Lisa Zelljadt, Leonardo Massai, Megan Ceronsky

Carbon & Climate Law Review, Volume 4 (2010), Issue 3, Page 298 - 303

As this issue went to press, negotiators were wrapping up the last round of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) negotiations before the 16th Session of the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the UNFCCC and the 6th Session of the Meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (MOP) in Cancun: the 14th Session of the Convention’s Ad Hoc Working Group on the Kyoto Protocol (AWG-KP) and the 12th Session of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action (AWG-LCA) in Tianjin, China. After a similar round of talks in August in Bonn, progress at the Tianjin meeting toward a set of options for decisions to be taken by high-level negotiators in Cancun looked doubtful.

Lisa Zelljadt

Carbon & Climate Law Review, Volume 4 (2010), Issue 1, Page 3

br />1. Copenhagen and the Developing World Following the 15th Conference of the Parties (COP) to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change from a market perspective revealed a strong dichotomy between developed and developing countries on the very concept of tradable credits for GHG reductions. Negotiators from Europe, where there is a functioning emissions trading system (ETS), were joined by parties like Japan, Australia, and the US in assuming that deals in Copenhagen could be struck around market mechanisms that provide incen