[11] Lima Call for Climate Action puts the world on the right track after Paris 2015, UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (14 December 2014), newsroom.unfccc.int/lima/lima-call-for-climate-action-puts-world-on-track-to-paris-2015/; At COP17, the parties established the ad hoc working group on a Durban platform to strengthen action and tasked by 2015 to develop “a protocol, another legal instrument or an agreed-upon outcome with the force of law within the framework of the agreement applicable to all contracting parties.” United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, report of the Conference of the Parties to its seventeenth session, held in Durban from 28 November to 11 December 2011. FCC/CP/2011/9/Add.1, 2, Decision 1/CP.17 (March 15, 2012). Parity culminated in two ways at COP20: 1) with negotiations on the elements necessary to include the parties in their planned national contributions (“INDC”) to be presented before COP21; and 2) at the heart of the new agreement. [11] It is likely that developed countries have argued that NDCs should focus exclusively on reduction. Developing countries disagreed and supported the inclusion of adaptation. [12] In the end, developing countries have emerged, as shown in the text of CoP20, which “refuses to include all parties in their commitments in adaptation planning or to include an adjustment element in their planned national contributions.” [13] The parties also agreed that the new legal instrument to be developed at COP21 would be “balanced” in terms of adaptation and mitigation. [14] Section 8 differs from adaptation and mitigation articles in that neither it nor its related decisions indicate funding. It is not clear how the parties will pay for damage caused by extreme weather or slow events. It is also unclear how the parties will finance damage and damage planning measures.
While the creation of a separate article on losses and damage in the Paris Agreement brings to an end the debate on its proper implementation, gaps in its treatment will fuel the future debate on adjustment measures. Unlike previous international climate treaties, the articles of the Paris Agreement on adaptation, loss and differentiation of damage are used as a guide for policy planning and implementation. Countries have different weaknesses and capacities to respond to climate change. Given the diversity of trends in climate change, it would not be practical to set an overall target for quantitative adaptation or loss and damage. It would be equally in practice to define a single set of obligations to accommodate or lose and damage. It is preferable to use a bottom-up approach to address site-specific areas of adaptation, loss and damage. However, this approach is based on a collective objective of support for these individual measures, which includes the top-down aspect of the combined approach. This article will begin to compare the historical treatment of adaptation, loss and damage with mitigation in international climate change negotiations.
The article will then analyze the treatment of adaptation, loss and damage in the Paris Agreement. The losses and damage caused by the Paris Agreement were one of the most controversial topics of COP21. Developed and developing countries debated whether losses and damages should be included in the decision or agreement and whether they should be organized as part of adaptation or as independent articles. In the face of such losses, the LDCs and SIDS must give priority to securing a place for losses and damages in the Paris Agreement, where their provisions would carry the full force of law. With regard to liability for the costs of review and damage in developing countries in financial compensation, developed countries have sought to prevent losses and damages from being visible in the agreement.
Comments
Powered by Facebook Comments
