Work Packages, Deliverables and Milestones - VIII

Table 1.2 d:    Work package description

Work package number	3		Start date or starting event:					Month 1
Work package title	Copenhagen Technology Architecture and their National Policy Implications
Activity Type	SUPP
Participant number	1	2		3	4	5	6		7
Participant short name
Person-months per participant

Objectives Contribution to the international discussion on the implementation of the technology framework, including identification of research needs for its further development and implementation Elaborate policy options for effectively connecting the international technology framework to national policies (link with WP 5)

Description of work It is currently still very unclear what the Copenhagen outcome will be on technology. While developing countries have demanded a dedicated technology fund and mechanism, developed countries have so far been very reluctant to create new mechanisms and provide additional funding. But even if there is an agreement in Copenhagen, it will very likely only define the overall framework and significant further work will be required to flesh out the details. The history of the climate regime offers some object lessons in this regard. While the Kyoto Protocol established the CDM, agreement on the modalities took four years (Marrakesh Accords) and the CDM Executive Board took several more years to lay out all the details of the project approval process. The first CDM project was approved only in 2004. Similarly, while establishment of an Adaptation Fund under the Kyoto Protocol was agreed in 2001, agreement on its institutional architecture was possible only in 2007 and the Adaptation Fund Board is currently working on the specific funding modalities. It may therefore be necessary to revisit the design of WP 3 when the project starts based on the current status of the international negotiations. ##these different layers of decision-making and what it means for the project is something to elaborate in the first part of the proposal## Depending on what the status of the international negotiations will be, the following questions may be relevant to be addressed: •           Funding priorities and modalities (especially the distribution of funding from Annex I countries) •           International guidelines for national technology needs assessments •           Current status of national technology needs assessments#link to WP 5## •           Guidelines/contents of international technology framework programmes or action plans •           Possible roles of existing international agencies or newly created technology centres (e.g. IRENA) •           Treatment of intellectual property rights (link to trade paper) WPs 1, 2-4 and 5 should be designed to mutually inform each other: The international framework agreed in Copenhagen and subsequently should inform the discussion on national policy options in WP 5. Likewise, the needs determined at national level should be fed back to the discussion of international policy options. While the discussion paper would be a preliminary assessment, the thematic paper should be fully informed by the results from the country case studies and discussions during the workshops/conferences.

Deliverables D3.1: Discussion paper on Technology (month 8) D3.2: Thematic report on Technology (month 15)