Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Action

NAMA - N ationally A ppropriate M itigation A ction (in German: nationally appropriate mitigation measure ) is a concept for climate action in developing countries , which under the since 2007 UNFCCC is discussed.

Central characteristics of NAMA (according to Bali Action Plan )

The concept is mentioned for the first time in the Bali Action Plan , which the contracting states of the Framework Convention on Climate Change negotiated at the 2007 climate negotiations in Bali . Paragraph 1 (b) (ii) defines NAMA as "a nationally appropriate mitigation measure by the contracting parties that are developing countries, in the context of sustainable development, supported and enabled by technology, funding and capacity building, in a measurable, reportable and verifiable manner;" These are the main characteristics of NAMAs:

Taking into account national conditions and distinct from obligations ( commitments ) of industrialized countries

Linking with the goals of sustainable development: The mitigation measures must be carried out in the context of sustainable development . This means that they have to be embedded in broader (national) strategies for the implementation of ecological, social and economic goals.

Support from industrialized countries: The industrialized countries should support the development and implementation of NAMAs technologically and financially, and capacity building should also be promoted.

Measurement, reporting and verification (MRV): The addition of measuring, reporting and verification ( Measurement, Reporting and Verification - MRV) is a key requirement, which itself also refers to both the mitigation measure as to their support.

The NAMAs in the international climate negotiations

According to the Bali Action Plan , the 2009 climate conference in Copenhagen (COP 15) should lead to an agreed outcome . Instead of the globally binding global climate agreement expected by many, however, the negotiations only ended with the Copenhagen Accord . This political declaration of intent could not be formally adopted by the Conference of the Parties due to opposition from individual countries, but was merely noted. For the further development of the NAMA concept and the further course of the NAMA negotiations, the Copenhagen Accord was of great importance despite its questionable status under international law: The text already contains references to the distinction between NAMAs that are internationally supported ( supported NAMAs ), and those that are carried out from their own resources ( domestic NAMAs ). The Copenhagen Accord also included an appendix ( Appendix 2 ) in which developing countries could enter their NAMAs.

At the climate negotiations in Cancun (COP 16) , these NAMAs were brought under the official umbrella of the UN . However, the voluntary nature of the NAMAs was maintained. In the Cancun Agreements , developing countries are requested to provide information on planned NAMAs on a voluntary basis (Decision 1 / CP.16, para 50).

In addition, further decisions were made in Cancun that are particularly important with regard to support in the development and implementation of NAMAs. The industrialized nations' pledge made in Copenhagen to provide US $ 100 billion annually in support for developing countries by 2020 was formally adopted. In addition, the signatory states agreed to set up the Green Climate Fund , which is to provide financial resources for adaptation and climate protection measures in developing countries. Another key decision is the decision to set up a registry for NAMAs ( NAMA Registry ). The NAMA Registry is designed to promote cooperation between countries in need of support for the implementation of NAMAs and donor countries and organizations. Other important requirements relate to the measurement, reporting and review of NAMAs.

In 2012, at the negotiation round in Durban ( COP 17 ), the signatory states agreed to develop the NAMA Registry as an internet-based platform administered by the Secretariat of the Framework Convention on Climate Change. Developing countries were also asked to provide more information on NAMAs. In Durban, the contracting parties also stipulated the guidelines according to which developing countries must report on their climate protection activities and how this information should be checked internationally. Both requirements are important in connection with MRV from NAMAs.

At the 18th climate conference in Doha (COP 18), the contracting states agreed to set up a work program to better understand the diversity of NAMAs and to advance the development and implementation of NAMAs. The work program is intended to collect and evaluate information and experience on NAMAs, the necessary support and the use of the NAMA register (Decision 1 / CP.18 para 19).

In Warsaw (2013), the contracting states adopted the MRV guidelines for NAMAs that are carried out without international support. In addition, the first interim results of the work program were presented, the final results of which are expected for the climate conference in Lima in December 2014 .

The variety of NAMAs

Numerous developing countries have entered their NAMAs in Appendix 2 of the Copenhagen Accord . The diversity of the measures proposed here reflects the breadth of the NAMA concept. The Maldives ' goal to achieve CO ₂ neutrality by 2020 is a NAMA, as is the sub-national projects announced by Ethiopia for the expansion of renewable energies .

Types

According to Sterk (2010), the NAMAs proposed for the Copenhagen Accord can be divided into five categories:

National emissions neutrality targets
National emission intensity targets
National emission targets in the sense of a deviation from a business as usual
Sectoral emissions targets
Specific actions at national or local level
Combinations of specific actions as well as an aggregated emissions target to be achieved with these actions.

This diversity of NAMAs results from the fact that the socio-economic conditions and the national goals for sustainable development that have to be taken into account in the development and implementation of NAMAs can vary greatly from country to country.

financing

Depending on the support, two different NAMAs can be distinguished:

domestic NAMA: As domestic NAMAs those measures are referred to by the developing country exclusively with our own resources are carried out.
supported NAMAs: Supported NAMAs are measures that are carried out with the help of external support. The distinction between NAMAs that are carried out with international support and those that are implemented without this help was formally adopted by the contracting states at the 2010 Cancun Climate Change Conference.

Measurement, reporting and verification (MRV)

According to the Bali Action Plan , both NAMAs and their support must be measurable, reportable and verifiable. In this context, “measuring” refers to the gathering of information on the progress of the NAMA and the effects. “Report” means the transparent and standardized compilation of this information. "Check" describes the checking of the information reported for completeness, consistency and reliability by an independent process. This is intended to increase the transparency of the measures and to strengthen trust between the contracting states.

The requirements for measuring, reporting and checking NAMAs are to be seen in the context of the general MRV requirements for developing countries. These stipulate that developing countries must prepare and submit national communications (NCs ) and biennial update reports (BURs ). For the least developed countries ( Least Developed Countries - LDCs ) and Small Island States ( Small Iceland Developing States but) there are no time constraints for submission of burs.

The review of the information submitted following the process of international consultation and analysis ( International Consultation and Analysis ). This calls for a team of international experts to carry out a technical analysis and draft a report. This will be discussed with the affected contracting party and completed before it is forwarded to the UNFCCC. The resulting additional costs are borne by the industrialized countries. Both in data collection and in the preparation of reports to get the developing countries of international support, including through the Global Environment Facility ( Global Environment Facility - GEF ) and a dedicated group of experts ( Consultative Group of Experts on National Communications from Parties not included in Annex I to the Convention - CGE ).

With regard to MRV of NAMAs, the Cancun Agreements stipulated that internationally supported NAMAs must be subjected to national as well as international measurement, reporting and verification. In the case of NAMAs that are carried out without international support ( domestic NAMAs ), on the other hand, only a national MRV is necessary (Decision 1 / CP.16, para 61, 62).

Domestic NAMAs

In 2012, it was decided at the climate conference in Doha to develop MRV guidelines for NAMAs that do not receive international support ( domestic NAMAs ). These guidelines were adopted at the climate conference in Warsaw at the end of 2013 (Decision 21 / CP.19). However, the application of the guidelines is voluntary and the information on how to set up an MRV system for domestic NAMAs is minimal. This follows the general view that NAMAs should be developed in a bottom-up process without being hindered by formal MRV requirements.

Supported NAMAs

So far, there are no detailed specifications of the international measurement, reporting and verification of internationally supported NAMAs ( supported NAMAs ). It is to be expected, however, that the promotion of NAMAs through bilateral and multilateral funding instruments will be linked to compliance with requirements that go beyond the requirements of the UNFCCC.

Existing funding measures for the implementation of NAMAs

So far, the development of NAMAs has mainly been supported, in particular through capacity building and technical assistance in designing the measures. However, initiatives that are geared towards supporting the implementation of NAMAs have so far been rare. A counter example is set up by Germany and the United Kingdom in December 2013. NAMA Facility ( NAMA Facility is). It is focused solely on the implementation of NAMAs. The NAMA Registry lists numerous other support initiatives. However, very few have so far explicitly supported the implementation of NAMAs or clearly communicated this intention.

In addition to these NAMA-specific funding measures, there are numerous other programs - e.g. B. to promote renewable energies and energy efficiency - which can also be used in the implementation of NAMAs, although they were not explicitly created for this purpose. In addition, the newly created Green Climate Fund, which has been operational since May 2014 and is currently being funded, is expected to play a central role in the financing of NAMAs.

Current state of development of NAMAs

In addition to the official NAMA registry of the UNFCCC, there are numerous other databases that provide information about the current state of development of NAMAs. One of these databases is the NAMA database run by Ecofys . It includes both planned measures and NAMAs that are already being implemented. In August 2014, the database comprised a total of 106 NAMAs, seven of which were being implemented. In the following, the central properties of the 106 NAMAs listed in the NAMA database are summarized .

Regional distribution: Latin America is particularly well represented with a share of 44%, while Asia is underrepresented with 16%. The proportion of Africa and the Middle East is comparatively high at 28%. The remaining 12% of the NAMA pipeline is in Europe.

Sectoral distribution: The majority (38%) of NAMAs are aimed at measures in energy supply. Other important sectors are waste management (17%), transport (15%) and buildings (13%).

Intervention level: The majority of NAMAs are set up at the national level (71%), while only a fraction (11%) address the subnational level.

Individual evidence

↑ UNFCCC (Ed.): Report of the Conference of the Parties on its thirteenth session, held in Bali from 3 to 15 December 2007 - Addendum, Part Two: Action taken by the Conference of the Parties at its thirteenth session . ( unfccc.int [PDF; 264 kB ]).
↑ ^a ^b UNFCCC (Ed.): Report of the Conference of the Parties on its sixteenth session, held in Cancun from 29 November to 10 December 2010 - Addendum, Part Two: Action taken by the Conference of the Parties at its sixteenth session . ( unfccc.int [PDF; 251 kB ]).
↑ UNFCCC (Ed.): Report of the Conference of the Parties on its eighteenth session, held in Doha from November 26 to December 8, 2012 - Addendum, Part Two: Action taken by the Conference of the Parties at its eighteenth session . ( unfccc.int [PDF; 817 kB ]).
↑ Wolfgang Sterk, Wolfgang: Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions: Definitions, Issues and Options (= Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment, Energy [Ed.]: JIKO Policy Paper . No. 02/2010. ). 2010 ( [pubuid = 105 carbon-mechanisms.de]).
^ Søren E. Lütken, Bjoern Dransfeld, Stefan Wehner: Guidance for NAMA Design - Building on Country Experiences . Ed .: UNDP, UNEP, UNFCCC. 2013 ( namapipeline.org [PDF; 3.0 MB ]).
^ S. Sharma, D. DR. Desgain: Understanding the Concept of Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Action . Ed .: UNEP Risø Center on Energy, Climate and Sustainable Development. Department of Management Engineering. Technical University of Denmark. 2013 ( dtu.dk [PDF; 1.1 MB ]).
↑ Wolfgang Sterk, Christof Arens, Florian Mersmann, Hanna Wang-Helmreich, Timon Wehnert: On the Road Again - Progressive Countries Score a Realpolitik Victory in Durban While the Real Climate Continues to Heat Up . Ed .: Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment, Energy. Wuppertal. December 2011 ( wupperinst.org [PDF; 411 kB ]).
↑ UNFCCC (Ed.): Report of the Conference of the Parties on its nineteenth session, held in Warsaw from 11 to 23 November 2013 Addendum Part two: Action taken by the Conference of the Parties at its nineteenth session . S. 10 ( unfccc.int [PDF; 289 kB ]).
↑ Wolfgang Sterk, Christof Arens, Lukas Hermwille, Nicolas Kreibich, Florian Mersmann, Timon Wehnert: Warsaw groundhog days: old friends, positions and impasses revisited all over again at the 2013 Warsaw climate conference . Ed .: Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment, Energy. Wuppertal. December 2013 ( wupperinst.org [PDF; 973 kB ]).
↑ Frauke Röser, Xander van Tilburg, Gesine Hänsel, Thomas Day, Lachlan Cameron, James Falzon: NAMA Status Report . Ed .: ecofy. 2014 ( mitigationmomentum.org [PDF; 4.7 MB ]).
^ NAMA Registry. UNFCCC, 2014, accessed April 8, 2020 .
^ NAMA Database. Ecofys, 2014, accessed April 8, 2020 (numbers accessed in 2014).

[1] UNFCCC (Ed.): Report of the Conference of the Parties on its thirteenth session, held in Bali from 3 to 15 December 2007 - Addendum, Part Two: Action taken by the Conference of the Parties at its thirteenth session . ( unfccc.int [PDF; 264 kB ]).

[cop1607a01-2] UNFCCC (Ed.): Report of the Conference of the Parties on its sixteenth session, held in Cancun from 29 November to 10 December 2010 - Addendum, Part Two: Action taken by the Conference of the Parties at its sixteenth session . ( unfccc.int [PDF; 251 kB ]).

[3] UNFCCC (Ed.): Report of the Conference of the Parties on its eighteenth session, held in Doha from November 26 to December 8, 2012 - Addendum, Part Two: Action taken by the Conference of the Parties at its eighteenth session . ( unfccc.int [PDF; 817 kB ]).

[4] Wolfgang Sterk, Wolfgang: Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions: Definitions, Issues and Options (= Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment, Energy [Ed.]: JIKO Policy Paper . No. 02/2010. ). 2010 ( [pubuid = 105 carbon-mechanisms.de]).

[5] Søren E. Lütken, Bjoern Dransfeld, Stefan Wehner: Guidance for NAMA Design - Building on Country Experiences . Ed .: UNDP, UNEP, UNFCCC. 2013 ( namapipeline.org [PDF; 3.0 MB ]).

[6] S. Sharma, D. DR. Desgain: Understanding the Concept of Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Action . Ed .: UNEP Risø Center on Energy, Climate and Sustainable Development. Department of Management Engineering. Technical University of Denmark. 2013 ( dtu.dk [PDF; 1.1 MB ]).

[7] Wolfgang Sterk, Christof Arens, Florian Mersmann, Hanna Wang-Helmreich, Timon Wehnert: On the Road Again - Progressive Countries Score a Realpolitik Victory in Durban While the Real Climate Continues to Heat Up . Ed .: Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment, Energy. Wuppertal. December 2011 ( wupperinst.org [PDF; 411 kB ]).

[8] UNFCCC (Ed.): Report of the Conference of the Parties on its nineteenth session, held in Warsaw from 11 to 23 November 2013 Addendum Part two: Action taken by the Conference of the Parties at its nineteenth session . S. 10 ( unfccc.int [PDF; 289 kB ]).

[9] Wolfgang Sterk, Christof Arens, Lukas Hermwille, Nicolas Kreibich, Florian Mersmann, Timon Wehnert: Warsaw groundhog days: old friends, positions and impasses revisited all over again at the 2013 Warsaw climate conference . Ed .: Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment, Energy. Wuppertal. December 2013 ( wupperinst.org [PDF; 973 kB ]).

[10] Frauke Röser, Xander van Tilburg, Gesine Hänsel, Thomas Day, Lachlan Cameron, James Falzon: NAMA Status Report . Ed .: ecofy. 2014 ( mitigationmomentum.org [PDF; 4.7 MB ]).

[11] NAMA Registry. UNFCCC, 2014, accessed April 8, 2020 .

[12] NAMA Database. Ecofys, 2014, accessed April 8, 2020 (numbers accessed in 2014).