CLIMATE TALKS IN BANGKOK SEE COMPETITIVENESS CONCERNS RAISED

Five days of contentious climate change talks in Bangkok concluded last week with an agreement on a timetable for negotiations that are supposed to culminate in a new United Nations accord on reducing greenhouse gas emissions by the end of 2009.

Meeting under the auspices of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), delegates from close to 200 governments agreed on a detailed work programme for 2008. They also discussed approaches to slash global emissions amid concerns about how such reductions might affect the economic competitiveness of countries or particular sectors.

The Bangkok talks, which ran from 31 March through late into the night on 4 April, marked the first official negotiations since the landmark Bali conference last December, which launched negotiations on a successor agreement to the Kyoto Protocol, due to expire in 2012. The 'Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention' (AWG-LCA), which includes all UNFCCC parties, held its first session. The 'Ad Hoc Working Group on Further Commitments for Annex I Parties under the Kyoto Protocol', which includes industrialised nations that already have taken on reduction commitments, met for the fifth time.

Discussions on "sectoral approaches" give rise to competitiveness concerns

Some countries have suggested a sectoral approach to reducing emissions for industries such as steel, aluminium, pulp and paper, cement and agro-chemicals. Proponents say that this would ensure that effective reductions are achieved in emissions-heavy sectors.

How sectoral reductions would be implemented, however, remains divisive. While developing countries have stressed that the sectoral cuts should be part of industrialised nations' reduction obligations, others argue that developing countries should also participate in global reduction efforts by controlling emissions from their high-emitting sectors. Some analysts say that a worldwide reduction effort across all major emitting sectors would contribute to preventing 'carbon leakage', the term given to the relocation of polluting industries to places where they face laxer emissions standards.

Developing countries such as Brazil and India, however, cautioned against sectoral approaches that led to the development of international standards that developing countries would be forced to comply with, hampering their exports. Brazil noted that this would conflict with the notion of "common but differentiated responsibilities" that underlies the climate regime. India stressed that there was no legal basis under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change to deal with competitiveness issues.

In general, several developing countries emphasised that in efforts to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions, there is a difference in the nature of the obligations on developed and developing countries. Brazil and South Africa noted developed countries need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In contrast, developing countries should take action to reduce growth in emissions, it being understood that their total emissions will have to continue growing as their economies develop.

Delegates ultimately agreed that cooperative sectoral approaches and sector-specific actions would be further discussed at future sessions of the working groups.

Intellectual property issues divisive

The development and transfer of environmentally friendly technologies, such as those for increasing energy efficiency or generating renewable energy, has emerged as a major aspect of the climate negotiations.

In Bangkok, delegates grappled with mechanisms and funding for the development, deployment and transfer of technologies. While addressing barriers to technology transfer and diffusion, several developing country delegates raised concerns about barriers posed by intellectual property (IP) rights.

India and Pakistan called for a relaxation of intellectual property standards for all climate-related technology, in order to support their rapid diffusion and facilitate access by developing countries. Going further, Saudi Arabia suggested that countries should be able to issue compulsory licenses for climate change technologies - meaning they would be allowed to unilaterally authorise companies to copy patented technologies, against payment of a royalty to the patent-holder.

Others took different views. The US argued that intellectual property has not been a barrier to the diffusion of climate technologies and that those criticising the IP system were the very countries that benefited from it. The US also called for the elimination of tariffs and non-tariff barriers to trade in environmental goods and services as a way to foster access to technology.

China, a significant importer of environmental technology but also a rapidly growing producer and exporter, called for a balanced approach, saying the technology transfer discussion should not be allowed to get stuck on the single issue of intellectual property.

In order to better understand the issue, delegates have agreed to further exchange on technology development and transfer, including at three of the scheduled eight in-session workshops under the AWG-LCA.

The next round of climate talks is due to take place from 2-12 June, in Bonn, Germany.

ICTSD reporting; EARTH NEGOTIATIONS BULLETIN (available at http://www.iisd.ca/climate/ccwg1/).