Donald Brown, Penn State University, US, praised the work of the IPCC, but said some ethical issues still need to be “teased out.” He highlighted the unfair focus on welfare maximization, which he said undermines both the duty to act and the ethical call for all countries to reduce emissions to their fair share of safe global emissions.

John Dernbach, Widener University, US, recommended the IPCC release a special report on energy efficiency and conservation, and an analysis of how to reduce per capita emissions in developed countries, in order for them to take the lead in emissions reductions.

Marilyn Averill, University of Colorado, US, commended the IPCC for addressing uncertainty across the Fourth Assessment Report. She highlighted issues of procedural and distributive justice and recommended: making the uncertainty definitions more accessible; expressing uncertainties in assumptions made in analyses; and disaggregating uncertainties.

Christiaan Hogenhuis, World Council of Churches, said ethical work should be part of the UNFCCC process and gave a critique of the Greenhouse Development Rights, recommending differentiation of historical and future emissions. He questioned rights to development without considering sustainability for future generations.

Benito Müller, Oxford Institute for Energy Studies, presented the paper “Differentiating (Historic) Responsibilities for Climate Change” and described the methodology used. He urged the IPCC to address the issue of historical responsibilities in order to clarify the meaning of the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities.

Jon Rosales, St Lawrence University, noted that the IPCC is not based on “bad” science but “narrow” science. He emphasized that many peoples hold knowledge about climate change outside of peer reviewed literature and that procedural justice calls for their voices to be heard. He said working on the participation criteria of the IPCC would make for a more effective regime.

Ogunlande Davidson, IPCC WGIII Co-chair, showed how the IPCC’s focus has moved from pure science to incorporate other disciplines and how equity issues have become integrated. He said the ethical issues are still not adequately addressed due to lack of peer-reviewed literature and hoped that upcoming special reports and a fifth assessment would include ethics more adequately.

Participants discussed the inclusion of equity in the way the IPCC’s synthesizes information for policy makers.

Patricio Bernal, UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), introduced “UNESCO’s strategy for action on global climate change,” which seeks to integrate climate change in a coherent manner across UNESCO’s work programmes. He explained that the strategy takes the natural and social science knowledge bases and “moves them downstream” to end users. He suggested that the social and human science knowledge base needs strengthening and that a shared ethical philosophy is required.

John Hattingh, Stellenbosch University, South Africa, argued that the world we live in is at risk, and that we must ask simple “value-rational questions" to address this challenge. He said our ability to ask these questions has been impaired by a shift to instrumental rationality over the last 200 years. He explained how a new approach to social and human sciences could help us to ask value-rational questions. He stated that these questions identify and interrogate power relations, and that the main challenge for social and human sciences is to develop local and global power relations that will allow for the development and implementation of effective technical solutions to address global issues, including climate change.

Timmons Roberts, College of William and Mary, US, presented key findings from his co-authored book “A Climate of Injustice,” which argues that inequality is the cause of the global impasse that currently exists in addressing climate change, because it drives: vulnerability in the South; anger at the injustice of the distribution of goods and bads; and an inability and unwillingness to participate in international efforts to address climate change. He recommended future roles for UNESCO, including: capacity building of NGOs and scientific groups; developing better understandings of adaptive and sustainability capacity; and providing good, accessible and locally-relevant information to the public.

Participants discussed: who is responsible for making people in vulnerable communities aware of climate change; the need to train journalists to accurately communicate on climate change, including on its equity, social justice and political aspects; and challenges associated with freedom of the press and communicating climate change messages. They also noted the biased distribution of scientific research between the global North and South. Bernal informed that UNESCO is finalizing a journalists’ toolkit on climate change communication.

Igino Emmer, Emmer International, emphasized that the potential of afforestation and reforestation (A/R) under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) can be accessed if equipped with the right tools. He lamented that A/R is being ignored in favor of a new spotlight on REDD, and that currently only one A/R project is registered. He noted barriers such as: the limited scope of projects considered; the temporary nature of A/R credits, which inhibits linkages with carbon trading schemes; perceptions of risk; and lack of technical skills and financial resources. Emmer also presented on the “Environment and Community-Based Framework for Assigning Afforestation and Revegetation Projects Under the CDM (ENCOFOR),” noting case studies in Kenya, Uganda, Bolivia and Ecuador.

Marcelo Rocha, University of Sao Paolo, noted challenges associated with initiating A/R projects, including the complexity of the modalities and procedures contained in Decision 5 from CMP 1. He said the definitions of terms such as “leakage,” “carbon pools” and “additionality” are problematic for methodology development and subject to different interpretations. He cautioned against developing new methodologies, indicating that ten have already been approved. He noted the role that software tools can play, adding that not all tools will apply to each project.

Lucio Pedroni, CATIE/ World Bank, presented on several software tools that have been developed for the application of A/R approved methodologies. He demonstrated how the software tools can help select the appropriate methodology for A/R projects, and model forest growth.

Till Neeff, EcoSecurities, underlined that although A/R methodologies are very complex, there are even greater barriers to its widespread application, including high up-front investment costs, and the fact that the resulting credits are not fungible and thus have no access to carbon markets such as the EU Emission Trading Scheme. He noted that the complexity of drafting forestry project design document requires expensive consultants. Neef stated that buyers have not been attracted to forestry CDM because it is less lucrative and too complex. He lamented the lost opportunity that this represents, and the foregone potential of socioeconomic and biodiversity co-benefits.

Participants discussed the subjectivity of the methodology review process and the consideration of fire within methodologies.

The Earth Negotiations Bulletin on the side (ENBOTS) © <enb@iisd.org> is a special publication of the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) in cooperation with the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). This issue has been written by Alice Bisiaux, Suzanne Carter, Alexandra Conliffe and Peter Wood. The Digital Editor is Diego Noguera. The Editor is Soledad Aguilar <soledad@iisd.org>. The Director of IISD Reporting Services is Langston James “Kimo” Goree VI <kimo@iisd.org>. Funding for the publication of ENBOTS at the United Nations Climate Change Conference - Bali is provided by UNDP and UNEP. The opinions expressed in ENBOTS are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of IISD and funders. Excerpts from ENBOTS may be used in non-commercial publications only with appropriate academic citation. For permission to use this material in commercial publications, contact the Director of IISD Reporting Services at <kimo@iisd.org>. Electronic versions of issues of ENBOTS from the United Nations Climate Change Conference - Bali can be found on the Linkages website at <http://enb.iisd.org/climate/cop13/enbots/>. The ENBOTS Team at the United Nations Climate Change Conference - Bali can be contacted by e-mail at <alice@iisd.org>.