Governance of Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs)

As a part of a project funded by the Swedish Energy Agency, the INS surveys participants’ views on the most important objectives for Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs) by developing country Parties. We examine six different objectives:

  • Increase mitigation contributions by developing countries,

  • Increase financial support from developed to developing countries,

  • Increase technology transfers from developed to developing countries,

  • Increase research and development of low emitting technologies in developing countries,

  • Promote nationally defined sustainable development goals,

  • Promote internationally agreed development goals, e.g. the Sustainable Development Goals.




COP PARTICIPANTS’ PREFERENCES FOR OBJECTIVES FOR NATIONALLY APPROPRIATE MITIGATION ACTIONS IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES

This figure demonstrates the preferences for these six potential NAMA objectives among government delegates at COP17-COP19.

Overall, the governmental respondents agree more strongly about two NAMA objectives: increase technology transfer from developed to developing countries and promotion of nationally defined sustainable development goals. In a second tier, objectives about increasing financial support from developed to developing countries and increase research and development of low emitting technologies in developing countries. In a third tier, government respondents see the goal to promote internationally agreed development goals as well as to increase mitigation contributions by developing countries.

This data is used in the Governance of NAMAs project and has appeared in different publications.




PERCEPTIONS OF GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVES ON WHETHER TRANSFER OF FINANCE IS ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT OBJECTIVES FOR NAMAS

This figure reports on the prioritization of increased financial transfers from developed to developing countries as a NAMA objective for COPs 17-20 . It depicts preferences among governmental representatives from developed (orange) and developing (blue) countries respectively. The differences in preferences identified through the INS indicate that finding consensus on a more precise definition of NAMAs may be difficult. This in turn may complicate the exercise of matching design of NAMAs with support.