218 CCLR 3|2018
What Can the Paris Agreement’s Global Stocktake Learn from the Sustainable Development Goals? Jennifer Huang*
In December 2018, countries will adopt the rules and guidelines that will bring the elements of the Paris Agreement to life. One key element is the global stocktake, a unique multilater- al review mechanism focusing on collective action and achievement. Parties to the Paris Agreement may want to look to the United Nations (UN) Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and its High-level Political Forum on Sustainable Development (HLPF), which offer parallels to both the Agreement’s enhanced transparency framework and the global stock- take. A review of the potential similarities and differences in their review and reporting cy- cles, their high-level events and outcomes, measuring progress, managing technical expert input, sharing knowledge, information and experience, as well as including non-state actors could provide some relevant lessons for the upcoming international climate negotiations. In some ways, the SDGs process is structurally and politically too dissimilar to offer a template but its approach to adaptation offers insight into how adaptation could be addressed in the global stocktake. Both processes also highlight the need to build the capacity of governmen- tal processes to continuously improve the reporting of key information over time. Because these processes are complementary and meant to evolve, countries could begin to look to the long-term integration of aspects of both regimes to enhance coherence and reduce re- dundancies. At the climate conference in Katowice, Poland, Parties will need to narrow the broad outlines of the global stocktake down to specifics. Cycles need to be defined and ways to aggregate or synthesize the vast amounts of information must be determined. Parties can begin to draw on parallels between relevant processes and any early lessons they offer as they consider what key features to include in the modalities, rules, and guidelines to be de- cided in Katowice.
I. Introduction designed to review individual progress and none have long-term global goals with similar time- The Paris Agreement establishes a global stocktake frames.3 What distinguishes the global stocktake to periodically review Parties’ collective progress to- process is the importance placed on driving ambi- wards achieving its global climate change goals.1 In tious climate action over time and its focus on collec- global governance terms, the global stocktake is a tive rather than individual achievement.4 multilateral review mechanism but one quite unlike The United Nations (UN) Sustainable Develop- those of other multilateral regimes.2 Most have been ment Goals (SDGs) and its High-level Political Forum
DOI: 10.21552/cclr/2018/3/8 2 Manjana Milkoreit and Kate Haapala, ‘Designing the Global Stock- take: A Global Governance Innovation’ (C2ES 2017)
on Sustainable Development (HLPF) offer some in- enforced by punitive measures,6 as exemplified by teresting parallels to both the Paris Agreement’s en- the Kyoto Protocol,7 but the Paris Agreement takes a hanced transparency framework and global stock- new approach, tying together complementary take. The SDGs processes review Member States' ac- processes in a cyclical system. The global stocktake tions, qualitatively and quantitatively, to assess col- is a crucial piece of that framework, together with lective progress towards the Goals. Engaging in the the regular submission of nationally determined con- SDGs process is both a management tool, helping tributions (NDCs),8 an enhanced transparency countries develop implementation and monitoring process that requires each Party to report on their ac- strategies for achieving the SDGs, and a report card, tion and support every two years,9 and an implemen- measuring progress towards achieving the Goals.5 tation and compliance committee, whose functions This article explores the similarities and differ- have yet to be negotiated but are meant to be facili- ences between the SDG and HLPF processes and the tative rather than punitive.10 broad outlines of the Paris Agreement’s global stock- To raise ambition, every five years Parties will take, drawing some key lessons learned and identi- conduct a global stocktake of collective progress to- fying potential opportunities for complementary ward the Agreement’s long-term goals (LTGs) on evolution. mitigation, adaptation and support.11 The outcome will inform Parties’ submission of a new NDC two years later.12 The first stocktake is set for 2023,13 II. Measuring Collective Achievement but Parties at the Paris conference decided to kick- and Enhancing Implementation and start the process with a ‘facilitative dialogue’ in Ambition 2018.14 Rechristened the Talanoa Dialogue by the Fi- jian presidency and similar to but more limited in International environmental lawyers may be more scope than the global stocktake, it will run through th familiar with traditional accountability frameworks the year and culminatPowered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) e at the 24 Conference of the Parties (COP 24) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in Ka-
www.lexxion.eu 15 5 Leadership Council of the Sustainable Development Solutions towice, Poland. It is intended to inform the new Network, ‘Indicators and a Monitoring Framework for the Sustain- or revised NDCs Parties will submit by 2020 and able Development Goals: Launching a Data Revolution for the SDGs’ (2015)
consumption.19 All UN Members are invited to make Parties have not yet agreed on the ways that the glob- efforts to achieve those goals. An annual HLPF pro- al stocktake will measure progress towards the LTGs, vides a public opportunity to voluntarily highlight particularly with respect to adaptation or finance. individual achievements and concludes with a high- level report from the Secretary-General describing progress towards the SDGs. 2. Timing and Review Cycle
Each year, five to six SDGs are reviewed at the HLPF III. Comparing the SDGs, HLPF, and the under the UN Economic and Social Council Global Stocktake (ECOSOC) or UN General Assembly, completing all 17 SDGs every four years. There is no pause in the re- The SDGs and global stocktake processes broadly view process, with a high-level event occurring every share the same objectives: measuring collective year. progress, providing an opportunity for experience- While the Paris Agreement mandates that the and lessons-sharing, and enhancing implementation global stocktake occur every five years, Parties are and ambition.20 Therefore, a review of their poten- considering just how long the stocktake process it- tial similarities and differences in how they function, self should be, given timing and resources. Accord- their methodology, inputs and outputs, and key ac- ing to the early options drafted by Parties at the UN- tors ought to provide some relevant lessons for the FCCC sessions in Bonn in May 2018 (Bonn informal negotiations on the global stocktake. A review is time- notes), Parties are largely envisioning a one- to two- ly: as of July, the SDGs process finished its fourth year process from start to finish.25 HLPF since the adoption of the SDGs in 2015.21 This article compares key elements of the SDG process with those being negotiated or decided for the glob- 3. Reporting al stocktake. In the SDGs process, all government reporting is strictly voluntary; the UN encourages regular and in- 1. Measuring Progress clusive country progress reviews but does not stipu- late their frequency.26 Where a Member State wish- There are 17 SDGs, each with their own set of targets and indicators.22 The indicators are tiered based on their level of methodological robustness and the 19 United Nations Development Programme, ‘Background on the availability of data globally. For most indicators, the Goals’
es to be reviewed on the SDGs, it can submit a vol- Partiesareconvergingaroundamulti-phasedglob- untary national review (VNR) synthesis report on, al stocktake process, in which the first two prepara- inter alia, the status of their progress towards the tory and technical phases will gather information be- SDGs, several examples of good practices, challenges fore compiling and ‘considering’ it.33 They are also encountered, and areas in which it needs additional furtherrefininganon-exhaustivelistofinputs,which support. Over a week at the HLPF, governments give will include outside sources like the Intergovernmen- a 30-minute presentation of their VNR report.27 In tal Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports but must addition to individual national reports, the HLPF ac- define whether outputs from other Paris processes cepts input by Regional Commissions.28 will link to the stocktake.34 Every five years, the Paris Agreement requires Par- ties to submit an NDC, or a Party’s commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to the 4. High-Level Event(s) impacts of climate change.29 Parties are also mandat- ed to report at least biennially through the enhanced To review progress, the HLPF annually discusses five transparency framework on their actions and sup- to six SDGs and their interlinkages, meeting under port, as well as through the national communications the ECOSOC for eight days, including a three-day required every four years under the Convention.30 ministerial segment, and every four years at the lev- The Agreement states that the purpose of the trans- el of Heads of State and Government under the Gen- parency framework is to provide a clear understand- eral Assembly for two days.35 Five Regional Forums ing of climate change action and to track progress to- on Sustainable Development review progress on the wards Parties’ achievement of their NDCs to inform SDGs and offer an opportunity for countries to share the global stocktake.31 Parties’ reports will then un- lessons learned, best practices, and challenges in im- dergo both a technical expert review and peer review plementation.36 process.32 To raise the profile of climate action, UNFCCC Par- ties seem inclined for a final, political phase of the global stocktake to take on a role similar to that of the HLPF. However, it would not likely be a stand- 27 Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform, ‘Voluntary Na- tional Reviews Database’
cated political ministerial segment, high-level minis- tation of the SDGs.45 Through their VNR presenta- terial dialogues or roundtables), a presidential state- tions, countries can share that information and ex- ment or final report, a summary of key messages, a perienceonanindividualbasis.TheRegionalForums decision by the COP serving as meeting of the Par- on Sustainable Development further offer an oppor- ties to the Paris Agreement, or a formal declaration.40 tunity for countries to share lessons learned, best A combination of the above is also possible. Given practices, and challenges in implementation.46 that the stated purpose of the outcome of the global To promote the exploration, analysis, and use of stocktake is to ‘inform Parties in updating and en- authoritative SDG data sources for evidence-based hancing […] their actions and support’ and to influ- decision-making and advocacy by Member States, ence the next round of NDCs, Parties will have to con- the Open SDG Data Hub serves as a repository for of- sider which outcome or combination of outcomes ficial SDG data and Member States’ own open data will best achieve these purposes.41 sites (where available). Its goal is transparent access to enable data providers, managers, and users to bet- ter see and communicate trends and relationships 6. Technical Expert Input out of the wealth of technical information.47 UNFCCCPartiesareexploringoptionsforsupport- Composed of Member States and including regional ing databases or platforms for the global stocktake. and international agencies as observers, the Inter- One possible template is the platform for the Talanoa Agency Expert Group on SDG Indicators (IAEG- Dialogue, which publicly stores Party and non-Party SDGs) was established to develop and implement the submissions in response to the three guiding ques- global indicator framework for the SDGs. The Group tions upon which the Dialogue is framed: ‘Where are then formed three technical working groups to ad- we?’, ‘Where do we want to go?’, and ‘How do we get dress specific areas relevant to indicator implemen- there?’48 Parties could choose to be economical, con- tation: Statistical Data and Metadata Exchange, Geo- sidering the number of registries that will be estab- spatial Information, and Interlinkages. Each group lished under the Paris Agreement. For example, the is responsible for their own work plans, methods of Agreement calls for an NDC registry to house NDCs49 work, coordination with other partners and reports and an adaptation registry to house Parties’ adapta- on their progress at each of the IAEG-SDGs meet- tion communications.50 If mediated input like syn- ings.42 thesis reports will aggregate these sources, yet anoth- As noted above, UNFCCC Parties have called for er registry or platform may not be useful unless it the inclusion of IPCC reports in the global stock- houses additional information that will need to be take.43 A number of Parties also want to replicate or considered by the global stocktake. repurpose the Structured Expert Dialogue (SED) that was conducted from 2013-2015 to ensure the scien- tific integrity of the 2013-2015 review of the agreed 40 Draft Conclusions Proposed by the Co-Chairs (n 15) 128-129. long-term global goal to reduce greenhouse gas emis- 41 Paris Agreement (n 1) art 14(3). sions to hold the global average temperature below 42 United Nations Statistics Division, ‘IAEG-SDGs: Inter-agency and 2°C above pre-industrial levels. The SED considered Expert Group on SDG Indicators’
UNFCCC Parties also expect that active engage- to-face exchanges of views between over 70 experts ment in the global stocktake process will facilitate and Parties over the course of four sessions and was knowledge- and experience-sharing. Under the Paris well-received by Parties.53 A final report summarized Agreement’s enhanced transparency framework, discussions and technical information. UNFCCC Parties will be able to engage with one an- other on their individual NDCs through a facilitative, multilateral consideration of process.51 Most likely 8. Non-State Actor Participation modelled on the current multilateral assessments and facilitative sharing of views for developed and The international climate community has increasing- developing countries, it could consist of a peer ques- ly recognized the need for all actors to work towards tions-and-answers session. However, the means by a better future. While the 2030 Agenda underlines which Parties can engage and learn from one anoth- that governments carry the primary responsibility to er during the global stocktake is yet to be determined. implement the SDGs, it also states that the scope and In May 2018, the first Talanoa Dialogue event of ambition of the Agenda requires countries and con- the year provided a mix of Parties, intergovernmen- cerned stakeholders to work together in the imple- tal organizations and non-state actors the opportuni- mentation and follow-up processes.54 Non-state ac- ty to literally have a dialogue in small groups, struc- tors in the SDG process are generally limited to the tured around the three guiding questions. These con- role of observer but can be involved in the SDG versations took place over seven parallel sessions in process in other ways. a single day.52 Replicating these intimate conversa- The UN launched the Partnerships for the SDGs tions on a larger scale while still addressing all the online platform as a tool to inform businesses, orga- workstreams of the global stocktake process would nizations and individuals, and to encourage global be costly, both in terms of time and expense to Par- partnerships around the goals. Non-Member stake- ties and the UNFCCC secretariat. holders can find information on initiatives imple- Another possibility is that a SED-like process could mented as a result of global partnerships and com- provide an opportunity for Parties to engage with ex- mitments made to reach the SDGs.55 perts and stakeholders in a more structured and fo- The voluntary VNR guidelines encourage govern- cused setting. The SED consisted of fact-finding, face- ments to develop a stakeholder engagement plan, identifying key stakeholders across all sectors and levels of government, civil society, the private sector and others, and methods of engagement.56 In 2018, 51 ibid art 13(11). the UN experimented with so-called VNR Labs, 52 UNFCCC, ‘Summary of the Talanoa Dialogue at the May Ses- sions’ (May 2018)
How UNFCCC Parties envision the breadth and Parties are valuing early learning over early account- depth of stakeholder engagement in the global stock- ability. Both the UN and governments are learning take remains an important open question. The trend from their experience in this process and the empha- since the start of the Paris Agreement negotiations sis on doing so is encouraging openness and has been for greater involvement of civil society and change.63 A second observation is that embedding recognition of sub-national action. The establish- civil society and private sector involvement in the ment of an online portal cataloguing non-state ac- VNRs can improve self-reporting, understanding, tion, the appointment of Climate Champions, and and reduce duplicative and sometimes critical paral- promotion of the achievements of key sectors at high- lel processes.64 A third lesson is Parties are more will- level COP events, indicate a new respect for the role ing to be candid and open about challenges they face of civil society in effective and global climate ac- if discussed in a ‘safe space’. Countries may be less tion.60 willing to ask for help when opening themselves up If the Talanoa Dialogue is any indication, it is en- to criticism by civil society and media. A challenge tirely possible that non-state actors could have their is creating an open and balanced but facilitative en- voices heard in the global stocktake. A select, repre- vironment.65 The fourth realization is that the sentative, and carefully vetted group of non-party process needs to help countries move from plans to stakeholders was invited to participate in the paral- impact. Rather than simply restating existing or mod- lel dialogue sessions with negotiators and Party rep- est policies, the SDG process needs to incentivize resentatives at the May 2018 meeting in Bonn.61 A countries to leverage political support, economic re- similar channel for Party and stakeholder dialogue sources, and experiences to take real and significant could be established for the global stocktake. But Par- steps forward towards achieving their goals.66 ties do not envision that non-state actors will also par- Second, it will be important to see what nascent ticipate and interact with ministers at the conclusion lessons can be learned from the Talanoa Dialogue of the Talanoa Dialogue in December 2018 in process, which will conclude at COP 24. At the same Poland.62 For civil society to engage at such a high meeting, the modalities and guidelines for the glob- level would be singularly unique to any process un- al stocktake process will be adopted. Some early ob- der the Convention. servations can, however, be drawn from the May Ta- In the same spirit of inviting non-party experts to lanoa session. participate in technical working groups in the SDG The Talanoa Dialogue’s online platform, inclusive process, civil society could engage with Parties dialogues, and a ministerial level event at the COP through a SED-like process. The focus of the SED follow a similar structure to that proposed for the would limit the discussion to scientific and technical global stocktake. These dialogues featured a broad experts but allow for face-to-face exchanges between group of stakeholders that were able to engage with them and Parties.
60 David Wei, ‘Linking Non-State Action with the U.N. Framework IV. Lessons Learned Convention on Climate Change’ (C2ES October 2016)
one another on the three-question format.67 But sim- supplemented qualitative assessment because of lack ply planning for a bigger Talanoa Dialogue in 2023 of data, lack of quality data, or the inability to suffi- will neither be manageable nor fulfil the mandate of ciently aggregate the data provided. the global stocktake. Not all Parties felt comfortable With greater and regular participation, reporting engaging in candid dialogue and resorted to stock on greenhouse gas inventories in the UNFCCC statements avoiding the articulation of real chal- regime is likely sufficiently comprehensive and ro- lenges. Moreover, the three questions that frame the bust enough to reasonably assess progress on emis- Talanoa Dialogue are not enough to make a meaning- sions reductions. However, given the unique and spe- fulglobalassessmentofprogressonmitigation,adap- cific nature of adaptation and that the UNFCCC has tation, and support. Eliciting qualitative, narrative re- not previously measured Parties’ adaptation efforts, sponses to these broad questions will not provide a Parties will need to innovate or borrow how they will clear snapshot of global greenhouse gas emissions, measure progress towards the new global adaptation efforts to adapt to the impacts of climate change, fi- goal, like adopting adaptation indicators in order to nancial flows, and technical and other capacity-build- measure progress on adaptation. The SDG indicators ing support, nor address the Paris Agreement’s im- in adaptation-related areas like water or land (SDGs perative to take stock of Parties’ implementation in 14 and 15, respectively) could provide useful frames light of the best available science.68 of reference. Another way to integrate adaptation da- Reflections on these two processes can inform the ta could be to include regional reports, similar to how negotiations on the 2023 global stocktake, as well as the HLPF accepts regional information by the Re- later iterations, particularly on the key issues identi- gional Commissions. fied earlier in this article: How will the global stock- take assess collective progress towards the Paris Agreement’s LTGs? How will equity will be opera- 2. Operationalizing Equity tionalized? Has the Paris Agreement elaborated all necessary linkages between the global stocktake and The Paris Agreement, in establishing a global stock- other processes and how do Parties need to define take in Article 14(1), states that when the Parties as- those relationships? sess collective progress, they shall do so ‘in the light of equity’.69 Neither the Convention nor the Paris Agreement defines equity, and it is often used in con- 1. Assessing Collective Progress junction with or interchangeably with the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities (CB- The SDGs process relies on voluntary reporting DR), which distinguishes between developed and de- around sets of indicators. Quantification of some of veloping countries with respect to the climate chal- the information provided can provide a numerical lenge. This concept has, with some resistance, found assessment of progress but the UN Secretary-Gener- its way into the SDGs process, as well.70 The ways in al’s final report is still generally an independently which it is reflected take several forms. CBDR in the SDGs can be seen as operationalized in the voluntariness of reporting and because gov- 67 UNFCCC, ‘Talanoa Sessions’
phasizes the need to build capacity for developing ceived’ and a full overview of aggregate financial sup- countries.72 SDGs 1 and 5, eradicating poverty and port provided to inform the global stocktake.80 promoting gender equality respectively, also pro- However, the links between the transparency mote aspects of equity and mirror CBDR principles frameworks have yet to be made operationally clear. reflected in the Paris Agreement.73 Parties must tackle how individual mitigation, adap- UNFCCC Parties are still exploring how equity can tation, and financial data are submitted in a mean- be meaningfully reflected in the global stocktake ingful way to the stocktake. For example, if individ- process. Some Parties feel that equity is already cap- ual greenhouse gas inventories, adaptation commu- tured in the structure and the implementation of the nications, and financial reports are transmitted di- Paris Agreement, including in the preambular text rectly to the global stocktake, they will have to be fur- that asks Parties to ‘respect, promote and consider ther synthesized to make a global assessment. Alter- their respective obligations on human rights, the natively, Parties could decide that those inputs will right to health, the rights of indigenous peoples, lo- be aggregated by an assigned body and those synthe- cal communities, migrants, children, persons with sis reports transmitted to the global stocktake as in- disabilities and people in vulnerable situations, the puts. Parties have yet to articulate these roles and re- right to development, as well as gender equality, em- sponsibilities.81 powerment of women and intergenerational equi- The global stocktake could also potentially link to ty’.74 other processes not explicitly mentioned by the Paris Other Parties prefer for certain equity elements to Agreement. For example, Parties could decide that be highlighted, such as whether there will be suffi- reports from the Article 15 implementation and com- cient support for the participation of developing pliance mechanism could feed into the global stock- countries or an adequate balance between develop- take, informing Parties of gross or systematic non- ing and developed country participation in the glob- compliance issues.82 al stocktake.75 The global stocktake could play a role In the latter of these two issues, the SDGs and Paris in enabling donor countries to match with recipient Agreement processes may simply be far too dissim- countries where they demonstrate their need.76 Oth- ilar to draw comparable lessons. However, there are er Parties would prefer for equity to be measured, via other points of comparison that merit some consid- equity indicators or through an equity framework, eration. with possible reference to historical responsibility.77 Both processes encourage and rely on receiving Still other Parties have suggested that, because it will more and better data over time. In the introduction inform the ambition of future NDCs, the considera- to the Secretary-General’s 2018 SDGs report, he em- tion of equity in Parties’ NDCs should be assessed or phasizes that the ‘availability of quality, accessible, reported in some way.78 open, timely and disaggregated data is vital for evi- dence-based decision-making and the full implemen- tation of the 2030 Agenda […] To meet these data de- 3. Linkages
The structure of the SDGs process is such that Mem- 72 ibid 15, 18. bers’ voluntary reporting is designed to feed direct- 73 ibid 26-31. ly into the HLPF and the final report. By contrast, 74 Paris Agreement (n 1) preamble. UNFCCC Parties have yet to fully define all the chan- 75 Draft Conclusions Proposed by the Co-Chairs (n 15) 123-124. nels and modalities by which information may flow 76 ibid 128, 130. into the global stocktake. The Paris Agreement makes 77 ibid 131. clear that the purpose of the framework for trans- 78 ibid 127. parency of action is ‘to provide a clear understand- 79 Paris Agreement (n 1) art 13(5). 80 ibid art 13(6). ing of climate action’ against its LTGs, including 81 For instance, it is clear that the transparency process will feed progress towards achievement of Parties’ NDCs and into the global stocktake but how that information will be aggre- their adaptation actions to inform the global stock- gated and who will do it has yet to be determined. Draft Conclu- sions Proposed by the Co-Chairs (n 15) 123, 125-126. take.79 The framework for transparency of support 82 Paris Agreement (n 1) art 15; Draft Conclusions Proposed by the is to ‘provide clarity on support provided and re- Co-Chairs (n 15) 133. CCLR 3|2018 227
mands there is an urgent need to strengthen the ca- to do so. Member States are encouraged but not oblig- pacities of national statistical systems.’ 83 Without ro- ed to take forward lessons from the HLPF and report bust information, it is difficult to ascertain whether into their policy planning and monitoring processes. countries are individually or collectively meeting The outcome of the global stocktake, however, their targets. Both processes also accept that many should have significant gravity: it is meant to ‘inform countries, especially developing countries with less Parties in updating and enhancing, in a nationally or limited capacity, will struggle with reporting reg- determined manner, their actions and support […], as ularly and robustly. They recognize the need to build well as enhancing international cooperation for cli- their capacity to improve their reporting over time. mate action’.87 This event, intended to occur every The Paris Agreement also places a strong empha- five years, ought to enhance the ambition of Parties’ sis on building domestic capacity for reporting and next NDCs, which will account for the next five or review and the current negotiations on the modali- ten years of their efforts under the climate regime. ties, procedures and guidelines for the enhanced These NDCs, in turn, will have a substantial impact transparency framework reiterate the Agreement’s on domestic litigation and policy, business and cor- vision of improvement over time.84 To help develop- porate planning and decision-making, multilateral ing countries, the Agreement established the Paris partnerships, and global financial flows. Such an Committee on Capacity-Building to facilitate capaci- event will require a host of resources and political ty-building generally85 and the Capacity Building Ini- capital that should be spent strategically on a process tiative for Transparency, specifically to ‘build institu- meant to be a regular and powerful driver to greater tional and technical capacity’ for developing coun- global action and support over time. tries to meet the enhanced transparency require- ments and to ‘assist in the improvement of trans- parency over time’.86 V. The SDGs/HLPF and Global Arguably, hosting the HLPF every year, even if at Stocktake: Complementary versus the head of state level every few years, diminishes the Distinct Processes political impact of the SDG outcomes, as compared to the global stocktake. The HLPF culminates annu- Given the differences between the two processes, can ally in a public event and UN Secretary-General re- they become complementary? A number of actors port. All of the SDGs are not reviewed every year and haveconsideredthispossibility,88 recommendingthe only those Parties that wish to be reviewed volunteer alignment of adaptation under the Paris Agreement and UNFCCC with related SDG indicators, as well as the indicators in the Sendai Framework on Disaster 83 ECOSOC (n 21) para 4. Risk Reduction, a 15-year, voluntary, non-binding 84 Draft Conclusions Proposed by the Co-Chairs (n 15) 55, 58, 68. agreement to reduce disaster risk and losses in lives, 85 Decision 1/CP.21 (n 13) para 71. livelihoods and health.89 In a recent expert meeting 86 ibid para 85(c). with Parties and in a technical paper, the UNFCCC 87 Paris Agreement (n 1) art 14(3). Secretariat and the Adaptation Committee have ex- 88 China, ‘China’s Input on Talanoa Dialogue’ (UNFCCC Talanoa Dialogue Platform 2 April 2018) 5
Both the SDGs and global stocktake processes will stocktake down to specifics. Cycles need to be defined continually evolve as countries improve their report- and ways to aggregate the vast amounts of informa- ing,incorporatemorerobustdata,andtweakprocess- tion must be determined. Although the Talanoa Dia- es and outputs to make them fit for purpose: obtain- logue has yet to conclude and elements of the SDG ing the information necessary to determine whether process are unique in their own right, Parties can be- countries are making actual and effective progress gin to draw on their parallels and any early lessons towards global goals. Both processes emphasize the they offer as they consider now what key features to need for better governance and information manage- include in the modalities, rules, and guidelines to be ment systems, which call for better intergovernmen- decided at the December 2018 climate conference in tal coordination, the mainstreaming of climate Katowice, Poland. change action and sustainable development, and the All need not be decided in one go. Parties can and reframing of priorities of ‘non-climate’ ministries likely should further evolve and fine-tune the process and departments to fall in line with or complement in the future. Given that the Paris Agreement asks climate change laws and policies. Parties could begin governments to endeavour to continuously improve to look to the long-term integration of aspects of both over time, negotiations on the global stocktake are regimes to enhance coherence and reduce redundan- unlikely to be finished in their entirety in Katowice. cies over time. TheBonninformalnotesindicatethatPartiesarecon- sidering how and when they want to revisit modali- ties of the stocktake, such as refining its procedural VI. Conclusion and logistical elements on the basis of experience and reviewing and updating the list of inputs to the stock- The Paris Agreement’s global stocktake is a unique take, as appropriate, two years prior to the next glob- multilateral review process, incorporating increas- al stocktake.92 Like other reviews in the UNFCCC, ingly regular and robust individual country reports Parties can decide to dedicate regular moments to re- and internationally vetted scientific data to make an visit and update key aspects of the mechanism, tak- assessment of global progress towards the goals of ing into account, for instance, experience gained and the Agreement. It is a crucial feature of the facilita- the latest science. tive accountability framework underpinning the The global stocktake is a key piece of the founda- careful balance between top-down obligations and tion for the Paris framework. The modalities decid- bottom-up national determination that sets the ed in Katowice this year will lay the groundwork for Agreement apart from other conventionally punitive a process that can carry forward the current political international accords. In taking stock of collective ac- momentum and contribute to defining the legacy of tion and progress, and sharing challenges, lessons the Paris Agreement, ultimately giving it the robust- learned, and successes, it further lays the foundation ness, ambition, and durability that Parties envisioned for greater ambition, collaboration, and improve- in Paris. ment over time. At COP 24, Parties will need to narrow the broad outlines of how they currently envision the global 92 Draft Conclusions Proposed by the Co-Chairs (n 15) 124 and 130.