Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 37 views

    Maria Manguiat - Compliance Mechanisms in Kyoto

    Uploaded by

    Harsh Garg
    The Kyoto Protocol established a compliance mechanism to enforce legally binding emission reduction targets for Annex I countries. It consists of an enforcement branch and facilitative branch. The enforcement branch can declare non-compliance, require compliance action plans, and impose sanctions. The facilitative branch provides advice and support to help parties meet their commitments. The mechanism was used effectively for the first commitment period, addressing 8 cases of non-compliance. However, the facilitative branch was underutilized and review processes were sometimes inconsistent.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Maria Manguiat - Compliance Mechanisms in Kyoto

    Uploaded by

    Harsh Garg
    37 views9 pages
    The Kyoto Protocol established a compliance mechanism to enforce legally binding emission reduction targets for Annex I countries. It consists of an enforcement branch and facilitative branch. The enforcement branch can declare non-compliance, require compliance action plans, and impose sanctions. The facilitative branch provides advice and support to help parties meet their commitments. The mechanism was used effectively for the first commitment period, addressing 8 cases of non-compliance. However, the facilitative branch was underutilized and review processes were sometimes inconsistent.

    Original Title

    Maria Manguiat_Compliance mechanisms in Kyoto

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Kyoto Protocol established a compliance mechanism to enforce legally binding emission reduction targets for Annex I countries. It consists of an enforcement branch and facilitative branch. The enforcement branch can declare non-compliance, require compliance action plans, and impose sanctions. The facilitative branch provides advice and support to help parties meet their commitments. The mechanism was used effectively for the first commitment period, addressing 8 cases of non-compliance. However, the facilitative branch was underutilized and review processes were sometimes inconsistent.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    37 views9 pages

    Maria Manguiat - Compliance Mechanisms in Kyoto

    Uploaded by

    Harsh Garg
    The Kyoto Protocol established a compliance mechanism to enforce legally binding emission reduction targets for Annex I countries. It consists of an enforcement branch and facilitative branch. The enforcement branch can declare non-compliance, require compliance action plans, and impose sanctions. The facilitative branch provides advice and support to help parties meet their commitments. The mechanism was used effectively for the first commitment period, addressing 8 cases of non-compliance. However, the facilitative branch was underutilized and review processes were sometimes inconsistent.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 9

    The Kyoto Protocol compliance mechanism

    UEF // University of Eastern Finland


    The Kyoto Protocol in brief
    • Operationalizes principle of common but differentiated responsibilities
    & respective capabilities
    • Legally binding emission targets for Annex I countries
    - covers six greenhouse gases listed in Annex A
    - countries’ quantified targets defined in Annex B
    - First commitment period: average reduction 5% from 1990 levels between 2008-
    2012
    - Second commitment period (Doha Amendment): average reduction 18% from
    1990 levels between 2013-2020
    • Use of flexible mechanisms

    UEF // University of Eastern Finland


    The Kyoto Protocol compliance mechanism
    Reports
    • Annual reports
    • National Communications
    Reporting • One-off reports

    Review Expert review teams Parties


    Referral Referral
    Compliance

    Compliance Committee
    Enforcement Facilitative
    Branch Branch
    UEF // University of Eastern Finland
    Expert review under Kyoto
    •No evaluation of progress, but procedural checks
    – Transparency, accuracy, completeness, consistency,
    comparability

    •Carried out by expert review teams


    – In-country or desk-based/centralized

    •Can lead to ‘questions of implementation’ (referral)


    UEF // University of Eastern Finland
    Enforcement Branch
    Mandate
    • Annex I Parties’ emissions-related commitments
    • Key reporting and methodological requirements
    • Determine non-compliance and ‘apply’ consequences

    Means
    • Declaration of non-compliance
    • Compliance Action Plan
    • Analysis of non-compliance
    • How and by when to restore compliance
    • Suspended eligibility for flexible mechanisms
    • More emissions reductions required in next period
    UEF // University of Eastern Finland
    Facilitative Branch
    Mandate
    • Providing advice and facilitation to Parties in
    implementing the Protocol, and for promoting
    compliance by Parties with their commitments under the
    Protocol
    • ‘Early-warning’ function

    Means
    • Advice
    • Facilitation of financial and technical assistance
    • Recommendation to Parties
    UEF // University of Eastern Finland
    The (non-)case of the G77

    • South Africa made a submission on behalf of G-77 with respect to late


    reporting by 15 Parties included in Annex I

    • Facilitative branch could not determine whether to proceed or not


    with the consideration of the question of implementation

    What happened here?


    UEF // University of Eastern Finland
    The case of Canada

    UEF // University of Eastern Finland


    What happened here?
    The Kyoto compliance mechanism: an assessment
    +

    -/-
    • The mechanism, in particular,
    the enforcement branch, was
    actively used • Facilitation by expert reviewers
    • 8 cases of non-compliance were more extensively used than the
    addressed facilitative branch
    • Enforcement Branch performed • Early warning mandate not
    according to mandate utilized
    • (100% compliance with first • Inconsistent reviews potentially
    commitment period) led to unfair outcomes

    UEF // University of Eastern Finland

    You might also like