Under the Bali Action Plan, the nationally appropriate mitigation actions of developing countries are to be supported and enabled by technology transfer (paragraph 1 (b) (ii)). Furthermore, under 1 (d) there is agreement for “enhanced action on technology development and transfer to support action on mitigation and adaptation”.
Quick summaryThis is a highly divided terrain. The G-77 countries want to create an instutitional arrangement to facilitate technology transfer and development under the rubric of unfccc.
China calls it the Multilateral technology Acquisition Fund; India calls it the Multilateral Climate Technology Fund. By contrast, the EU and the US suggest the scope of the issue goes beyond the UNFCCC, and demand efforts taken outside be recognised.
The US believes new institutions under the UNFCCC are not required; the EU is all for ‘voluntary co-operative technology-oriented agreements’.
Smelling an opportunity to push its Cool Earth programme (a technology roadmap for 21 innovative technologies), Japan is enthusiastic about the issue, but has a devastating rider: to support actions by developing countries, it wants ‘sectoral sub-groups with the participation of private sectors’.
It is clear that negotiations will revolve around the visible reluctance of the developed world to share technology via transfer. This attitude is most visible in the differing vocabulary used: the EU, for instance, wishes technology transfer to be limited to ‘research, development and demonstration’; India, for instance, also wants ‘manufacture, commercialization, deployment and diffusion’ of technologies.
It is also clear that the question of intellectual property rights (IPR) related to environmentally sound technologies (ESTs) will be debated; as always, without agreement.
China (September 28, 2008)A subsidiary body under the Convention should be established by the COP for the development and transfer of technologies as an operational and implementing body.
The aim of the financial mechanism supporting the development, transfer and deployment of technology is to develop private partnerships by linking public finance with carbon markets, capital market and technology market and in this way, leveraging large amounts of private finance using smaller public finance.
The existing Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) system does not match the increasing needs for accelerating the development, transfer and deployment of environmentally sound technologies (ESTs) to meet the challenge of climate change.
Sector-specific action will enhance the implementation of article 4.1 (c) of the convention. To this end, priority areas should be identified sector by sector and technology by technology and considered for technology development, transfer and deployment.
India (October 17, 2008)An Executive body on Technology should be established as a subsidiary body of the Convention under the authority and guidance of the COP and be accountable to it.
A Multilateral Climate Technology Fund (MCTF), financed by assessed contributions from Annex I parties, should be established under the COP as part of the enhanced multilateral financial mechanism.
Financial transfers to the Fund will be counted as measurable, reportable and verifiable commitments under para 1 (b) (ii) of the Bali Action Plan. Any funding on technology not under the authority and guidance of the UNFCCC shall not be regarded as the fulfillment of commitments by developed countries.
A three-year technology action plan will serve as a starting point for the work of the executive body. It will include specify policies and actions, with regards to the following:
Brazil (September 30, 2008)
It is important to bear in mind that the extent of actions by developing countries will depend on the level of financial and technological support that they receive from developed countries. The Bali Action Plan adds that the technological support from developed countries should be measurable, reportable and verifiable.
A new mechanism should be created under the Convention to address these issues, as suggested by G77.
EU (misc.2)The EU underlines that the scope of the technology challenges stretches beyond the remit of the UNFCCC alone. A future climate change agreement should acknowledge the efforts undertaken outside the Convention.
An enhanced Framework on technology for mitigation and adaptation should include agreement by:
There should be sector technology oriented agreements, to guide and regulate technology related cooperation within and outside UNFCCC is areas like, energy efficiency related standards, large scale demonstration projects etc.
Japan (August 13, 2008)Considering the importance of innovative technology and the urgency with which these technologies must be developed by around 2030, UNFCCC must promote its acceleration. Investment in energy technology has been stagnant since, its peak of 1980s.
Japan has announced investment of US$ 30 billion over the next five years. It has a technology roadmap for 21 innovative technologies under its Cool Earth programme.
Similarly, developed country government’s must strive to meet the commitments made at the G-8 Hokkaido Toyako summit to spend US$ 10 billion over the next several years in government funded research and development.
In order to support the actions by developing countries, sectoral sub-groups should be established with the participation of private sectors. The result of the examination of issues by the sub-groups will assist technology transfer under the financial mechanism.
US (misc.5)Enhancing financial and technology promotion tools does not necessarily mean creating new institutions under the UNFCCC. Wants the Convention to take in to account technology activity outside the Convention (Asia Pacific Forum, Clean Technology Fund etc).
Wants developing countries to reform institutions and create enabling environment to attract private funds for getting ESTs.
Says many non-Annex I Parties, and in particular the major emerging economies, have a level of financial and technical capacity far greater than two decades ago. Expects these countries to contribute towards improving technology through their own policies and resources.
Mechanisms to address intellectual property right issue were proposed by Parties, including:
(a) Appropriate mechanisms to promote actions leading to technology development, deployment, diffusion, and transfer taking into account intellectual property issues (Argentina, MISC.1); a suitable intellectual property rights (IPR) regime for accessing technologies owned by the private sector in developed countries (India, technology workshop);
(b) An innovative IPR sharing arrangement for joint development of ESTs (China, MISC.5), considering criteria on compulsory licensing for related patented ESTs (China, MISC.5; India, sectoral approach workshop; Brazil, technology workshop);
(c) Mechanisms to strengthen legal and economic institutions to promote the protection and enforcement of IPR, promote competitive and open markets for ESTs, and provide a well-defined, efficient and transparent system of contract enforcement (United States, technology workshop);
(d) Ways to examine the benefits of innovation protection systems and how joint R&D collaboration among developed and developing Parties could instil IPR and bring cobenefits such as endogenous technology development (Canada, MISC.1/Add.2);
(e) Mechanisms to ensure protection of IPR and guarantee access to and use of technologies by avoiding over-protectionism (Ghana, MISC.2/Add.1).
On the strategy on disbursement of financial resources, Parties proposed: