HOW TO (NOT) TALK ABOUT THE GLOBAL STOCKTAKE
Among the main areas of negotiation being worked on in Bonn are the talks on the Global Stocktake, the five-year inventory of national climate commitments. At the end of the first week, the delegations had met only four times for informal consultations, and progress had been very limited. However, it was not the lack of time that produced few results, but rather the ongoing disagreement between the Parties.
One of the tables discussing the Global Stocktake here in Bonn is the one dealing with defining the procedures and logistical elements of the Global Stocktake process as a whole (19/CMA1 para. 5). At COP29, it was not possible to reach agreement on the negotiating text, which was postponed to the June negotiations here in Bonn. After a week, however, we are still at square one.
During the meetings over the next few days, the Parties aim to continue improving the GST process, to keep it up to date and in line with needs. The five-year inventory does not have its own rigid procedure.
The most difficult issue concerns the science behind climate targets. The Paris Agreement clearly states the need to use what it defines as the best available science, which has so far been identified in the IPCC reports. However, for years, some delegations have been trying to insert a key word into the text: “balance”. The Russian Federation and the Like-Minded Developing Countries, led by Saudi Arabia and supported by China, would like to see a “balance” between IPCC and non-IPCC sources: a method of weakening the solid foundations of science and discrediting what some actors refer to as the IPCC’s “alarmism” about the link between fossil fuels and rising temperatures.
To overcome this deadlock, the facilitators proposed temporarily setting aside the issue and moving on to other points of greater disagreement in an attempt to resolve at least those. In fact, at COP29, other issues also blocked the work on this table, in particular:
- the possibility of requesting the IPCC to produce its next report, AR7, with a timeline aligned with the next Global Stocktake, in order to assess the climate goals of nations based on the most up-to-date science possible;
- the possibility of adding new areas of interest, such as loss and damage and just transition;
- the possibility of introducing follow-up mechanisms for GST2, which will take place in 2028 at COP33;
- the duration of this table itself: being a technical negotiation, should it be concluded before the start of the political discussion around GST2? Or can they proceed in parallel?
The introduction of new topics is provided for in paragraph 15 of the text on which the Parties were negotiating in Baku, and, as can be seen from the square brackets indicating disagreement, the issue has stalled there. We will need to follow the work in the coming days to see how – and if – the discussions evolve.
Article by Anna Pelicci, head of the Italian Climate Network delegation in Bonn.
Cover image: photo by Anna Pelicci