Climate Change Negotiations Game

July 2014
Instructions and Participants
Instructions
The objective of this game is for the participants, all Parties (and several observers) to the United
Nations Framework Agreement to agree on a Manila Agreement on Implementing the Paris
Agreement. In this game, the setting is Manila, Philippines, in December 2018 where Parties of
the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change are meeting to finalize implementation
details of the Paris Agreement so countries can finalize their implementation plans.
The game will begin with the opening Plenary session where Parties will deliver opening
statements that will state how is climate change going to affect each country or the constituencies
they represent, what it wants the world to do about the issue, the kind of agreement the Party
wants to achieve in Manila, and what the county/organization is willing to do on climate change.
Each party shall also articulate their initial positions on the issues listed below.

In the negotiation, the following issues will have to be addressed by the players (acting out roles
as Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Paris Agreement):
(1)

Principles

What principles should guide the Parties in implementing the Paris Agreement?
Principle of Common
environmental integrity, environmental, governance, social safeguards, and comparability and
transparency of the rules
Is the Common but differentiated responsible principle and the historical
responsibility principle still valid?
http://www.fyeg.org/news/cop21-guide-4-differentiation
The principle of common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR) is stated in the Rio
Declaration (Principle 7). It is reasserted in the preamble of the UNFCCC and in the article 3 as a
guiding principle:
The Parties should protect the climate system for the benefit of present and future generations
of humankind, on the basis of equity and in accordance with their common but differentiated
responsibilities and respective capabilities. Accordingly, the developed country Parties should
take the lead in combating climate change and the adverse effects thereof.
This principle means that all parties under the Convention have a common responsibility to
address climate change. However, as the developed countries emitted the most greenhouse gases

(GHG) in the past the so-called historical emissions they have to assume a bigger
responsibility than the developing countries. The principle thus accounts for the notion of equity.
THE PAST WILL HAUNT YOU! IT IS EXISTENT!
What is the role of human rights and respecting the integrity of ecosystems in
climate change actions?
http://fyeg.org/news/cop21-guide-2-human-rights-climate-change
Having human rights as a part of an international legal agreement offers two advantages: first if
the signed document is legally binding the protection of human rights is too. For this to happen it
needs to be mentioned on the core text of the agreement not in the preamble. Secondly it offers a
new channel for much stronger communication urging states to protect human rights and since
human rights are connected to future generations also known as intergenerational equity it
offers a pressure point to push for an ambitious agreement.
Is the preamble of the Paris Agreement legally binding on Parties?
https://newclimate.org/2015/12/14/what-the-paris-agreement-means-for-global-climate-changemitigation/
No. The Paris Agreement has legal force and is considered to be an international treaty under the
Vienna Convention. The legal form of the Agreement is of great importance with regards to the
signal it provides on the degree of political will behind it. On the other hand, there are no
international enforcement mechanisms in place which would allow any form of penalisation for
non-compliance.
While some elements within the Paris Agreement are legally binding, others are not. The long
term goals and the national reporting requirements are legally binding. National mitigation
targets submitted as INDCs for the post-2020 period, on the other hand, ended up as not legally
binding: countries are to undertake these contributions (Article 3), a departure from the much
stronger language shall undertake.
http://libel.iflry.com/2015/12/cop21-the-iflry-delegation-weighs-in-on-the-agreement/
The preamble is an introductory statement describing the purpose, yet it is not binding as the rest
of the agreement. Article 2 also discussed the purpose of the agreement, but this is a part of the
binding text. Thus, it has less strength being a part of the preamble and not in article 2. However,
as one negotiator told us, it is not too bad to have it in the preamble. Everything that is
mentioned in article 2 of the agreement must be taken stock of at the Global Stocktake, to assess
the collective progress towards the goals of the agreement, every five years.
Is there a need to come out with a COP decision establishing clearer obligations
on human rights?
http://climate-l.iisd.org/policy-updates/taking-stock-of-the-paris-agreement-onclimate-change/
Many view the preamble as modern, as it includes references to human rights,
intergenerational equity, climate justice, Mother Earth and the right to health. Although these
terms are included, some have said the Agreement is limited because it does not operationalize

these rights and omits references to gender responsiveness or a global carbon budget in line with
historical
responsibilities.
2. Climate Support Finance, Technology Transfer, and Capacity Building
The biggest issue in the climate change negotiations continues to be Support.
Who will pay for the mitigation and adaptation actions that are agreed in (1) and
(2)?
Should developed countries pay the whole bill?
Should the big developing countries pay their share too?
Should a distinction be made between different types of developed and
developing countries in terms of their responsibility?
Should financial contributions be based on responsibility for climate change
and/or capacity to pay?
Should the private sector and markets be a source of funds?
Is there an obligation to transfer technology without due regard to intellectual
property rights?
Is there a legal duty to help developing countries build capacity to mitigate and
adapt to climate change?
http://libel.iflry.com/2015/12/cop21-the-iflry-delegation-weighs-in-on-the-agreement/
While developing countries wanted to be sure they will receive support, developed countries
hesitated with referring to numbers and money in the agreement. Already, they have agreed upon
reaching USD 100 billion as climate finance annually by 2020. Still, several developed countries
did not want this in the agreement, especially not a reference to scaling up finance flows. As a
compromise, this reference was put in the COP decisions, which are not legally binding, but give
effect to the agreement. What is important about the phrasing is that it says 100 billion is the
floor. This ensures that climate finance will remain at a high level, with the hopes of increasing
it, should it be necessary.
http://www.climatechangenews.com/2015/12/12/decoding-the-paris-climate-deal-what-does-itmean/
A big hurdle in climate talks over the years has been agreeing how to share responsibility
between developed and developing countries. Under the 1992 climate convention, developed
countries were listed in an Annex 1. That has led to a binary division of responsibilities between
Annex 1 and non-Annex 1 countries for more than two decades. Developed countries are fed up
with this, especially because some are now less well-off than developing countries like South
Korea and Saudi Arabia.
The Paris Agreement broke the impasse. It has no reference to Annex 1. There is now more
flexible sharing of responsibilities, in the light of different national circumstances (Article 2.2).
Different responsibilities for rich and poor still pervade the Agreement, but not as a fixed list of

countries. Article 3 stresses that all parties are to undertake and communicate ambitious
efforts.
The issue of finance has dogged UN climate negotiations for 20 years. The challenge is to strike
a balance, between the rights of poor countries to grow their economies, and the obligation of
richer nations to pay them to make sure this is low-carbon growth. Developed countries should
also pay some of the costs of climate damage and adaptation, in vulnerable countries. Article 9.3
says that developed countries should take the lead in supplying finance, and that such climate
finance should represent a progression beyond previous efforts, in other words grow over time.
Article 9.2 states that developing countries can also voluntarily provide climate finance.
Countries agreed that $100 billion annually would be the floor for climate finance going forward,
beyond 2020 (Decision, Paragraph 54).
3. Climate Justice
Developing countries that are vulnerable to and suffering climate change are seeking the
establishment of a climate justice and redress mechanism. This is different from
adaptation mechanisms in that what is being sought for is compensation based on liability
under the polluters pay principle. There is already broad agreement on a loss and damage
mechanism but that is not adequate for vulnerable countries.
What principles of liability should be adopted on climate justice?
What remedies and processes should be allowed eg. adjudication, mediation,
arbitration?
Are there institutions that need to be established like an International Climate
Justice Tribunal or is the International Court of Justice an adequate forum?
Each country and organization must come with a prepared speech to deliver at a plenary session
that Peru will preside over. During the Plenary speech, each State must address the three issues
mentioned above. Therefore, all of the participants must know what climate change means for
their country and what their current positions on these issues are. Research is needed for these as
well as familiarity with the materials that are in the course outline and posted in the Facebook
page.
Please come in your national costumes if convenient or in business attire. Bring your own Flags
(in UNFCCC speak, this means the name of the country/observer that you can put in front of
your table).
The plenary sessions will be followed by a negotiation session where these three issues will be
distributed to three working groups based on a negotiation text to be provided by the professor.
The plenary will be chaired by the COP President, the Philippines) and the three working groups
will have a chair (to be assigned later). Instructions will be given after the plenary.