In December 2009 representatives from the Pacific Islands including Tuvalu, the Federated States of Micronesia, the Solomon Islands, Fiji, Vanuatu, Kiribati, and PNG,⁽¹⁾ were among a long list of attendees from 192 nations, to the 15th Conference of the Parties (COP) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) (the Copenhagen Summit). This article examines the outcomes from the Copenhagen Summit and in particular the implications of the Copenhagen Accord for Pacific Island States.

Background to the Copenhagen Summit

Concerns unique to Pacific Islands States

For the Pacific Islands, much was at stake during the Copenhagen Summit given their particularly vulnerable position regarding:

• the risk of sea level rise to low lying Pacific atoll states such as Kiribati, Marshall Islands and Tuvalu, and the prospect of becoming uninhabitable of the next 50 years, requiring the relocation of entire populations;⁽³⁾

• coastal erosion, flooding, coral bleaching, and more frequent and intense extreme weather events;⁽⁴⁾  and

• the ability to manage development in terms of water supply, sanitation, agricultural productivity, food security, economic development, healthcare and education, simultaneously with the implementation of adaptation and mitigation strategies to deal with climate change.⁽⁵⁾
  

Status of Pacific Island States under the UNFCCC

What does the Copenhagen Accord (Accord) mean for the Pacific Islands?

The Accord is a politically binding agreement between its signatory countries. However, the Accord does not have treaty status and is to be differentiated from the “legally binding” Kyoto Protocol.⁽⁹⁾  Consensus was not reached by COP which meant that the Accord could not be adopted. Rather, the Accord was “noted” on 18 December 2009 whereby the parties formally acknowledged its existence.⁽¹⁰⁾

Countries were invited to communicate their desire to be associated with the Accord by 31 January 2010 and:

• Annex-1 parties were invited to provide commitments to implement individually or jointly the quantified economy wide emissions targets for 2020 (the Accord itself does not contain targets for reduction of greenhouse gas (“GHG”) emissions);

• Non-Annex 1 parties were invited to provide mitigation actions for future implementation;⁽¹¹⁾  and

• Least developed countries and small island developing states were invited to undertake actions voluntarily and on the basis of support.⁽¹²⁾

On 2 February 2010 the UNFCCC issued a press release listing government climate pledges to cut and limit GHG emissions by 2020 from 55 countries.⁽¹³⁾  Of the 55 countries, the Marshall Islands and PNG (both Non-Annex 1 Countries) are the first two Pacific countries to associate with the Accord and to make such pledges (which will be contained in Appendix 2 to the Accord).

The Marshall Islands pledged a 40% reduction in Carbon Dioxide (Co2) emissions below 2009 levels by 2020, pursuant to the “2009 National Energy Policy and Energy Action Plan” and subject to the provision of adequate international support (significantly higher than Australia’s current pledge of a 5% - 25% reduction from 2000 levels).⁽¹⁴⁾

On 2 February 2010 PNG pledged (albeit in a preliminary and conditional form) to reduce GHG emissions by at least 50% before 2030 while becoming carbon neutral by 2050. PNG also pledged to increase adaptation investments by USD 80-90 million per annum to reduce expected losses by USD 230-250 million.⁽¹⁵⁾

The ability of the Pacific Islands to fulfill pledges will largely hinge on the provision of adequate funding and support from developed countries. The Accord provides for the collective commitment by developed countries to contribute USD 30 billion for the period of 2010-2012, to be allocated to adaption and mitigation mechanisms, with small island developing states (along with Africa and least developed countries) to receive priority in the allocation of adaptation funds.⁽¹⁶⁾  The Accord also provides a further goal for developed countries to mobilize USD 100 billion a year by 2020 to address the needs of developing countries through mitigation actions.⁽¹⁷⁾ 

While it is uncertain whether developed countries will follow through with these financing goals due to the nature of the Accord, it has at least provided a benchmark for long-term funding when a legal agreement is finally reached.

This article has been prepared for the general information of clients and contacts of PLN Lawyers Sydney and the affiliated firms of the Pacific Legal Network. While it deals with and comments on the law in specific areas it is not intended nor should it be used, as a substitute for specific legal advice as legal counsel may only be given in response to inquiries regarding particular situations.

PLN News February 2010