Advanced Options Paper on Article 6, Paragraph 2 of the Paris Agreement

AUTHOR(S): ANDREI MARCU AND PETER ZAMAN

This advanced options paper on article 6.2 builds upon the first options paper (Straw Man) jointly produced by Reed Smith and ERCST in February 2018.

Subsequent to the Straw Man Paper, the Chair of the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (“SBSTA”) produced a further informal note titled ‘Informal document containing the draft elements of guidance on cooperative approaches referred to in Article 6, paragraph 2 of the Paris Agreement’ dated 16 March 2018 (the “SBSTA48 Options Paper”) with a view to furthering discussions at SBSTA’s 48th meeting in Bonn between 30 April and 10 May 2018.

In producing this Advanced Options Paper we have been guided by the following principles:

• To reduce or discard any options in the Straw Man Paper or the SBSTA 48 Options Paper on the basis that they are either:
  • too complicated to implement,
  • inconsistent with the bottom-up philosophy of the Paris Agreement,
  • too restrictive to the future potential of developing carbon, climate or other environmental products market infrastructure, or
  • duplicative with other provisions of the Paris Agreement.
• To recognise that, for the purposes of any text presented to the Conference of Parties to the Paris Agreement (“CMA”) by SBSTA, it is likely to be based on a further revised version of the SBSTA48 Options Paper (or updates thereof).
• Where we have adopted a position or made an election from the various options, to provide a rational for such choices. This is to enable the reader to weigh up the merits of the choice in question. It is however not possible to provide such rational for every deletion or change made as to do so would make this discussion document very difficult to follow. Therefore, only those material elections have been explained in any detail.

We hope that you find this Advanced Options Paper helpful in highlighting one of the many possible courses that Parties to the Paris Agreement may take.  However, we hope our rationale, in view of the above-mentioned principles, provides some guidance and logic to the reader’s understanding of our approach.