negotiation watcher > legal outcome
Possible outcomes for the future commitments could have been:
- a Decision of the Parties;
- an Amendment:
- of the UNFCCC
- of the Kyoto Protocol
- of Annexes to the UNFCCC or the Kyoto Protocol;
- a new Protocol.
Because of the very important consequences of this outcome, the debate is quite heated and shows two opposite positions: on the one hand, developed countries ask for a new protocol to include a commitment also by the developing world, on the other hand, developing countries call for an amendment of the Annex B to the Kyoto Protocol (Annex I to the Convention) that holds industrialized nations to binding commitments but allows developing nations to reduce emissions on a voluntary basis.
Despite the efforts made by countries to reach a common position, the outcome in 2009 in Copenhagen was a decision of Parties, namely a political instrument that does not establish new legal obligations but only further political commitments. In addition, the COP-15 did not adopt the Copenhagen Accord but only took note of it.
The Cancún Agreements, despite bringing the essential elements of the Copenhagen Accord back into the UNFCCC negotiation process, do not solve the issues concerning the legal nature of the future agreement. In particular, the legal status of both mitigation and financial pledges remains undefined. To clarify this matter, the mandate of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action has been extended for another year.
