December 14, 2020 by eklose
In order to stimulate action, international and national decision-making processes should be informed through in-depth analysis, calibration and representation of interests. While the global inventory is fuelled by measures taken at the national level, non-state actors, including cities, states, businesses and civil society, contribute to this process by providing valuable information, analysis, tools and means to prepare for the necessary transition. These are civil society-led initiatives, such as the Independent Global Inventory (ISTS), that lay the groundwork for the important task ahead of us, rather than waiting for the global inventory. The iGST is a data and interest initiative that brings together climate scientists, modellers and supporters from around the world to support the more ambitious ambition of the Paris Agreement. It also strengthens the credibility of the process by empowering countries and contributing to more accurate and transparent data, procedures and results. Based on this overview, we recommend that an independent global inventory focus on the following: The implementation modalities agreed at the Katowice climate change conference include three phases of inventory: Countries have agreed on the global inventory process. The global inventory is conducted in three phases: in order to assess progress towards the mitigation objective, some parties intend to present the UNEP report and the UNCTAD summary report of the UNFCCC secretariat, which demonstrate the gap between the planned measures and the necessary measures. Others point out that the inventory should focus on what has already been implemented – using the information provided by the parties themselves – without thinking about how the measures will disappear in the future. Balancing this with the need to assess progress towards the long-term temperature target would certainly be a challenge. Learn more about the global inventory in this video hosted by Christiana Figueres. In signing the Paris Agreement, countries agreed on long-term goals based on national plans that will be reviewed every five years. This process, known as global inventory, is the key to increasing ambition.
Imagine inventory as a regular review of the Paris Agreement. It assesses the state of health of collective efforts: countries stated in their decision that they wanted to refine the procedural and logistical elements of the global inventory to reflect the knowledge and experience gained, but they did not indicate a date or timetable for such a review. They also noted the need to reflect and supplement the sources of information needed for the inventory. But most questions remain unanswered, creating uncertainty about the success of the global inventory. Among the unsefined points is: it is generally accepted that the inventory will be carried out taking into account the capital and the best science available. This should not be a surprise – it is indeed written in the Paris Agreement – but the question of how justice is taken into account, in particular, is an issue that dominates the interventions of a number of countries. The lack of a general definition of justice in the context of climate change is a remarkable challenge. This could mean that what a country needs to do (emissions reduction, financial endowment, etc.) depends on its contribution to climate change or its ability to do so. But there are many other ways of looking at it, and parties have very different views of how justice should be applied in the overall inventory.