29 September 1998

ENGLISH ONLY

UNITED NATIONS FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE

CONFERENCE OF THE PARTIES^*

Fourth session

Buenos Aires, 2-13 November 1998

Item 4 (a) (i) of the provisional agenda

1. At its eighth session, the Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI) considered the issue of submission of third and subsequent national communications by Annex I Parties. It invited Parties to submit their views on this item by 1 September 1998 and requested the secretariat to compile them for consideration at its ninth session.

2. Two submissions have been received.^** In accordance with the procedure for

miscellaneous documents, these submission are attached and are reproduced in the language in which they were received and without formal editing.

^* Including the ninth sessions of the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice and the Subsidiary Body for Implementation.

^** In order to make these submissions available on electronic systems, including the World Wide Web, these contributions have been electronically scanned and/or retyped. The secretariat has made every effort to ensure the correct reproduction of the texts as submitted.

FCCC/CP/1998/MISC.8

GE.98-

Paper No. Page

1. Austria (on behalf of the European Community and its member 3

States)

2. Philippines 4

Austria, on behalf of the European Community and its Member States, wishes to express its views on the question of the subsequent national communications, as requested by the SBI at its eighth session.

Firstly, the EU fully endorses the Secretariat's exhortation that annual inventory data should be submitted by 15 April each year. This data will become increasingly important as we move closer to the start of the 2008-2012 commitment period. The EU welcomes the Secretariat's intention to make each Party's data available in electronic form. The EU also looks forward to the Secretariat's annual report on inventories in years when no compilation and synthesis of national communications is produced and to the proposed compilation and synthesis of second national communications for consideration at COP 4.

On the scheduling of the third and subsequent national communications, the EU can see the advantage of maintaining the present frequency. However, for the third communication from Annex I Parties we see greater advantage in setting the date in 2001 for all Annex I Parties including those with economies in transition. This would allow Parties to provide information on the results of their efforts to return greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by the end of the present decade, in accordance with Article 4.2(a) and (b) of the Convention. It would also enable revised FCCC reporting guidelines on Annex I communications, which the EU believes should be adopted at COP5, to be used. The fourth communication should be due not later than the end of 2005 and provide information for the consideration of targets for the second commitment period which Article 3.9 of the Protocol requires to be initiated not later than that year. A subsequent communication required after the year 2005 could be used to demonstrate progress in achieving commitments under the Kyoto Protocol, in accordance with Article 3.2 of the Protocol.

Recognising that the above approach will make the periods between communications longer, the EU could support the Secretariat's proposal that, in addition to annual inventory data, Parties could be asked to submit information on other appropriate areas, as designated by the COP, such as information under Article 2.1(b) or on progress in implementing Article 10 of the Protocol.

Finally, on the question of in-depth reviews, the EU welcomes the inclusion of additional experts from non-Annex I Parties in teams reviewing second national communications from Annex I Parties, as a result of proposed additional funding. The EU also welcomes the progress made so far in reviewing communications but expects that, as we move closer to the 2008-2012 commitment period, it will be necessary to strengthen the process.

1. The Philippines finds that the in-depth reviews did not fully comply with the requirements of the Convention, as given in Article 12.2 (a) and (b), Article 12.3, and as mandated to the SBI in Article 10.2(b). These articles require a review of a "detailed description of the policies and measures ...to implement commitments under Article 4.2.(a) and 2(b)", as well as the review of "a specific estimate of the effects that the policies and measures referred to in sub-para (a) on anthropogenic emissions referred to in Article 4.2 (a).

Article 4.2 (a) states that "these policies and measures will demonstrate that developed countries are taking the lead in modifying longer-term trends in anthropogenic emissions..."

2. Annex I communications should continue to be reviewed in-depth in this manner as provided for in the Convention, separately from their specific reports on compliance with their targets in the Kyoto Protocol when the Protocol does enter into force.

The choice and criteria for choice of members of in-depth review teams should likewise be made with these articles and review objective in mind.

3. The Philippines also urges that, in view of recent developments in the Convention, a thorough review of information on Article 12.3 of the Convention should be made. For this information must be clear and verifiable as presented in subsequent Annex I communications.

This would also assist on the second and subsequent reviews of adequacy of Article 4.2(a) and (b) of the Convention, and in which the first of these reviews resulted in the adoption of the Kyoto Protocol.