ecbi Publications

ecbi's Publications and Policy Analysis Unit (PPAU) generates information and advice for developing country negotiators that is relevant to the climate negotiations under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).  

Developing countries often lack the economic and institutional capacity for policy analysis. If negotiators are unable to engage proactively by submitting proposals, responding to proposals from other States, and assessing the impact of global climate policy decisions on their individual States, progress in the negotiations can be hampered by the lack of alternatives and uncertainity. The differences in analytic capacity between developing countries and the industrialised world are often profound – developing countries lack support from organisations like the OECD, for instance, which has an immense apparatus producing thorough and focused reports, including direct advice on future policy responses to each of member country.

ecbi publications aim to be relevant to ongoing negotiations under the UNFCCC, timely, and trustworthy. PPAU works with negotiators from developing countries, sometimes through Editorial Committees, to identify UNFCCC issues where further analysis and policy advice is needed. Global experts are then teamed up with negotiators from devleoping countries to produce Policy Briefs and Discussion Notes. This partnership between experts and negotiators helps to ensure that the process of producing a Brief addresses the specific concerns of developing country negotiators; builds the capacity of developing country co-authors in policy analysis; and also builds ownership of the analysis. 

For new negotiators, and for use in ecbi Regional and Pre-COP Training Workshops, PPAU produces Background Papers and a series of Pocket Guides. These generally provide a more basic analysis of issues for newcomers to the process, along with the background and history of the issue in the negotiations. 

Oxford Fellowships & Seminar 2007 Report

During the 2007 Seminar, discussions took place on the post-2012 UN regime on climate change; the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), reduction of emissions from deforestation in developing countries; the operating modalities of the Adaptation Fund (in particular, the institutional aspects); and capacity building 

Author:
Publication Date:
September, 2007

COP13/MOP3 Side Event

Author:
Publication Date:
December, 2007

COP12/MOP2 Side Event

Author:
Publication Date:
November, 2007

ecbi Phase I Evaluation

Author:
Rod Janssen
Publication Date:
March, 2007

Sida funded an independent review of ecbi for its 2011-2013 activities and found that the ecbi has achieved its overall outcomes as outlined in the report. The ecbi was found to fulfil a need not met by other initiatives, attributed to the fact that it does not push a specific agenda, and allows open discussion amongst negotiators in a setting separate from the negotiations process.

The ecbi has become an established presence in the climate change negotiation field - set apart by its participatory, impartial, developing countryled approach, which is rooted in negotiation experience. ecbi input has enabled developing country negotiators to collaborate and develop joint positions. This has led to impacts on negotiation decisions.

One of the key underpinning goals of the ecbi is to build trust between negotiators, both amongst developing country participants, and between those from the developing country and Europe. Respondents communicated strongly that they believed the ecbi is enabling trust building between participating negotiators, and were able to give examples of how this is manifest.

The evaluation also found that participants did feel they were better informed as a result of the ecbi.

Useful examples were identified of how this resulted in a more level playing field, as developing country negotiators and women negotiators often have less access to information resources than other stakeholders in the climate change negotiations. The ecbi also considers gender in its programming and is fulfilling its gender objectives.

Sida funded an independent review of ecbi for its 2011-2013 activities and found that the ecbi has achieved its overall outcomes as outlined in the report. The ecbi was found to fulfil a need not met by other initiatives, attributed to the fact that it does not push a specific agenda, and allows open discussion amongst negotiators in a setting separate from the negotiations process.

The ecbi has become an established presence in the climate change negotiation field - set apart by its participatory, impartial, developing countryled approach, which is rooted in negotiation experience. ecbi input has enabled developing country negotiators to collaborate and develop joint positions. This has led to impacts on negotiation decisions.

One of the key underpinning goals of the ecbi is to build trust between negotiators, both amongst developing country participants, and between those from the developing country and Europe. Respondents communicated strongly that they believed the ecbi is enabling trust building between participating negotiators, and were able to give examples of how this is manifest.

The evaluation also found that participants did feel they were better informed as a result of the ecbi.

Useful examples were identified of how this resulted in a more level playing field, as developing country negotiators and women negotiators often have less access to information resources than other stakeholders in the climate change negotiations. The ecbi also considers gender in its programming and is fulfilling its gender objectives.

Author:
Lucy Heaven Taylor
Publication Date:
January, 2014

Whether or not the regime emerging from the current negotiations under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) will be based on an explicit cost/burden sharing formula, the debate about (implied) costs/burdens will be central. Such a debate cannot be genuinely meaningful in the absence of an acceptable operationalisation of Article 3.1 in general, and of the concept of ‘respective capability’ in particular.

The Brief proposes a measure for national 'differentiated economic capabilities ('ability to pay') as integral part of an operationalisation. The primary purpose of the measure is to define or assess climate change cost/burden sharing (schemes). To illustrate the potential use of this methodology the Brief considers two examples: assessing the fairness of a given cost distribution; and developing a (rule-based) 'graduation scheme' regarding obligations to pay.

This is a second revised edition of the original ecbi Policy Brief by Benito Müller & Lavan Mahadeva that served as summary for policy makers of a technical report by the same authors published by the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies, available at the link below. The revision is mainly with regards to the final section on determining ‘Levels of Capability’.

Author:
Benito Müller and Lavan Mahadeva
Publication Date:
January, 2014

Invitation by the The Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Indonesia to the Pre-GCF Board Meeting Luncheon Discussion on “Country Ownership and Enhancing Direct Access”, held on 17 February 2014 in Bali, Indonesia. The discussion was aimed to provide a space for the Board and observer organizations to examine the key issues that need to be addressed relating to realising country ownership by enhancing direct access in different ways based on country circumstances in the design of GCF. It featured presentations of ideas from the Board members/alternates and experts as well as lessons learned from national and international funding institutions.

Invitation by the The Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Indonesia to the Pre-GCF Board Meeting Luncheon Discussion on “Country Ownership and Enhancing Direct Access”, held on 17 February 2014 in Bali, Indonesia. The discussion was aimed to provide a space for the Board and observer organizations to examine the key issues that need to be addressed relating to realising country ownership by enhancing direct access in different ways based on country circumstances in the design of GCF. It featured presentations of ideas from the Board members/alternates and experts as well as lessons learned from national and international funding institutions.

Author:
Publication Date:
February, 2014
Author:
ecbi Executive Committee
Publication Date:
May, 2011

This Rough Guide to Enhanced Direct Access (EDA) by Benito Müller provides the key conceptual tools needed to understand EDA and exemplifies the main access models graphically with a number of figures, meant to illustrate the key differences between these models.

This Rough Guide to Enhanced Direct Access (EDA) by Benito Müller provides the key conceptual tools needed to understand EDA and exemplifies the main access models graphically with a number of figures, meant to illustrate the key differences between these models.

Author:
OCP/ ecbi/ OIES
Publication Date:
March, 2014

The Green Climate Fund (GCF) Board is in the process of considering "additional modalities that further enhance direct access". A devolved and decentralized access modality has been proposed as an alternative to the more traditional model, where detailed project approval is carried out at the multilateral level. This ecbi Policy Brief by Benito Müller and William Pizer explains the relation between "enhanced direct access" and "programmatic approaches," and addresses certain concerns raised about this decentralized/devolved access model, using seven case studies to illustrate current practices that could provide ideas and insights about how the GCF might design its own approach. The case studies are focused around four questions:
a. How does the funding model generally work, in terms of disbursing funds?
b. Who decides what? What decisions are taken by the governing funding body and what decisions are devolved and to whom?
c. How does this funding model ensure the governing body’s objectives are met, and how does it ensure that the various fiduciary standards and safeguards are satisfied?
d. How is the funding level for a particular programme determined?

The Green Climate Fund (GCF) Board is in the process of considering "additional modalities that further enhance direct access". A devolved and decentralized access modality has been proposed as an alternative to the more traditional model, where detailed project approval is carried out at the multilateral level. This ecbi Policy Brief by Benito Müller and William Pizer explains the relation between "enhanced direct access" and "programmatic approaches," and addresses certain concerns raised about this decentralized/devolved access model, using seven case studies to illustrate current practices that could provide ideas and insights about how the GCF might design its own approach. The case studies are focused around four questions:
a. How does the funding model generally work, in terms of disbursing funds?
b. Who decides what? What decisions are taken by the governing funding body and what decisions are devolved and to whom?
c. How does this funding model ensure the governing body’s objectives are met, and how does it ensure that the various fiduciary standards and safeguards are satisfied?
d. How is the funding level for a particular programme determined?

Author:
Benito Müller & William Pizer, with contributions by Sophie de Coninck, Dan Morrow, Gonzalo Serrano de la Rosa, Anju Sharma & Ced Hesse
Publication Date:
March, 2014

Pages