Abstract
A transparency framework has been enhanced under the Paris Agreement. Developing countries need to develop the capacity to regularly update national greenhouse gas (GHG) inventories, thereby tracking progress toward climate change mitigation goals under their nationally determined contributions (NDCs). Although much study in recent years has been focused on the challenges faced by developing countries in building the long-term institutional capabilities required for more frequent inventory reporting, little work has been done to analyze the institutional linkage between the national GHG inventories and NDCs in the respective countries. Against this backdrop, we examined the cases of Vietnam and the Philippines. Through desktop reviews and a series of interviews conducted in 2018, the present study characterized their institutional designs for the national GHG inventory. It also evaluated observed outcomes of institutional performance in the following dimensions: (1) the frequency and quality of national GHG inventory reporting and (2) the effectiveness of the national GHG inventory at informing the process to formulate mitigation actions under NDCs. The study found that there are differences in performance outcomes between the two countries, which may be linked to the differences in institutional designs. It also found potential trade-offs: A good performance outcome in one dimension may not necessarily translate into a similar result in the other. The findings have implications for transparency-related capacity building assistance: A sound understanding of institutional arrangements and their potential consequences is important for development partners to facilitate the interplay between the national GHG inventory and NDCs in developing countries.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
AusCham Vietnam. (2016). Viet Nam prime minister’s decision no. 2053/QD-TTg. English translation. https://auschamvn.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Plan-for-implementation-of-Paris-Agreement-in-Vietnam-Eng.pdf. Accessed 18 September 2018.
Ausubel, J. H., & Victor, D. G. (1992). Verification of international environmental agreements. Annual Review of Energy and the Environment,17, 1–43.
Bodansky, D. (2016a). The Paris climate change agreement: A new hope? American Journal of International Law,110(2), 288–319.
Bodansky, D. (2016b). The legal character of the Paris agreement. Review of European Community & International Environmental Law,25(2), 142–150.
Boin, A., & Christensen, T. (2008). The development of public institutions: Reconsidering the role of leadership. Administration & Society,40(3), 271–297.
Breidenich, C. (2011). Improving reporting of national communications and GHG inventories by non-annex I parties under the climate convention. New York: Natural Resources Defense Council.
Briner, G., & Moarif, S. (2016). Unpacking provisions related to transparency of mitigation and support in the Paris Agreement. Paris: OECD/IEA.
Cash, D. W., Clark, W. C., Alcock, F., Dickson, N. M., Eckley, N., Guston, D. H., et al. (2003). Knowledge systems for sustainable development. PNAS,100(14), 8086–8091.
Chayes, A., & Chayes, A. H. (1995). The new sovereignty: Compliance with international regulatory agreements. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Damassa, T., & Elsayed, S. (2013). From the GHG measurement frontline: A synthesis of non-annex I country national inventory system practices and experiences. Washington: World Resource Institute.
Desgain, D. D. R., & Sharma, S. (2016). Understanding the Paris agreement: Analyzing the reporting requirements under the enhanced transparency framework. Copenhagen: UNEP DTU Partnership.
Ellis, J., & Moarif, S. (2015). Identifying and addressing gaps in the UNFCCC reporting framework. Paris: OECD/IEA.
Falkner, R. (2016). The Paris agreement and the new logic of international climate politics. International Affairs,92(5), 1107–1125.
Gehring, T., & Oberthur, S. (2008). Interplay: Exploring institutional interaction. In O. R. Young, L. A. King, & H. Schroeder (Eds.), Institutions and environmental change: Principal findings, applications, and research frontiers (pp. 187–224). Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Herold, A. (2003). Current status of national inventory preparation in annex I parties and non-annex I parties. Paris: OECD/IEA.
Hood, C., Briner, G., & Rocha, M. (2014). GHG or not GHG: Accounting for diverse mitigation contributions in the post-2020 climate framework. Paris: OECD/IEA.
IPCC. (2006). 2006 IPCC guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories. Kanagawa: National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Programme.
Kawanishi, M., & Fujikura, R. (2018). Evaluation of enabling factors for sustainable national greenhouse gas inventory in developing countries. International Journal of Environmental Science and Development,9(10), 290–297.
Kawanishi, M., Kato, M., Matsuda, E., & Fujikura, R. (2019). Comparative study of reporting for transparency under international agreements on climate change and ozone protection: The case of the Philippines. International Journal of Environmental Science and Development,10(1), 1–8.
Majone, G. (1989). Evidence, argument, & persuasion in the policy process. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Mitchell, R. B. (1998). Sources of transparency: Information systems in international regimes. International Studies Quarterly,42, 109–130.
Mitchell, R. B. (2008). Evaluating the performance of environmental institutions: What to evaluate and how to evaluate it? In O. R. Young, L. A. King, & H. Schroeder (Eds.), Institutions and environmental change: Principal findings, applications, and research frontiers (pp. 79–114). Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Obergassel, W., Arens, C., Hermwille, L., Kreibich, N., Mersmann, F., Ott, H. E., et al. (2015). Phoenix from the ashes: An analysis of the Paris agreement to the united nations framework convention on climate change—part 1. Environmental Law and Management,27(6), 243–262.
Pentland, B. T., & Feldman, M. S. (2008). Designing routines: On the folly of designing artifacts, while hoping for patterns of actions. Information and Organization,18, 235–250.
Rajamani, L. (2016). Ambition and differentiation in the 2015 Paris agreement: Interpretative possibilities and underlying politics. International and Comparative Law Quarterly,65(2), 493–514.
Recabar, S. G. (2018). Climate reports: Philippines case. Presented at the meeting with the climate change commission. Manila, June 18, 2018.
The Lawphil Project. (2018). Executive order no. 714. https://www.lawphil.net/executive/execord/eo2014/eo_174_2014.html. Accessed 13 August 2018.
Thu Vien Pha Pluat. (2015). Viet Nam prime minister’s decision no. 2359/QD-TTg. English translation. https://thuvienphapluat.vn/van-ban/Tai-nguyen-Moi-truong/Quyet-dinh-2359-QD-TTg-duyet-he-thong-quoc-gia-kiem-ke-khi-nha-kinh-2015-299344.aspx. Accessed 18 September 2018.
Umemiya, C., White, M., Amellina, A., & Shimizu, N. (2016). Greenhouse gas emissions inventory capacity: An assessment of Asian developing countries. Kanagawa: Institute for Global Environmental Strategies.
UNFCCC. (1992). United Nations framework convention on climate change. https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/conveng.pdf. Accessed 21 May 2017.
UNFCCC. (2010). Report of the conference of the parties on its 16th session, held in Cancun from 29 November to 10 December 2010. https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/docs/2010/cop16/eng/07a01.pdf. Accessed 21 May 2017.
UNFCCC. (2011a). Report of the conference of the parties on its 17th session, held in Durban from 28 November to 11 December 2011. https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/docs/2011/cop17/eng/09a01.pdf. Accessed 21 May 2017.
UNFCCC. (2011b). Report of the conference of the parties on its seventeenth session, held in Durban from 28 November to 11 December 2011: Addendum. https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/docs/2011/cop17/eng/09a02.pdf. Accessed 21 May 2017.
UNFCCC. (2014). The initial biennial updated report of Viet Nam to the United Nations framework convention on climate change. https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/bur1vietnam.pdf. Accessed 11 June 2017.
UNFCCC. (2015a). Report of the conference of the parties on its twenty-first session, held in Paris from 30 November to 13 December 2015. https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/english_paris_agreement.pdf. Accessed 30 May 2017.
UNFCCC. (2015b). Summary report on the technical analysis of the first biennial update report of Viet Nam submitted on 8 December 2014. https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/docs/2015/tasr/vnm.pdf. Accessed 1 November 2018.
UNFCCC. (2016a). Record of the facilitative sharing of views during the forty fourth session of the subsidiary body for implementation: Viet Nam. https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/fsvr_vnm_v02.pdf. Accessed 31 October 2018.
UNFCCC. (2016b). Viet Nam first NDC. https://www4.unfccc.int/sites/ndcstaging/PublishedDocuments/Viet%20Nam%20First/VIETNAM%27S%20INDC.pdf. Accessed 18 September 2018.
UNFCCC. (2017). The second biennial updated report of Viet Nam to the United Nations framework convention on climate change. https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/97620135_Viet%20Nam-BUR2-1-Viet%20Nam%20-%20BUR2.pdf. Accessed 26 August 2018.
UNFCCC. (2018a). Modalities, procedures and guidelines for the transparency framework for action and support referred to in Article 13 of the Paris agreement. https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/Art%2013_transparency_13122018%201609_clean.rev_.pdf. Accessed 28 December 2018.
UNFCCC. (2018b). Decision-/CP.24: Preparations for the implementation of the Paris agreement at the first session of the conference of the parties serving as the meeting of the parties to the paris agreement—Advance unedited version. https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/cp24_auv_1cp24_final.pdf. Accessed 28 December 2018.
UNFCCC. (2018c). Technical analysis of the second biennial update report of Viet Nam submitted on 20 November 2017. https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/tasr2018_VNM.pdf. Accessed 1 November 2018.
UNFCCC. (2019a). Financial and technical support for non-annex i parties. https://unfccc.int/process/transparency-and-reporting/reporting-and-review-under-the-convention/support-for-developing-countries/financial-and-technical-support-for-non-annex-i-parties. Accessed 28 January 2019.
UNFCCC. (2019b). National Communication submissions from non-annex I parties. https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/transparency-and-reporting/reporting-and-review-under-the-convention/national-communications-and-biennial-update-reports-non-annex-i-parties/national-communication-submissions-from-non-annex-i-parties. Accessed 17 March 2019.
UNFCCC. (2019c). Biennial update report submissions from non-annex I parties. https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/transparency-and-reporting/reporting-and-review-under-the-convention/national-communications-and-biennial-update-reports-non-annex-i-parties/biennial-update-report-submissions-from-non-annex-i-parties. Accessed 17 March 2019.
UNFCCC. (2019d). Interim NDC registry. http://www4.unfccc.int/ndcregistry/Pages/Home.aspx. Accessed 17 March 2019.
United States General Accounting Office. (1992). International environment: Strengthening the implementation of environmental agreements. GAO Report RCED-92-188. https://www.gao.gov/assets/220/216570.pdf. Accessed 7 February 2018.
Willems, S., & Baumert, K. (2003). Institutional capacity and climate actions. Paris: OECD/IEA.
Young, O. R. (2002). The institutional dimensions of environmental change: Fit, interplay, and scale. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the Mitsui & Co. Environment Fund and JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number 18H03449. The opinions expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not represent the views of the organizations to which the authors belong.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kawanishi, M., Kato, M., Matsuda, E. et al. Comparative study on institutional designs and performance of national greenhouse gas inventories: the cases of Vietnam and the Philippines. Environ Dev Sustain 22, 5947–5964 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-019-00460-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-019-00460-y