M ay 24, 2010
The land use and forest ry sect or m ust deliver genuine emissions reduct ions for a safer clim at e. Int ernat ional rules and incent ives m ust be designed t o achieve t his. Under t he Kyot o Prot ocol, rules applying t o land use, land use change and forest ry (know n as LULUCF) in Annex 1 count ries are not delivering for t he clim at e. The draft LULUCF decision w ould encourage em issions t o increase wit hout penalt y. Ambit ion and environm ent al integrit y are now here to be seen.
The Chair of the Kyoto Protocol negotiation st ream has suggest ed in his scenario not e t hat
w ork on a LULUCF decision could be concluded in Bonn t his June. Finalizing t he current approach would ent rench an unacceptable set of rules t hat would undermine the broadernegot iat ions.
W e need a re-focused LULUCF framew ork, free of loopholes, w ith a goal to reduce
emissions and increase removal of greenhouse gases from the atmosphere.
This w ill entail substantial change from current proposals.
The current LULUCF rules must not be finalized in Bonn.
LULUCF as if the clim ate m at t ered – w e are calling for a new approach:
Focus on am bition and environm ent al int egrity: Count ries m ust adopt a goal t o reduce em issions and enhance sequest rat ion from land use, land use change and forestry in developed count ries
Form rules around t his emissions reduct ion goal and abandon t he at t em pt t o hide anticipat ed increased emissions in t he 2nd comm itm ent period.o
Adopt an hist orical baseline for forest m anagem ent1 (currently volunt ary), not a projected baseline.o
Require m andat ory account ing for forest m anagem ent;o
Plug t he bioenergy emissions gap. It is not accept able t o ignore em issions from forest m anagement and also count t hese em issions as zero carbon (renew able energy) at t he point of com bust ion, as takes place in m any developed count ries.o
Com mit t o prot ect reservoirs of carbon (eg. forest s and peatlands).o
Apply environm ent al safeguards (eg. protection of biodiversit y and ecosyst em services, safeguards against t he conversion of nat ural forest s and ot her ecosyst em s t o plant at ions)o
Ensure great er t ransparency in t he policy process, dat a report ing, and account ingo
M andat e high quality dat a and adopt a w ork program t o achieve t his.
M ove t ow ards com plete account ing aft er t he 2nd comm itm ent period (recognizing technical difficult ies)How LULUCF is failing to deliver for the Climate
• M ost developed count ries are anticipat ing t hat t heir forest m anagem ent em issions w ill increase in t he second commit ment period and propose t o m easure fut ure em issions against these levels – this loophole is equivalent to 5% of their total
1990 emissions (approx. 400M t CO2e/ yr)
– a significant fraction of t he t ot al Copenhagen pledges.
• An even larger am ount of emissions from land use and land-use change w ill go accounting for increased emissions from cut t ing and burning t rees t o produce energy, m aking a joke of renew able energy policies
• In t ot al, developed countries are prom oting a loophole equivalent t o 5% of t ot al Annex 1 count ries’ em issions reductions in t he first comm itm ent period. This w ould undermine global am bit ion t o baseline of em issions levels in 1990.
Abou t CAN
The Clim ate Act ion Net work (CAN) is a worldwide network of roughly 500 Non-
governm ental Organizat ions ( NGOs) working to prom ote governm ent and individual act ion to lim it hum an- induced clim ate change to ecologically sust ainable levels. CAN m em bers work t o achieve this goal t hrough inform at ion exchange and
t he coordinated developm ent of NGO st rategy on internat ional, regional, and
nat ional clim ate issues. Clim ate Act ion Net work's vision is t o protect the at m osphere while allowing for sust ainable
and equit able developm ent worldwide.
W hat is the state of play after Copenhagen?
No decision w as finalized on draft LULUCF rules for a pot ent ial 2nd commit ment period. An opport unit y t herefore exist s t o push for im provem ent – ie for LULUCF t o becom e part of t he solut ion rat her t han a loophole underm ining t he integrit y of any fut ure deal
Weak emissions reduction pledges from developed count ries currently fall far below w hat is needed t o effectively t ackle accounting loophole, and t hus t he adverse im pact t hat t hese rules m ay have on developed country t arget s
On forest m anagem ent rules: count ries w ould choose w hat ever baseline t hey like and hide increases in em issions by t his Chris Henschel and M elanie Coat h LULUCF W orking Group Coor dinat orchenschel@cpaw s.org M elanie.Coat h@rspb.org.uk
