What Is Article 6 Of Paris Agreement
This highlights a reason for disagreement with Article 6.4, namely that cdM hosts did not have specific Kyoto emission reduction targets, meaning that economies cannot be “counted twice” towards more than one target. One of the keys to this strengthened ambition lies in the implementation of Article 6 of the Paris Agreement. At COP24 in Katowice, Poland, last December, the participating countries reached an agreement on the implementation of the Paris Agreement – the so-called Paris regulation – but failed to agree on the implementation of Article 6. That is why Article 6 of the Paris Agreement was at the centre of the United Nations climate change conference in Bonn, which marked the first formal meeting of governments to advance negotiations on the absence of Paris rules. “There can be no double counting of emissions reductions and there can be no production of hot air. In this context, we cannot support the transfer of credits or quotas from the Kyoto Protocol until 2020, which would jeopardize what we are trying to achieve with the Paris Agreement. The nature of the “internationally transferred mitigation outcomes” (ITMOs) covered by Article 6.2 is being discussed, with some countries intending to decide for themselves what they can do and others that want all co2-tonne emissions operations to be covered. Last December, an agreement was close to reaching an agreement in Katowice, Poland. But since then, the assumption has grown rather than narrowed, after analyzing the number of brackets (points of disagreement) in the Carbon Brief negotiating text. In Katowice, the rest of the Paris rules were negotiated and the countries insisted that everything would be agreed. Now that Article 6 has been isolated, that pressure has dissipated. At the international climate summit in Madrid in December 2019, climate negotiators will once again attempt to finalize the Article 6 “regulatory framework” that will govern voluntary international cooperation on climate change issues, including carbon markets.
In order to truly understand the task entrusted to them and the main areas of disagreement that remain, the first point of contact is the text of Article 6 of the Paris Agreement itself, presented in annotated form in the graph below. The situation in other areas is less clear: discussions are under way on what the non-market-based approach actually implies and how to distinguish it from existing forms of cooperation. Progress has been made in this regard, for example in identifying activities that could benefit from this approach, including the elimination of fossil fuel subsidies.  Under the Paris Agreement, some of the revenue from the markets must be made available to help developing countries adapt to the effects of climate change. Whether this applies only to the centralized MDS market or to all trade, including bilateral agreements, has not yet been agreed. To finalize the rules, negotiators must navigate the text through a thicket of impenetrable jargon, a series of technical accounting challenges and bear traps of “constructive ambiguity” that often hide incompatible views on how Article 6 should work and why it was created. This reduction means that emissions and red lines can be exchanged for each other, while negotiators seek to reach agreement on the article 6 regulatory framework. There may also be attempts to link these discussions to other COP political priorities, further complicating matters.