Subscribe
Stockholm Conference 1972
The United Nations Conference on the Human Environment (also known as the Stockholm Conference) was an international conference convened under United Nations auspices held in Stockholm, Sweden from June 5-16, 1972. It was the UN’s first major conference on international environmental issues, and marked a turning point in the development of international environmental politics.One of the key issues addressed was the use of CFCs (haloalkanes), which seemed to be responsible for the depletion of the ozone layer. Global warming was mentioned, but in this matter nothing of substance was achieved at this Conference.The Stockholm Conference laid framework for future environmental cooperation; led to the creation of global and regional environmental monitoring networks and the creation of the United Nations Environment Programme.
First World Climate Conference 1979
The First World Climate Conference identified climate change as an urgent world problem and issued a declaration calling on governments to anticipate and guard against potential climate hazards. A World Climate Programme was set up, steered by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the International Council of Scientific Unions (ICSU).
Toronto Conference and Establishment of IPCC 1988
The Toronto Conference on the Changing Atmosphere advanced public debate, when more than 340 participants from 46 countries all recommended developing a comprehensive global framework convention to protect the atmosphere. The World Meterological Organisation (WMO) and UNEP established the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), to assess the magnitude and timing of changes of climate, estimate their impacts and present strategies for how to respond.
Second World Climate Conference 1990
The IPCC published the First Assessment Report on the state of the global climate, which had a potent effect on policy makers and on public opinion. The Second World Climate Conference met in Geneva in November, and, unlike the 1979 Climate Conference, included ministers as well as scientists.The Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee for a Framework Convention on Climate Change (INC) was established under the auspices of the General Assembly to negotiate the Convention text.
United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) Rio de Janeiro (Earth Summit) 1992
The major outcome of the Rio convention were primarily the ‘Earth Summit Agreements’ which included-
•Agenda 21 — a comprehensive programme of action for global action in all areas of sustainable development
•The Rio Declaration on Environment and Development — a series of principles defining the rights and responsibilities of States
•The Statement of Forest Principles — a set of principles to underlie the sustainable management of forests worldwide
•The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)
•The Convention on Biological Diversity
Most countries joined the international treaty – the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) – to begin to consider what can be done to reduce global warming and to cope with whatever temperature increases are inevitable. UNFCCC thus commenced its proceedings with the annual Conference of Parties (COP) from 1995.
COP1 Berlin 1995
The first Conference of the Parties was marked by uncertainty as to which means the individual countries possessed to combat greenhouse gas emissions. This resulted in “The Berlin Mandate”, which set a two-year analysis and evaluation phase. This phase was to result in a catalogue of instruments from which the member countries could choose and thereby compose a set of initiatives that matched their needs.
Political outcome: It launched a process to decide on stronger commitments for Annex I Parties.
COP2 Geneva 1996
The second Conference of the Parties endorsed the results of the IPCC’s second assessment report, which came out in 1995. At this conference it was established that member countries would not pursue uniform solutions. Each country should have the freedom to find the solutions that were most relevant to its own situation. At the Geneva conference the parties also expressed a wish for binding targets to be defined in the medium-term future.
Political outcome: Renewed the momentum of the Kyoto Protocol negotiations (taken note of, but not adopted)
COP3 Kyoto 1997
At this conference the Kyoto Protocol was adopted after intense negotiations. For the first time the protocol introduced binding targets for greenhouse gas emissions in 37 industrialised countries from 2008 to 2012. Subsequently there were several years of uncertainty as to whether a sufficient number of countries would ratify the treaty, but on 16 February 2005 it came into force. Several of the member countries of the UNFCCC have not ratified the Kyoto Protocol and do not acknowledge its requirements regarding emissions.
Political outcome: Set legally binding targets and timetables for cutting the greenhouse gas emissions of Annex I Parties.
COP4 Buenos Aires 1998
At this conference it became clear that there were several outstanding questions regarding the Kyoto Protocol. A two-year period was therefore scheduled to clarify and develop tools for implementing the Kyoto Protocol.
Political outcome: Set out Programme of work on issues under the Protocol; Established deadline for completion as COP 6 in 2000.
COP5 Bonn 1999
This conference was dominated by technical discussions concerning mechanisms under the Kyoto Protocol.
Political outcome: Held “exchange of views” on selected topics during high-level segment (seen as mid point toward COP 6)
COP6 The Hague 2000 (Part I of COP6)
This conference was quickly marked by vehement political discussions concerning a proposal from the USA to let agricultural and forest areas be included as carbon sinks. If the proposal had been passed, it would at the same time have largely fulfilled the USA’s obligation to reduce its emissions of greenhouse gases. It also became clear that there was uncertainty as to which opportunities for sanctions should be adopted for the countries that did not live up to their obligations to reduce emissions. The meeting ended when the EU countries refused a compromise proposal, and the negotiations in reality broke down. It was agreed that negotiations would be resumed at an extraordinary conference in July 2001.
COP6 Bis Bonn 2001(Part II of COP6)
When the parties met again about six months after the breakdown of negotiations in The Hague, expectations of a result were not high. In the meantime the USA – under its new President Bush – had definitively rejected the Kyoto Protocol and accordingly only took part in negotiations about the protocol as an observer. Despite the low level of expectations, agreement was reached on several significant questions. These included the extent to which forests and other carbon sinks could be included in countries’ budgets for greenhouse gas emissions; the principles for sanctions relating to countries that did not meet their targets, and the flexible mechanisms that in different ways enabled reduction obligations to be moved between countries in return for financial compensation.
Political outcome: Part I of COP6 couldn’t reach an agreement.Part II reached the Bonn Agreement (political package). Between Part I and Part II, the US announced that it would not ratify the Kyoto Protocol.
COP7 Marrakesh 2001
Later in 2001 the parties met again for the regular annual conference. Here negotiations concerning the Kyoto Protocol were (almost) completed. The results were gathered in the documents called the Marrakesh Accords.
Political outcome: Translated Bonn Agreement into decisions setting out detailed rules for the implementation of the Protocol and took important steps toward implementation of the Convention.
COP8 Delhi 2002
At this conference the EU countries (under Danish chairmanship) tried unsuccessfully to get a declaration passed which called for more action from the parties under the UNFCCC.
Political outcome: Reaffirmed development and poverty eradication as overriding priorities in developing countries and highlighted the importance of adaptation.
COP9 Milan 2003
The focus of this conference was to clear up some of the last technical details concerning the Kyoto Protocol.
Political outcome: No concrete political outcome
COP10 Buenos Aires 2004
At this meeting the countries gradually began to open discussions as to what would happen when the Kyoto Protocol expired in 2012. The technical discussions still took up a lot of time.
Political outcome: Calls for action on issues to address the adverse effects of climate change and response measures; seminar to promote an informal exchange of information on mitigation and adaptation, and on policies and measures.
COP11/CMP1 Montreal 2005
This conference was the first one to take place after the Kyoto Protocol had come into force. Accordingly the annual meeting between the parties to the UNFCCC (COP) was supplemented by the annual conference between the parties to the Kyoto Protocol (CMP or COP/MOP). The countries that had ratified the UNFCCC but not accepted the Kyoto Protocol had observer status at the latter conference. The focus of both conferences was what should happen after the expiry of the Kyoto Protocol in 2012.
Political outcome: Under the protocol, a new working group was established to discuss future commitments for developed countries for the period after 2012. Under the Convention, a dialogue on long term global cooperative action to address climate change was also launched. Parties to the Kyoto Protocol also formally adopted the “rulebook” of the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, the so called “Marrakesh Accords”, which sets the framework for implementation of the Protocol.
COP12/CMP2 Nairobi 2006
Here the last remaining technical questions regarding the Kyoto Protocol were finally answered. The work involved in reaching a new agreement for the period after Kyoto continued, and a series of milestones were established in the process towards a new agreement.
Political outcome: The programme was adopted by the SBSTA and subsequently renamed by the COP. Decisions related to financial flows were adopted and the two Montreal processes made progress.
COP13/CMP3 Bali 2007
At this meeting the work involved in reaching a new agreement to replace the Kyoto Protocol.It took a decisive step forward-first with the acknowledgement of the most recent report from the IPCC and its conclusions that the signs of global warming were unambiguous; second by formulating a common text calling for quicker action in this area, and finally with the adoption of the Bali Action Plan. This plan sets the scene for the negotiations leading to COP15 in Copenhagen, where a new agreement can hopefully be negotiated.
Political outcome: Includes a no. of forward looking decisions that represent the various tracks. It includes the Bali Action Plan, which charts the course for a new negotiating process designed to tackle climate change, with the aim of completing this by 2009.
COP14/CMP4 Poznan 2008
At this conference the work towards a new global climate agreement in Copenhagen continued. The upcoming change of power in Washington set its mark on the conference, that was characterised by anticipation for the stance to be adopted by new American government. Still the parties reached an agreement on the work programme and meeting plan towards the Copenhagen conference and on the final operationalisation of the Adaptation Fund, that will support concrete adaptation measures in the least developed countries.
Political Outcome: A remarkable progress was made on Adaptation Fund though there were no other significant breakthroughs.
COP15/CMP5 Copenhagen 2009
The last hour deal named as Copenhagen Accord contained no specifics on emissions cuts, but it did commit the countries to look to keep global warming at 2°C or less and to promise $30 billion for adaptation and mitigation between 2010 and 2012 for the most vulnerable countries, including a “Copenhagen Climate Fund”.It also included aims to create medium-term financial mechanism that will be able to provide US$100 billion every year to the developing countries from the year 2020. It also created a framework for international transparency on climate actions for developed and developing nations alike.As part of the accord, developed and developing countries would list their national actions and mechanisms for addressing climate change, then provide information on those actions, and how well they’re carried out, through “national communications, with provisions for international consultations and analysis under clearly defined guidelines.In this accord,a reference to an end-2010 deadline for reaching a legally binding treaty was removed in contrast to legally binding Kyoto Protocol.
Political Outcome: The Copenhagen Accord is said to have at least opened the door for a future agreement in COP16, bringing US and China,the two major polluters,to a transparent commitment.
To be clear about the technical terms used throughout the text, Click Here
Very good information.