MRV and accounting Clause Samples

MRV and accounting. National determination of mitigation commitments requires not only international consultation and review to check their adequacy and fairness in the level of ambition, but also measurement, reporting and verification (MRV) to ensure transparency and accountability in Parties’ implementation of these commitments. The EU emphasised the need for a multilaterally-agreed common robust monitoring, reporting and verification framework and accounting rules to ensure environmental integrity, avoid double-counting and enhance transparency, comparability of efforts and effective implementation. It believed that this system should build on the provisions of and experience with the current MRV system, noting that international assessment and review (IAR) (for developed countries) and international consultation and analysis (ICA) (for developing countries) would go into their first rounds in 2014 and 2015 and would be subject to a review respectively in 2016 and 2017. The EU believed that the common MRV framework and accounting rules should eventually develop into a common, coherent international MRV system for all Parties, and that Parties should set the basic principles of that framework, specific to different types of commitment, in the 2015 agreement (Council of the EU 2013). The US believed that an accounting system should generate understanding of Parties’ commitments, prevent double-counting of international units, and provide assurances that countries are doing what they said they would. This accounting system should be flexible enough to be applied to all Parties. For the post-2020 period, the US supported a single transparency system with built-in flexibility to enable all Parties to participate according to their capabilities (US 2013a). Japan believed that submission of a mitigation commitment including an emission reduction target and all possible measures, basic accounting rules, and basic rules on transparency mechanisms, should constitute a core new legal agreement applicable to all Parties (Japan 2013b). Canada viewed that a robust MRV system is critical to ensure transparency and accountability in the new agreement (Canada 2013). India argued that work under the transparency of action pillar must extend to the Durban Agreements, in particular by further substantiating MRV requirements. In the Indian view, it is important to have common accounting rules for MRV of developed country mitigation targets. The country believed that MRV of the flow of finance...