Home

All Parties provided information on mitigation targets or mitigation co-benefits resulting from adaptation actions and/or economic diversification plans in their NDCs (see figure 1), which range from economy-wide absolute emission reduction targets to strategies, plans and actions for low-emission development, to be implemented within a specified time frame or implementation period: (a) Some Parties included absolute emission reduction targets expressed as an emission reduction from the level in a specified base year, ranging from 7.2 to 88.0 per cent. (...) In addition, a few of these Parties expressed their target as a carbon budget in addition to the absolute target, establishing an overall limit on GHGs to be emitted over a specified period of time (e.g. between 2021 and 2030); (b) Many Parties included relative targets for reducing emissions below the ‘business as usual’ level by a specified target year, either for the whole economy or for specific sectors, ranging from 5 to 103.5 per cent and thus achieving carbon neutrality; or emission intensity targets for reducing specific GHG emissions per GDP unit relative to a base-year (e.g. 1990) level; (c) Some Parties included strategies, plans and actions for low-emission development reflecting their particular national circumstances; (d) Some Parties provided information on mitigation co-benefits resulting from their adaptation actions and/or economic diversification plans, mostly in combination with other targets. 34 Including emissions from countries that are not Parties to the Paris Agreement, a harmonization factor to ensure comparability with SSP scenarios assessed by the IPCC, and emissions from international aviation and maritime transport, which accounted for approximately 1.2 and 1.5 per cent, respectively, of total global emissions in 2019. 35 In line with anthropogenic land-use emissions and removals in the scenarios assessed by the IPCC, although actual directly induced net emissions from LULUCF could be higher.

All Parties provided information on mitigation targets or mitigation co-benefits resulting from adaptation actions and/or economic diversification plans in their NDCs (see figure 1), which range from economy-wide absolute emission reduction targets to strategies, plans and actions for low-emission development, to be implemented within a specified time frame or implementation period: (a) Some Parties included absolute emission reduction targets expressed as an emission reduction from the level in a specified base year, ranging from 7.2 to 88.0 per cent. (...) In addition, a few of these Parties expressed their target as a carbon budget in addition to the absolute target, establishing an overall limit on GHGs to be emitted over a specified period of time (e.g. between 2021 and 2030); (b) Many Parties included relative targets for reducing emissions below the ‘business as usual’ level by a specified target year, either for the whole economy or for specific sectors, ranging from 5 to 91 per cent; or emission intensity targets for reducing specific GHG emissions per GDP unit relative to a base-year (e.g. 1990) level; (c) Some Parties included strategies, plans and actions for low-emission development reflecting their particular national circumstances; (d) Some Parties provided information on mitigation co-benefits resulting from their adaptation actions and/or economic diversification plans, mostly in combination with other targets. 34 Including emissions from countries that are not Parties to the Paris Agreement, a harmonization factor to ensure comparability with SSP scenarios assessed by the IPCC, and emissions from international aviation and maritime transport, which accounted for approximately 1.2 and 1.5 per cent, respectively, of total global emissions in 2019. 35 In line with anthropogenic land-use emissions and removals in the scenarios assessed by the IPCC, although actual directly induced net emissions from LULUCF could be higher.

And as implementation of measures enshrined in the Decree of the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan dated July 1, 2004, the “State Program on improvement of living conditions and increasing employment of Refugees and Internally Displaced Persons”, as well as in the amendments to this document dated 31 October, 2007 and 21 February, 2011, were provided. (...) As it is known that in the Summit at the United Nations Headquarter in New York from 25-27 September 2015, the Heads of member States decided on new global Sustainable Development Goals which include 17 Goals and 169 targets. The most of the targets directly or indirectly are linked to the development of business which requires human oriented approach. For instance, the target 8 of the SDGs is about the “Decent work and economic growth” which shows that the real economic growth can not be considered without human rights oriented approach.

Naciones Unidas A/HRC/33/NI/2 Asamblea General Distr. general 6 de septiembre de 2016 Español Original: inglés A/HRC/33/NI/2 2 GE.16-15395 Anexo [Inglés únicamente] Submission by the Azerbaijan: Human Rights Commissioner (Ombudsman) The Statement of the Commissioner for Human Rights (Ombudsman) of the Republic of Azerbaijan on the Right to Development The development is a comprehensive process embracing various fields of life and it is a continuous improvement of welfare of individuals and population in a whole and obvious display of measures undertaken by states at different levels for improvement of particular spheres of society, well-being of population. (...) Successful application of national development model basing on achieving targeted goals, consecutive socio-economic reforms, improvement of legislation, building a civil society, legal statehood became basic factors accelerated development in Azerbaijan. (...) The State Program considered the establishment of the Ombudsman Institute in Azerbaijan – a serious step forward in the field of improvement situation with human rights protection.

To that extent, human capital accumulation, job creation and improvement of the quality of employment are key issues for sustainable poverty alleviation. (...) With these goals in mind, a number of international development targets have been established. The Millennium Declaration indicated, in particular, the decision to: (a) reduce by half in the proportion of people living in extreme poverty by 2015; (b) guarantee universal primary education in all countries by 2015 and the elimination of gender disparity in all levels of education; (c) reduce mortality rates for infants and children under age 5 by two thirds and maternal mortality by three fourths by the same date; (d) halt and reverse the spread of major diseases that afflict humanity, particularly HIV/AIDS and malaria; and (e) achieve by 2020 a significant improvement in the lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers. (...) In this regard, a number of targets should orient public decisions: universal access and coverage of basic education, continuity and permanence of students throughout the basic cycle, the continuous improvement of quality standards, and the promotion of democratic values and social tolerance, among other issues related to social cohesion.

Assessment of the implementation of the Convention and The Strategy Expected accomplishments Performance indicator Parties assess the progress made in meeting strategic objectives 1–4 of The Strategy and related targets, and provide guidance on further steps to be taken CRIC draft decisions on further steps to be taken to meet the strategic objectives, taking into consideration the section of the mid-term evaluation that deals with strategic objectives 1–4 Strategic objectives 1–3 analysed by the CST and integrated into PRAIS Target for 2012 Second assessment of implementation (2010–2011) undertaken, including against impact indicators Target for 2013 Targets for strategic objectives 1–4 adopted, including input by the CST Parties assess the progress made in meeting operational objectives 1–5 of The Strategy and related targets, and provide guidance on further steps to be taken CRIC draft decision(s) submitted to the eleventh session of the COP (COP 11) on further steps to be taken to meet the operational objectives CRIC draft decision(s) submitted to the twelfth session of the COP (COP 12) on further steps to be taken to meet operational objectives, outcome areas, performance indicators and related targets that may be adopted/amended as part of the mid-term evaluation at the performance level Target for 2012 Second assessment of implementation (2010–2011) against performance indicators Target for 2014 Third assessment of implementation (2012–2013) against performance indicators Parties assess the mobilization and use of financial resources and other support, and provide guidance on how to enhance their effectiveness and efficiency in the achievement of the objectives of the Convention CRIC draft decision(s) submitted to COP 11 on how to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of financial resources and other support CRIC draft decision(s) submitted to COP 12 on how to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of financial resources and other support, including on ICCD/CRIC(10)/L.1* GE.11-71056 7 new provisions that may be adopted as part of the mid-term evaluation in this regard Target for 2012 Second review of financial flows (2010–2011) based on preliminary analysis submitted by the GM to the secretariat Target for 2014 Third review of financial flows (2012–2013) based on preliminary analysis submitted by the GM to the secretariat Parties adopt methods that improve communication of information, as well as the quality and format of reports to be submitted to the COP CRIC draft decision(s) submitted to COP 11 on methods to improve communication of information and the quality and formats of reports Target for 2013 Complete the first iteration on reporting against impact indicators and the second iteration on reporting against performance indicators as part of the mid-term evaluation B. (...) Collaboration with the Global Environment Facility Expected accomplishments Performance indicator Parties assess the progress made in the cooperation with the Global Environment Facility, and provide guidance on further improvement in order for the GEF to serve as a financial mechanism of the Convention CRIC draft decision submitted to COP 11 on a revised memorandum of understanding with the GEF Target for 2014 GEF reports according to the revised reporting requirements F. (...) (b) Support to the review and assessment of progress in implementing The Strategy Expected accomplishments (2012–2015) Performance indicators (2012–2015) 3.1.3 Parties assess the relevance and effectiveness of The Strategy, and recommend appropriate measures for improving performance and furthering its implementation The extent to which the assessment of The Strategy is conducted according to the modalities, criteria and terms of reference adopted at COP 10 Target for 2013: Linkages between GEF investment and the objectives of The Strategy clarified, including alignment of the sets of impact indicators of the GEF land degradation focal area and The Strategy; The merits of a fixed timeframe, with 2018 being the final year of The Strategy, versus a rolling system, as applied in the RBM framework of the workplans of the institutions and subsidiary bodies of the Convention, considered. 3.1.4 Parties assess the progress made with the implementation of The Strategy and recommend appropriate measures to improve efficiency The extent to which the assessment of progress made in the implementation of The Strategy is undertaken by referring to the baseline assessment of CRIC 9 (as reflected in the pertinent decisions of COP 10) and the analysis of trends to be undertaken at CRIC 1, by making use of the findings of the iterative process undertaken mainly in 2011 and 2012; and by considering how the results achieved under the operational objectives contribute to the delivery of the expected accomplishments under the strategic objectives The extent to which PRAIS is implemented according to the provisions contained in the relevant decisions of COP 11 ICCD/CRIC(10)/L.1* GE.11-71056 19 3.1.5 Parties assess the CRIC and provide guidance to improve its performance and increase its effectiveness The extent to which the assessment of the CRIC concerns its operation under the terms of reference as modified by the relevant decision of COP 11 Target for 2013 Assessment of the relevance, impact, effectiveness, appropriateness of format and cost-effectiveness of CRIC meetings 3.1.6 Parties assess the CST, with reference of it fulfilling operational objective 3 on how best to measure progress on strategic objectives 1,2 and 3 The extent to which the assessment of the CST concerns its fulfillment of operational objective 3 on how best to measure progress on strategic objectives 1,2 and 3 3.1.7 Parties assess PRAIS and provide guidance on further improvement of its effectiveness The extent to which the assessment of PRAIS concerns its implementation according to the provisions contained in the relevant decisions of COP 11 3.1.8 Parties assess the effectiveness of existing institutional arrangements and regional coordination mechanisms, and provide guidance on further improvement of regional coordination of the implementation of the Convention The extent to which the assessment of the institutional arrangements for RCMs supports the revision and amendment of these arrangements Outcome area: 3.2 A baseline based on the most robust data available on biophysical and socio-economic trends is developed and relevant scientific approaches are gradually harmonized Expected accomplishments (2012–2015) Performance indicators (2012–2015) 3.2.1 Effective support to the CST to guide the development of national and global baselines for assessing progress in meeting strategic objectives 1–3 The extent to which the background information provided by the secretariat is reflected in CST recommendations Target for 2013 At least 75% of the information provided by the secretariat is reflected in CST recommendations ICCD/CRIC(10)/L.1* 20 GE.11-71056 Outcome area: 3.3 Knowledge of biophysical and socio-economic factors and of their interactions in affected areas is improved to enable better decision-making Expected accomplishments (2012–2015) Performance indicators (2012–2015) 3.3.1 Effective support to the CST in advancing knowledge of the biophysical and socio-economic factors of DLDD and of related interactions in affected areas The extent to which background information for and outcomes of the Convention’s scientific conferences are disseminated in a timely manner to a large group of recipients Target for 2013 The outcomes of the second scientific conference are made available online at least three months before COP 11 Outcome area: 3.4 Knowledge of the interactions between climate change adaptation, drought mitigation and restoration of degraded land in affected areas is improved to develop tools to assist decision-making Expected accomplishments (2012–2015) Performance indicators (2012–2015) 3.4.1 Effective support to the CST in addressing interlinkages between the agenda of the CST and the agendas of other organizations and bodies relating to the interactions between climate change adaptation, drought mitigation and the restoration of degraded lands The extent to which the background information of the secretariat on interlinkages is reflected in CST recommendations Target for 2013 At least 75% of the information provided by the secretariat is reflected in CST recommendations The extent to which the actions and needs of the CST are reflected in the work of those scientific bodies and organizations that the secretariat has addressed 3.4.2 Improved knowledge and understanding of the mutual benefits of measures to address drought mitigation and the restoration of degraded land The extent to which background information on drought mitigation is reflected in CST recommendations and COP decisions Target for 2013 At least 75% of the information provided by the secretariat is reflected in CST recommendations ICCD/CRIC(10)/L.1* GE.11-71056 21 Outcome area: 3.5 Effective knowledge-sharing systems, including traditional knowledge,7 are in place at the global, regional, subregional and national levels to support policymakers and end-users, including through the identification and sharing of best practices and success stories Expected accomplishments (2012–2015) Performance indicators (2012–2015) 3.5.1 Effective support to the CST in promoting the use of scientific knowledge to support decision-making concerning the Convention The extent to which partners support or join the improvement of knowledge management under the Convention Target for 2013 10% increase of involved partners on 2011 Outcome area: 3.6 Science and technology networks and institutions relevant to DLDD are engaged to support the implementation of the Convention Expected accomplishments (2012–2015) Performance indicators (2012–2015) 3.6.1 The secretariat effectively supports the CST in improving the provisions for the engagement of scientists and scientific institutions The extent to which the background information of the secretariat on how to improve provisions for the engagement of scientists and scientific institutions is reflected in CST recommendations Target for 2013 At least 75% of the information provided by the secretariat is reflected in CST recommendations Subprogramme 4 – Capacity-building To identify and address capacity-building needs to prevent and reverse desertification/land degradation and mitigate the effects of drought.

Non-Annex I Parties may participate in emissions trading on the basis of agreed emission targets established for sectors. The emission target for a sector shall be set below the level of projected anthropogenic emissions by sources of GHGs within the sector boundary, or above the level of projected enhancements in removals by sinks of GHGs within the sector boundary, and shall be based on the most recent available data. (...) A participating non-Annex I Party shall be issued with emission allowances corresponding to its sectoral target. Parties may devolve emission targets and allowances to legal entities. 62. (...) In relation to sectoral emissions trading, the CMP shall adopt modalities for: (a) The governance of sectoral emissions trading and the means of reaching agreement on sectoral targets; (b) The determination of a sector boundary; (c) The monitoring, reporting and verification of emissions within the sector boundary; (d) Accounting of emission allowances, including their issuance; (e) The treatment of potential leakage from within the sector boundary; (f) Consequences of not achieving the target.

In the few years of its existence, it has become clear that this Protocol has been innovative in many fields. It targets a multitude of sectors and sources, it addresses human induced activities and their impact on the carbon stocks. (...) Instead, we must construct an enabling framework that assists countries that are willing to achieve their GHG reduction targets. Therefore, in order to foster positive intentions and efforts among Parties toward the compliance over a long period as well as to encourage the wide participation by countries in the amended Protocol, a new system should put emphasis on providing advice and assistance on domestic policy measures and other matters which help Parties to achieve their targets, and not on penalties that will make it even more difficult to achieve the targets once one fails to do so (...) The Kyoto Protocol is a significant first step, but it needs further improvement and development. Japan is strongly committed to engage actively in this historic task to reach an agreement on new and long-term actions

Gráfico 1 Tipos de metas de mitigación que figuran en las contribuciones previstas determinadas a nivel nacional Abreviatura: BAU = escenario en que todo sigue igual. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Other Peak target Intensity Policies and actions Absolute emission target Reduction relative to BAU FCCC/CP/2015/7 GE.15-18808 6/64 12.

The target has certainly heightened awareness on the issue but of all the MDG targets, it remains one of the most off- track.7 In Indonesia’s MDG Report for example, the Government acknowledged that sanitation was a low priority and the World Bank estimates that less than 1 per cent of the investment in sanitation needed to reach the sanitation target in Indonesia over the last years has been made.8 The poor progress on the target, amongst others, has strengthened calls for increasing a rights focus in the strategies for realisation of the MDG targets.9 Some supporters of the MDGs acknowledged early on that the MDGs framework was deficient in this regard.10 Some emphasise, however, that human rights approaches go further than merely adding extra tools to the development toolbox. (...) For example, in South Africa, the bucket system for sanitation in many black townships has endured since the apartheid era despite current government targets for its eradication. Statements by politicians on the targets have generally emphasised the personal dignity dimension: The President of South Africa stated that they were on course to “put an end to this dehumanising system” former Minister for Water Affairs and Forestry has acknowledged that the “It can only be described as demeaning to those who have been required to use this system” (emphasis added).15 The personal dignity dimension also has health consequences. (...) A manager at a South African local municipality recently commented that the directive from national government was to meet the water targets first and then concentrate on sanitation afterwards.44 Thus, a third way of framing the debate is to ask whether our task is simply to recognise a long- lost twin.