{"id":4570,"date":"2016-11-20T21:56:16","date_gmt":"2016-11-21T02:56:16","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/?p=4570"},"modified":"2016-11-21T08:53:33","modified_gmt":"2016-11-21T13:53:33","slug":"report-from-cop22-conclusion-of-talks-in-marrakech","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2016\/11\/20\/report-from-cop22-conclusion-of-talks-in-marrakech\/","title":{"rendered":"Report from COP22: Conclusion of Talks in Marrakech"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>
\"Flags<\/a>
Flags of the 197 parties to the UNFCCC outside the blue zone at COP22<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

For the last two weeks, representatives of almost 200 countries have been in Marrakech for the 22nd<\/sup> Conference of the Parties (COP) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, known as COP22. Coming into the conference, there were high hopes that it would be the \u201cCOP of Action,\u201d with countries working to implement the Paris Agreement, reached at COP21 last year. Aimed at limit global warming to \u201cwell below\u201d 2o<\/sup>C above pre-industrial levels, the Paris Agreement<\/a> establishes an overarching framework for action to address climate change, but leaves much of the detail to be worked out through future negotiations. These negotiations began in May in Germany\u00a0and continued in Morocco\u00a0at COP22.<\/p>\n

There was broad agreement, among country representatives at COP22, on the need to advance implementation of the Paris Agreement. Reaching consensus on how to do proved difficult, however. Discussions continued into the early hours of the morning for several days, finally wrapping up around 4am on Saturday, with the adoption of thirty-five decisions<\/a>, establishing a detailed plan for moving forward to implement the Agreement. Most significantly, it was decided<\/a> that all preparatory work for implementation should be completed by 2018, with a progress review in 2017. While that is longer than many had hoped, it bears remembering that completion of work to implement the Kyoto Protocol<\/a> took four years. Whereas the Kyoto Protocol required only developed countries to take action to address climate change, the Paris Agreement requires action by developing countries as well.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

To assist developing countries implement the Paris Agreement, developed countries agreed to provide at least $100 billion per year by 2020, to support their climate change mitigation and adaptation efforts. Many hoped that COP22 would result in a roadmap for delivering those funds. A key focus of the conference was on funding for adaptation, with countries discussing whether the Adaptation Fund serving the Kyoto Protocol should be continued under the Paris Agreement. Going into the final day of the conference, it looked as if a decision would be reached to continue the fund, to the delight of many developing countries. This was, however, strongly resisted by a number of developed countries. In the end, consensus could only be reached about the need to continue discussing the issue at future meetings.<\/p>\n

Like discussions on the Adaptation Fund, most of the negotiations at COP22 did not result in substantive decisions, but merely an agreement to continue work. Most decisions are, therefore, largely procedural in nature. This has disappointed many environmentalists and others, who despair that COP22 did not turn out to be the COP of Action. While this is understandable, it is important to recognize the numerous achievements that were made, outside of the formal negotiations. These include:<\/p>\n