Impacts of implementation of response measures

1. Overview

This submission contains the views of the Australian Government on impacts of the implementation of response measures, as requested under paragraph 94 of Decision 1/CP.16 on Outcome of the work of the Ad Hoc Working Group on long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention (AWG-LCA). Australia also draws attention to its previous submissions on the impact of implementation of response measures1.

The Cancun Agreements delivered a balanced package of decisions across all UNFCCC bodies. Some items are ready for implementation, and others require further elaboration. Guided by the Cancun Agreements, it will be important to use the negotiating forums at our disposal to progress work in a coordinated way, utilising the bodies best suited and considering joint work programs where useful.

Australia welcomes the opportunity to submit its views under the Cancun agreements on the impacts of implementation of response measures. In summary, Australia considers that:

  • the forums provide an important opportunity to share information on the actual and observed impacts arising from Parties’ mitigation measures, including impacts on the poorest and most vulnerable countries that might be affected by such measures, and for best practice exchanges on facilitating economic transition to a low-carbon future;
  • any proposed work programme should take a scientific approach to this topic to better understand the real impacts Parties may face in the future, and consider how existing channels can be used to build an evidence-based platform;
  • to maximise coherence and efficiency, we should endeavour to coordinate proposed discussions on impacts of the implementation of response measures and leverage work undertaken elsewhere; and
  • given the significant forward work agenda on the impacts of the implementation of response measures, it would be pre-emptive to consider the merits of a further possible forum.

2. Forums and work programme on the impacts of the implementation of response measures

At Cancun, Parties and relevant intergovernmental organisations were invited to submit their views to the secretariat on issues that could be considered at forums convened by the Chairs of the SBSTA and SBI at the bodies’ thirty-fourth and thirty-fifth sessions to develop a work programme on the impacts of the implementation of response measures. Australia looks forward to participating in these forums.

All Parties must prepare for the changes we face as we move to a low-carbon world and take advantage of the opportunities these changes will create for sustainable growth. Australia, as an emissions intensive economy and a major energy exporting country, is in the process of managing the impacts of economic and structural change as Australia and the world transitions to a low carbon future.

Some Parties, of course, are better equipped than others to meet this challenge. With that in mind, the forums and proposed work programme should focus on how to best assist the poorest and most vulnerable countries that might be affected by response measures, including Least Developed Countries and the Small Island Developing States, to diversify their economies and build economic resilience. The discussions should provide an opportunity for best practice exchanges on what countries are doing, and can do, to transition their economies for a sustainable future.

The forums and proposed work programme should also focus on sharing information on actual and observed impacts – both positive and negative – arising from Parties’ mitigation measures. Given the relatively abstract nature of discussions on this topic in the UNFCCC to date, a more scientific approach to this topic is needed to enhance understanding of the nature of the impacts Parties may face in the future. The work programme should include consideration of how existing channels, such as national communications, can be used to provide an evidence-based platform for understanding these potential impacts.

To maximise coherence in our consideration of this issue over 2011, the work programme should leverage work undertaken elsewhere to best meet our objectives of deepening understanding of this topic and building consensus. The forums should coordinate with the discussions to be undertaken in the joint SBI/SBSTA workshop addressing matters relating to Article 2, paragraph 3 and Article 3, paragraph 14 of the Kyoto Protocol (SBI/2010/27, SBSTA/2010/13) and with the workshop to discuss the potential impacts of response measures agreed in paragraph 86 of the SBI conclusion (SBI/2010/27) on matters relating to Article 4, paragraphs 8 and 9 of the Convention (progress on the implementation of decision 1.CP/10). The issues for discussion at these workshops overlap heavily, and should be consolidated to maximise efficiency and coherence across negotiating streams.

Effectively coordinated, these scheduled workshops and forums, provide opportunities for Parties to comprehensively take forward work on response measures under the UNFCCC. It is both premature and unnecessary to make a determination on the need for a further possible forum on response measures while this substantial stream of work is ongoing.

1 FCCC/AWGLCA/2008/MISC.5/Add.2 (Part 1); submission under the Cancun Agreements on matters relating to Articles 2.3 and 3.14 of the Kyoto Protocol: impacts of implementation of response measures (February, 2011).