Building bridges to 2020 and beyond: the road from Bali

Winkler, Harald; Vorster, Shaun

doi:10.1080/14693062.2007.9685652

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Verification could start with national institutions, followed by verification by other developing countries. Politically this might be more acceptable, or more within the 'contract zone' (Winkler and Vorster, 2007). Models of peer-review mechanisms, for example in the African Union or the WTO, might provide useful lessons.…”

Section: Verifiablementioning

confidence: 99%

“…What is clear is that a fair, effective, flexible and inclusive package deal will have to strike a core balance between development and climate imperatives (Winkler and Vorster, 2007). A fair deal in Copenhagen will need to balance developed countries' commitments to absolute reductions and developing countries' actions to reduce emissions relative to baseline, because of historical responsibility, different levels of emissions per capita, and the levels of development.…”

Section: The Scientific Basis: What Are We Imrv'ing?mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Measurable, reportable and verifiable: the keys to mitigation in the Copenhagen deal

Winkler

2008

Climate Policy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The climate negotiations up to Copenhagen will need to elaborate on measurable, reportable and verifiable (MRV) mitigation commitments and actions as part of the future of the climate regime. The conceptual, political, scientific, financial and institutional principles for MRV are explored for (1) mitigation commitments in developed countries, (2) mitigation actions in developing countries, supported by (3) means of implementation. For developed countries, the procedures in Articles 5, 7, 8 and 18 of the Kyoto Protocol will be critical in order to ensure comparability of commitments, both in effort and compliance. Outcomes should be reportable and verifiable through Annex I national communications and in-depth review. Existing procedures could be enhanced and need to apply across Protocol and Convention. MRV mitigation actions by developing countries should result in measurable deviations beiow baseline. Inventories will be important to measure, and enhanced national communications for reporting. The challenge will be to make mitigation actions verifiable, and options include verification by domestic institutions working to internationally agreed guidelines. A critical distinction is to be made between unilateral mitigation actions and those with international support. MRV applies to the provision of the means of implementation, including technology and finance. Investment in technology can be measured, so that institutional arrangements for technology and finance should be aligned. Verification of funds raised at international level would be simpler than raising funds nationally.

show abstract

Section: Verifiablementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Scientific Basis: What Are We Imrv'ing?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Measurable, reportable and verifiable: the keys to mitigation in the Copenhagen deal

Winkler

2008

Climate Policy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…in favour of the rich and powerful. Looking back at earlier scenarios of how negotiations might evolve (Winkler and Vorster, 2007), the international community has perhaps achieved 'enhanced status quo', but whether this will lead to an 'ambitious transitional' path or to 'regime collapse' is still unclear. Yet the reasons why a new legally binding agreement is needed remain as compelling as ever.…”

Section: Moving Beyond Copenhagenmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There simply was no 'contract zone' (Winkler and Vorster, 2007) between ideologically extreme positions. It will take significant effort to rebuild trust in the process beyond Copenhagen.…”

Section: What Did Not Work In Copenhagenmentioning

confidence: 99%