The State Department web site below is a permanent electronic archive of information released prior to January 20, 2001.  Please see www.state.gov for material released since President George W. Bush took office on that date.  This site is not updated so external links may no longer function.  Contact us with any questions about finding information. NOTE: External links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views contained therein.

U.S. Delegation to the Fifth Session of the Conference of the Parties to the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP-5) U.S. Intervention on "Best Practice" in Policies and Measures Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice, Session 11, Agenda Item 8(b) Bonn, Germany, October 27, 1999

Thank you, Mr. Chairman:

Effective mitigation of greenhouse gases depends on the use of a variety of nationally and sub-nationally implemented policies and measures. Parties have implemented mitigation measures in keeping with their commitments under Article 4.1 of the Convention. The U.S. believes that Parties will continue to utilize policies and measures at the national level in a manner that fits national circumstances and as a supplement to the Kyoto mechanisms.

In our own context the U.S. has focussed its Convention efforts on taking measures that reduce greenhouse gas emissions in a way that is both effective and complements national goals. In addition to examples outlined in our submission, the President has over this last summer signed Executive Orders that will significantly reduce GHG emissions from the Federal Government.

The President has also established a goal of tripling U.S. use of bio-based products and bioenergy by 2010. Meeting this will reduce U.S. GHG emissions by 100 million tons annually.

While ultimately establishing a value for carbon through the Kyoto Mechanisms will be the principal means for reducing U.S. emissions, other domestic policies and measures will always play an important role. The U.S. hopes to learn from the experience of others and that its own experiences will benefit others.

In this regard, we believe the Secretariat's paper, FCCC/SBSTA/1998/8, provides a valuable summary of the experiences of Parties and documents some of the extensive efforts underway in various fora to exchange information on experiences. In the U.S. submission we noted that our experience with policies and measures indicates that they are most successful when they are "best fits" in six basic ways. They are best fits when they: (1) are flexible to changing circumstances and regional differences, (2) provide multiple benefits, (3) recognize existing institutional frameworks and establish processes for public participation, (4) are cost-effective, (5) match key attributes of the technologies they target, and (6) are implemented with clear accountability and enforcement measures. We believe these are particularly useful elements for assessing the fit of policies and measures to national circumstances.

In our view, the concept of "best fit" embodies the notion of "best practice" because differing economic, institution, cultural, political and geographic circumstances are so varied as to severely limit the broad applicability of individual policies and measures. Moreover, any desire to "optimize" the development of policy has to recognize the critical importance of achieving "best fit" these specific national circumstances.

We look forward to the workshop referenced in the Secretariat document. Generally speaking, we believe that the Secretariat's paper poses questions that are useful for workshop participants. We believe it could be made clear that these be thought of as a kind of checklist that domestic policy makers would consider in choosing in selecting those measures that will produce beneficial results in the light of their particular national circumstances.

In this regard, we would question the value of international efforts to monitor and analyze best practices as suggested in Section E of the Secretariat paper. National governments are best able to assess policy effectiveness, as they understand their own particular circumstances best. Given the large amount of work for which the Secretariat is already tasked to support our efforts to complete the other elements of the Kyoto Protocol, it would appear to us that this is not the best use of our resources.

Finally, we would not support any new process for international assessment of policies and measures, or use of a common indicator analysis to produce cross-country comparisons, as suggested in Section E of the Secretariat paper. We believe the existing processes -- such as the AIXG's policy roundtables -- are adequate. Mechanisms to encourage outreach that will enable developing countries to more fully benefit from such exchanges could be considered. Key elements of best practice could be incorporated in national communication submissions, as is currently being considered in discussions on the revised guidelines for the preparation of national communications by Parties (FCCC/SBSTA/1999/13).

[end of document]

|| Climate Change |
Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs |
U.S. Department of State | Disclaimers ||