Annex I Expert Group Workshop on
Joint Implementation and International
Emissions Trading under the Kyoto Protocol
Workshop report
ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT
INTERNATIONAL ENERGY AGENCY
PARIS, 19 NOVEMBER 1999
1
FOREWORD
The Annex I Expert Group on the UNFCCC aims to provide useful and timely input to the climate change
negotiations. As part of its work, it oversees the development of analytical papers and organises of
workshops.
The Annex I Parties or countries referred to in this document refer to those listed in Annex I to the
UNFCCC (as amended at the 3rd Conference of the Parties in December 1997): Australia, Austria, Belarus,
Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, the European Community, Estonia,
Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liechtenstein,
Lithuania, Luxembourg, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania,
Russian Federation, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom of
Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and United States of America. Where this document refers to
“countries” or “governments” it is also intended to include “regional economic organisations”, if
appropriate.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This workshop report was prepared by Stéphane Willems (OECD) with input from Jane Ellis (OECD),
Richard Baron and Martina Bosi (IEA). The authors would like to thank the workshop’s Chair, facilitators
and speakers for their input as well as Jan Corfee-Morlot (OECD) and Jonathan Pershing (IEA) for their
comments and suggestions. The authors are responsible for any errors or omissions in this report.
Special thanks are due to Aleksi Hokkanen as well as to Lyndia Levasseur and Carolyn Sturgeon for their
input to organisation of the workshop.
Questions or comments should be sent to:
Stéphane Willems
Administrator
Environment Directorate
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
2 rue André Pascal
75016 Paris, FRANCE
Tel: (33 1) 4524 9697
Fax: (33 1) 4524 7876
E-mail: [email protected]
OECD and IEA information papers for the Annex I Expert Group on the UNFCCC can be downloaded
from: http://www.oecd.org/env/cc
2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Annex I Expert Group Workshop on Joint Implementation and International Emissions Trading, held
on 13-14 September 1999, laid out some of the technical options surrounding the development of
international rules and guidelines for both Joint Implementation (JI) and International Emissions Trading
(IET) under the Kyoto Protocol. The workshop addressed four groups of issues:
•
•
•
•
participation of countries with economies in transition in JI and IET;
market power, trade and competitiveness;
monitoring, reporting and verification; and
eligibility, liability and responses to non-compliance.
In the panel session on Countries with economies in transition, participants recognised the particular
difficulties that these countries face in preparing for the implementation of the Kyoto mechanisms. The
difficulties most frequently cited include uncertainty about future economic growth, changes in legal and
institutional frameworks (often brought about by working to obtain EU membership) and lack of
institutional capacity. Yet the experience of many countries with JI-type projects during the pilot phase
“activities implemented jointly” is recognised as a useful starting point.
In the session on trade and competitiveness issues, participants noted that there was little evidence that a
dominant player could exert market power in particular if legal entities participate in the market. On the
link between the Protocol and the World Trade Organization (WTO), legal experts thought that there was a
low risk of the Kyoto Protocol being challenged as WTO-inconsistent, although there is no jurisprudence
on this issue. In particular, Assigned Amount Units (AAUs), which would be traded under the Protocol,
may not be subject to WTO ruling, since they may be considered as neither a “product” nor a “service”.
Specific compliance rules could therefore be established within the Kyoto Protocol if Parties wish to
regulate the trade of AAUs. However, Parties will need to be sensitive to WTO and competitiveness
concerns when implementing domestic rules for the Kyoto mechanisms as well as domestic policies and
measures.
In the session on monitoring, reporting and verification, participants noted the importance of complying
with guidelines under the Protocol’s Article 5 (national inventory systems) and Article 7 (reporting) when
participating in the Kyoto mechanisms. However they disagreed whether additional rules for Joint
Implementation were needed, in particular to assess and/or verify the additionality of projects. Two broad
options regarding national registries for tracking international transactions by Parties and entities were also
discussed. One option would require the development of minimum international rules for inter-linking
national registries. The other option would not require international rules at the outset, as international
trading among entities and/or governments could be initiated through bilateral agreements between Parties.
In the session on eligibility, liability and responses to non-compliance, participants noted the
interdependence of liability rules with any decisions on the compliance regime under the Kyoto Protocol.
They also noted the effect of different liability rules on the participation of legal entities. Last, the role of
domestic compliance regimes (including national registries) was considered as key in preventing noncompliance through emissions trading.
3
1
INTRODUCTION
The objective of the Annex I Expert Group’s work on the Kyoto mechanisms is to contribute to developing
an international implementation framework under the Kyoto Protocol. Analytical work is being carried out
to improve understanding of - and develop practical options for - implementation requirements for the
Kyoto mechanisms.
To contribute to this work, the Annex I Expert Group held a workshop in Paris, France, on 13-14
September, 1999. This workshop focused on Joint Implementation and International Emissions Trading.
Both mechanisms provide an opportunity for Annex I Parties to trade among themselves portions of their
assigned amounts, as defined by the Kyoto Protocol. The workshop aimed to:
−
explore linkages, common issues and differences between Joint Implementation and International
Emissions Trading.
−
promote a clearer understanding of specific technical issues that underpin the implementation of these
mechanisms, including issues related to: market and trade; monitoring, reporting and verification; and
eligibility, liability and responses to non-compliance; and to
−
place a special emphasis on the challenges faced by the Annex I countries with economies in transition
in implementing the Kyoto mechanisms.
The workshop started with a panel session on the participation of countries with economies in transition in
JI and IET, in order to increase understanding of the specific circumstances of these countries. This
session was followed by three working group sessions:
−
Working group 1 on market and trade issues outlined issues related to market power as well as
competitiveness, including the link between the Protocol and the World Trade Organisation;
−
Working group 2 on monitoring, reporting and verification discussed minimum requirements needed at
the international level for monitoring, reporting and verification as they pertain to JI and EIT; and
−
Working group 3 on eligibility, liability and responses to non-compliance focused mainly on a
discussion of liability issues raised by International Emissions Trading.
There were approximately 140 participants in the workshop, including 100 delegates from Annex I country
governments and approximately 40 experts from business and industry, environmental non-government
organisations, research institutes and other intergovernmental organisations.
4
2
PARTICIPATION OF COUNTRIES WITH ECONOMIES IN TRANSITION
Facilitator: Serena Adler (Ministry of Waters, Forests & Environmental Protection, Romania)
Rapporteur: Jane Ellis (OECD)
2.1
Questions and presentations
This panel session was asked to address the following questions:
−
What are the relative advantages and disadvantages between JI and IET for countries with economies
in transition?
−
What are the main institutional needs (and capabilities) to prepare a project e.g. to collect data, to
monitor national emissions and/or project emissions, enforcement etc.?
−
What is necessary in countries with economies in transition to meet these needs? Are there examples of
progress in this area?
−
What is the size and nature of the market in countries with economies in transition (market potential
and project opportunities)?
Four discussants introduced the main issues:
Lubomir Nondek (DHV, Czech republic) focused his presentation on the different strategies needed to
successfully implement JI and IET. He highlighted the potentially heavy human resource needs for host
countries to participate in JI (e.g. administrative processes, technical experts). He also identified the
challenges posed by participation in IET, such as uncertain GHG projections, a need for an accurate
emissions inventory and the lack of a mechanism to allocate emission rights/revenues. He also outlined the
particular difficulties that these issues posed to economies in transition, which are already undergoing
significant, and sometimes unpredictable, changes in economic growth, legal framework and
environmental performance.
Ingrida Apene (Ministry of Environmental Protection & Regional Development, Latvia) outlined Latvia’s
opinions on JI and IET, and Latvia’s proposed national institutional arrangements to supervise these
mechanisms. She emphasised Latvia’s positive experience with "activities implemented jointly" (AIJ), but
also pointed out the difficulties faced in financing the institutions needed to oversee AIJ activities and in
calculating and monitoring emission reductions from AIJ/JI projects. She also identified the need for
simplicity in any IET system to be set up, and outlined the institutional, legal, financial, technical and
capacity-building barriers to IET.
5
Vladimir Berdin (Russian State Committee on Environmental Protection) indicated the Russian
government’s favourable attitude to both IET and JI. He presented steps that the Russian government is
undertaking to improve its greenhouse gas emissions inventory and projections. He also outlined changes
in Russian legislation and institutions that are planned or initiated in order to facilitate participation in IET
and JI. He emphasised that co-operation within a country (i.e. between different stakeholders and different
levels of governments) was critical to implement the Kyoto mechanisms successfully.
Anne Arquit-Niederberger (Swiss AIJ Pilot Program, State Secretariat for Economic Affairs) gave an
overview of the characteristics of JI and IET and their potential advantages and disadvantages from the
perspective of economies in transition. She based her views on results of the studies being undertaken by
potential host countries under the Swiss-World Bank Collaborative Initiative on National AIJ/JI/CDM
Strategy Studies. For example, while the costs of individual transactions might be higher for JI than IET
(due to e.g. the project-by-project approval requirements), IET requires sophisticated national inventory
systems, which can be very expensive for governments in transition countries to put in place. She also
pointed out that by definition, JI results in increased transfer of climate-friendly technologies with foreign
investment, while the fate of revenues from trading depends on domestic policy. She identified needs for
capacity-building, including efficient institutions, information/awareness on climate change issues within a
country, and environmental expertise in different areas (e.g. in the private sector). In addition, she
indicated estimates of the potential AAU demand of Annex I countries and of AAU "supply" in four
transition countries.
2.2
Discussion
Countries with economies in transition are not a homogeneous group. The different situation of each
country regarding the rate of economic and emissions growth, difficulty of achieving the Kyoto target,
institutional capacity, etc., may lead individual governments to follow different paths for implementing
these mechanisms.
On the issue of whether priorities should be set between JI and IET, one participant from an investing
country noted that they had had difficulties implementing AIJ projects, and suggested that it would be
easier for investors if potential host countries decided to prioritise either JI or IET. However, other
participants felt that there was sufficient time for countries to start both. Another participant noted that
although the transaction costs for IET were lower than for JI projects, there was a fixed cost associated
with setting up an IET system and that this should be taken into account.
Participants from several countries with economies in transition noted the lack of institutional and
administrative capacity to deal with the demands of implementing the Kyoto mechanisms. Regarding JI,
lack of a focal point and country priorities for types of AIJ/JI projects were noted as barriers to project
identification and implementation. Moreover, many participants outlined the difficulties in establishing
emission baselines for AIJ/JI projects, in particular in uncertain economic environments, and some
participants outlined that their country lacked capacity needed to calculate and verify such baselines.
This difficulty may be compounded by the fact that environmental performance in those countries planning
to accede to the EU is likely to change significantly from current performance. This should occur as such
countries strengthen environmental legislation and performance to prepare for EU membership (e.g. by
implementing the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Directive).
On next steps planned or required to implement the mechanisms, there was interest in different
perspectives on how governments’ plan to devolve parts of assigned amounts. Initial results from a study
undertaken by UNEP suggested for instance that upstream regulation (e.g. on coal production) may not be
a practical option.
6
Participants noted the need for strategic thinking by governments of countries with economies in transition
in order to implement the Kyoto mechanisms. The uncertain economic climate in which many countries
are operating, and consequently uncertain emissions projections make it difficult to predict what the
market potential for JI/IET will be in many countries with economies in transition. For example,
although it may seem clear for most countries with emissions targets whether they will be net buyers or
sellers, it is by no means clear cut for all countries with economies in transition.
Thus, by the first commitment period, countries with economies in transition could be buyers or sellers in
an IET system, hosts or investors in JI projects, as well as potentially being investors in CDM projects.
However, it was noted that erring on the side of compliance could be beneficial for countries with
economies in transition, given that any unused parts of assigned amount could be banked for subsequent
commitment periods. One participant suggested that demand for credits or parts of assigned amounts from
economies in transition could actually be smaller than supply. This could result from the significant
potential for low-cost mitigation measures existing in economies in transition, and from the risks
associated with buying parts of assigned amount (depending on the rules pertaining to the Kyoto
mechanisms that will be set up).
One Slovakian participant outlined the situation in her country. Her government would like to introduce an
emission ceiling for CO2 in addition to that of other pollutants. The government does not anticipate wide
IET in the first commitment period, and assumes that if IET were to take place, it would be among
governments, rather than entities. Nevertheless, in such a case, revenue from government trading would be
given to entities that had reduced their emissions, in order to provide incentives to other entities to do
likewise. This raised the question as to whether or not rules governing how to spend IET receipts should
be set up internationally, or whether national governments should decide.
Discussion also outlined an alternative method for encouraging a move to a lower emission pathway.
Some countries could initiate forward trading for a part of their projected surplus ("hot air"), and use the
revenue from this forward trading for specific environment-friendly investments. Some participants thus
felt that forward trading could reduce the risk of non-compliance for some Parties, and could also help to
overcome financial barriers by providing start-up capital for mitigation investments. Moreover, at least in
the view of some, not being able to participate in forward trading was seen to result in significant foregone
revenue for their country.
7
3
MARKET AND TRADE ISSUES
Facilitator: Andrej Kranjc (Slovenia)
Rapporteur: Martina Bosi (IEA)
3.1
Questions and presentations
The working group addressed the following questions:
− Can a “seller” country with a large market share influence the price of a unit? Is cartel behaviour
possible?
−
What trade practices can help limit market power?
−
What is to be traded internationally? What is the traded item in the Kyoto Protocol, and which WTO
Agreement covers trade in that item? What are the underlying legal principles, property rights and
legal status of a unit of trade (parts of assigned amount, emission reduction units or certified emission
reductions)?
−
To what extent might the Kyoto Protocol mechanisms raise trade-rule compatibility issues? Are there
specific trade issues to be addressed in designing these mechanisms?
−
Do different approaches to national allocation of AAUs raise competitiveness issues?
The first two discussants addressed the questions of market efficiency and market power. The last two
speakers addressed trade and competitiveness issues and the link between the Protocol and the WTO.
Peter Bohm (Stockholm University, Sweden) noted the suitability of GHG emissions as a "perfect"
commodity for trading. He also argued that greater market efficiency would be achieved with trading
carried out on an emissions exchange, through greater information transparency and lower transaction
costs, than under bilateral trading. It is well known that the higher the number of participants (e.g. if
private entities are allowed to participate in emissions trading), the lower the risks of inefficient trading and
thus market power. However, even in the event that there is a dominant buyer or seller, there are
incentives on an emissions exchange for the transaction volume and final prices to approach the
competitive outcome. This result is supported by general, as well as emissions-trading-specific,
experimental evidence. Moreover, the information on marginal abatement costs likely to be available will
tend to make early prices on the exchange approach the competitive level. If so, both effects of market
power: transaction volumes below the competitive level and prices favourable for a dominant trader, would
be small or even disappear, when emission trading is carried out on an exchange.
Tatsuyioshi Saijo (Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University, Japan) presented the
features and results of emissions trading research experiments. His experiments indicate that the overall
market efficiency of emissions trading, as a mechanism to achieve GHG emissions targets, is close to its
theoretical potential. The efficiency is also basically unaffected by whether or not price and quantity
information is disclosed, or by trading rules such as bilateral trading and double auction. However, double
auction is better than bilateral trading since the convergence to competitive price of the auction is much
8
faster than that of bilateral trading. The experiments included a dominant player that could have
potentially exercised market power, but did not. The overall efficiency of trading was reduced in the
experiment that included non-compliance consequences because trading entities over-complied to avoid
the consequences or were forced to under-comply due to the shortage of supply. On the issue of the
potential implications of quantitative constraints on trading, Prof. Saijo’s theoretical work indicates that the
efficiency of the trading mechanism is reduced. However, the buyers would gain compared to a no
constraint case, because constraints make the permit price lower.
Jacob Werksman (Foundation for International Environmental Law and Development, UK) presented an
assessment of the potential scope of the WTO’s jurisdiction over various aspects of the design of
international emissions trading. At this stage, it is not possible to draw precise conclusions on the potential
relationship between the WTO and the Kyoto Protocol’s IET provisions. Nonetheless, in his view,
emissions allowance are government permits or licences to emit, and would not, themselves, qualify as
either products or services under the WTO (but the services associated with trading of AAUs may be a
"service" within the meaning of the WTO). Consequently, the rules governing the transfers and
acquisitions of emissions allowances, including restrictions on the trading of those allowances, would not
violate WTO prohibitions on trade bans. Internationally agreed rules under the UNFCCC would determine
non-compliance with IET and the Kyoto Protocol. Furthermore to ensure the stability of the IET system,
disputes between Parties to the Kyoto Protocol should be resolved by the Protocol’s compliance regime.
However, the discussant did note that the domestic implementation of IET, as well as any other domestic
climate change policy or measure implemented to meet Kyoto targets, would need to be designed in a
manner that is sensitive to WTO rules. For example, in his view, domestic allocation through "grandfathering" might prove an irresistible temptation to policy makers to favour domestic producers and service
providers over foreigners, and thus may raise the potential for trade disputes.
Annie Petsonk (Environmental Defense Fund, USA) clarified that while she could not speak on behalf of
the WTO, it was, in her view, very unlikely that the Kyoto Protocol, and its rules, would be WTOinconsistent. She also thought that “parts of assigned amount” would not be covered by WTO rules as they
are neither products nor services. Nonetheless, she was of the view that Parties to the Kyoto Protocol
should avoid placing restrictions on the use of IET in order to minimise the (small) risk of WTOinconsistency. She suggested that the design of the IET market include the following elements which are
essential to well-functioning market systems: measurement, transparency, fungibility, consistency, and
integrity. This would help avoid market imperfections (e.g. market power, cartels). She also opined that it
was unlikely that a country’s choice about domestic allocation would be considered a subsidy by a WTO
Panel, as it is unlikely that the allocation of emissions obligations would be viewed as the distribution of “a
financial contribution”.
3.2
Discussion
On the market power issue, participants appreciated the theoretical and experimental insights provided by
the discussants. However, they questioned the likely application of model and experiment results and
conclusions to real world situations. Several participants felt that the experiment results regarding reduced
efficiency of emission trading with non-compliance measures was a result of the underlying assumptions
and may not be the case in reality. In particular, it was suggested that the experiments did not consider the
benefits of compliance. Furthermore, experiment and modelling results were also questioned because they
assume that there is sufficient timely supply to satisfy demand and participants will necessarily comply
with their targets. Some felt that reality may be different as supply of emission units may not be adequate,
in the timeframe considered, to meet demand at the price predicted by models. It was also suggested that
9
in reality, some players may view non-compliance as a good strategy if the price of emission units needed
to meet the targets is too high. Participants were generally of the view that work on models and
experiments should seek to better reflect real-life possibilities in the context of international GHG
emissions trading.
On trade and competitiveness, most of the discussion was based on questions to and answers from the
discussants.
One participant asked whether the discussants agreed with a legal opinion that emission reduction units
(ERUs) resulting from Joint Implementation would be defined as “products”. The discussants did not
share that view. Another JI-related question was whether or not the policy of a country to host JI projects
only from certain countries could be viewed as discriminatory from a WTO perspective. This was viewed
as very unlikely.
It was also asked whether the WTO or UNFCCC would be the most appropriate forum to raise any trade
and compliance issues relating to the implementation of the Kyoto Protocol (including IET as well as
domestic policies and measures). It was pointed out that a WTO contracting Party would have a right to
challenge a Kyoto Protocol rule, provided that it had not itself voted to adopt it (i.e. it was not a Party).
However, there is only one country, currently, that is Party to the WTO, but not the UNFCCC. The
importance of establishing, in the context of the Kyoto Protocol, a compliance mechanism to resolve
potential disputes was underlined.
Clarification was sought with respect to the question of restrictions on IET and the likelihood of potential
WTO implications. While both discussants were of the view that rules relating to the implementation of
the Kyoto Protocol were very unlikely to be deemed WTO-inconsistent, one of the discussants nonetheless
advised against restrictions. The other discussant, however, did not believe that an IET rule on restrictions
should have a different status than any other IET rule adopted under the Kyoto Protocol from a WTO
perspective (i.e. it would be equally improbable of raising WTO concerns).
Several questions were raised with respect to the potential implications of AAU domestic allocation
schemes (e.g. “grand-fathering” or auctioning) with respect to WTO rules. Caution with respect to the
design of domestic allocation schemes was recommended in order to avoid protectionism. Caution was
also advised in the design of regulation for GHG mitigation purposes, for example restrictions on sales of
products based on process and production methods (PPM).
In summary, presenters made the following recommendations:
- Parties need to be sensitive to WTO and competitiveness concerns when implementing the Kyoto
Protocol, either through rules for the Kyoto Mechanisms or through and other policies and measures
they may adopt.
- A compliance mechanism is needed within the Kyoto Protocol.
- Transparency is important.
10
4
MONITORING, REPORTING AND VERIFICATION
Facilitator: John Drexhage (Environment Canada)
Rapporteur: Stéphane Willems (OECD)
4.1
Questions and presentations
Implementing the Kyoto Protocol in general, and the Kyoto Mechanisms in particular, places a heavy
emphasis on the need for domestic monitoring, reporting and verification of environmental performance.
The main issue addressed in the working group was: what is the minimum set of rules and guidelines that
needs to be adopted by the Conference of the Parties (at its sixth session) in terms of monitoring, reporting
and verification? The group was also asked to address more specific questions:
−
What are the common elements and differences in monitoring and reporting requirements for JI and
IET?
−
Are baselines needed to determine the additionality of JI projects? If not, how are additionality and
emission reduction units assessed?
−
Is there a role for (third party) verification in the implementation of these mechanisms?
−
Are registries needed for JI and IET?
Four discussants introduced these different issues:
Einar Telnes (Det Norske Veritas, Norway) presented the main lessons from the ILUMEX pilot (AIJ)
project as well as further thoughts from the BP pilot (internal trading) project from the perspective of
verification and certification. He emphasised the importance of developing project specific monitoring and
verification protocols (MVPs) that cover a generic set of requirements (for third party auditing purposes),
that can sustain best practices and that can be used as a benchmark for other projects. He also emphasised
the need for guidelines to resolve potential conflicts of interest that may occur as a result of third party
involvement in project activities.
Tiit Kallaste (Stockholm Environment Institute, Estonia) presented his view on monitoring, reporting and
verification needs, in particular for setting emission baselines for JI projects. He argued for the use of topdown baselines, which are less data intensive than bottom-up baselines.
Flemming Tost (Deloitte & Touche, Denmark) emphasised the value of third party review and audit
functions in implementing the Kyoto Mechanisms and the parallels with existing financial auditing
procedures.
11
Jo Simons (Department of the Environment, Transport & the Regions, United Kingdom) presented
different options for setting up national registries to track international transfers under International
Emissions Trading and Joint Implementation. One option would be based on a minimum set of
compatibility requirements for national registries, in order to facilitate international transfers. Under
another option, international guidelines for national registries would not be necessary, as international
transfers among governments and/or entities could simply be based on bilateral agreements between
Parties.
4.2
Discussion
Much of the discussion focused on the monitoring and reporting requirements for Joint
Implementation (as compared to Emissions Trading).
Some participants felt that the main international requirement for participating in Joint Implementation
under the Kyoto Protocol’s Article 6 should be compliance with Articles 5 and 7. Transfers of emission
reduction units for joint implementation projects are a zero sum game, since they occur only among Parties
with fixed emission targets. Therefore, as for International Emissions Trading, the most important
international requirement, should be the maintenance of a reliable national system for estimating
greenhouse gas emissions and removals (inventories).
At a minimum, Parties hosting Joint
Implementation projects will need to establish guidelines for project additionality, monitoring and
verification, in order to provide a sound basis for determining the amount of emission reduction units to be
transferred. However, this can be left to national authorities and requirements could vary from country to
country.
Other participants felt that guidelines on project additionality, monitoring and/or verification should be
defined internationally. Host countries might not have the institutional capacity to elaborate these
guidelines. Consistent monitoring and verification procedures, as well as for additionality, might in fact
lower transaction costs for investors. There might also be pressure to give away credits for projects that
are not additional (e.g. for ‘low hanging fruit’ projects)1. This would endanger the ability of these host
countries to meet their quantitative commitments under Art. 3. Some participants stressed that noncompliance with Articles 5 and 7 should not prevent Parties from participating in Joint Implementation.
But in this case, specific guidelines would clearly be needed under Article 6 to ensure that joint
implementation projects were additional.
Some participants pointed out that it might be difficult to adapt international guidelines to national
circumstances and that such guidance might increase project costs. For instance, it would be easier for host
countries to use national guidelines drafted in their own language. International guidelines might also
require costly verification and certification procedures. These participants stressed that transparency was
more important than drawing up international guidelines for additionality, monitoring and verification of
joint implementation activities. Parties should be transparent about their own monitoring and verification
procedures, including guidelines on how to calculate baselines. In particular, Parties should publish in
advance the criteria they are using for determining the additionality of projects. This might also increase
business confidence and foster investments in Joint Implementation projects. One participant also pointed
out that there can be multilateral initiatives to provide Parties with appropriate guidelines for Joint
Implementation, for capacity building purposes (so as not to ‘reinvent the wheel’ in each country), but that
this could be done voluntarily and would not necessarily require a COP decision.
1.
One participant mentioned that such pressure might come from within the country, with different interests
at stake in government agencies.
12
Participants discussed baseline methodologies in some detail. Some participants considered that a
“benchmark” approach would reduce costs of setting up baselines and would not lead to higher levels of
errors than project specific baselines. However, others felt that, while both types of baselines led to
random errors, benchmark approaches may also lead to systematic errors. In this case, some of the costs of
reducing emissions may simply be shifted from private investors to the Parties themselves.
On third party verification, some participants felt that it was not strictly needed for joint implementation
projects and that verification by the host country and the investing party was sufficient. Others mentioned
that independent verification and certification might reduce investment risk in host countries. One
participant also mentioned the need for verification and certification of national inventories.
Finally, a brief discussion on national registries closed the session. Some participants stressed that
international guidelines on registries would only be needed to ensure that the output of each system is
compatible i.e. the information that is communicated between national registries is compatible in terms of
language, units of trade, etc.. Parties could still set up their own specific registry system, much like there
can be different registry systems for trade in shares. Other participants felt that, while this may encourage
trading by entities, elaborating guidelines on registries might detract attention from more important issues
under the Protocol as national registries may not need to be compatible from the outset. Rather registries
could evolve into compatible systems over time, e.g. through bilateral agreements between countries.
13
5
ELIGIBILITY, LIABILITY AND RESPONSES TO NON-COMPLIANCE
Facilitator: Paul Lanser (DTI, UK)
Rapporteur: Richard Baron (IEA)
5.1
Questions and presentations
The working group was asked to address the following questions related to eligibility, liability and
compliance for international GHG emission trading (IET) and joint implementation (JI):
−
Compliance with Articles 5 and 7 is often mentioned as a prerequisite for participation to IET and JI:
What information related to transfers and acquisitions needs to be reported under Article 7.1 (e.g. net
trades, level of detail of JI reporting)?
−
National registries are proposed for Parties participating to IET/JI. How would governments use such
registries for compliance purposes? What other options are considered to ensure compliance?
−
What eligibility criteria, if any, are considered necessary for JI (certification at Party level, or at project
level)?
−
Should there be specific non-compliance measures for IET or JI, e.g. if a Party found in noncompliance has transferred parts of its assigned amount?
−
What is the role of liability rules, e.g., to assign responsibility, or discourage “overselling”? What
other requirements can we envisage in addition to, or instead of, liability rules?
−
Is there a need for specific liability rule for JI, in addition to Article 6.4?
The discussion was introduced by four presentations.
Nuno Lacasta (Euronatura, Portugal) introduced the “traffic light” approach to international emissions
trading. This approach would use either issuer beware, buyer beware, or an interruption of transfers
depending on the issuing Party’s compliance prospects. The idea of a compliance fund, financed by
penalties for non-compliance, was also discussed.
Matt Evans (International Petroleum Exchange, UK) explained how exchange-based trading operated, and
how it was regulated under an issuer liability regime with financial penalties for market operators and strict
surveillance by the exchange authority.
14
Anne Arquit-Niederberger (Swiss AIJ Pilot Program, State Secretariat for Economic Affairs) presented
an option for an international post-verification trading system, which is an alternative to trading systems
based on seller or buyer liability. For trading purposes only, Parties would undertake an annual allocation
of their total assigned amount (i.e. five annual allocations, which could be adjusted over time). If their
annual inventory shows that emissions are below the annual allocation for the year in question, Parties
would automatically be issued certified excess assigned amount units by an electronic registry maintained
by the UNFCCC Secretariat. Only such certified excess AAUs can be traded internationally and thus, by
definition, all AAUs available on the market are valid, which contributes to market certainty.
Alexander Golub (Harvard Institute for International Development, Russia) described the possibility of
early trading and investment in energy efficiency projects as a means to generate future reductions and
encourage compliance in the Russian Federation.
5.2
Discussion
The discussion focused mostly on liability rules and market design.
Liability was broadly defined as the allocation of responsibility for non-compliance by a Party if that Party
had transferred assigned amount units. There was little consensus among participants on what form of
liability should be applied to IET. The benefits of an issuer beware regime were highlighted (homogeneity
of traded units, market certainty), while it was recognised that a strong compliance regime would be
required in order to discourage potential “overselling”. Buyer beware systems were seen as likely to
generate different prices based on the likelihood of compliance of country of origin of the AAUs, and were
seen as a way to encourage compliance. Post verification trading was presented as a possible means to
disconnect compliance with emission targets from trading. All these options would require different
procedures: the “traffic light” procedure is based on triggering mechanisms to combine and switch from
issuer to buyer liability. Parties must define an annual allocation of their 5-year assigned amounts under a
post-verification trading option. Some participants argued that the risk of non-compliance caused by
“overselling” should be addressed through decisions on eligibility, liability and other trading rules. Others
favoured a separate discussion of trading rules and of the non-compliance regime, arguing that noncompliance could be caused by factors other than international transfers through IET or JI.
The effect of different market designs on the participation of legal entities was actively debated. Some
felt that a system of post-verification trading might create a difficulty for the transfer of AAUs by legal
entities, as these would depend on the country’s overall emission level for that year. It was argued that the
post verification trading may generate segmented domestic markets. This could occur if firms willing and
able to sell might only be able to do so domestically, or if they had only limited access to the international
market, if there is a limit on how much the Party can sell in a particular year.
At the same time, governments are likely to monitor closely the trading activity of their entities (e.g. on an
annual basis). Since the responsibility for compliance rests with Parties and not entities, governments may
pay particular attention to transfers of AAUs, irrespective of which liability rules are agreed on in future.
The important role of domestic legislation and domestic enforcement mechanisms was noted in addition to
an internationally-agreed compliance regime. Participants did not agree on whether or not domestic
compliance regimes should be the subject of international guidance.
While all participants seemed to agree that incentives for early action should be sought in the design of
rules and guidelines for IET and JI, there was no agreement on what would be the best approach. The
main options discussed included unrestricted transactions under issuer beware; post verification trading;
and early trading via forward transactions.
15
Public information on international transfers, e.g. via an international registry, could also help minimise the
risk of “overselling”, as potential buyers would be able to assess the compliance prospect of sellers,
provided they also have access to their inventory information. However, such information may only be
effective to dissuade “overselling” under a buyer liability regime.
In conclusion, the non-compliance regime to be decided under Article 18 of the Kyoto Protocol is likely to
affect the rules and guidelines chosen for IET, especially with respect to eligibility and liability. Views
differed on whether there would be sufficient rigour in the mechanism under Article 18 to dissuade noncompliance by Parties, and entities operating under their responsibility. Some discussants saw the need for
safeguards within the rules for the mechanisms such as liability rules.
There was little discussion on specific eligibility criteria beyond compliance with Article 5 and 7, although
Parties should probably comply with these Articles regardless of whether they intend to trade or not. There
was no elaboration on what differences there might be in the rules for IET and JI.
16
APPENDIX 1: WORKSHOP AGENDA
Joint Implementation and International Emissions Trading,
13-14 September, 1999, IEA headquarters
Chair: Midori Tani (Japan)
Monday, 13 September 1999
9.30 - 13.00Opening Plenary
9.30 - 9.35 Introduction remarks by the Chair of the Annex I Expert Group (Richard Bradley,
US Department of Energy, USA)
9.35 - 10.00Opening statement and objective of the workshop by Chair (Midori Tani, MITI,
Japan)
10.00 - 11.00Panel session: Participation of countries with economies in transition in JI and IET
Facilitator: Serena Adler, Ministry of Waters, Forests & Environmental Protection,
Romania
Discussants:
Ingrida Apene, Ministry of Environment, Latvia
Vladimir Berdin, Russian State Committee on Environmental Protection
Lubomir Nondek, DHV, Czech Republic
Anne Arquit Niederberger, Swiss AIJ Pilot Phase Secretariat
Rapporteur: Jane Ellis, OECD
11.00 - 11.30Coffee Break
11.30 - 13.00Panel session continues with discussion/questions.
13.00 - 14.30 Lunch break (sandwich lunch at the IEA)
14.30 - 18.00 Plenary session: working group 1
Working group 1: Market and Trade issues
Facilitator: Andrej Krancj, Ministry of Environment, Slovenia
Discussants on market power:
Peter Bohm, Stockholm University
Tatsuyoshi Saijo, Osaka University
Discussants on competitiveness and WTO issues:
Annie Petsonk, Environmental Defense Fund
Jacob Werksman, FIELD
Rapporteur: Martina Bosi, IEA
17
Tuesday, 14 September 1999
9.00 - 12.30 Parallel sessions
Working group 2: Monitoring, reporting and Working group 3: Eligibility, liability and
verification requirements at domestic level
responses to non-compliance
Facilitator: John Drexhage, Environment Canada Facilitator: Paul Lanser, Department of Trade &
Industry, United Kingdom
Discussants:
Einar Telnes, Det Norske Veritas
Tiit Kallaste, Stockholm Environment Institute Tallinn
Flemming Tost, Deloitte & Touche
Jo Simons, Department of the Environment,
Transport & the Regions, United Kingdom
Rapporteur: Stéphane Willems, OECD
Discussants:
Nuno Lacasta, Euronatura
Matthew Evans, IPE
Alexander
Golub,
Harvard
Institute
for
International Development
Christian Albrecht, State Secretariat for Economic
Affairs, Switzerland
Rapporteur: Richard Baron, IEA
12.30 - 14.30 Lunch break
14.30 - 17.30 Closing Plenary (wrap-up session)
Discussion of Working Group outcomes and conclusion
14.30 - 15.15 Outcome of Working Group 1: presentation and discussion
15.15 - 16.00 Outcome of Working Group 2: presentation and discussion
16.00 - 16.15 Coffee break
16.15 - 17.00 Outcome of Working Group 3: presentation and discussion
17.00 - 17.30 Conclusions by Midori Tani and concluding comments from all participants.
18
APPENDIX 2: LIST OF PARTICIPANTS
Chair:
Ms. Midori TANI
Director, Global Environment Affairs Office
Ministry of International Trade & Industry (MITI)
1-3-1 Kasumigaseki, Chiyoda-ku
Tokyo 100-8901
Tel: (81 3) 35 01 78 30
Fax: (81 3) 35 01 76 97
Email: [email protected]
AUSTRALIA
Mr. Patrick GIBBONS
Department of Foreign Affairs & Trade
The R.G. Casey Building,
John McEwan Crescent
Barton ACT 2600
Tel: (61 2) 62 61 26 53
Fax: (61 2) 62 61 25 94
Email: [email protected]
Dr. Jim HAGAN
General Manager,
Industry Policy Division
Australia Treasury
Parkes Place
Parkes Act 2600
Tel: (61 2) 62 63 44 05
Fax: (61 2) 62 63 44 71
Email: [email protected]
Ms. Linda MEISEL
Assistant Manager
Climate Change International
Australia Greenhouse Office,
King Edward Terrace
Parkes ACT 2600
Tel: (61 2) 62 74 15 69
Fax: (61 2) 62 74 14 39
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Rob STURGISS
First Secretary
Permanent Delegation of Australia to the OECD
Tel: (33 1) 40 59 33 59
Fax: (33 1) 40 59 33 94
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Ian TURLAND
Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade
R.G. Casey Building, John McEwen Crescent
Barton ACT 2600
Tel: (61 2) 6261 2608
Fax: (61 2) 6261 2594
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Bruce WILSON
Manager, Greenhouse Response Branch
Department of Industry, Science & Resources
GPO Box 9839
Canberra Act 2601
Tel: (61 2) 62 13 78 84
Fax: (61 2) 62 13 73 61
Email: [email protected]
AUSTRIA
Mr. Dieter BEISTEINER
Federal Ministry for the Environment
Stubenbastei 5
A-1010 Vienna
Tel: (43 1) 515 22 13 51
Fax: (43 1) 515 22 73 01
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Ulrike ETEME
Federal Ministry for the Environment
Stubenbastei 5
A-1010 Vienna
Tel: (43 1) 515 22 13 24
Fax: (43 1) 515 22 73 25
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Klaus RADUNSKY
Director
Federal Environmental Agency
Spittelauer Lände 5
A-1090 Vienna
Tel: (43 1) 31 304 5534
Fax: (43 1) 31 304 5800
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Stefan P. SCHLEICHER
Chair of Austrian Council on Climate Change
University of Graz
Universitaetsstrasse 15/F4
A-8010 Graz
Tel: (43 316) 380 3440
Fax: (43 316) 380 9520
Email: [email protected]
BELARUS
Mr. Viktor KORBUT
Head, Dept. of State Control for Use &
Protection of Atmospheric Air
Ministry of Natural Resources &
Environmental Protection
10 Kollektornaya str.,
220048 Minsk
Tel: (375 172) 20 47 71 / 20 47 57
Fax: (375 172) 20 47 71 / 20 55 83
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Teodor Dimitrov IVANOV
Senior Expert and Coordinator of FCCC
Ministry of Environment & Water
22 Maria Luiza St.
1000 Sofia
Tel: (359 2) 981 4412
Fax: (359 2) 980 3926
Email: [email protected]
Ms. Daniela STOYTCHEVA
Senior Expert
Ministry of Environment & Water
W. Gladstone Str. 67
1000 Sofia
Tel: (359 2) 84 72 22 44
Fax: (359 2) 986 48 48
Email: [email protected]
Ms. Svetlana RUDNEVA
Chief, Sector of Ecology
Cabinet of Ministers
House of Government, Sovetskaya Str.
220010 Minsk
Tel: (375 172) 22 63 66
Fax: (375 172) 22 66 65
Email: [email protected]
CANADA
Mr. John R. DREXHAGE
Associate Director,
Climate Change International
Environment Canada
Les Terrasses de la Chaudière (22ème étage)
10 Wellington St.
Hull, Quebec K1A 0H3
Tel: (1 819) 994 5156
Fax: (1 819) 953 5787
Email: [email protected]
BELGIUM
Mr. Thomas BERNHEIM
Expert
Bureau Fédéral du Plan
47-49 Kunstlaan
B-1000 Brussels
Tel: (32 2) 507 7485
Fax: (32 2) 507 7486
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Ewa GAWRON-DOBROCZYNSKA
Commercial Officer
Canadian Embassy
Ul. Matejki 1/5
00-481 Warsaw, Poland
Tel: (48 22) 629 8051 (ext. 3353)
Fax: (48 22) 622 9803
Email: [email protected]
Ms. Eveline ROOIJMANS
Policy Advisor
Flemish Ministry for the Environment
E. Jacqmainlaan 156, bus 8
1000 Brussels
Tel: (32 2) 553 81 30
Fax: (32 2) 553 81 65
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Éric LANDRY
Environment Division
Natural Resource Canada
580 Booth Street
Ottawa, Ontario K1A OE4
Tel: (1 613) 996 0721
Fax: (1 613) 947 6799
Email: [email protected]
BULGARIA
Mrs. Lidia Ilieva ASSENOVA
Senior Expert
Ministry of Environment & Water
22 Maria Luiza St.
1000 Sofia
Tel: (359 2) 980 9989
Fax: (359 2) 980 3926
Email: [email protected]
Mr. William PALMER
Vice-President
Cheminfo Services Inc.
1706 Avenue Road, Suite 4
Toronto, Ontario M5M 3Y6
Tel: (1 416) 785 9051
Fax: (1 416) 785 9876
Email: [email protected]
20
CANADA (Cont.)
Mr. Satender SINGH
Policy Analyst,
Climate Change and Energy Division
Department of Foreign Affairs &
International Trade
125 Sussex Drive
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0G2
Tel: (1 613) 944 1455
Fax: (1 613) 944 0064
Email: [email protected]
DENMARK
Mr. Ture HAMMAR
Programme Manager
Danish Energy Agency
44 Ameliegade
1256 Copenhagen K
Tel: (45 33) 92 67 94
Fax: (45 33) 92 68 67
Email: [email protected]
Ms. Fanny MISSFELDT
UNEP
Collaborating Centre on Energy & Environment
P.O. Box 49
4000 Roskilde
Tel: (45 46) 32 22 88
Fax: (45 46) 32 19 99
Email: [email protected]
CROATIA
Mr. Zvonimir KATUSIN
Assistant Director
Meteorological & Hydrological Service
Gric 3
10 000 Zagreb
Tel: (385 1) 456 5706
Fax: (385 1) 431 026
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Flemming TOST
Deloitte & Touche
H. C. Andersens Boulevard 2
1780 Kobenhavn V
Tel: (45 33) 76
Fax: (45 33) 76
Email: [email protected]
CZECH REPUBLIC
Mr. Lubomir NONDEK
c/o Ministry of the Environment
DHV CR (Environmental Consultants)
Taboritska 23
Praha 3
Tel: (420 2) 67 09 23 72
Fax: (420 2) 67 09 23 60
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Nicolai ZARGANIS
Head of Section
Danish Energy Agency
44 Amaliegade
DK-1256 Copenhagen K
Tel: (45 33) 92 68 24
Fax: (45 33) 92 68 67
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Jan PRETEL
Head, Dept. of Global Climate Change
Czech Hydrometeorological Institute
Na Sabatce 17
143 06 Prague 4
Tel: (420 2) 44 03 24 14
Fax: (420 2) 44 03 24 15
Email: [email protected]
ESTONIA
Mr. Tiit KALLASTE
Programme Director
Stockholm Environment Institute Tallinn Centre
Lai 34, PO Box 160
10502 Tallinn
Tel: (37 2) 631 4200
Fax: (37 2) 631 3240
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Milos TICHY
Consultant
Tristolicna 5
150 00 Prague 5
Tel: (420 2) 26 71 47 40
Fax: (420 2) 26 71 43 60
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Andres KRATOVITS
Counsellor
Ministry of the Environment
Toompuiestee 24
EE 15172 Tallinn
Tel: (37 2) 626 2841
Fax: (37 2) 626 2845
Email: [email protected]
21
FINLAND
Mr. Magnus CEDERLOF
Senior Technical Advisor
Ministry of the Environment
PO Box 380
FIN-00131 Helsinki
Tel: (358 9) 19 91 94 66
Fax: (358 9) 19 91 94 53
Email: [email protected]
FRANCE
Mr. Jean-Jacques BECKER
Chargé de mission
Mission interministerielle de l'effet de serre
35 rue St Dominique
75700 Paris
Tel: (33 1) 42 75 87 13
Fax: (33 1) 47 53 76 34
Email: [email protected]
Ms. Erja FAGERLUND
Special Adviser
Ministry of Trade & Industry
PO Box 37
00131 Helsinki
Tel: (358 9) 1608 8846
Fax: (358 9) 160 2695
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Cedric PHILIBERT
Senior Consultant
UNEP / ADEME
Tour Mirabeau, 39-43 quai André Citroën
Paris 75015
Tel: (33 1) 44 37 30 03
Fax: (33 1) 44 37 14 74
Email: [email protected]
Ms. Lena GRANVIK
EU Assistant
Environmental Protection Department
Ministry of the Environment
Ratakatu 3
PO Box 399
FIN-00121 Helsinki
Tel: (358 9) 1991 97 27
Fax: (358 9) 1991 9630
Email: [email protected]
Ms. Béatrice QUENAULT
Mission interministerielle de l'effet de serre
35 rue St. Dominique
Paris
Tel: (33 1) 42 75 87 14
Fax: (33 1) 47 53 76 34
Email: [email protected]
GERMANY
Ms. Regina BETZ
Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and
Innovation Research
Breslauer Strasse 48
D-76139 Karlsruhe
Tel: (49 721) 68 09 249
Fax: (49 721) 68 91 52
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Markku LEHTONEN
Senior Advisor
Ministry of the Environment
PO Box 380
Helsinki
Tel: (358 9) 1991 94 92
Fax: (358 9) 1991 94 33
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Dietrich BROCKHAGEN
Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature
Conservation & Nuclear Safety
Bernkasteler Strasse 8
PO Box 12 06 29
D-53048 Bonn
Tel: (49 228) 305 2313
Fax: (49 228) 305 3337
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Heikki SISULA
Environmental Counsellor
Ministry of the Environment
PO Box 380
FIN-00131 Helsinki
Tel: (358 9) 1991 9490
Fax: (358 9) 1991 9433
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Enno HARDERS
Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature
Conservation & Nuclear Safety
Bernkasteler Strasse 8
PO Box 12 06 29
D-53048 Bonn
Tel: (49 228) 305 2315
Fax: (49 228) 305 3337
Email: [email protected]
22
GERMANY (Cont.)
Mr. Anke HEROLD
Oeko-Institut
Novalisstrasse 10
10115 Berlin
Tel: (49 30) 2804 8686
Fax: (49 30) 2804 8688
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Franz Josef SCHAFHAUSEN
Head of Division Z II 6
Federal Ministry for Environment,
Conservation & Nuclear Safety
Bernkasteler Strasse 8
P.O.B. 12 06 29
53048 Bonn 1
Tel: (49 228) 305 2350
Fax: (49 228) 305 3971
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Yorgos KLIDONAS
Counselor
Permanent Delegation of Greece to the OECD
Tel: (33 1) 45 02 24 03
Fax: (33 1) 42 21 40 09
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Dimitris P. LALAS
Director
National Observatory of Athens
Lofos Nymfon, Thission
11810 Athens
Tel: (30 1) 34 90 104
Fax: (30 1) 34 90 120
Email: [email protected]
Nature
Mr. Panayotis NICOLARAS
Director
Ministry for Development
80 Michalakopoulou Str.
10192 Athens
Tel: (30 1) 777 9583
Fax: (30 1) 770 9346
Mr. Manfred SCHULZ
Deputy Head of Division
Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology
PO Box 14 02 60
D-53107 Bonn
Tel: (49 228) 615 2168
Fax: (49 228) 615 3457
Email: [email protected]
Ms. Elpida POLITI
Ministry for the Environment, Physical Planning
and Public Works
15, Amaliados Street
Athens 115-23
Tel: (30 1) 643 5740
Fax: (30 1) 643 4470
Email: [email protected]
GREECE
Dr. Constantin CHATZIYANNAKIS
Head of Section
Ministry for Development
80 Michalakopoulou Str.,
10192 Athens
Tel: (30 1) 770 3106
Fax: (30 1) 770 9346 / 771 7612
HUNGARY
Ms. Zsuzsanna IVANYI
Project Manager
Regional Environmental Center for Central &
Eastern Europe
2000 Szentendre
Ady Endre 9-11
Tel: (36 26) 311 127
Fax: (36 26) 311 281
Email: [email protected]
Ms. Olga DRITSA-DOSCHORI
Head of Department
Ministry of National Economy
1, Coryarou str. and Ermou str.
Athens 10563
Tel: (30 1) 328 6323
Fax: (30 1) 328 6309
Dr. Tamàs PALVÖGYI
Director General
Department of Strategy Planning and
Co-operation
Ministry of Environment
PO Box 351
1394 Budapest
Tel: (36 1) 457 3447
Fax: (36 1) 201 2091
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Konstantinos HATZIGIANNAKIS
Head of Division
Energy Policy Directorate
Ministry for Development
80 Michalakopoulou Str.
10192 Athens
Tel: (30 1) 777
Fax: (30 1) 770
23
HUNGARY (Cont.)
Mr. Istvàn POMAZI
Chief Advisor
Department of Strategy Planning and
Co-operation
Ministry of Environment
PO Box 351
1394 Budapest
Tel: (36 1) 457 3383
Fax: (36 1) 201 2091
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Kazuhiro MORIMOTO
Permanent Delegation of Japan to the OECD
Tel: (33 1) 53 76 61 92
Fax: (33 1) 45 63 05 44
Email: [email protected]
Prof. Tatsuyoshi SAIJO
Institute of Social and Economic Research
Osaka University
Ibaraki
Osaka 567-0047
Tel: (81 6) 68 79 85 71
Fax: (81 6) 68 78 27 66
Email: [email protected]
ITALY
Dr. Giovannino DI PALMA
Ministry of Industry
Via Molise 2
00187 Rome
Tel: (39 06) 47 05 27 00
Fax: (39 06) 47 88 79 67
Ms. Keiko SEGAWA
Permanent Delegation of Japan to the OECD
Tel: (33 1) 53 76 61 82
Fax: (33 1) 45 63 05 44
Email: [email protected]
JAPAN
Mr. Kazuhiro ISHIKAWA
Chief, Global Environmental Affairs Office
Ministry of International Trade & Industry
(MITI)
1-3-1 Kasumigaseki, Chiyoda-ku
Tokyo 100-8901
Tel: (81 3) 35 01 78 30
Fax: (81 3) 35 01 76 97
Email: [email protected]
KOREA
Mr. Jai-Chul CHOI
Director, Environment Co-operation Division
Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade
1105 Lima Building, 146-1 Soosong-dong,
Chongro-ku
Seoul 110-775
Tel: (82 2) 720 2329
Fax: (82 2) 722 7581
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Shigemoto KAJIHARA
Director,
Office of International Strategy on
Climate Change
Global Environment Department
Environment Agency
1-2-2 Kasumigaseki
Chiyoda-Ku
Tokyo 100-8975
Tel: (81 3) 5521 8246
Fax: (81 3) 3581 3348
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Young-Dae JEONG
Senior Programme Manager
Ministry of Environment
Government Complex Kwacheon
Kwacheon 427 760
Tel: (82 2) 504 9245
Fax: (82 2) 504 9206
Email: [email protected]
Mr. In-Su LEE
Director General for International Co-operation
Ministry of Environment
Government Complex Kwachon
Kwachon 422-960
Tel: (82 2) 504 9245
Fax: (82 2) 504 9206
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Daisuke MATSUNAGA
Director,
Climate Change Division
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
2-2-1, Kasumigaseki
Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 100-0013
Tel: (81 3) 35 81 38 82 or 35 80 33 11 (ext.2799)
Fax: (81 3) 35 92 03 64
Email: [email protected]
24
LATVIA
Mrs. Ingrida APENE
Senior Official
Ministry of Environmental
Regional Development
25 Peldu Str.
LV-1494 Riga
Tel: (37 1) 702 6508
Fax: (37 1) 782 0442
Email: [email protected]
Protection
Mr. Blas PEREZ HENRIQUEZ
Phd Candidate
Goldman School of Public Policy
University of California, Berkeley
2607 Hearst Avenue
Berkeley, CA 94720 7320
Tel: (1 510) 643 5170
Fax: (1 510) 643 9657
Email: [email protected]
&
Mr. Valdis KREGERS
Director, Energy Department
Latvian Development Agency
Brivibas Str. 55
LV-1010 Riga
Tel: (371) 701 3265
Fax: (371) 782 1489
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Fernando TUDELA
Ministry of Environment, Renewable Resources
& Fisheries (SEMARNAP)
Lateral Anillo Periférico Sur 4209, 6th floor
Fracc. Jardines de la Montaña, Tlalpan
14210 México D.F.
Tel: (52 5) 628 0704
Fax: (52 5) 628 0706
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Janis REKIS
Specialist
Department of Energy
Latvian Development Agency
Brivibas Str. 55
LV-1010 Riga
Tel: (371) 701 3267
Fax: (371) 782 1489
Email: [email protected]
NETHERLANDS
Mr. L.J.M. BLANSON HENKEMANS
Manager, Dutch JI Programme
Ministry of Economic Affairs
Bezuidenhoutseweg 6
Den Haag
Tel: (31 76) 354 5772
Fax: (31 70) 379 7423
Email: [email protected]
LITHUANIA
Mr. Petras KORKUTIS
Head
Lithuanian Hydrometeorological Service
6, Rudnios Street
Vilnius GSP 2600
Tel: (370 2) 751 194
Fax: (370 2) 724 160
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Bill HARE
Climate Change Policy Advisor
Greenpeace International
Keizersgracht 176
1016 DW Amsterdam
Tel: (31 20) 523 6222
Fax: (31 20) 523 6200
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Wim IESTRA
Ministry of Environment
PO Box 30945
2500 GX The Hague
Tel: (31 70) 339 4086
Fax: (31 70) 339 1310
Email: [email protected]
MEXICO
Ms. Soledad LEAL
Counsellor
Permanent Delegation of Mexico to the OECD
Tel: (33 1) 53 67 86 13
Fax: (33 1) 47 20 33 92
Email: [email protected]
25
NETHERLANDS (Cont.)
Mr. Tinus PULLES
TNO Institute of Environmental
Energy Research & Process
PO Box 342
7300 AH Apeldoorn
Tel: (31 55) 549-3762
Fax: (31 55) 549 3252
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Georg BØRSTING
Adviser
Ministry of the Environment
PO Box 8013 Dep
N-0030 Oslo
Tel: (47 22) 24 60 92
Fax: (47 22) 24 27 55
Email: [email protected]
Sciences,
Ms. Anne Johanne ENGER
Adviser
Norwegian Pollution Control Authority
P.O. Box 8100 Dep.
0032 Oslo
Tel: (47 22) 57 36 43
Fax: (47 22) 67 67 06
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Walter RUIJGROK
KEMA
Utrechtseweg 310
6800 ET Arnhem
Tel: (31 26) 356 2374
Fax: (31 26) 446 0483
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Toon VAN HARMELUS
TNO Institute of Environmental
Energy Research & Process
PO Box 342
7300 AH Apeldoorn
Tel: (31 55) 549 3762
Fax: (31 55) 549 3252
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Kjersti FLATHEN
Ministry of Finance
P.O. Box 8008 Dep
0030 Oslo
Tel: (47 22) 24 43 66
Fax: (47 22) 24 95 05
Email: [email protected]
Sciences,
Ms. Marte GERHARDSEN
Executive Officer
Royal Ministry of Foreign Affairs
7 Juni Plassen - Victoria Terrasse
P.O. Box 8114 Dep
N-0032 Oslo
Tel: (47 22) 24 36 03
Fax: (47 22) 24 95 80
Email: [email protected]
NEW ZEALAND
Mr. Peter ALSOP
Policy Analyst
Ministry of Commerce
PO Box 1473
Wellington
Tel: (64 4) 474 2616
Fax: (64 4) 499 0969
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Peer STIANSEN
Adviser
Ministry of the Environment
PO Box 8013, Dep.
N-0030 Oslo
Tel: (47 22) 24 59 67
Fax: (47 22) 24 27 55
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Stuart CALMAN
Senior Policy Analyst
Ministry for the Environment
84 Boulcott Street, PO Box 10-362
Wellington
Tel: (64 4) 917 7411
Fax: (64 4) 917 7523
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Einar TELNES
Det Norske Veritas
Veritasveien 1
N-1322 Hovik
Tel: (47 67) 57 78 17
Fax: (47 67) 57 90 71
Email: [email protected]
NORWAY
Mr. Lars Erik AAMOT
Adviser
Royal Ministry of Petroleum & Energy
PO Box 8148 Dep.
N-0033 Oslo
Tel: (47 22) 24 63 57
Fax: (47 22) 24 95 66
Email: [email protected]
26
NORWAY (Cont.)
Mr. Ole Christian WASENDEN
Senior Executive Officer
Ministry of Industry and Trade
PO Box 8014 Dep.
N-0030 Oslo
Tel: (47 22) 24 05 33
Fax: (47 22) 24 05 05
Email:
[email protected]
Mr. Nuno LACASTA
Director
Centre for Environmental Law &
Sustainable Development
Edificio Leste - Tapada da Ajuda
Lisbon
Tel: (351 21) 361 6748
Fax: (351 21) 361 6752
Email: [email protected]
Ms. Teresa NEVES ANACLETO
Divisão de Ambiente Atmosférico
Rua da Murgueira
Zambujal
2720 865 Amadora
Tel: (351 21) 472 14 55
Fax: (351 21) 471 9074
Email: [email protected]
POLAND
Mr. Wieslaw PAWLIOTTI
Head of Division
Ministry of Economy
Plac Trzech Krzyzy 3/5
00-507 Warsaw
Tel: (48 22) 628-9129
Fax: (48 22) 628-0882
ROMANIA
Mrs. Serena ADLER
Environmental Senior Adviser and
Counsellor to the Minister
Ministry of Waters, Forests &
Environmental Protection
12, Bd. Libertatii , sector 5
70 005 Bucharest
Tel: (40 1) 410 0215
Fax: (40 1) 430 2141
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Maciej J. SADOWSKI
Vice Director
National Fund for Environment Protection and
Water Management
Kolektorska Str. 4
01-692 Warsaw
Tel: (48 22) 849-0079 (ext. 358)
Fax: (48 22) 853 37 40
Email: [email protected]
PORTUGAL
Mrs. Maria ARLETE DE GOUVEIA
Conseiller
Ministry of Industry & Energy
Av. 5 de Outubro, 87
Lisbon
Tel: (351 21) 792 2720
Fax: (351 21) 793 9540
Ms. Lavinia ANDREI
Director
TERRA III - CANCEE
Brasov Str., No. 19, Bl OD5, Sc. A, ap22. S6
773691 Bucharest
Tel: (40 1) 745 2487
Fax: (40 1) 745 2487
Email: [email protected]
Ms. Teresa COSTA PEREIRA
Direccão Geral do Ambiente
Rua da Murgueira - Zambujal
2720 865 Amadora
Tel: (351 21) 472 8200
Fax: (351 21) 471 9075
Email: [email protected]
RUSSIAN FEDERATION
Mr. Vladimir H. BERDIN
Chief, Division on Global Environmental
Agreements
Russian State Committee on Environmental
Protection
4/6 Bolshaya Grusinskaya St.
123 812 Moscow
Tel: (7 095) 254 6656
Fax: (7 095) 254 8283
Email: [email protected] (home)
[email protected] (office)
Mr. Mario Placido M. GARCIA
Head of Division
Ministerio da Economia
Ave. 5 de Outubro, 87
1050 Lisbon
Tel: (351 21) 792-0753
Fax: (351 21) 793 9540
Email: [email protected]
27
RUSSIAN FEDERATION (Cont.)
Mr. Alexander GOLUB
Senior Economist
Harvard Institute for International Development
34 Bolshaya Cheryomushkinskaya, Office 218a
117259 Moscow
Tel: (7 095) 120 3020 / 128 9385
Fax: (7 502) 224 7698
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Ivo NOVAK
Counsellor to the Government
Ministry of Economic Affairs
Kotnikova 5
1000 Ljubljana
Tel: (386 61) 178 3287
Fax: (386 61) 132 6094
Email: [email protected]
SWEDEN
Mr. Leif BERNERGARD
Swedish Environmental Protection Agency
S-106 48 Stockholm
Tel: (46 8) 698 1119
Fax: (46 8) 698 1504
Email: [email protected]
Mrs. Marina E. LENEVA
Principal Specialist, ROOM 413
Ecological and economic Research and
Information Center
8/1 Kedrova Street
117 874 Moscow
Tel: (7 095) 413 6263
Fax: (7 095) 413 6263
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Olle BJORK
Energy Division
Ministry of Industry
S-103 33 Stockholm
Tel: (46 8) 405 1997
Fax: (46 8) 405 2280
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Oleg PLOUJNIKOV
Head of Division
Ministry of Fuel and Energy
Kitaigirodsky proezd, 7
103074 Moscow
Tel: (7 095) 220 6247
Fax: (7 095) 929 1627
Email: [email protected]
Ms. Gudrun KNUTSSON
Head of Section, International Climate-related
Energy Investment Programme
Swedish National Energy Agency
Administration
Box 310
S-631 04 Eskilstuna
Tel: (46 16) 544 2072
Fax: (46 16) 544 2264
Email: [email protected]
SLOVAK REPUBLIC
Ms. Gabriela FISCHEROVA
Ministry of the Environment
Nám, L'. Stúra 1
812 35 Bratislava
Tel: (421 7) 59 56 25 46 / 59 56 22 21
Fax: (421 7) 59 56 26 62 / 59 56 20 31
Email: [email protected]
SWITZERLAND
Ms. Anne ARQUIT NIEDERBERGER
Program Manager
Federal Office for Foreign Economic Affairs
Effingerstrasse 1
3003 Berne
Tel: (41 31) 323 0885
Fax: (41 31) 324 0958
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Jozef STAHL
Department of Energy Policy and Regulation
Ministry of Economy
Mierova 19
Bratislava 827 15
Tel: (421 7) 48 54 19 20
Fax: (421 7) 48 54 39 18
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Urs BRODMANN
Factor Consulting + Management Ltd.
Binzstrasse 18
8045 Zurich
Tel: (41 1) 455 6100
Fax: (41 1) 455 6069
Email: [email protected]
SLOVENIA
Mr. Andrej KRANJC
Counsellor to the Government
Ministry of Environment,
Hydrometeorological Institute
Vojkova 1/b
1000 Ljubljana
Tel: (386 61) 178 4255
Fax: (386 61) 133 1396
Email: [email protected]
28
SWITZERLAND (Cont.)
Mr. José ROMERO
Swiss Federal Office of Environment, Forests
and Landscape
CH-3003 Berne
Tel: (41 31) 322 6862
Fax: (41 31) 323 0349
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Nicholas HUGHES
British Petroleum Company plc, The
Britannic House, 1 Finsbury Circus
London
Tel: (44 171) 496 4861
Fax: (44 171) 496 4707
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Richard JACKSON
Senior Policy Advisor on Economics and
Environment
Confederation of British Industry (CBI)
103 New Oxford Street
London WC1A 1DU
Tel: (44 171) 395 8052
Fax:
Email: [email protected]
UKRAINE
Mr. Vladimir DEMKIN
Expert to the
Ministry for Environmental Protection & Nuclear
Safety
5 Khreschatyk Str.
Kyiv 1
Tel: (380 44) 565 8505
Fax: (380 44) 565 8505
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Paul LANSER
Senior Economist
Department of Trade & Industry
51 Buckingham Palace Road
London SW1W 9SS
Tel: (44 171) 215 5837
Fax: (44 171) 215 1071
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Georgy PANCHENKO Ph. D.
Senior Expert
Agency for Rational Energy Use and ecology
P.O. Box 48
Kyiv 252133
Tel: (380 44) 268 8088
Fax: (380 44) 268 8451
Email: [email protected]
Mr. James LOWEN
Department of the Environment, Transport &
the Regions
Ashdown House
123 Victoria Street
London SW1E 6DE
Tel: (44 171) 890 5212
Fax: (44 171) 890 5219
Email: [email protected]
UNITED KINGDOM
Ms. Melanie EDDIS
Consultant
KPMG
8 Salisbury Square
London EC4Y 8BB
Tel: (44 171) 311 8839
Fax: (44 171) 311 8971
Email: [email protected]
Ms. Fiona MULLINS
Senior Consultant
Environmental Resources Management
Eaton House, Wallbrook Court,
North Hinksey Lane
Oxford OX2 0QS
Tel: (44 1865) 384 869
Fax: (44 1865) 384 812
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Matthew EVANS
IPE
International House,
1 St. Katherine's Way
London E1 9UN
Tel: (44 171) 265 3642
Fax: (44 171) 481 8485
Email: [email protected]
Ms. Jo SIMONS
Economic Advisor
Department of the Environment, Transport &
the Regions
Ashdown House
123 Victoria Street
London SW1E 6DE
Tel: (44 171) 890 5206
Fax: (44 171) 890 5219
Email: [email protected]
Ms. Charlotte GREZO
Manager, Climate Change Programmes
The British Petroleum Company plc
Britannic House, 1 Finsbury Circus
London
Tel: (44 171) 496 4861
Fax: (44 171) 496 4707
Email: [email protected]
29
UNITED KINGDOM (Cont.)
Mr. Jacob WERKSMAN
Senior Lawyer
FIELD
46-47 Russell Square
London WC1B 4JP
Tel: (44 171) 637 7950
Fax: (44 171) 637 7951
Email: [email protected]
Ms. Marcia GOWEN
Senior Consultant
ICF Consulting Inc
1850 K Street, Suite 1000
Washington
Tel: (1 202) 862 2967
Fax: (1 202) 862 1144
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Johannes HEISTER
Economist
The World Bank
1818 H Street, NW
Tel: (1 202) 458 4280
Fax: (1 202) 522 2130
Email: [email protected]
UNITED STATES
Mr. Joe ALDY
Council of economic Advisers
Tel: (1 202) 395 1455
Fax: (1 202) 395 6870
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Richard BRADLEY
Senior Advisor for Global Change
US Department of Energy
1000 Independence Ave., SW
Washington DC 20585
Tel: (1 202) 586 0154
Fax: (1 202) 586 4341
Email: [email protected] /
[email protected]
Mr. Steven LEE
US Department of Energy
Office of Policy
1000 Independence Ave., SW
Washington DC 20585
Tel: (1 202) 586 0836
Fax: (1 202) 586 4341
Email: [email protected]
Ms. Jennifer MACEDONIA
US EPA
401 M. Street SW 6204J
Washington, DC 20460
Tel: (1 202) 564 9123
Fax: (1 202) 565 2141
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Lawrence E. COHEN
International Economist
Office of International Energy and
Commodities Policy
US Department of State
Washington DC 20520-3535
Tel: (1 202) 647 1486
Fax: (1 202) 647 4037
Email: [email protected]
Ms. Jennifer MORGAN
Senior Program Associate
World Wildlife Fund - US
1250 24th Street NW Suite 600
Washington DC
Tel: (1 202) 778 9514
Fax: (1 202) 331 2391
Email: [email protected]
Mr. David D. DONIGER
Counsel to the Assistant Administrator for Air &
Radiation
US EPA
401 M Street SW (6101)
Washington DC 20460
Tel: (1 202) 260 7400
Fax: (1 202) 260 5155
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Richard MORGENSTERN
US Department of State
Washington DC 20520-3535
Tel: (1 202) 647 0367
Fax: (1 202) 647 4037
Email: [email protected]
Ms. Shari FRIEDMAN
US EPA
401 M Street SW (6101)
Washington DC 20460
Tel: (1 202) 260 9718
Fax: (1 202) 260 6405
Email: [email protected]
30
UNITED STATES (Cont.)
Mr. John PALMISANO
Director, Environmental Policy & Compliance
Enron Corp.
1775 Eye Street, NW, Suite 800
Washington
Tel: (1 202) 466 9159
Fax: (1 202) 331 4717
Email: [email protected]
Ms. Christine ZUMKELLER
Manager
UN FCCC Secretariat
PO Box 260124
D-53153 Bonn
Germany
Tel: (49 228) 815 1620
Fax: (49 228) 815 1999
Email: [email protected]
Ms. Annie PETSONK
International Counsel
Environmental Defense Fund
1875 Connecticut Ave,
NW. 10th Floor, Suite 1016
Washington DC 20009
Tel: (1 202) 387 3500
Fax: (1 202) 234 6049
Email: [email protected]
Ms. Susan WICKWIRE
Foreign Affairs Officer
US Department of State
OES/EGC, Room 4330
Washington DC 20520-7818
Tel: (1 202) 647 4069
Fax: (1 202) 647 0191
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Glenn WISER
Project Attorney
Center for International Environmental Law
(CIEL)
1367 Connecticut Avenue, NW Suite #300
Washington DC 20036
Tel: (1 202) 785 8700
Fax: (1 202) 785 8701
Email: [email protected]
UNFCCC SECRETARIAT
Mr. Tahar HADJ-SADOK
Coordinator, Science & Technology Programme
UN FCCC Secretariat
PO Box 260124
D-53153 Bonn
Germany
Tel: (49 228) 815 1000
Fax: (49 228) 815 1999
Email: [email protected]
31
OECD SECRETARIAT
2, rue André Pascal, 75775 Paris Cedex 16
ENVIRONMENT DIRECTORATE
Pollution Prevention and Control Division - Fax: (33 1) 45 24 78 76
Jan CORFEE MORLOT (Principal Administrator)
Tel: (33 1) 45 24 79 24
Jane ELLIS (Administrator)
Tel: (33 1) 45 24 15 98
Stéphane WILLEMS (Administrator)
Tel: (33 1) 45 24 96 97
Aleksi HOKKANEN (Consultant)
Tel: (33 1) 45 24 76 93
Lyndia LEVASSEUR (Secretariat)
Tel: (33 1) 45 24 76 93
Carolyn STURGEON (Secretariat)
Tel: (33 1) 45 24 19 66
INTERNATIONAL ENERGY AGENCY
9, rue de la Féderation, 75739 Paris CEDEX 15
Energy & Environment Division - Fax: (33 1) 40 57 67 09
Alessandro LANZA (Principal Administrator)
Tel: (33 1) 40 57 67 23
Richard BARON (Administrator)
Tel: (33 1) 40 57 67 24
Martina BOSI (Administrator)
Tel: (33 1) 40 57 67 22
Maggy MADDEN (Secretariat)
Tel: (33 1) 40 57 67 17
32