page 1
page 2
page 3
page 4
page 5
page 6
page 7
page 8
page 9
page 10
page 11
page 12
page 13
page 14
page 15
page 16
page 17
page 18
page 19
page 20
page 21
page 22
page 23
page 24
page 25
page 26
page 27
page 28
page 29
page 30
page 31
page 32
page 33
page 34
page 35
page 36
page 37
page 38
page 39
page 40
page 41
page 42
page 43
page 44
page 45
page 46
page 47
page 48
page 49
page 50
page 51
page 52
page 53
page 54
page 55
page 56
page 57
page 58
page 59
page 60
page 61
page 62
page 63
page 64
page 65
page 66
page 67
page 68
page 69
page 70
page 71
page 72
page 73
page 74
page 75
page 76
page 77
page 78
page 79
page 80
page 81
page 82
page 83
page 84
page 85
page 86
page 87
page 88
page 89
page 90
page 91
page 92
page 93
page 94
page 95
page 96
page 97
page 98
page 99
page 100
page 101
page 102
page 103
page 104
page 105
page 106
page 107
page 108
page 109
page 110
page 111
page 112
page 113
page 114
page 115
page 116
page 117
page 118
page 119
page 120
page 121
page 122
page 123
page 124

PRE-MEXICO REVIEW115structures. This includes channels under theConvention, Protocol and bi-lateral or multilateralchannels.Yet overall, Parties need to know and plan for what theyare working towards. Many Parties have called for alegally binding instrument to be ready for adoption inCancun, while other Parties have made it clear they arenot ready for such a step. But "legally binding" meansdifferent things to different people. There is a need tounravel the concept and to define it clearly.One starting point for this may be to clearly assesswhich issues need a legal or regulatory foundation, andwhat that foundation might constitute. Anotherstarting point for this may be to turn the debate on"legally binding" into a debate on "compliance". Inthis way, issues that could be enforced by compliancearrangements could be identified. Such an approachwould lead to a more focused discussion on the needfor either a new legal instrument, or strong compliancearrangements attached to specific issues. In this way,consensus could be reached to turn the outcome inMexico into a legal treaty by a specific date.Copenhagen brought many issues to the advancedstage of negotiations. At the same time, the processhas been overly focused on political issues. In a way,negotiations would benefit from being depoliticised.More than ever, there is a need to focus on substantiveissues in order to make long-term climate changecooperation work. I am confident this can be done inview of a successful outcome in Mexico. nThe above remarks are extracted from an address byYvo de Boer, Executive Secretary of the UNFCCC, atthe 8th Informal Meeting on Further Action againstClimate Change in Tokyo, 1-2 March 2010.

he participation of some 120 worldleaders at the UN climate conferencelast December in Copenhagenconfirmed that climate change is nowrightly considered across much of the world as anissue justifying attention at the highest political level.It remains at the top of the European Union's agenda. The Copenhagen outcome fell well short of the EU'sambitions and was a disappointment for Europe aswell as many other countries. Nonetheless, theCopenhagen Accord is a step towards the globalclimate agreement the world needs for the post-2012period. It provides a basis that the internationalcommunity can and must build on this year. Even though the Accord was not adopted as a formalUN decision, the fact that some 120 nations haveendorsed it is proof of the broad support it enjoys.Industrialised and developing countries responsiblefor more than 80 per cent of the world's emissions ofgreenhouse gases have included their emissiontargets or actions in the Accord. This demonstratesthe clear determination of a majority of nations tostep up their action. The EU continues to press for an ambitious andcomprehensive global agreement that would also belegally binding. We believe this is the most effectiveway to reach the objective, endorsed in theCopenhagen Accord, of keeping global warmingbelow 2°C above the pre-industrial level and thuspreventing the most severe and dangerous impactsof climate change. With the world's greenhouse gas emissionscontinuing to rise, staying within this temperatureceiling will be possible only with a strong andcoordinated international effort. That is why the EUhas always supported the UN negotiation process. The EU would be ready to adopt a robust and legallybinding global agreement at the next UN climateconference, in the Mexican city of Cancún starting atthe end of November. We recognise, however, thatthis may be too soon after Copenhagen for someParties and that a final global deal may have to wait until the conference in South Africa at the endof 2011. This does not mean that Cancún must not deliver alot - on the contrary. To keep up the momentum, it isabsolutely crucial that Cancún delivers a number ofdecisions leading to specific action. We must pursuea stepwise approach under which Cancúnincorporates the new elements agreed in theCopenhagen Accord - for instance, the below 2°Ctarget, the provisions on monitoring, reporting andverification, and fast start financing - and alsodelivers on some of the areas where the formalnegotiations in Copenhagen did actually bringsubstantial progress. I am thinking here of REDD+ (reducing emissionsfrom deforestation and forest degradation),adaptation and accounting rules for forest emissionsfrom developed countries. In other words there is a full plate for Cancún to deal with.It is clear that swift implementation by the EU andother industrialised countries of the almost US$ 30billion in "fast start" financing they pledged todeveloping nations in Copenhagen is essential torebuild trust in the international process. The EU hasAFTER COPENHAGEN THE WORLD STILL NEEDS A COMPREHENSIVECLIMATE DEAL116PRE-MEXICO REVIEWCONNIE HEDEGAARD, EUROPEAN COMMISSIONER FOR CLIMATE ACTIONTPhoto: European Commission