Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Christian religion --- Russian Federation --- 281.93 --- #SBIB:316.331H332 --- #SBIB:328H262 --- #SBIB:003.IEB --- Orthodoxe Kerk van Rusland --- Godsdienst en staat --- Instellingen en beleid: Rusland en het GOS --- Orthodox Eastern Church --- -Orthodox Eastern Church --- -Russkaia pravoslavnaia tserkov' --- -Eastern Orthodox Church --- Pravoslavnai︠a︡ vostochnai︠a︡ t︠s︡erkovʹ --- Holy Orthodox Catholic Apostolic Church --- Holy Orthodox Eastern Catholic and Apostolic Church --- Greek Church --- Orthodoxos Katholikē Ekklēsia --- Orthodoxos Katholikē kai Anatolikē Ekklēsia --- Kanīsah al-Sharqīyah --- Tung cheng chiao --- Kanīsat al-Masīḥ al-Sharqīyah al-Urthudhuksīyah --- Biserica Ortodoxă --- .كنيسة الشرقية الارثوذكسية --- History --- Church history --- Former Soviet republics --- -Soviet Union --- -CIS countries --- Commonwealth of Independent States countries --- Ex-Soviet republics --- Ex-Soviet states --- Former Soviet states --- New Independent States (Former Soviet republics) --- Newly Independent States (Former Soviet republics) --- NIS (Former Soviet republics) --- -History --- -Church history --- 281.93 Orthodoxe Kerk van Rusland --- Russia --- Russkai︠a︡ pravoslavnai︠a︡ t︠s︡erkovʹ --- Chiesa ortodossa russa --- Chiesa russa --- Eglise russe --- Orthodox Eastern Church (Russian) --- Rosiĭsʹka pravoslavna t︠s︡erkva --- RPT︠S︡ --- Russian Church --- Russian Orthodox Church --- Russian Orthodox Eastern Church --- Russisch-Orthodoxe Kirche --- Russische Orthodoxe Kirche --- Русская православная церковь --- РПЦ --- Російська православна церква --- History. --- Soviet Union --- CIS countries --- Church history. --- Russkaia pravoslavnaia tserkov --- Russkaëiìa pravoslavnaëiìa ëtìserkov§ - Soviet Union - Church history. --- Russkaëiìa pravoslavnaëiìa ëtìserkov§ - Former Soviet republics - Church history. --- Orthodox Eastern Church - Former Soviet republics - History. --- Former Soviet republics - Church history.

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

At the 16th Conference of the Parties (COP) in 2010, developed countries formalised a collective climate finance commitment made previously in Copenhagen of “mobilising jointly USD 100 billion per year by 2020 to address the needs of developing countries...from a wide variety of sources, public and private, bilateral and multilateral, including alternative sources” (UNFCCC, 2010). However, there is currently no definition of which “climate” activities, flows, or other interventions could count towards the USD 100 billion; what “mobilising” means; or even which countries are covered by this commitment. The paper examines different definitions used by 24 key actors in climate finance to quantify the level of private climate finance mobilised by their interventions, as well as the methods used to track such private climate finance. Key findings are that i) methodologies to assess and estimate mobilisation vary widely, and ii) considerable risk of double-counting exists.

Energy --- Environment

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

There are many reasons why the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) reporting framework requests information from countries. These include understanding and tracking progress with individual or collective commitments or pledges, providing confidence and enhancing accountability in quantified information measured and reported, and providing background information on the scope and ambition of national climate responses. This paper highlights the gaps, inconsistencies and uncertainties in the current reporting framework, which was developed for both long-standing obligations and mitigation pledges for the period to 2020. The paper also identifies possible improvements in the UNFCCC reporting framework in the context of the post-2020 transparency framework and nationally determined contributions (NDCs) for the post-2020 period.

Energy --- Environment

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

The Bali Action Plan (BAP) language on “measurable, reportable and verifiable” (MRV) greenhouse gas mitigation actions and commitments for a post-2012 climate framework was introduced to apply both to developed countries’ greenhouse gas (GHG) commitments and actions (paragraph 1(b)(i) of the BAP), as well as to “nationally appropriate mitigation actions by developing country Parties in the context of sustainable development, supported and enabled by technology, financing and capacity-building” (paragraph 1(b)(ii)). This paper provides an overview of current efforts to assess if GHG mitigation actions underway in different countries and regions are “measurable, reportable and verifiable”. The paper also assesses how such efforts could be improved, explores MRV options for different types of GHG mitigation actions, and highlights decision points needed to establish a post-2012 framework.Several different types of GHG mitigation actions and commitments have been proposed for the post-2012 period. Some of these - such as national-level GHG emission limits - are already being used, with countries therefore already gaining experience with implementing, monitoring, reporting (and potentially reviewing or verifying the effects of) such actions/commitments. The extent of this experience varies both by type of action/commitment, as well as by country and sector. In general, Annex I countries have significant experience with monitoring and reporting national emission levels (reflecting their reporting commitments under the UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol). However, official reporting on other GHG-mitigation actions occurs every few years in Annex I countries and only irregularly in non-Annex I countries. Thus, significant new guidance would be needed if post-2012 MRV provisions were to focus on GHG mitigation actions rather than GHG emission levels. In deciding a MRV framework, it will be important to consider measurement, reporting and verification issues separately (as for example some non-supported actions may be reported but not verified). A transition process may also be needed for some countries, in terms of what is to be subject to MRV provisions, and how M, R and V are to be carried out.

Energy --- Environment

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

At the 16th Conference of the Parties (COP) in 2010, developed countries formalised a collective climate finance commitment made previously in Copenhagen of “mobilising jointly USD 100 billion per year by 2020 to address the needs of developing countries...from a wide variety of sources, public and private, bilateral and multilateral, including alternative sources” (UNFCCC, 2010). However, there is currently no definition of which “climate” activities, flows, or other interventions could count towards the USD 100 billion; what “mobilising” means; or even which countries are covered by this commitment. The paper examines different definitions used by 24 key actors in climate finance to quantify the level of private climate finance mobilised by their interventions, as well as the methods used to track such private climate finance. Key findings are that i) methodologies to assess and estimate mobilisation vary widely, and ii) considerable risk of double-counting exists.

Energy --- Environment