Conference of Parties (COP)
|
Key Outcomes
|
India`s Stance
|
COP 1
(Berlin, 1995)
|
- Parties agreed that the commitments in the Convention were "inadequate" for meeting the Convention's objective.
- In a decision known as the Berlin Mandate they agreed to establish a process to negotiate strengthened commitments for developed countries.
|
- India`s stand was based on pragmatic view that the reduction in emission must be initiated by the industrialized countries to provide necessary space for the developing countries to increase their emission.
- India`s proposed 20% cut in carbon-dioxide emission of the industrialized countries by year 2005.
|
COP 2
(Geneva, 1996)
|
- The Geneva Ministerial Declaration was noted, but not adopted.
- A decision on guidelines for the national communications to be prepared by developing countries was adopted.
- Also discussed - Quantified Emissions Limitation and Reduction Objectives (QELROs)1 for different Parties and an acceleration of the Berlin Mandate talks so that commitments could be adopted at COP- 3.
- To evaluate the progress made since C0P-1.
- Oil producing countries & industrialized groups were opposed throughout the meet.
|
- India along with other developing countries who had been active at COP-1, were hesitant at pushing on any agenda at this conference.
- India did not even send its Environment Minister to the conference.
|
COP 3
(Kyoto, 1997)
|
- The Kyoto Protocol 2was adopted by consensus.
- The Kyoto Protocol includes legally binding emission targets for developed country. (Annex I) 3Parties for the six major greenhouse gases, which are to be reached by the period 2008-2012.
- Most industrialized countries and some central European economies in transition (all defined as Annex II 4countries) agreed to legally binding reductions in greenhouse gas emissions of an average of 6 to 8% below 1990 levels between the years 2008–2012, defined as the first emissions budget period.
|
- India endorsed the Kyoto Protocol as an Annex II member, which carried no responsibility towards emission mitigation.
|
COP 4
(Buenos Aires, 1998)
|
- Parties adopted a 2-year "Plan of Action"5 to advance efforts and to devise mechanisms for implementing the Kyoto Protocol, to be completed by 2000.
|
- India intended to participate fully in global efforts to protect and improve the environment, but this would be done without hindering India’s development process.
- Any proposal which seemed to deprive India of its rightful entitlement to grow or to deny it a quality of life consistent with human dignity was rejected.
- Indian Environment and Forests Minister at the meet stated that, “India sees any measures which deprive its citizens of a dignified human development as a violation of human rights.”
|
COP 5
(Bonn, 1999)
|
- Primarily it was a technical meet.
- A focus on the adoption of the guidelines for the preparation of national communications by Annex I countries, capacity-building6, transfer of technology and flexible mechanisms.
- Further meant to pave way for COP-6.
|
- Indian Environment and Forests Minister pointed out that the Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC) 7too acknowledges that development and poverty eradication are the first and the overriding priorities of the developing countries, consequent to which their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions would grow.
- Further it was pointed out that the FCCC explicitly underlined the conspicuous North-South disparities by recognizing the "common but differentiated responsibilities" 8(CBDR) and respective capabilities. Thus, while underpinning the principle of Equity, the Convention differentiated the levels of commitments for the developed and the developing countries.
|
COP 6
(The Hague, 2000)
Part II of the sixth COP (Bonn, 2000)
|
- Consensus was finally reached on the so-called Bonn Agreement
- Work was also completed on a number of detailed decisions based on the Bonn Agreements, including capacity-building for developing countries and countries with economies in transition.
|
- India supported the resurrection of Kyoto Protocol at part II
|
COP 7
(Marrakech, 2001)
|
- Parties agreed on a package deal, with key features including rules for ensuring compliance with commitments, consideration of LULUCF9.
- Principles in reporting of such data and limited banking of units generated by sinks under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM)10.
- The meeting also adopted the Marrakech Ministerial Declaration as an input into the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg.
|
- India played a major role in codification of Kyoto Protocol at this meet.
- Emphasized the need for implementation of concrete measures to safeguard the climate
- Further highlighted the fact that the impacts of climate change will affect the developing countries more adversely than the developed countries and called for greater attention to adaptation needs of the developing countries.
|
COP 8
(New Delhi, 2002)
|
- The Delhi Ministerial Declaration on Climate Change and Sustainable Development reiterated the need to build on the outcomes of the World Summit.
- Delegates agreed on principles for the financing of a fund to help the poorest nations cope with the effects of climate change.
- The parties approved a mechanism to incorporate forest protection into the effects of the international community to combat climate change.
|
- Pointed out that climate change and sustainable development are inter-linked and it was necessary to focus on poverty, land degradation, access to water and food and human health to effectively address to climate change concerns.
- India laid emphasis on the need of financial resources to help developing countries to adopt the adverse impact of climate change.
- At the same time remained firm in its rejection of emission commitment for developing countries.
- Fully embraced CDM.
|
COP 9
(Milan, 2003)
|
- Adopted decisions focused on the institutions and procedures of the Kyoto Protocol and on the implementation of the UNFCCC.
- The formal decisions adopted by the Conference intend to strengthen the institutional framework of both the Convention and the Kyoto Protocol.
- New emission reporting guidelines based on the good-practice guidance by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 11were adopted to provide a sound and reliable foundation for reporting on changes in carbon concentrations resulting from land-use changes and forestry.
- Two funds were further developed, the Special Climate Change Fund and the Least Developed Countries Fund, which will support technology transfer, adaptation projects and other activities.
|
- India called for removal of obstacles- financial & IPRs, for the successful adaptation of emerging technology options in energy efficiency, fuel switching & renewable energy.
- Opined that all facets of sustainability development must contribute positively to the dominant challenge of our time that of poverty alleviation.
|
COP 10
(Buenos Aires, 2004)
|
- Discussed the progress made since the first Conference of the Parties, 10 years ago, and its future challenges with special emphasis on climate change mitigation and adaptation.
- The Buenos Aires Plan of Action was adopted to promote developing countries better adapt to climate change.
- Discussions were made on the Post-Kyoto mechanisms on how to allocate emission reduction obligation following 2012 when the first commitment period ends.
|
- India stated that immediate priority must be to put the Kyoto mechanism fully into operation at the soonest possible.
- Observed that transfer of environmentally sound technologies to developing countries remain a major concern.
- Further suggested that technologies for addressing climate concern both with respect to mitigation of GHGs & adaption to the impact of climate change be placed in the limited public domain for use by developing countries.
|
COP 11
(Montreal, 2005)
|
- The COP agreed on a process for considering future action beyond 2012 under the UNFCCC.
- The Montreal Protocol was established to extend the life of the Kyoto Protocol beyond its 2012 expiration date and negotiate deeper cuts in greenhouse-gas emissions.
|
- The Indian delegation played an important role in drafting the decision providing further guidance relating to the CDM.
|
COP 12
(Nairobi, 2006)
|
- A wide range of decisions were adopted at COP-12 designed to mitigate climate change and help countries adapt to the effects.
- There was agreement on the activities for the next few years under the "Nairobi work program Impacts, Vulnerability and Adaptation", as well as on the management of the Adaptation Fund under the Kyoto Protocol.
- Parties welcomed the "Nairobi Framework12" which will provide additional support to developing countries to successfully develop projects for the CDM.
- Parties in Nairobi also adopted rules of procedure for the Kyoto Protocol's Compliance Committee, making it fully operational.
|
- India and other major developing countries joined the United States in vigorously challenging any dialogue on taking on binding commitments and therefore were blamed for halting reckonable advancement on the road to new agreements on international action beyond 2012 when the Kyoto commitments were planned to expire.
|
COP 13
(Bali, 2007)
|
- This COP resulted in the Adaptation of the Bali Action Plan.
- It calls for a shared vision for long-term cooperation action on four key elements: Mitigation, Adaptation, Finance, and Technology.
- The Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention (AWG-LCA) was established as a new subsidiary body to conduct the negotiations aimed at urgently enhancing the implementation of the Convention up to and beyond 2012.
|
- India demanded that the rich countries compensate developing countries for afforestration drive & for avoiding deforestration , this demand was accepted by key decision making Contact Group of conference.
- Further India highlighted the poor record by rich countries in emission cuts of GHGs, which was backed by the UN data.
|
COP 14
(Poznan, 2008)
|
- Adaptation Fund13 was launched under the Kyoto Protocol, to be filled by a 2% levy on projects under the CDM.
- Parties agreed that the Adaptation Fund Board should have legal capacity to grant direct access to developing countries.
- Also saw Parties endorse an intensified negotiating schedule for 2009
|
- India`s stand was, that developed countries must sharply reduce their emission so as to release atmospheric space for development of poorer countries in a manner that is consistent with the achievements of stabilization of GHGs concentration in atmosphere.
- On technology issue, India had called for strategic support for transfer of technology that can accelerate carbon mitigation in developing countries and compensation for all additional costs related to accelerated transfer of technology to promote mitigation & adaptation.
|
COP 15
(Copenhagen, 2009)
|
- It produced the Copenhagen Accord14, which was supported by a majority of countries.
- A number of developing countries agreed to communicate their efforts to limit GHG emissions every two years.
- On long-term finance, developed countries agreed to support a goal of mobilizing US$100 billion a year by 2020 to address the needs of developing countries
|
- The Environment Minister of India stated at the Conference that India`s entire approach is anchored in the sanctity of the troika; the UNFCCC, the Kyoto Protocol and the Bali Action Plan. India believes that the well-known and widely accepted principles of CBDR and historical responsibilities are sacrosanct.
|
COP 16
(Cancun, 2010)
|
|
- India fully committed to Kyoto Protocol.
- Along with South Africa and other Like-minded countries, India had submitted a proposal calling for Annex I parties to agree at least 40% emission reduction commitment by 2020 as compared to 1990 levels.
- Further advocated for strengthening of CDM.
|
COP 17
(Durban, 2011)
|
- At COP 17, Parties decided to adopt a universal climate agreement by 2015, with work beginning under a new group called the Ad Hoc working Group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action (ADP)16.
- Parties also agreed a second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol from 1 January 2013. A significantly advanced framework for the reporting of emission reductions for both developed and developing countries was also agreed, taking into consideration the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities.
|
- India proposed three agenda items for consideration by COP. These were issues of equity, unilateral actions & technology related IPRs.
- Played a key role in establishing the second commitment period under the Kyoto Protocol.
- As it was also decided to begin a process for developing legal arrangements for enhancing actions of all parties under the Convention. India ensured that the new arrangements, which have to be decided by 2015 and implemented from 2020 are established under the Convention.
- India highlighted the issues of equity and CBDR in the climate change negotiations.
- With support of India, the Green Climate Fund was also established.
|
COP 18
(Doha, 2012)
|
- Parties set out a timetable to adopt a universal climate agreement by 2015, to come into effect in 2020.
- They completed the work under the Bali Action Plan to concentrate on new work towards a 2015 agreement under a single negotiating stream, the ADP.
- Emphasized the need to increase their ambition to cut greenhouse gases and to help vulnerable countries to adapt.
- Also saw the launch of a second commitment period under the Kyoto Protocol, from 1 January 2013 to 31 December 2020, with the adoption of the Doha Amendment to the Kyoto Protocol
|
- India pursued the strategy of working together with Group of 77 & China in order to protect the overall interest of developing countries.
- Also raised the issue of equity in climate change related action & commitments, techno-related, IPRs & unilateral measures taken by some countries in the name of climate change.
- Further succeeded in having these issues included in the ongoing work of various bodies of Convention.
|
COP 19
(Warsaw, 2013)
|
- Governments advanced the timeline for the development of the 2015 agreement.
- It was decided to either begin or to intensify domestic preparations for their Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDC)17towards the agreement so that they are ready well before December 2015 and ideally by the first quarter in 2015. This is an important part of the timeline of the negotiations.
- It was also decided that nationally determined contributions would be put forward in a clear and transparent manner. Developed country governments were urged to provide support to developing countries for this important domestic process.
- Developed countries were keen on ensuring that climate negotiations focus on reducing emissions in the agricultural sector.
|
- India called for CBDR.
- India, countered by pointing out that emission reduction efforts in the agricultural sector would affect farmers who constitute a large percentage of the population, and are often the poorest, in the developing world.
- Also argued that the effort to reduce emissions should be focus on fossil-fuel-based activities that spew out carbon dioxide, the greatest contributor to global warming by far.
- Indian intervention supported by many other countries ensured that the talks remained focused on adaptation and only a report on this specific matter is produced for the countries to discuss in future.
|
COP 20
(Lima 2014)
|
- For the first time, an agreement was reached in which all countries will specify their objectives, and they will submit their CO2 emissions information by March 2015 (INDC).
- The first Multilateral Assessment was held in Lima, providing greater transparency for actions by developed countries, as they can compare their degree of compliance with the emission reduction goals.
- The Lima Conference agreed that the contribution of countries has to be more than their current commitments.
|
- India`s stand was guided by the principle of Equity and CBDR, which is the bedrock principle of the UNFCCC.
- In regard to submission of INDC, India was of view that the INDCs would be mitigation centric and that after countries submit their INDCs, these would be aggregated to ascertain whether the sum total of contributions is adequate to achieve the global goal of containing temperature rise to below 2 degree Celsius by the end of the century from pre- industrial levels. Any gap between the two could mean pressure on countries to re-submit their INDCs or enhance their contributions.
- However, India and many other countries of the developing world were not in favor of such externally imposed review as it would compromise the sovereignty of Parties in determining their targets as per their national circumstances.
|
COP 21
(Paris, 2015)
|
- The COP agreed to a set of decisions with immediate effect to accelerate climate action and to prepare for the implementation of the Paris Agreement once it enters into force.
- Reaffirmed the goal of limiting global temperature increase well below 2 degree Celsius, while urging efforts to limit the increase to 1.5 degree.
- Established binding commitments by all parties to make “nationally determined contributions” (NDCs), and to pursue domestic measures aimed at achieving them.
- Reaffirmed the binding obligation of developed countries under the UNFCC to support the efforts of developing countries, while for the first time encouraging voluntary contribution by developing countries too.
- The Agreement also explicitly recognizes that the principles of equity and CBDR and respective capabilities, in the light of different national circumstances will be respected.
|
- India was able to secure its interest and that of developing countries in the Paris Agreement.
- The Purpose of the Agreement notes that the Agreement is to enhance the implementation of the Convention. This was a key demand of India so that the Agreement remains under the Convention and does not create a completely new regime.
- India called for climate justice (a fair share of carbon budget18); its attempt to accommodate ‘differentiation’ in the agreed outcome and its reluctance to give in on its coal production goals had already created an atmosphere of disbelief in terms of attainment a strong legally binding agreement.
|