In the warm-up here, the maximum buzz and heat has been around two contrasting drafts, one proposed by Denmark and the other by four large developing countries, including India, that have been doing the rounds to be considered as the possible outlines for the agreement coming out of Copenhagen. Neither of them is yet part of the negotiating process, and is in circulation only as ideas around which the final agreement can be constructed.
The Danish draft
* Its existence was first known at the start of this month when Denmark shared it with some countries. It is said to have the backing of some developed countries, including the US.
* It introduces a 2020 target for global peaking of emissions, with developed countries peaking sometime earlier by an unspecified year so that developing countries get some more time beyond 2020 to let their emissions peak. However, in the best case scenario, it would mean the peak year of emissions for developing countries would be earlier than 2025?something that is unacceptable, and probably unachievable, not only for poorer countries but relatively larger economies like China and India.
* It supports the goal of reducing global emissions by 50% of 1990 levels by the year 2050. The developed countries, it says, should reduce their emissions by 80% of 1990 levels by that time. However, it leaves reduction targets for the developed countries for the year 2020 open for discussion and wants carbon offset mechanisms to remain as valid contributions to meet those targets, something developing countries want changed.
* It wants developing countries, except for least developed ones, to commit to nationally appropriate mitigation actions and convey how much emission reduction these actions could result into.
* It wants these countries to list their purely domestic actions in a ?registry? which can then be put to a national MRV (Measurement, Reporting and Verification) based on internationally agreed guidelines and a consultative review under UNFCCC. The developing countries find this to be an indirect way of introducing international scrutiny of purely domestic efforts, something they are not at all comfortable with.
The Danish draft has been circulated to some select countries for their opinion and ?shown? to many others, including India. Following its leak yesterday, it has invited widespread condemnation from the developing world. There were reports that, under intense pressure, the Danish government had withdrawn its proposal.
The Basic draft
Prepared by China earlier this month, this reflects the common objectives of Brazil, South Africa, India and China (therefore ?Basic?) and was seen essentially as an attempt to counter the Danish draft.
The Basic draft is not as detailed as the Danish one and mainly reiterates the red lines that these countries as the leaders of the developing world have been articulating for long. It does not have figures or targets but lays down the principles and format on which the Copenhagen agreement must be based.
These include the principles of common but differentiated responsibilities, the need for ambitious reduction targets for the developed countries both in the short and long-term and the need to have an architecture on transfer of technology and finance from rich countries to the developing world.
The Basic draft has been circulated in the G-77 group, which has more than 135 members, and is open for modification. Members have been asked to contribute their suggestions and proposals.
The Basic draft has also been criticised from some countries from Africa and small island states for not giving space to their concerns.
These drafts are separate from the one that is likely to come out from the normal negotiating process. Two groups, the Ad-hoc Working Group on Kyoto Protocol (AWG-KP) and the one on Long-term Cooperative Action (AWG-LCA)?both the result of the Bali Action Plan ?are working to produce an agreeable draft for the Copenhagen agreement.
