UNFCCC civic wiki

For indicators that could be included in the MRV, see Indicator Dictionary Guidance; for possible groupings, see: Indicator Groups.

For details on, and links to the study, see: http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/2010/09/30/study-shows-climate-change-innovation-concentrated-in-few-nations/

The use of patent pools could help reducing hurdles for innovators from other nations - more reflections at: http://www.pragmetaknowledgeclout.be/patent-reform

Citing: Dr Turner: "If we don't take a look at the whole picture, but instead choose to look only at small parts of it we stand to make poor decisions about how to respond that could do more damage than climate change itself to the planet's biodiversity and the ecosystem services that help to keep us all alive."

Further details at: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/08/100806080220.htm?goback=.gmp_2357900.gde_2357900_news_166758628

This document (Synthesis report on technology needs identified by Parties not included in Annex I to the Convention) http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2006/sbsta/eng/inf01.pdf , contains such lists on pages 36 and 37.
It also lists common barriers on page 38.

Relevant publications at http://www.oecd.org/env/cc/mrv

Relevant publications from OECD at: http://www.oecd.org/document/16/0,3343,en_2649_34361_43577616_1_1_1_37465,00.html

Relevant publications from OECD at: http://www.oecd.org/document/58/0,3343,en_2649_34361_36738106_1_1_1_37465,00.html

Relevant publications from OECD at http://www.oecd.org/document/32/0,3343,en_2649_34361_41951200_1_1_1_37465,00.html

For some details on this idea, see a post by Pete Koepfgen at http://en.cop15.dk/news/view+news?newsid=3000;
it refers to EU WEEE and RoHS Directives on hazardous materials in electronics.

Products would need life-cycle inventories before they could be imported into a country (signing up for the tax); for related publications, see also http://www.citeulike.org/group/11578/tag/lca

In a post to http://en.cop15.dk/news/view+news?newsid=2022 (Africa threatens to veto climate deal. Sept. 4, 2009)

The cost of planning and proposal development was raised by Robert Bakiika (EMLI-Uganda):

Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs) are also to be developed. This is to counter act what happened with National Adaptation Plans of Actions (NAPAs), where after some African states developed them, implementation shadowed the restless efforts African governments spent in channeling some of their limited resources when developing them.

This is a valid concern.

How will this agreement contain those costs and ensure that there remain resources for the real work?

For details on the proposal: see http://www.regjeringen.no/nb/dep/smk/pressesenter/pressemeldinger/2009/norge-mexico/the-mexican-norwegian-proposal-on-climat.html?id=588479

A political statement is here: http://www.regjeringen.no/nb/dep/smk/pressesenter/pressemeldinger/2009/norge-mexico/the-mexican-nprwegian-proposal-on-climat.html?id=588466

COP15 news article on the model's launch: http://en.cop15.dk/news/view+news?newsid=2973

This principle and its implications for science, policy and governance are explained in a report by UNESCO's World Commission on the Ethics of Scientific Knowledge and Technology ( http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0013/001395/139578e.pdf ).

Question: Do the proposed agreements and the institutions created under UNFCCC comply with these recommendations?

Richard S. Lindzen' Opinion The Climate Science isn't Settled (Wall Street Journal, Nov 30, 2009) and the context picture depicted in Value Proposition offers some background for looking into the matter.

At Climate Change impacts in Mali – Expectation of Civil Society for COP15 in Copenhagen it is illustrated, and at Value Proposition it is argued that the Copenhagen Therapy has a much broader scope than just reducing carbon levels.

Though the suspicion of Data Manipulation will tarnish the straightforward "Kyoto-Copenhagen Diagnosis", it should not tempt our leaders to throwing the baby with the bath water.

That threats to a vulnerable endeavour materialize must not become an argument for doing nothing.

Putting caps on pollution and man-made decline of our environment, must not be disputed.

Enhancing sustainable development and environmentally sound technologies, building resilience to climate impacts and consenting to keeping measured emissions and extractions within agreed constraints, all this must be done.

The long term cooperative agreements that are being negotiated do all that.

Yet their adaptiveness to improved (scientific) knowledge and their alignment with existing constituencies must be normalised. Communications strategy must be improved as well!

The people of Mali and of the G77 group are still in need of the COPENHAGEN THERAPY.

Let those people not be the victim of the poor risk management and communications strategy of planners facing truly unprecendented challenges!

(for background on programme management, see OGC(UK) Introduction to Programmes, with in particular OGC Communications Strategy Template ).

The news of the past days on possible climate data manipulations by CRU and NIWA (see also Value Proposition ) exposes a strategic flaw in the UNFCCC planning.

Referring to the precautionary principle, the prior lack of consensus among scientists, and the human temptation to give in to unethical attitudes in front of growing stakes, it was risky to present a single measure (CO2 levels) as a single justification for an unprecedented global institutional approach (the single-issue (communications) strategy). See also a post at http://en.cop15.dk/blogs/view%20blog?blogid=2336 , responding to the observation on an expensive urban legend (by Roy Spencer, Phd, An Expensive Urban Legend).

For the challenges faced by Mali's farmers, see:

http://en.cop15.dk/blogs/view+blog?blogid=2591 by Ibrahim Togola, PhD. Chairman of MFC NYETAA, Mali

Does NAMA provide a suitable mechanisms where CDM had failed for African countries?

For details on the share of international aviation and shipping in emissions,
see: http://en.cop15.dk/blogs/view+blog?blogid=2336 (blog post by Ulla Rasmussen, President, The European Federation for Transport and Environment (T&E) )

The comments by Qualcomm Inc, on a white paper on Modernising ICT Standardisation in the EU – The Way Forward¹ offers IPR owners perspective on IPR policies (e.g. clauses 13-14 (complexity in technology and licensing situations) and clauses 27-30 on regulatory intervention in IPR policies)) (For the comments, see: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/ict/files/consultation_standardisation_2009/014_qualcomm_en.pdf ).

Another perspective is given in the paper IPR misuse: the core issue in standards and patents by Xuan Li and Baisheng An, from the South Centre. This paper can be found at: http://www.southcentre.org/index2.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_view&gid=1553&Itemid=69

Can we reconcile these opposing viewpoints?

For the description of the challenge, see the Science and Development Network Feature Article at http://www.scidev.net/en/climate-change-and-energy/clean-technology-and-copenhagen/features/climate-change-s-tech-transfer-challenge.html (T.V. Padma, Nov. 5, 2009)

For information on energy intensity of industry, with comparison of different countries in the EU, Japan and US, see: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/pdf/policy/1_6.pdf

Published mid December 2009 (by GRI and ACCA): Getting It - Expert Perspectives on the Corporate Response to Climate Change ;

Reports on MRV as addressed in UNFCCC are found at http://www.citeulike.org/group/11578/tag/mrv

Measurement, Reporting and Verification (MRV) will need to build upon public and private sector "reporting" interoperability.

A good starting point to explore the area is at http://www.asria.org/portal/emissionreporting/introduction, there is a list of emission reporting standards and initiatives.

ISO 14064 is one of the standards listed.

ISO/IEC JTC1 on Information Technology Standards has produced a comprehensive report (ISO/IEC JTC 1 N9686) on a standardization initiative for Green ICT (reference at http://www.incits.org/j1n/reg94.htm).

The WTO/UNEP report Trade and Climate Change, on pages 124-129 addresses international standards and their role in avoiding technical barriers to trade (TBT) (full report is at http://www.unep.org/pdf/pressreleases/Trade_Climate_Publication_2289_09_E%20Final.pdf )

Refering to the problem description at http://www.scidev.net/en/news/africa-facing-climate-data-shortage.html (Africa facing climate data shortage)
and to the capacity-building framework on Pages 8-14 of Marrakesh Accords of 10 November 2001, at: http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/cop7/13a01.pdf; it appears to me that the framework is very UNSPECIFIC.

Experiences with it, as reported in capacity building experiences under the convention (reported at the Poznan Meeting, with reports from Brazil, China, Iran, Sri Lanka, USA and Uruguay, text at: http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PCAAB917.pdf ) demonstrate this.

Capacity for collecting and using data is a key requirement for the convention to work.

Lessons learned in the Health sector are very instructive in this context; see the full paper by World Health Organization Maximizing Positive Synergies Collaborative Group (June, 2009) An assessment of interactions between global health initiatives and country health systems ( http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2809%2960919-3/fulltext )

The fragmentation that the approach affords is harmful for the least developed countries (see in this context the report by Papa Louis Fall and Mohamed Mounir Zahran (United Nations System Joint Inspection Unit (JIU)): TOWARDS MORE COHERENT UNITED NATIONS SYSTEM SUPPORT TO AFRICA (http://www.unjiu.org/data/reports/2009/en2009_5.pdf ).

But even at the global scale fragmentation is harmful, as addressed by Tadanori Inomata (JIU) in his Management Review of Environmental Governance within the UN System (http://www.unjiu.org/data/reports/2008/en2008_3.pdf )