LDC Group statement at opening of SBSTA 41

Opening of the forty-first session of the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA 41)

Statement by Nepal on behalf of the Least Developed Countries Group

1 December 2014, Lima, Peru

Mr. Chair, I have the honour to speak on behalf of the LDC Group. We would like to associate ourselves with the statements made by Bolivia on behalf of G77 and China, by Sudan on behalf of the Africa Group.

Let me begin by thanking you for issuing the information note on SBSTA 41. As the note rightly says, 2014 marks significant scientific findings such as those identified by the Fifth Assessment Report of the IPCC which clearly states that if deep cuts in greenhouse gas emissions are not made there will be severe, pervasive and irreversible impacts on people and ecosystems. It is the poorest and most vulnerable countries, such as the LDCs, that will suffer the most from these impacts.

To that end, your information note identifies the issues you believe are of particular importance to the SBSTA, which are those prerequisite to the successful implementation of the Kyoto Protocol’s second commitment period (Sub-item 10a, 11a and 11b).

The LDCs believe that implementing the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol as soon possible is crucial to help close the mitigation gap and prevent the impacts spelled out by the IPCC. Of the19 nations that have ratified the Doha Amendment thus far, 4 of them are LDCs. Several other members of our group are working to add their names to those of Bangladesh, Djibouti, Solomon Islands and Sudan’s. We share your hope Mr Chair, that the successful ratification of the Doha Amendment will be completed as soon as possible.

Regarding the Nairobi work programme, the LDC Group has very clearly put forward its views in the past. Our countries have not seen substantial impacts of this work programme at field level. We believe that the Nairobi work programme should regularly produce a list of concrete implementable activities and forward it to the SBI for its effective implementation through the Adaptation Committee.

Mr. Chair, the work on REDD+ in Warsaw was a culmination of many years of work and is a significant and outstanding achievement, bringing us a step closer to the full implementation of REDD+ activities. We hope that we continue to progress and address the remaining REDD+ issues for full implementation. Our group is keen to see progress in the areas of methodological guidelines for both non–market approaches and non-carbon benefits related to REDD+ activities.

Mr. Chair, we would like to acknowledge the work conducted by the TEC and the CTCN, in particular the incubator programme developed for the LDCs. Many parties have undertaken their Technology Needs Assessment (TNAs) and identified and prioritized activities including the formulation of Technology Action Plans. For those that have not done so, support may be needed to accelerate the process.

Regarding the 2013-2015 Review, we acknowledge the work done since the establishment of the Structured Expert Dialogue (SED). We hope that it will deliver concrete outcomes to inform the work of the ADP. Again, it is critical that the SED is directed towards finding the pathways that will lead us to a below 1.5 degree Celsius temperature limit relative to pre-industrial levels. We hope further consideration will be given to the means of implementation in the review process.

On the Warsaw International Mechanism on Loss and Damage, the LDCs acknowledge the two-year work plan and appreciate the hard work done by the Executive Committee. We hope that the work plan will address actions and support, including finance, technology and capacity building as mandated by the COP, in order to enable the Warsaw International Mechanism to be fully operationalized at all levels. These levels include support for rehabilitation, risk transfer and human displacement and other losses and damage caused by the impacts of climate change such as permanent economic and non-economic issues, recognizing that loss and damage is beyond the adaptation. We also hope that the 2 year work plan will address loss and damage issues at national level, such as institutional establishments to facilitate research and data management.

We believe that issues related to economic instruments: market based mechanisms, non-market approaches and framework for various approaches are fundamental and need careful considerations and balanced outputs. Chair, we believe we should consider the potential relationship of these instruments with the 2015 agreement and previous decisions, including amendments to the Kyoto Protocol flexible mechanisms.

On cross cutting issues, the SBSTA and SBI should work together to ensure the Parties benefit from both the areas of expertise. These include, among others, technology development and transfer, loss and damage and key political issues such as the 2013-2015 review.

Mr Chair, we are confident that your chairmanship will continue to progress with significant and outstanding achievements.

Thank you!


Comments are closed.