goals.

MEXICO called for comprehensive guidance. BRAZIL suggested a general basis, with layers of detail depending on the kind of NDC or the purpose of the information provided. Noting differences in capacities and capabilities, China, for the LMDCs, opposed by the US, called for differentiation between developed and developing countries.

On features, many countries cautioned against prescriptive guidance. The LMDCs said guidance is already defined in the Paris Agreement, identifying both common and differentiated elements. The EU, SOUTH AFRICA and AUSTRALIA stressed the quantifiability of NDCs.

On types of mitigation NDCs requiring tailored guidance, countries suggested, inter alia, economy-wide emission reduction/limitation targets, deviations from business-as-usual, intensity and sectoral targets, and low-emission development strategies, plans and actions.

On information, Maldives, for AOSIS, stressed supporting improved quality of information over time, calling for full operationalization of capacity building for transparency. NORWAY stressed the need for clarity on the role of the

land sector and markets. CANADA identified the need for a focus on enhancing information on baselines and projections. AUSTRALIA called for submissions.

Saudi Arabia, for the ARAB GROUP, stressed clarity, transparency and understanding as the main criteria, and noted his country’s INDC is centered on adaptation and economic diversification with mitigation co-benefits. Kuwait, for the G-77/ CHINA, noted that, for many, the NDCs include mitigation, adaptation and other elements.

On lessons from INDCs, SWITZERLAND, the EU and NORWAY proposed drawing from the Lima guidance on INDCs. The REPUBLIC OF KOREA called for analyzing existing INDCs. VIET NAM called for future NDCs to reflect lessons learned.

On accounting, many countries called for building on the Paris Agreement, the Convention and the Kyoto Protocol, and stressed the principles of environmental integrity and avoidance of double counting.

Kenya, for the AFRICAN GROUP, called for guidance that addresses the diversity of NDCs, and is voluntary and not prescriptive. The LMDCs called for general principles rather than detailed operational procedures or modalities.

BRAZIL, with GRENADA, suggested conceptual clarity around “accounting,” with BRAZIL stressing work should focus on tracking progress, not counting units.

NEW ZEALAND called for submissions on accounting guidance focused on: principles and norms to safeguard environmental integrity; drawing from existing approaches; and how to accommodate all NDCs.

FURTHER GUIDANCE IN RELATION TO THE ADAPTATION COMMUNICATIONS, INCLUDING, INTER ALIA, AS A COMPONENT OF NDCS, REFERRED TO IN PARIS AGREEMENT ARTICLES 7.10 AND 7.11:

Co-Chair Sarah Baashan invited parties to discuss: what adaptation communications seek to achieve, especially in light of linkages with other issues and what scope of guidance needed; and how balance be achieved between the need for both flexibility and guidance for adaptation communications.

On what adaptation communications seek to achieve and scope, many parties stated that adaptation communications should share national practices and experiences. Uruguay, for the G-77/CHINA, highlighted the role of adaptation

(2)

Wednesday, 25 May 2016 Vol. 12 No. 674 Page 2 Earth Negotiations Bulletin

. . .

catalyzing action and support; achieving parity with mitigation; and assisting developing countries in achieving the global goal on adaptation.

Botswana, for the AFRICAN GROUP, and Jamaica, for AOSIS, emphasized the role of adaptation communications in assessing scale of needs and supporting an effective global stocktake. INDONESIA, with HAITI, urged viewing the global stocktake as an opportunity to help increase adaptation ambition. ARGENTINA said adequacy of support is also an important component of the global stocktake.

The LDCs and Colombia, for AILAC, said adaptation communications should clarify needs and priorities. NORWAY said adaptation communications are “just one part of the picture” for adaptation support.

The US highlighted the role of adaptation communications in maintaining the high profile for adaptation achieved in the Paris Agreement and proposed using adaptation communications as “high-level summaries” of lessons learned.

SWITZERLAND noted that adaptation communications should be based on national planning and have buy-in. The EU recommended the inclusion of backward- and forward-looking elements. INDIA cautioned against conflating adaptation planning and action with communication. Ecuador, for the LMDCs, stressed maintaining a differentiated approach for adaptation communications.

AUSTRALIA saw adaptation communications as a vehicle for disseminating information on implementation progress, gaps, challenges and lessons learned, while cautioning against duplicating work under other Convention bodies. JAPAN called for clarity on the relationship between the process of recognizing efforts of developing countries and communications guidance.

EL SALVADOR emphasized that the communications and global stocktake should guard against backsliding and be guided by science and equity.

Saudi Arabia, for the ARAB GROUP, said the

communications should show how parties are contributing to the global goal on adaptation, without being punitive.

On balance, many parties emphasized the need to maintain flexibility while minimizing additional burdens on developing countries.

Uruguay, for the G-77/CHINA, noted the need for flexibility in accordance with provisions of Paris Agreement Article 7 (adaptation), including on vehicles for communication.

The AFRICAN GROUP called for “common minimum guidance” regardless of the vehicle of communication used. AOSIS called for maintaining flexibility in adaptation reporting modalities. INDIA said guidance must be simple, bottom-up and country driven. ARGENTINA called for preserving flexibility while recognizing that identifying guidance would make the process more efficient. The REPUBLIC OF KOREA supported common minimum elements.

The US suggested including: overview of a country’s decision-making process, information on priorities and actions; adaptation activities for the near future; and needs for support.

The LDCs noted the linkage between the global stocktake and transparency, with adaptation communications as a source of input. INDONESIA supported parallel development of modalities, procedures and guidelines with those of the global stocktake and transparency.

JAPAN emphasized that a new type of communication is unnecessary, given the existence of NDCs, NAPs and National Communications, and suggested the guidance could recommend items to be included without making them mandatory.

The LMDCs said balance could be maintained by

respecting the voluntary and discretionary nature of adaptation communications.

NORWAY urged sufficient detail to enable tracking of progress towards the global goal. MEXICO called for an ecosystem-based approach.

AILAC recommended, given the number of INDCs with adaptation components, requesting the Secretariat to develop a technical paper that distills their common elements.

MODALITIES, PROCEDURES AND GUIDELINES FOR THE TRANSPARENCY FRAMEWORK FOR ACTION AND SUPPORT REFERRED TO IN PARIS AGREEMENT ARTICLE 13: Co-Chair Tyndall invited parties to discuss: experiences and lessons learned from existing MRV, and how these provide basis for an enhanced transparency framework on action and support; and what constitutes flexibility for developing countries, and how it could be applied through modalities, procedures and guidelines to ensure full and effective participation.

On experiences and lessons, South Africa, for the AFRICAN GROUP, said that starting to report on a regular basis is more important than reporting in a transparent manner. He suggested that, in developing modalities, all parties need to take into account, inter alia: flexibility; capacity-building needs; and, with BRAZIL, interlinkages with other relevant Paris Agreement articles. The US, supported by NORWAY, emphasized that reporting and review are an opportunity to build capacity.

Peru, for AILAC, suggested that experiences from REDD+ can be useful in establishing baselines and noted that REDD+ guidelines will not be superseded by modalities, procedures and guidelines of the transparency framework.

JAPAN, CANADA, NORWAY and others identified the FSV as being instructive of capacity gaps and challenges. BRAZIL said one of the lessons of the FSV is that more general guidance is not synonymous to flexibility, but that detailed guidance could be more helpful for implementation and review.

MEXICO suggested entrusting the Adaptation Committee and the LEG on the technical work on adaptation, and called attention to the need for guidance on transparency of support. IRAN emphasized the need for preparation of comprehensive reports on MOI and mobilization of support to developing countries.

The Democratic Republic of the Congo, for the LDCs, called for clear guidelines on what should be measured, verified and accounted for in the MRV system, and for an agreed operational definition of climate finance.

SAINT LUCIA called for, inter alia, common reporting formats and the use of common IPCC guidelines and metrics.

On flexibility, many parties supported using the principle of continuous improvement over time in the design of the transparency framework. Maldives, for AOSIS, stressed ensuring that parties’ capacities improve over time. NEW ZEALAND suggested learning from the use of the tiered approach of the IPCC.

(3)

India, for the LMDCs, emphasizing the differentiated nature of the transparency framework, called for operationalizing differentiation and the principle of CBDRRC and systematically integrating flexibility into the modalities, procedures and guidelines. SAUDI ARABIA identified two layers of flexibility: systematic application; and flexibility embedded in current guidelines.

The EU and NORWAY opposed applying flexibility at a general level. The US said flexibility could only be discussed in the context of common procedures, and, with NORWAY, that it depends on each country’s capacity. AUSTRALIA and the EU supported extending flexibility to the LDCs and SIDS.

The AFRICAN GROUP stressed, inter alia, the political will of developing countries to participate effectively in the transparency framework.

On the mode of work, many parties supported focused submissions. CANADA proposed launching technical work in Marrakech. JAPAN called for a work programme. SAUDI ARABIA opposed submissions at this stage and suggested working in a contact group or informal sessions.

MATTERS RELATING TO THE GLOBAL

STOCKTAKE REFERRED TO IN PARIS AGREEMENT ARTICLE 14: Co-Chair Baashan invited parties to discuss: inputs to the global stocktake; how the global stocktake will be conducted, keeping in mind the need for simplicity, relevance, ownership and inclusiveness; and the relationship, if any, between the global stocktake and the 2018 facilitative dialogue.

On inputs to the global stocktake, many parties mentioned the reports: of the IPCC; the constituted bodies under the Convention; and the subsidiary bodies. Many also noted that inputs would vary for mitigation, adaptation and MOI.

Colombia, for AILAC, proposed linking the global stocktake with the IPCC’s assessment cycle. GRENADA mentioned regional information. INDONESIA, JAPAN, NORWAY and NEW ZEALAND called for considering non-state actors’ inputs.

Kuwait, for the G-77/CHINA, highlighted overall assessments of NDCs and information on mobilization of support. JAPAN pointed to information from the GEF and GCF. The EU and SWITZERLAND referred to the transparency framework outputs. INDIA, ARGENTINA and NORWAY called for including the state of adaptation support. BRAZIL urged consideration of inputs that would be necessary to assess equity in the global stocktake.

Jordan, for the LMDCs, suggested submissions on information in addition to that listed in Decision 1/CP.21 (the Paris outcome).

On how to conduct the global stocktake, the EU said form should flow from function, calling for a balanced process tailored to the different nature of mitigation, adaptation and MOI.

Botswana, for the AFRICAN GROUP, and INDONESIA said information should be made available with enough time for its consideration. The EU, GRENADA, NORWAY, NEW ZEALAND and VIET NAM, opposed by SAUDI ARABIA, suggested separate technical and political processes.

Many countries, opposed by SAUDI ARABIA, suggested learning from the SED on the 2013-2015 review. INDIA said the 2013-2015 review focused on assessment of mitigation efforts.

On output, GRENADA and Solomon Islands, for the LDCs, stressed the need for the global stocktake to conclude in 2023 to allow parties to take stock of its output in preparing their NDCs. The LMDCs suggested a summary report of a high-level roundtable issued after 2023. AILAC suggested the global stocktake output be considered by the CMA. CANADA and the EU suggested a high-level “political moment” in 2023.

INDIA supported submissions on the design of the global stocktake and a miscellaneous document by the Secretariat.

On the relationship between the global stocktake and the 2018 facilitative dialogue, there was general recognition that the facilitative dialogue and the global stocktake differ in scope, but that the latter could learn from the former. The LDCs said the dialogue provides an opportunity for parties to enhance ambition. INDIA stated that the dialogue should address how equity, sustainable development and poverty eradication efforts are considered in mitigation efforts. ARGENTINA suggested the dialogue look at the possible early into force of the Agreement.

SBSTA

AGRICULTURE: Parties considered draft conclusions intended to reflect the work accomplished at SBSTA 44, including: considering workshop reports; taking note of submissions from parties and observers; holding two in-session workshops; and agreeing to continue consideration of workshop reports at SBSTA 45. One group of developing countries proposed inserting “, recalling Article 9 of the Convention, on the basis of the objective, principles and provisions of the Convention,” in a paragraph indicating the SBSTA had continued its scientific and technical work as decided at SBSTA 40. Several developed countries opposed the insertion. The matter remains outstanding.

MATTERS RELATING TO SCIENCE AND REVIEW: Advice on how the assessments of the IPCC can inform the global stocktake: In informal consultations, two parties opposed a reference to: the SED on the 2013-2015 review in relation to learning from past experiences; the SBSTA Chair’s report on the special SBSTA-IPCC event held at this session; and the encouragement, adopted at COP 21, to the scientific community to address research gaps, including on 1.5°C scenarios. Parties agreed to refer to the 2013-2015 review in a footnote and to the “exchange of information” at the special event. Parties did not reach agreement on reference to the encouragement to the scientific community and consulted in informal informals in the evening.

REVIEW OF THE MODALITIES AND PROCEDURES FOR THE CDM: In informal consultations, parties reviewed the draft conclusions proposed by the co-facilitators, taking into account the diversity of views heard at the last consultation. In general, parties appreciated the balance and compromises offered in the text. However, views diverged on whether to include direct links to party submissions in a footnote, with some advocating deleting the links. One party asked for clearer, more direct ways of finding the submissions, noting that the changes to the modalities and procedures that some parties feel are needed are not in the conclusions but can be found in these submissions. Parties agreed to the co-facilitators’ original formulation with links to the submissions.

(4)

Wednesday, 25 May 2016 Vol. 12 No. 674 Page 4 Earth Negotiations Bulletin

. . . SBI

MODALITIES AND PROCEDURES FOR THE OPERATION AND USE OF A PUBLIC REGISTRY REFERRED TO IN PARIS AGREEMENT ARTICLE 4.12 (NDC REGISTRY): In informal consultations on the draft conclusions, discussions focused on paragraphs: taking note of views expressed by parties on this item at SBI 44; and noting linkages of the work on the registry to issues under two SBI and APA agenda items.

After lengthy discussions, parties agreed to delete the paragraph on linkages, and add a reference to linkages “to agenda item 6 of the SBI and to the APA” in the paragraph on taking note of parties’ views.

Parties also decided to add text acknowledging that “the Secretariat will continue to improve, as appropriate, the interim registry.”

Two parties were unable to agree whether to refer to “the” or “a” public registry in a draft paragraph. Co-Facilitator Madeleine Diouf Sarr (Senegal) encouraged the parties to consult on the matter, and said a final proposal on the draft conclusions would be presented to the SBI closing plenary.

GENDER: In informal consultations to discuss draft conclusions, some countries, opposed by others, proposed removing a reference to insufficiency of funding for the Lima work programme. One country suggested adding references to “subject to national circumstances,” and removing references to preparing, at SBI 45, a draft decision for COP 22 and to inputs from parties annexed to the draft conclusions. Some suggested keeping the references to national circumstances and to the draft decision, without reference to the annex, as a compromise. Parties were unable to agree on these remaining issues.

Co-Facilitator Martin Hession (EU) will report to the SBI Chair, with a view to securing additional time to reach agreement.

SBSTA/SBI

RESPONSE MEASURES: During morning informal

consultations, parties considered the third version of the revised co-facilitators’ proposal of the work programme, including elements, timelines and deliverables. On sharing views and experiences including through case studies, one party opposed specification and preferred general reference to guidance from the Paris outcome decision. Similarly, while many parties agreed on inviting submissions, some preferred a more general framing on the scope of the submissions than others.

On hosting a workshop, some parties preferred an inter-sessional workshop. Concerned this could limit participation and have budgetary implications, others preferred an in-session workshop and/or a launch event at COP 22.

In the subsequent contact group, parties considered draft conclusions. SBI Chair Tomasz Chruszczow noted this item as important for many countries “entering economic transition and sustainable development.” SBSTA Chair Carlos Fuller welcomed the conclusion on the modalities, work programme and functions under the Paris Agreement of the forum, and encouraged progress on the improved forum and work programme. Bahrain, for the G-77/CHINA, and South Africa, for the AFRICAN GROUP, said they consider conclusions for all sub-items together as a package. Parties then continued considering elements of the work programme. Discussions will continue.

TEM ON ADAPTATION: Enhancing the implementation of adaptation action: Farhana Yamin, Track 0 and Chatham House, moderated. On implementing adaptation, panelists highlighted the role of information systems, such as linking hydro-meteorological systems with other data systems and automatic weather stations that advise on which crops and practices to choose. Several panelists noted the need for governance systems to shift to a multi-sectoral perspective and focus on policy reforms, as well as to engage in multi-level governance and joint decision-making among stakeholders. A speaker stressed engagement with the private sector, with another emphasizing the need to design new, climate-resilient business models. Many highlighted taking a contextual approach, including landscape planning.

Discussions focused on the risk of maladaptation, with participants highlighting building in flood-prone areas, planting cash crops that are sensitive to both climate change and market forces, and depleting aquifers to increase food security in the short term. Participants underscored that climate change data and information need to be available and accessible to reduce maladaptation, and that technologies can assess risks and maximize efficiency of existing systems. Many underscored the availability of water as fundamental for adaptation and development.

Breakout groups then discussed provision of financial, technology and capacity-building support, and opportunities and options for accelerating the implementation of adaptation action. In the afternoon, participants discussed opportunities for accelerating implementation of adaptation action, including replicable good practices, support and partnerships.

IN THE CORRIDORS

With clouds hanging over the World Conference Center Bonn on Tuesday, the grim weather seemed to seep into consultations as delegates tried to work through the outstanding agenda items before the Wednesday deadline set by the Chairs of the subsidiary bodies. Tensions persisted: one delegate expressed frustrations that some parties were “cherry picking” which aspects of the Paris Agreement to dig into, while another said old positions still loomed, slowing technical work.

With well-known entrenched positions re-emerging, including on the science-policy interface, one delegate worried that if progress did not accelerate at SB 44, “one year will have passed without work since Paris” when parties come together again in Marrakech. Others disagreed, recognizing that calls emerging from the informal consultations for technical papers, workshops, submissions, dialogues and stakeholder actions signaled for important work to be expected in preparation for and during COP 22.

Late in the day, observers welcomed a special event by the French and Moroccan Presidencies on the Warsaw International Mechanism on Loss and Damage, grateful that “loss and damage had not completely disappeared from this session.” With an abundance of examples from NGOs and IGOs on how they are supporting resilience, insurance, risk management, gender responsiveness and much more, participants left the room feeling upbeat about the range of solutions being advanced by non-state actors. However, those non-state actors left the meeting still seeking clarity on how COP 22 will address this important issue.

(5)

. . .

A Reporting Service for Environment and Development Negotiations

Online at http://www.iisd.ca/climate/sb44/

Published by the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD)

Vol. 12 No. 675 Thursday, 26 May 2016

Earth Negotiations Bulletin

#10

BONN HIGHLIGHTS:

WEDNESDAY, 25 MAY 2016

On Wednesday, the Bonn Climate Change Conference continued with the APA meeting in open-ended informal consultations in the morning. A TEM on effective policy frameworks and institutional arrangements for adaptation planning and implementation took place in the morning and early afternoon. In the afternoon, the SBI held the first part of its closing plenary and APA convened an informal consultation. SBI and SBSTA informal consultations convened throughout the day.

APA

MODALITIES AND PROCEDURES FOR THE EFFECTIVE OPERATION OF THE COMMITTEE TO FACILITATE IMPLEMENTATION AND PROMOTE COMPLIANCE REFERRED TO IN PARIS AGREEMENT ARTICLE 15.2: Co-Chair Sarah Baashan invited parties to discuss: features of a mechanism to facilitate implementation and promote compliance; and triggers for the work of the compliance committee and actions it could take.

On features, many parties underlined that the mechanism should be facilitative, non-punitive and non-adversarial, with several others adding it should be universal while taking into account national circumstances and parties’ capabilities.

India, for the LMDCs, stressed the dual role of the committee and urged operationalizing differentiation between developed and developing countries. JAPAN said consideration of national capabilities and circumstances was not “categorical” but depended on each country.

AUSTRALIA emphasized that compliance only applies to individual obligations and, with SWITZERLAND, pointed to communications as an example. NORWAY and MEXICO suggested promoting compliance for legally-binding obligations, and facilitating implementation of other provisions. The

Democratic Republic of the Congo, for the LDCs, said the committee could facilitate implementation of both legally-binding and aspirational elements.

Costa Rica, for AILAC, stated that “all international obligations” must be within the scope of the committee.

INDONESIA said the scope of the compliance committee should include mitigation, adaptation and MOI.

CANADA suggested that the mechanism develop as other aspects of the Agreement evolve, and, with the EU, called for examining how the compliance regime will relate to other mechanisms under the Agreement. NEW ZEALAND stressed the link between the transparency and compliance mechanisms.

On triggers, China, for the G-77/CHINA, Colombia, for AILAC, CANADA, SWITZERLAND, the LMDCs, Mali, for the AFRICAN GROUP and INDONESIA proposed self-referral triggers. The G-77/CHINA, CANADA and SWITZERLAND also supported party-to-party triggers.

The G-77/CHINA and AILAC suggested technical experts could serve as triggers, and SWITZERLAND added the Secretariat. IRAN stressed non-state parties and observers should not be triggers.

CHINA called for a clarification stage before and during the trigger process, and noted the need to consider different actors’ roles at various stages, including the Secretariat, the CMA bureau and transparency experts.

AILAC stressed early warning for potential non-compliance. AOSIS underlined that the triggers should be sensitive to different contexts.

AUSTRALIA identified “active” triggers that would allow the committee to reach out to countries, and “passive” triggers where input would be necessary to initiate the committee’s response.

The LDCs, NEW ZEALAND and the REPUBLIC OF KOREA said triggers could be linked to the transparency framework, with AILAC noting the transparency framework as only one input. Saudi Arabia, for the ARAB GROUP, cautioned against establishing linkages with other elements of the Paris Agreement prematurely.

AUSTRALIA and AOSIS, opposed by the LMDCs, supported a technical paper on triggers. VIET NAM and the US called for further discussion.

On actions of the committee, the LMDCs identified recommendations to the financial mechanism to support implementation. The AFRICAN GROUP suggested identifying causes of non-compliance and facilitating technical and capacity-building support.

SWITZERLAND suggested the committee could offer conclusions on how to improve compliance, along with a statement of concern if goals are far from being achieved.

The US stressed discussions on triggers and actions were “derivative” of the committee’s scope.

INDONESIA said the committee should formulate recommendations to the CMA, in light of national

circumstances. CHINA suggested the CMA then decide on measures to take based on the “facilitative measures” presented by the committee.

CANADA called for analysis to find the optimal solution, and with NORWAY, the LDCs and SWITZERLAND, suggested submissions from parties and/or a technical paper from the Secretariat. The EU called for deepening the discussion in Marrakech first. The US and the ARAB GROUP opposed inviting technical papers at this stage.

FURTHER MATTERS RELATED TO

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PARIS AGREEMENT:

Co-Chair Jo Tyndall invited parties to discuss: procedural and administrative arrangements CMA 1 could put in place in the event of early entry into force, and the timeline of such arrangements; procedural, institutional and administrative issues

(6)

Thursday, 26 May 2016 Vol. 12 No. 675 Page 2 Earth Negotiations Bulletin

. . .

requiring decisions at CMA 1; and modalities for the subsidiary and constituted bodies to report at COP 22 on progress made on their mandated work.

On procedural and administrative arrangements in the event of early entry into force, the Secretariat explained that the Paris Agreement’s institutions become operational when the Agreement enters into force and that CMA 1 must convene at the first COP following entry into force. Noting that if enough ratifications are secured by 7 October 2016, CMA 1 would convene in Marrakech, the Secretariat presented two options. First, the CMA could carry the work programme forward with the assistance of the APA, SBs and constituted bodies, which would require a COP decision to extend the APA. Second, the CMA could suspend its first session, requesting the COP to continue the work programme, and resume at subsequent COPs to take stock and appropriate decisions.

SWITZERLAND, the EU, Peru, for AILAC, the US, NORWAY and JAPAN supported the suspension option with a specific deadline, with some suggesting 2018. Algeria, for the LMDCs, proposed extending the mandate of the APA until the work programme concludes. SOUTH AFRICA supported suspension, adding that COP 22 should adopt a decision that captures this understanding.

The LDCs underlined they would consider suspension of CMA 1 only after consideration of the provisional application of the Paris Agreement and prompt ratification of the Doha Amendment. BRAZIL worried that suspending CMA 1 would send the wrong political signal and delay consideration of issues.

AOSIS called for using the practice established for the Kyoto Protocol, whereby observer parties were able to participate fully in discussions, but not in decision-making. The US, INDONESIA and SOUTH AFRICA supported the principle of inclusiveness.

Mali, for the AFRICAN GROUP, called for “effective and fair” participation of all parties and supported creating a contact group on this item at COP 22.

On reporting modalities at COP 22, AILAC called for a session during COP 22 to take stock of progress. JAPAN suggested stocktaking sessions held by the COP 22 Presidency. The ARAB GROUP recommended a contact group to assist the Co-Chairs and Presidencies to ensure parallel progress among the bodies. The LMDCs, JAPAN and VIET NAM proposed inviting the Chairs of the subsidiary and constituted bodies to report to the APA.

The EU said Decision 1/CP.21 (Paris outcome) contains all the necessary modalities.

MEXICO called for workshops to ensure work is progressing in all bodies on aspects included in the Paris Agreement

preambular paragraph on, inter alia, human rights, indigenous

peoples, gender equality and intergenerational equity.

SBI

Chair Chruszczow opened the plenary to consider items for which draft conclusions were ready for adoption.

KYOTO PROTOCOL MECHANISMS:Appeals against CDM EB decisions: Chair Chruszczow reported that agreement was not reached and invited the SBI to continue consideration at its next session. Indicating that this procedural request should be presented in draft conclusions by the chair, the RUSSIAN FEDERATION requested time to verify the correct procedural steps. Chair Chruszcow indicated the SBI would discuss the item on 26 May.

MATTERS RELATED TO LDCS: Chair Chruszczow introduced the draft conclusions (FCCC/SBI/2016/L.6). The SBI adopted the conclusions with an oral amendment to a paragraph on urging parties and other to contribute to the LDCF that replaced a reference to “and/or the GCF” with “the operating entities of the Financial Mechanism.”

TIMOR LESTE said the five-year rolling work plan of the LEG would help vulnerable countries implement their NAPs and NAPAs, noting the usefulness of further contributions to the LDCF.

The SBI adopted the following conclusions and recommended the draft decisions to the COP/CMP, as applicable:

• Annex I reporting: Compilation and synthesis of sixth NCs

and first biennial reports (FCCC/SBI/2016/L.1);

• Outcome of IAR (2014-2015) (FCCC/SBI/2016/L.12 and

Add.1);

• Review of CDM modalities and procedures (FCCC/

SBI/2016/L.13);

• Review of JI guidelines and implementation of draft

procedures (FCCC/SBI/2016/L.8 and Add.1);

• NAPs (FCCC/SBI/2016/L.9);

• Third review of the Adaptation Fund (FCCC/SBI/2016/L.10);

• Scope and modalities for the periodic assessment of the

Technology Mechanism in relation to supporting the

implementation of the Paris Agreement (FCCC/SBI/2016/L.5);

• Privileges and immunities for individuals on constituted

bodies established under the Protocol (FCCC/SBI/2016/L.3); and

• Privileges and immunities for individuals on constituted

bodies established under the Convention (FCCC/ SBI/2016/L.4).

SBSTA/SBI

TEM ON ADAPTATION:Effective policy frameworks and institutional arrangements for adaptation planning and implementation: On institutional arrangements, one panelist drew attention to a lack of investment in energy and irrigation projects in the Zambezi basin. Another challenge identified was coordination needs among difference government agencies in the cases presented from Myanmar and Japan. Also panelists highlighted the useful experience with stocktaking analyses of NAP processes, mainstreaming adaptation approaches and providing clear timeframes. Speaking on Vanuatu’s experience, a panelist highlighted opportunities for applying affirmative action to integrate women into the decision-making process.

Discussions shared experiences of replicable good practices, including with stakeholder engagement in identifying priorities and solving issues. One speaker suggested the UNFCCC develop guidelines on managing uncertainties to facilitate enhanced actions.

Breakout groups discussed: regional, national and

sub-national perspectives regarding multi-level governance, including stakeholder engagement; and emerging practices in monitoring and evaluation at the national and local level, as well as

emerging standards evolving from private sector monitoring and evaluation.

In the afternoon, participants discussed options for effective policy frameworks, including replicable good practices, support and partnerships.

IN THE CORRIDORS

On Wednesday, with the second week of SB 44 approaching its end, many at the Bonn Climate Change Conference started casting their gaze ahead to COP 22 in Marrakech.

Leaving the incoming Presidency’s informal lunchtime consultations on expectations for priority areas, activities and actions for COP 22, some observed that, while the Moroccan Presidency is clearly in “listening mode,” one delegate thought raising the level of their active engagement early in the process would increase the possibility of “delivering everything COP 22 has to, and beyond.” Yet, some delegates felt there was still a lack of clarity on whether COP 22 would be an “action,” “implementation,” “MOI” or perhaps a “youth” COP.

As delegates gathered to coordinate on the draft conclusions circulated by the APA Co-Chairs that provide a roadmap for Marrakech, what was clear was that they would leave Bonn with what one delegate called a “laundry list” of submissions that would keep them busy over the summer.

ENB SUMMARY AND ANALYSIS: The Earth Negotiations Bulletin summary and analysis of the Bonn Climate Change Conference will be available online on Sunday, 29 May at: http://www.iisd.ca/climate/sb44/

Peraturan & Dokumen - Direktorat Jenderal Pengendalian Perubahan Iklim laporan delri bonn

DELEGASI R

PADA

UNI TE

CHAN

44

TH

SBI ,

AND I TS PRE

Bonn, Jerm

Ja

UNI TED NATI ONS CLI M

Bon

LAPORAN

I REPUBLI K I NDONE

I TED NATI ONS CLI M

ANGE CONFERENCE

I , 44

TH

SBSTA, 1

ST

AP

REPARATORY MEETI

rman, 14 – 26 Mei 2016

Jakarta, Mei 2016

I MATE CONFERENCE,44

SBI , 44

SBST

onn, Germany, 16- 26 May 2016

ONESI A

LI MATE

E

APA

TI NGS,

2016

LAPORAN DELEGASI REPUBLI K I NDONESI A

PADA

UNI TED NATI ONS CLI MATE CHANGE CONFERENCE

44

SBI , 44

SBSTA, 1

APA AND I TS PREPARATORY MEETI NGS,

Bonn, Jerman, 14 – 26 Mei 2016

MATRIK LAPORAN DELEGASI REPUBLIK INDONESIA

PADA

THE FORTY-FOURTH SESSIONS OF THE SUBSIDIARY BODY FOR IMPLEMENTATION (SBI-44),

SUBSIDIARY BODY FOR SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL ADVICE (SBSTA-44),

THE FIRST SESSION OF THE AD- HOC WORKING GROUP ON THE PARIS AGREEMENT (APA-1)

BONN, JERMAN 16-26 MEI 2016

NO

AGENDA

PROGRESS DAN HASIL PERSIDANGAN

CATATAN PENGAMATAN

. . .

A Reporting Service for Environment and Development Negotiations

Online at http://www.iisd.ca/climate/sb44/

Earth Negotiations Bulletin

#9

BONN HIGHLIGHTS:

TUESDAY, 24 MAY 2016

. . .

A Reporting Service for Environment and Development Negotiations

Online at http://www.iisd.ca/climate/sb44/

Earth Negotiations Bulletin

#10

BONN HIGHLIGHTS:

WEDNESDAY, 25 MAY 2016

Parts

Dokumen yang terkait

Peraturan & Dokumen - Direktorat Jenderal Pengendalian Perubahan Iklim

Peraturan & Dokumen - Direktorat Jenderal Pengendalian Perubahan Iklim

Peraturan & Dokumen - Direktorat Jenderal Pengendalian Perubahan Iklim

Peraturan & Dokumen - Direktorat Jenderal Pengendalian Perubahan Iklim

Peraturan & Dokumen - Direktorat Jenderal Pengendalian Perubahan Iklim

Peraturan & Dokumen - Direktorat Jenderal Pengendalian Perubahan Iklim

Peraturan & Dokumen - Direktorat Jenderal Pengendalian Perubahan Iklim

Peraturan & Dokumen - Direktorat Jenderal Pengendalian Perubahan Iklim

Peraturan & Dokumen - Direktorat Jenderal Pengendalian Perubahan Iklim

Peraturan & Dokumen - Direktorat Jenderal Pengendalian Perubahan Iklim

Dokumen yang Anda mencari sudah siap untuk unduhkan