United Nations Framework Convention On Climate Change Negotiations Research Articles

Indicators of Global Climate Change 2023: annual update of key indicators of the state of the climate system and human influence

Abstract. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessments are the trusted source of scientific evidence for climate negotiations taking place under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Evidence-based decision-making needs to be informed by up-to-date and timely information on key indicators of the state of the climate system and of the human influence on the global climate system. However, successive IPCC reports are published at intervals of 5–10 years, creating potential for an information gap between report cycles. We follow methods as close as possible to those used in the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) Working Group One (WGI) report. We compile monitoring datasets to produce estimates for key climate indicators related to forcing of the climate system: emissions of greenhouse gases and short-lived climate forcers, greenhouse gas concentrations, radiative forcing, the Earth's energy imbalance, surface temperature changes, warming attributed to human activities, the remaining carbon budget, and estimates of global temperature extremes. The purpose of this effort, grounded in an open-data, open-science approach, is to make annually updated reliable global climate indicators available in the public domain (https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11388387, Smith et al., 2024a). As they are traceable to IPCC report methods, they can be trusted by all parties involved in UNFCCC negotiations and help convey wider understanding of the latest knowledge of the climate system and its direction of travel. The indicators show that, for the 2014–2023 decade average, observed warming was 1.19 [1.06 to 1.30] °C, of which 1.19 [1.0 to 1.4] °C was human-induced. For the single-year average, human-induced warming reached 1.31 [1.1 to 1.7] °C in 2023 relative to 1850–1900. The best estimate is below the 2023-observed warming record of 1.43 [1.32 to 1.53] °C, indicating a substantial contribution of internal variability in the 2023 record. Human-induced warming has been increasing at a rate that is unprecedented in the instrumental record, reaching 0.26 [0.2–0.4] °C per decade over 2014–2023. This high rate of warming is caused by a combination of net greenhouse gas emissions being at a persistent high of 53±5.4 Gt CO2e yr−1 over the last decade, as well as reductions in the strength of aerosol cooling. Despite this, there is evidence that the rate of increase in CO2 emissions over the last decade has slowed compared to the 2000s, and depending on societal choices, a continued series of these annual updates over the critical 2020s decade could track a change of direction for some of the indicators presented here.

Indicators of Global Climate Change 2022: annual update of large-scale indicators of the state of the climate system and human influence

Abstract. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessments are the trusted source of scientific evidence for climate negotiations taking place under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), including the first global stocktake under the Paris Agreement that will conclude at COP28 in December 2023. Evidence-based decision-making needs to be informed by up-to-date and timely information on key indicators of the state of the climate system and of the human influence on the global climate system. However, successive IPCC reports are published at intervals of 5–10 years, creating potential for an information gap between report cycles. We follow methods as close as possible to those used in the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) Working Group One (WGI) report. We compile monitoring datasets to produce estimates for key climate indicators related to forcing of the climate system: emissions of greenhouse gases and short-lived climate forcers, greenhouse gas concentrations, radiative forcing, surface temperature changes, the Earth's energy imbalance, warming attributed to human activities, the remaining carbon budget, and estimates of global temperature extremes. The purpose of this effort, grounded in an open data, open science approach, is to make annually updated reliable global climate indicators available in the public domain (https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8000192, Smith et al., 2023a). As they are traceable to IPCC report methods, they can be trusted by all parties involved in UNFCCC negotiations and help convey wider understanding of the latest knowledge of the climate system and its direction of travel. The indicators show that human-induced warming reached 1.14 [0.9 to 1.4] ∘C averaged over the 2013–2022 decade and 1.26 [1.0 to 1.6] ∘C in 2022. Over the 2013–2022 period, human-induced warming has been increasing at an unprecedented rate of over 0.2 ∘C per decade. This high rate of warming is caused by a combination of greenhouse gas emissions being at an all-time high of 54 ± 5.3 GtCO2e over the last decade, as well as reductions in the strength of aerosol cooling. Despite this, there is evidence that increases in greenhouse gas emissions have slowed, and depending on societal choices, a continued series of these annual updates over the critical 2020s decade could track a change of direction for human influence on climate.

Loss and damage and climate litigation: The case for greater interlinkage

AbstractWith the negotiations under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) failing to provide adequate support to climate victims, vulnerable countries, nongovernmental organizations and affected communities are increasingly exploring legal avenues to obtain recourse for loss and damage. This article contributes to the emerging scholarship on climate litigation by exploring whether, how and with what effects such litigation interacts with the UNFCCC negotiations. For this purpose, the article contextualizes normative claims about the influence of climate court cases through practice‐embedded views of stakeholders in the loss and damage context and provides a typology of loss and damage‐related cases. Having due regard to the fact that litigation for liability and compensation of climate harms is still at an early stage, it argues that this legal avenue offers significant potential to advance the UNFCCC negotiations on loss and damage, and provides recommendations on how both spheres can be more strongly interlinked.

The Power of Social Networks: How the UNFCCC Secretariat Creates Momentum for Climate Education

Despite the relevance of education-specific negotiations under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the influential role of the secretariat therein, research in this area is still scarce. We contribute to closing this research gap by exploring how the UNFCCC secretariat becomes involved in and has latent influence on the education-specific debates surrounding global climate conferences and the related information exchange on Twitter. Our analysis extends previous findings by combining theories and methods in novel ways. Specifically, we apply social-network theory and derive data from participant observations and Twitter, which enables us to analyze the role and influence of the UNFCCC treaty secretariat within education-specific negotiations. We find that the secretariat increases its influence by strategically establishing links to actors beyond the negotiating parties and show that it occupies a central and influential position within the education-specific communication networks in UNFCCC negotiations.

Framing Climate Change Loss and Damage in UNFCCC Negotiations

How does an idea emerge and gain traction in the international arena when its underpinning principles are contested by powerful players? The adoption in 2013 of the Warsaw International Mechanism on Loss and Damage as part of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) puzzled observers, because key state parties, such as the United States, had historically opposed the policy. This article examines the roles of frame contestation and ambiguity in accounting for the evolution and institutionalization of the “loss and damage” norm within the UNFCCC. The article applies frame analysis to the data from coverage of the negotiations and elite interviews. It reveals that two competing framings, one focused on liability and compensation and the other on risk and insurance, evolved into a single, overarching master frame. This more ambiguous framing allowed parties to attach different meanings to the policy that led to the resolution of differences among the parties and the embedding of the idea of loss and damage in international climate policy.

Edwards, Guy, and J. Timmons Roberts. 2015. A Fragmented Continent: Latin America and the Global Politics of Climate Change. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Edwards, Guy, and J. Timmons Roberts. 2015. <i>A Fragmented Continent: Latin America and the Global Politics of Climate Change</i>. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

The 2015 Paris Climate Agreement: outcomes and their impacts on small island states.

This update reflects upon the outcomes of the UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) negotiations held in Paris in December 2015 (COP21). As the dust settles, this update explores the temperature targets, loss and damage, climate justice and what the agreement might mean for small island states.

Energy research within the UNFCCC: a proposal to guard against ongoing climate-deadlock

We propose that an international ‘Low-Emissions Technology Commitment’ should be incorporated into the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) negotiation process in order to promote innovation that will enable deep decarbonization. The goal is to accelerate research, development, and demonstration of safe, scalable, and affordable low-emissions energy technologies. Such a commitment should be based on three elements. First, it should operate within existing UNFCCC negotiations so as to encourage developed states to offer directed funding for energy research as part of their national contributions. Second, pledges should be binding, verifiable, and coordinated within an international energy-research plan. Third, expert scientific networks and participating governments should collaborate to design a coordinated global research and technology-demonstration strategy and oversee national research efforts. To this end an Intergovernmental Panel on Low-Emissions Technology Research might be established. This proposal offers some insurance against the risk that the political impasse in international negotiations cannot be overcome. The higher costs associated with low-emissions alternatives to fossil fuels currently creates significant economic and political resistance to their widespread adoption. To breach this impasse, a mechanism supporting accelerated energy research is needed that seeks to reduce future abatement costs, share experience and ‘learning-by-doing’ in first-of-a-kind demonstrations, and thus facilitate future widespread deployments. These actions will also assist in addressing inequalities in energy access.Policy relevanceOver the past decade, global fossil-fuel use and associated carbon emissions have risen steadily, despite the majority of nations agreeing, in principle, to work to limit global warming to less than 2 °C above pre-industrial conditions (IPCC, 2014). Accelerated research, development, and demonstration of low-emissions technologies will be required for successful and economically efficient decarbonization of the global economy, but how can the current deadlock be broken? The UNFCCC does not contain adequate mechanisms to promote increased investment in research, so climate-governance institutions are not capturing the gains that could be achieved through a globally coordinated approach. Here, we outline reform proposals that would enhance both the economic effectiveness of global abatement efforts and the political feasibility of accelerated innovation.

Special Issue: The Potential Role for Community Monitoring in MRV and in Benefit Sharing in REDD+

Since the early design of activities to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries (REDD+) under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the need to engage local communities and indigenous groups in monitoring and reporting has been recognized. REDD+ has advanced under the UNFCCC negotiations, but most countries still need to define formally what the role of communities in their national monitoring systems will be. Previous research and experiences have shown that local communities can effectively contribute in the monitoring of natural resources. This editorial introduces a Special Issue of Forests which discusses the implications of and potential for including community based monitoring (CBM) in monitoring and benefit-sharing systems in REDD+. It outlines the main points of the nine contributions to the Special Issue which cover a wide geographical area and report on projects and research which engages more than 150 communities from eight different countries from Africa, Asia and Latin America. The editorial summarizes how the articles and reports build further understanding of the potential of CBM to contribute to the implementation, monitoring and distribution of benefits in REDD+. It also discusses the results of an on-going opinion survey on issues related to CBM and its relation to benefit sharing, which indicates that there is still disagreement on a number of key elements.

Climate change leaders and followers: Leadership recognition and selection in the UNFCCC negotiations

Past research has posited that effective leadership is an essential ingredient in reaching international agreements and overcoming the collective action problems associated with responding to climate change. Despite its fundamental importance for leadership relationships, the demand side of the leadership equation has been comparatively neglected in the literature. In this study, we answer several related questions that are vital for understanding the leadership dynamics that impact the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) negotiations. Are there any leaders in the field of climate change and, if so, who are they? How do followers select climate leaders? What factors are important to them? Using unique survey data collected at four consecutive United Nations (UN) climate summits, Conference of Parties (COP) 14–17, this article investigates which actors are actually recognized as playing a leadership role in the UNFCCC negotiations and probes how followers select leadership candidates in this issue area. The survey findings reveal a fragmented leadership landscape, with no one clear-cut leader, and spotlight that if an actor seeks to be recognized as a leader, it is crucial to be perceived as being devoted to promoting the common good.

Progress and Challenges of Combating Climate Change in Indonesia: An Interview with Prof. Rachmat Witoelar, the President's Special Envoy for Climate Change

Professor Rachmat Witoelar, former Minister of the Environment in Indonesia, heads the National Council on Climate Change in Indonesia (DNPI) and Indonesia’s delegations to negotiations under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). This interview was conducted during the most recent UNFCCC negotiations in Bonn in May 2012 and contains references to specific agreements in that process. As the Kyoto Protocol – which includes binding targets for countries in the Global North (so-called Annex 1 countries) – is drawing to an end, negotiations revolve around a new protocol, but last year’s high level talks in Durban only came up with a fairly vague result – the Durban Platform – without binding emission reduction targets. In this context, Indonesia’s announcement to pursue its own unilateral reduction target is significant. The progress and challenges of achieving this target are the focus of the following interview.

Strategy in the climate change negotiations: do democracies negotiate differently?

Governments in international negotiations such as the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) negotiations use different negotiation strategies to increase their impact, which can be hard or soft, that is, more or less adding conflict to a negotiation. However, little is known about the structural (e.g. economic size) and domestic (e.g. pressure from stakeholders) factors that determine their choice of strategies. Using an original data set created from interviews with 58 delegations who attended the UNFCCC negotiations in Copenhagen, it is shown that the variables of economic power, democratic status, and pressure from domestic stakeholders had an effect on whether these delegations used hard negotiation strategies. It was found that economically powerful states were likely to use such strategies; in contrast democracies tend to use fewer hard strategies if their economic status is accounted for. However, democracies can be pressured to use hard strategies when they are lobbied by their domestic interest groups (e.g. GHG emitter interests, environmental groups).

A Bottom-Up Approach for Climate Change: The Trade Experience

This article argues that the Kyoto Protocol to the 1992 Framework Convention on Climate Change was doomed to face difficulties ab initio. Moving the climate change agenda forward multilaterally among the 195 parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is proving to be a serious challenge. The lack of progress in UNFCCC negotiations in recent years, especially the failure to obtain an international agreement on emissions limitations targets and timetables by all major developed and developing country emitters, has led many to question whether the UNFCCC is, in fact, the best and most effective forum for mobilizing a global response to climate change. The current approach to negotiating a comprehensive, universal, and legally binding global agreement on climate change is unlikely to succeed. The article concludes that no breakthroughs will take place regarding a global climate change agreement until there is more political maturity on the side of the U.S., and until rapidly emerging economies such as China and India indicate that they are ready to play their part in tackling the climate change challenge, since they are part of the solution. Large emitters of GHG need to be involved for negotiations to come to a conclusion. Much progress is still needed until we reach an international agreement that covers all the world’s countries and that is strong enough to tackle climate change effectively and is equitable enough to gain the sympathy of all countries.

Could Taiwan be included in UNFCCC negotiations?

Taiwan has not been able to join the existing global climate regime because of its ambiguous international status. The Kyoto Protocol and the restrictive accession rules of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) preclude Taiwan's membership. The government of Taiwan is preparing to join the post-2012 multilateral climate regime by building its capacity to regulate greenhouse gases and by setting reduction targets. Taiwan currently contributes about 1% of the total anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions in the world. It has its share of responsibility in global warming and should be included as part of the solution. Taiwan's participation in the World Health Assembly in 2009 suggests that the People's Republic of China might be willing to accept Taiwan's participation in international treaties as long as membership does not imply statehood. If the post-2012 architecture is designed with flexible accession rules, Taiwan might be able to join despite the unresolved political issues regarding its statehood. The accession rules of the World Trade Organization and the Convention for the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean may provide useful precedents on how to design such flexibility.

Equity, responsibility and climate change

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and its decision-making processes are influenced by powerful economic and political interests, but also by debates on equity and responsibility. This is equally reflected in the work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), whose task it is to compile and assess existing knowledge for the UNFCCC negotiations. The IPCC is not charged with producing new knowledge, and its assessments, particularly the 'Summary for policy makers', are the product of political and ideological debates, and may include biased statements. The debate on equity and responsibility is characterized by a division, mainly based on socio-geographic differences, between the representatives from developed and those from developing countries. We argue that 'common but differentiated responsibilities' (UNFCCC 1992, Article 3) require a consideration of temporal and sectoral factors, as well as geographic ones. Countries and economic sectors that have caused today's climate change must be held accountable. More attention must be devoted to giving different responsibilities to the various economic sectors according to their importance for basic human needs. The differences in accountability between economic sectors were first analyzed in Agarwal and Narain (1991; Global warming in an unequal world. Centre for Science and Environment, New Delhi); the need for historical accountability was proposed by the Brazilian Delegation in UNFCCC (1997). © Inter-Research 2004.