Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
Filter
Datasource
Material
Language
Years
Keywords
  • 1
    Language: English
    Pages: 1 Online-Ressource (50 p.) , 21 x 29.7cm.
    Series Statement: OECD/IEA Climate Change Expert Group Papers no.2009/06
    Keywords: Energy ; Environment
    Abstract: The current monitoring, reporting and review framework under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) has a number of strengths and weaknesses. Weaknesses include inconsistent and/or incomplete self reporting of financial support; infrequent reporting; limited and incomplete information on multilateral development banks and other non-UNFCCC funds; lack of primary data on financial flows under KP mechanisms (CDM); and lack of verification procedures. This paper aims to facilitate a discussion about a possible framework to measure, report and verify (MRV) mitigation support. It considers the main pathways through which mitigation support to developing countries may flow as well as the availability and suitability of information in this area to provide a basis to measure, report and verify mitigation support. A strengthened framework for reporting could be developed and layered into the existing system, e.g. via National Communications. Data gaps and reporting frequency could be corrected through improvements in National Communication guidelines and the development of a common reporting format. The UNFCCC could also collaborate with other institutions to develop and draw on more standardised data from other sources and to assure that information across sources is comparable and publicly available. A key aspect would be to provide a monitoring system that covers not just public but also private finance in mitigation specific as well as mitigation relevant areas. The absence of verification procedures in the current UNFCCC monitoring and review system for mitigation support should also be addressed. The Convention does not lay out specific guidelines for the review of mitigation support reported in National Communications and reported information is not formally cross checked with alternative information sources. Parties could agree to the elaboration of guidelines for review and verification to help determine whether Parties have employed agreed methods for self assessment and reporting on technology transfer, capacity building and financing, and whether reporting is conducted in a transparent manner. In addition, standardised reporting by recipient countries about funds received, use and usefulness of funds could also be an important addition to provide information for verification with information on contributions to mitigation support.
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    Language: English
    Pages: 47 p. , 21 x 29.7cm
    Series Statement: OECD Economics Department Working Papers no.693
    Keywords: Economics
    Abstract: There are local air pollution benefits from pursuing greenhouse gases emissions mitigation policies, which lower the net costs of emission reductions and thereby may strengthen the incentives to participate in a global climate change mitigation agreement. The main purpose of this paper is to assess the extent to which local air pollution co-benefits can lower the cost of climate change mitigation policies in OECD and non-OECD countries and can offer economic incentives for developing countries to participate in a post- 2012 global agreement. The paper sets out an analytical framework to answer these questions. After a literature review on the estimates of the co-benefits, new estimates, which are obtained within a general equilibrium, dynamic, multi-regional framework, are presented. The main conclusion is that the co-benefits from climate change mitigation in terms of reduced outdoor local air pollution might cover a significant part of the cost of action. Nonetheless, they alone may not provide sufficient participation incentives to large developing countries. This is partly because direct local air pollution control policies appear to be typically cheaper than indirect action via greenhouse gases emissions mitigation.
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...