Through the Global Negotiations Support initiative and the Global Climate Change Policy Fellowship programme, SLYCAN Trust supports negotiators from the Global South in their engagement with the UNFCCC and other multilateral processes. Joseph Epitu is a SLYCAN Trust fellow who works as Commissioner Water and Environment Sector Liaison for the Ministry of Water and Environment of Uganda and as climate change negotiator in the UNFCCC process. These are his reflections from participating in the Bonn Climate Change Conference 2024 (SB60).

‍

At the just concluded 60^th sessions of the subsidiary bodies (SB60) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) that took place in Bonn, Germany from 28^th May to 13^th June 2024, SLYCAN Trust supported three officers from the Ministry of Water and Environment (MWE) of Uganda to follow various thematic negotiation streams, including myself. This article focuses on the proceedings of the thematic area of capacity-building at SB60, which I specifically followed up on.

‍

Capacity-building in the climate change negotiations

The purpose of capacity-building under Article 11 of the Paris Agreement is to “enhance the capacity and ability of developing country Parties, in particular countries with the least capacity, such as the least developed countries, and those that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change, such as small island developing States, to take effective climate change action, including, inter alia, to implement adaptation and mitigation actions, and should facilitate technology development, dissemination, and deployment, access to climate finance, relevant aspects of education, training, and public awareness, and the transparent, timely, and accurate communication of information.” 

This means that capacity-building interventions should be based on clearly identified needs, with the current focus being on capacity-building for the implementation of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs); preparation of project proposals and project development to access climate finance; preparation of adaptation plans; vulnerability and climate risk assessments; preparation of national communications and annual progress reports; and negotiation skills, to mention but a few.

Capacity-building is considered one of the means of implementation, and therefore in the global context an action required for and in all the tenets of the Paris Agreement and negotiating streams. As stated in Article 11 (2), capacity-building is a country-driven effort and hence requires close collaboration among all actors, including institutions of government, the private sector, and civil society. In the implementation of the capacity-building stream under the Paris Agreement, progress is reported by Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SBI) under two frameworks, the Durban Forum and the Paris Committee for Capacity-Building (PCCB).

At SB60, capacity-building was under agenda item 15, specifically comprising: (a) Development of the terms of reference for the fifth review of the implementation of capacity-building in developing countries under the Convention and the Kyoto Protocol; (b) Second review of the PCCB; and (c) Annual monitoring of the implementation of the capacity-building framework. Discussions on the above were informed by the synthesis reports prepared earlier by the UNFCCC Secretariat on the specific items under discussion.

‍

Summary of outcomes and reflections 

Having followed the negotiations on capacity-building over the last ten years, my personal view is that capacity-building--which considered an important part of means of implementation to the key climate change responses (mitigation and adaptation) and cutting across all the thematic areas—is increasingly not being given the attention it deserves, as evidenced by the inadequate finances allocated towards its implementation. It is also worth noting that negotiations and discussions on capacity-building are normally not controversial. At SB60, during the discussions on the agenda items on capacity-building, all Parties maintained a very cordial environment, exhibiting collaborative and non-confrontational engagements during both the official and informal consultations.

At the discussions on the terms of reference for the fifth comprehensive review of the implementation of the framework for capacity-building in developing countries under the Convention, minor adjustments were made to give more clarity on the draft document (refer to Draft decision -/CP.29. Addendum). It was suggested that this agenda item, which is currently under the COP, should also be added to the CMA.

Regarding the second review of the Paris Committee on Capacity-building, the draft conclusions proposed by the Chair under draft decisions -/CMA.6 were adopted. The proposed text for the annual monitoring of the implementation of the capacity-building framework did not attract any major discussions.

The documents for the above items were submitted to the SBI for consideration by the Conference of the Parties at its 29^th session (COP29 in November 2024) and uploaded to the UNFCCC Capacity-Building Portal on 12^th June 2024.

‍

Roadmap to COP29

In preparations for COP29, Parties were urged to take into consideration the following key moments and actions: awareness of the synthesis report by the secretariat on the second review of the PCCB as a useful document for negotiations; using the Capacity-Building Portal (available in five languages) and its resources for accessing relevant documents on capacity-building to facilitate negotiations and discussions at COP29; providing inputs on capacity-building activities to support the preparation and implementation of NDCs; and being aware of the soon-to-be-published “Annual technical progress report of the Paris Committee on Capacity-Building for 2024.”

‍

Conclusions 

Capacity-building remains central to the implementation of climate change responses and cuts across all the thematic negotiation areas under the UNFCCC. However, the thematic area is increasingly receiving less attention and limited resources are being channelled to address the subject matter. The global community should therefore re-think the current minimal attention given to capacity-building as a means of implementation as we move towards COP29 in Baku, Azerbaijan.