48 Matching Annotations
  1. Apr 2016
    1. Here’s the URL of annotations tagged wikipedia: https://hypothes.is/stream?q=tag:%27wikipedia%27 (Actually that doesn’t seem to work yet, but I’d love to see this become a next-gen delicious with all the taggy goodness.)

      I would love to see a worthy successor to delicious. Is hypothesis it?

    2. One thing I held on to during fedwiki was that it wasn’t intended to be wikipedia, and to me that meant it wasn’t intended to produce articles so much as to sustain and connect ideas in formation that might find their way into article-like things on other platforms.
  2. Jan 2016
    1. But even from this remove it was possible to glean certain patterns, and one that recurred as regularly as an urban legend was the one about how someone would move into a commune populated by sandal-wearing, peace-sign flashing flower children, and eventually discover that, underneath this facade, the guys who ran it were actually control freaks; and that, as living in a commune, where much lip service was paid to ideals of peace, love and harmony, had deprived them of normal, socially approved outlets for their control-freakdom, it tended to come out in other, invariably more sinister, ways.
  3. Dec 2015
    1. And instead of a nice dish of minnows—they had a roasted grasshopper with lady-bird sauce; which frogs consider a beautiful treat; but I think it must have been nasty!
    1. More venery. More love; more closeness; more sex and romance. Bring it back, no matter what, no matter how old we are. This fervent cry of ours has been certified by Simone de Beauvoir and Alice Munro and Laurence Olivier and any number of remarried or recoupled ancient classmates of ours. Laurence Olivier? I’m thinking of what he says somewhere in an interview: “Inside, we’re all seventeen, with red lips.”
    1. common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities

      Malaysia, for the LMDCs, stressed the need to “recognize that the principles of equity and CBDR must be preserved in all their facets and forms.” He urged parties to look at the best available social science to assess modern realities and stressed that civil society must have access to negotiations.

    2. [Article 3bis] (REDD-plus)http://cop21.okfnlabs.org/agreement/#article-3bis-redd-plus

      Calling for a REDD+ mechanism to be reflected in the agreement, Panama, for the Coalition for Rainforest Nations, recalled that heads of state sent a “strong” political signal on the role of forests and biodiversity in their speeches.

    3. Option II: No reference to loss and damage (no Article 5).]

      TUVALU urged reinsertion of language on loss and damage that preserves the issue as an independent article.

    4. Recognizing that Parties should take action to address climate change in accordance with [[relevant][evolving economic and emission] trends, which will continue to evolve post-2020] [and the principles and provisions of the Convention],

      On purpose (Article 2), VENEZUELA supported “stabilization” of GHG emissions and, with SAUDI ARABIA and PAKISTAN, opposed the inclusion of “decarbonization” and “carbon neutrality.”

    5. [and the Central American Isthmus]

      At the end of a preambular paragraph on special needs, EL SALVADOR requested adding “and the Central American isthmus.”

    6. First communication option for agreement5 Option 167: Each Party’s first [NDMC*][INDC] is that listed in [Annex [x] to the Agreement][the registry][the website]. Option 2: Each Party [shall][should] communicate its first [NDMC*][INDC] no later than upon [ratification or acceptance of] [joining] this Agreement. Option 3: No provision on first communication in agreement and/or decision

      On mitigation (Article 3), the EU, supported by Colombia, for AILAC, Maldives, for AOSIS, and the US called for clarifying the date for the submission of contributions.

    7. socially and environmentally sound technologies.

      MEXICO asked that “socially and environmentally sound technology” be reinserted.

    8. Option 1: [[Developed country Parties and other developed country Parties included in Annex II to the Convention][Developed country Parties should take the lead and][Developed country Parties[, Parties with economies in transition] [and Parties in a position to do so]] [All Parties in a position to do so] [shall][should][other] provide [support][[new and additional] financial resources] to assist developing country Parties [including Parties whose special circumstances recognized by [Article 4.8 of the Convention][COP decisions]] with respect to both mitigation and adaptation [as well as addressing loss and damage] [and others in a position to do so should complement such efforts].] Option 2: [Developed country Parties and other developed Parties included in Annex II to the Convention shall provide new and additional, adequate, predictable, accessible, sustained and scaled-up financial resources to developing countries to enhance actions with respect to both mitigation and adaptation to contribute to the achievement of the [objective][purpose] of this Agreement, based on the principles and in accordance with the provisions of the Convention.] Option 3: [Parties in a position to do so, including developed country Parties, should provide support to assist developing country Parties in need of support with respect to both mitigation and adaptation.]

      On finance, the EU, NEW ZEALAND and the US stated developed countries should meet their obligations, and that others in a position to do so should contribute. AILAC envisioned CBDR and respective capabilities (CBDRRC) and developed country parties and countries “willing to do so” providing support. The LMDCs underlined that finance should be from developed to developing countries.

    9. Flexibility LDCs [and SIDS][and African states] may communicate their [NDMC*][INDC] at their discretion, including information on strategies, plans and actions for low GHG development, reflecting their special circumstances.

      On mitigation, the EU, Colombia, for AILAC, the US and others said that the INDCs imply self-differentiation. The EU stated all countries should seek economy-wide targets but there should not be shared timelines. The US added that developing countries should be eligible for support in implementing their contributions, and that LDCs and others should have flexibility to submit at their discretion without expectation. JAPAN stated that only vulnerable countries should have “partly conditional” INDCs.

    10. [Taking account also of the [different and additional] specific needs and special [situations] [circumstances ] of [least developed country (LDC) Parties in accordance with Article 4, paragraph 9 of the Convention and specific circumstances of] small island developing States (SIDS) [and least developed country (LDC) Parties],] [Africa] [and the Central American Isthmus],

      In the afternoon, the contact group discussed differentiation with all parties agreeing that the new agreement needs to reflect differentiation. Several parties observed the need to recognize the special circumstances of small island developing states (SIDS) and LDCs, with SAUDI ARABIA noting that this is already in the Convention.

    11. [Taking account also of the [different and additional] specific needs and special [situations] [circumstances ] of [least developed country (LDC) Parties in accordance with Article 4, paragraph 9 of the Convention and specific circumstances of] small island developing States (SIDS) [and least developed country (LDC) Parties],] [Africa] [and the Central American Isthmus],

      In the afternoon, the contact group discussed differentiation with all parties agreeing that the new agreement needs to reflect differentiation. Several parties observed the need to recognize the special circumstances of small island developing states (SIDS) and LDCs, with SAUDI ARABIA noting that this is already in the Convention.

    12. [Taking account also of the [different and additional] specific needs and special [situations] [circumstances ] of [least developed country (LDC) Parties in accordance with Article 4, paragraph 9 of the Convention and specific circumstances of] small island developing States (SIDS) [and least developed country (LDC) Parties],] [Africa] [and the Central American Isthmus],

      In the afternoon, the contact group discussed differentiation with all parties agreeing that the new agreement needs to reflect differentiation. Several parties observed the need to recognize the special circumstances of small island developing states (SIDS) and LDCs, with SAUDI ARABIA noting that this is already in the Convention.

    13. [Taking account also of the [different and additional] specific needs and special [situations] [circumstances ] of [least developed country (LDC) Parties in accordance with Article 4, paragraph 9 of the Convention and specific circumstances of] small island developing States (SIDS) [and least developed country (LDC) Parties],] [Africa] [and the Central American Isthmus],

      In the afternoon, the contact group discussed differentiation with all parties agreeing that the new agreement needs to reflect differentiation. Several parties observed the need to recognize the special circumstances of small island developing states (SIDS) and LDCs, with SAUDI ARABIA noting that this is already in the Convention.

    14. Hold the increase in the global average temperature [below 1.5 °C] [or] [well] [below 2 °C] above preindustrial levels by ensuring deep cuts in global greenhouse gas [net] emissions;

      On the request to the IPCC to provide a special report on the impact of a temperature increase of 1.5°C, SAUDI ARABIA and others questioned its added value beyond the IPCC assessment reports. TUVALU noted that newer information may be available that was not considered during the last assessment report cycle. INDIA and CHINA underscored the need for information on how to achieve temperature goals. Several parties requested, and ADP Co-Chair Daniel Reifsnyder agreed, to consult with the IPCC.

    15. A [mechanism][committee] [with differentiation between developed and developing country Parties][applicable to all Parties] to promote [[and address] compliance with] and facilitate implementation [of the provisions of this Agreement], which shall be expert-based, [facilitative] in nature and shall act in a manner that is transparent, non-punitive, non-adversarial [for developing country Parties][for all Parties], is hereby established. [It shall pay particular attention to the respective national capabilities and circumstances of Parties.]

      On a facilitative dialogue, several parties proposed a wider scope, beyond mitigation. The EU expressed flexibility on this, suggesting referring to the purpose of the agreement.

      CHINA and SAUDI ARABIA expressed concern that a facilitative dialogue could represent an ex ante review and opposed this. The EU and the US said a dialogue would inform the next round of INDCs.

    16. To this end the CMA shall establish a cooperative mechanism to address the adverse impacts of the implementation of response measures on developing country Parties, as included in decision

      On cooperative mechanisms, Catherine McKenna (Canada) reported that parties considered guiding principles, including, inter alia: environmental integrity; avoiding double counting; and the voluntary nature of such approaches. On mechanisms to support sustainable development (Article 3ter), she reported some parties stressed that such mechanisms would need to be durable over time, while others said they should not be part of the agreement.

    17. The purpose of the REDD-plus mechanism shall be to incentivize the reduction of emissions from deforestation and forest degradation and to promote conservation, sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks in developing countries, while enhancing the non-carbon benefits derived as a result of the multiple functions of forests, including alleviating poverty and building ecosystem resilience.

      On forests, Henri Djombo (the Congo) reported a shared view that the Paris outcome could send a strong signal to facilitate sustainable forest management.

    18. An international mechanism to address loss and damage is hereby defined under this agreement/protocol and shall be bound by the principles and provisions of the Convention, in particular common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities. The purpose of the mechanism shall be to promote and support the development and implementation of approaches to address loss and damage associated with the adverse effects of climate change, inter alia, extreme events and slow onset events, in developing countries that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change. The international mechanism on loss and damage shall draw upon, further develop and elaborate on the work of the Warsaw International Mechanism on Loss and Damage pursuant to relevant COP decisions, including the development of modalities and procedures for the mechanism’s operation and support. It can involve, as appropriate, existing bodies and expert groups under the Convention, as well as relevant organizations and expert bodies outside the Convention, and be informed by relevant precedents in international law.

      Åsa Romson (Sweden) highlighted cross-cutting issues needing resolution, including references to a temperature goal, vulnerability and CBDR. On loss and damage, she noted ongoing discussions on institutional arrangements, saying there was no convergence.

    19. [The [global goal][long-term vision] for adaptation shall be the basis for, inter alia:

      On adaptation, and loss and damage, René Orellana (Bolivia) highlighted landing zones on: a clear goal for adaptation, with a link to Convention Article 2 (objective); recognition of the link between mitigation and adaptation; and a communication process that is flexible and does not further burden developing countries.

    20. Article 11 (facilitating implementation and compliance)http://cop21.okfnlabs.org/agreement/#article-11-facilitating-implementation-and-compliance

      On workstream 2, Pa Jarju Ousman (the Gambia) highlighted emerging convergence on mirroring the mitigation TEP’s institutional arrangements for an adaptation TEP, with a key role for the Adaptation Committee. On accelerating implementation, he noted divergence of views.

    21. Differentiated efforts Option 1: In accordance with Article 4, paragraph 2, of the Convention, developed country Parties and other Parties included in Annex I shall undertake quantified economy-wide absolute emission reduction and limitation commitments/targets, which are comparable, measurable, reportable and verifiable, cover all greenhouse gases and are implemented domestically without any conditions. 3bis. In accordance with Article 4, paragraphs 1, 3, 4, 5 and 7, of the Convention, developing country Parties should undertake diversified enhanced mitigation actions/efforts in a measurable, reportable, and verifiable manner, in the context of sustainable development and supported and enabled by the provision of adequate finance, technology and capacity-building by developed country Parties. Option 2: Option (a): Each Party that has previously [communicated] [implemented] absolute economy-wide emissions reduction or limitation targets should continue to do so and all Parties should aim to do so over time. Option (b): Developed country Parties [and other Parties [in a position][that determine] to do so] should take the lead in mitigation efforts, including by [communicating] [and implementing] absolute economy-wide emissions reduction [or limitation] targets and all other Parties should aim to do so over time. 3bis [Developed country Parties should continue to take the lead].2

      On differentiation, Vivian Balakrishnan (Singapore) noted that “parties are not yet ready to place their final positions on the table,” saying the co-facilitators would work with the Presidency and Secretariat to crystallize existing fault lines in the text.

    22. Hold the increase in the global average temperature [below 1.5 °C] [or] [well] [below 2 °C] above preindustrial levels by ensuring deep cuts in global greenhouse gas [net] emissions;

      Tine Sundtoft (Norway) presented messages, including that, inter alia: most parties are willing to reflect a 1.5°C temperature limit in the purpose of the agreement, with accompanying provisions related to sustainable development, MOI, equity and food security; the two options identified on a global mitigation goal are a goal with quantitative elements for different time periods and a long-term qualitative goal; and there is support for a comprehensive and facilitative global stocktake, and a five-year cycle for successive communications.

    23. Hold the increase in the global average temperature [below 1.5 °C] [or] [well] [below 2 °C] above preindustrial levels by ensuring deep cuts in global greenhouse gas [net] emissions;

      SAINT LUCIA, opposed by the ARAB GROUP who suggested deleting reference to “degrees” altogether, called for including a request for consideration of consistency with 1.5°C scenarios. Parties decided that those interested would work on a new proposal.

      SAINT LUCIA, supported by a number of parties, and opposed by the ARAB GROUP, introduced a new paragraph urging the update to the synthesis report to take into account 1.5°C scenarios.

    24. recognizing the [important] role of [subnational and local authorities as well as [non state actors and the private sector]] [a multiplicity of] [different] actors,

      ARAB GROUP proposed deleting two paragraphs, on requesting all actors to scale up and demonstrate efforts, cautioning against passing the burden to actors outside the Convention.

    25. This Agreement shall enter into force on the thirtieth day after the date on which at least [X] [50][55][100] [ the ¾] Parties to the Convention [including all Annex I Parties] [and] [or] [on which Parties to the Convention accounting for [55][60][70][X] per cent of total [net] global greenhouse gas emissions in [[date][1990][2000][2010][2012]]

      On implementation and compliance (Article 11) and final clauses, Co-Facilitator Sarah Baashan (Saudi Arabia) said CMA (Article 12) was now clean, but disagreements remained on a compliance committee/mechanism in Article 11 and the type of threshold to use for determining entry into force (Article 18).

    26. Option 1: [The mobilization of climate finance [shall][should][other] be scaled up [in a predictable and transparent manner] [beyond previous efforts] [from USD 100 billion per year] from 2020[, recognizing the important role of the Green Climate Fund in the scaling up of financial resources for the implementation of this agreement, as well as other multilateral mechanisms and other efforts].] Option 2: [The provision and mobilization of financial resources by developed country Parties and other developed Parties included in Annex II shall represent a progression beyond their previous efforts towards achieving short-term collective quantified goals for the post 2020 period to be periodically established and reviewed. Financial resources shall be scaled up from a floor of US$100 billion per year, including a clear burden-sharing formula [among them], and in line with needs and priorities identified by developing country Parties [including Parties whose special circumstances were recognized by COP decisions] in the context of contributing to the achievement of the [objective][purpose] (Article 2/XX) of this Agreement.

      Report of the GCF and Guidance to the GCF: GCF Board Co-Chair Henrik Harboe (Norway) highlighted key milestones including: nomination of 136 National Designated Authorities; accreditation of 20 entities to channel finance into action on the ground; and signed contribution agreements representing 58% of the initial US$100 billion in pledges.

    27. [Developed country Parties shall provide developing country Parties, taking into account the needs of those that are particularly vulnerable, with long-term, scaled-up, predictable, new and additional finance

      REPORT OF THE ADAPTATION FUND BOARD: Adaptation Fund Board Chair Hans Olav Ibrekk (Norway) reported that the “fund has never been more in demand” and has delivered effectively on its mandate, but that the sustainability of the fund is “in danger.” Parties established a contact group co-chaired by Richard Muyungi (Tanzania) and Herman Sips (the Netherlands) on this item (FCCC/KP/CMP/2015/2).

    28. The purpose of the system for transparency of support is to: Provide a clear understanding of the support provided and received [as relevant] by individual Parties [as well as needs of developing country Parties] [and assist Parties in identifying gaps in support provided and received], without placing an undue burden on SIDS and LDCs; Provide[, to the extent possible,] a full overview of aggregate support provided and [mobilized] [in the light of {refer to the objective of the stocktake under Article 10}][under Article 10];

      On the synthesis report of the aggregate effect of the INDCs, parties decided to take note of the document. After intensive discussions on the various elements of the paragraph, including the gap between the aggregate effect of the INDCs and emissions consistent with 2°C or 1.5°C, Co-Chair Reifsnyder proposed: mentioning the gap resulting from the aggregate effect of INDCs communicated by 1 October 2015; inserting figures to concretize the gap; and including language from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change on lowest-cost emission pathways. He noted a revised text would be proposed by the ADP Co-Chairs and the Secretariat.

    29. Option 1: [The [NDMC*][INDC] communicated by Parties shall be [listed][published] [in an online registry maintained by the secretariat][ in Annex [X] to this Agreement][on the UNFCCC website].]

      Parties added brackets around a paragraph related to requesting the Secretariat to publish INDCs on its website.

    30. Article 18 (entry into force)http://cop21.okfnlabs.org/agreement/#article-18-entry-into-force This Agreement shall enter into force on the thirtieth day after the date on which at least [X] [50][55][100] [ the ¾] Parties to the Convention [including all Annex I Parties] [and] [or] [on which Parties to the Convention accounting for [55][60][70][X] per cent of total [net] global greenhouse gas emissions in [[date][1990][2000][2010][2012]] have deposited their instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession [whichever occurs first, coming into effect not earlier than 1 January 2020]][.][, with such Parties to the Convention accounting for X per cent of total [net] global greenhouse gas emissions [in [date] [1990][2000][2010][2012]] [but not earlier than 1 January 2020].]

      On paragraphs related to the adoption of the agreement, parties converged on paragraph 5 on parties provisionally applying the provisions of the agreement pending entry into force.

      On a body to prepare for entry into force, parties agreed that the ADP Co-Chairs and Secretariat would streamline the three options into one, representing the various proposals for the body raised by parties, including: using the ADP, changing its mandate and name, but importing all its previously agreed operational arrangements; using the SBI and/or the SBSTA; or creating a new body.

    31. In pursuit of the objective of the Convention, [and being guided by its principles [and provisions], including the principle of equity and common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities, [in the light of different national circumstances],]

      TUVALU proposed adding language stating that the new agreement was being adopted in the context of Convention Article 17 (protocols). SAUDI ARABIA, the EU and the US opposed. Co-Chair Djoghlaf suggested discussing the issue during lunchtime.

    32. Option 1: A technology framework is hereby established to pursue that vision, including to enhance the development and transfer of socially and environmentally sound technologies. Option 2: A technology framework is hereby established to achieve that vision, with a view to enhancing the development and transfer of, and access to, socially and environmentally sound technologies by [addressing [mutually agreed] barriers and] guiding the work of the Technology Mechanism and further to facilitate the understanding of [the intended nationally determined contributions of Parties pertaining to] technology provision under the Agreement.

      Co-Facilitator Tosi Mpanu-Mpanu (Democratic Republic of the Congo), reporting back from technology development and transfer (Article 7), noted that the African Group presented a revised option for the technology framework that was well-received and informed that views remained divergent on the global goal.

    33. the rights of indigenous peoples

      INDIGENOUS PEOPLES urged, inter alia: respecting indigenous peoples’ rights; recognizing traditional knowledge and practices; and providing direct access to climate finance.

    34. Option 1: communication to 5 year time period Every 5 years, harmonised [NDMC*][INDC] Each Party shall [[communicate its [successive] [new]] [update its] [NDMC][INDC] by [year x] [2020] [2021] and every five years thereafter on a [synchronized][common] basis, [or resubmit an existing [NDMC][INDC]] [for the subsequent five-year time frame], taking into account the outcomes of the global stocktake referred to in Article 10.

      Saying “we are far from where we need to be,” Climate Action Network (CAN), for ENVIRONMENTAL NGOs (ENGOs), called for creating five-year cycles and matching conditional INDCs with finance.

    35. Option 1: [The mobilization of climate finance [shall][should][other] be scaled up [in a predictable and transparent manner] [beyond previous efforts] [from USD 100 billion per year] from 2020[, recognizing the important role of the Green Climate Fund in the scaling up of financial resources for the implementation of this agreement, as well as other multilateral mechanisms and other efforts].] Option 2: [The provision and mobilization of financial resources by developed country Parties and other developed Parties included in Annex II shall represent a progression beyond their previous efforts towards achieving short-term collective quantified goals for the post 2020 period to be periodically established and reviewed. Financial resources shall be scaled up from a floor of US$100 billion per year, including a clear burden-sharing formula [among them], and in line with needs and priorities identified by developing country Parties [including Parties whose special circumstances were recognized by COP decisions] in the context of contributing to the achievement of the [objective][purpose] (Article 2/XX) of this Agreement.

      China, for Brazil, South Africa, India and China, emphasized conducting work in an open, transparent, inclusive and party-driven manner, and said that the Paris agreement should be in line with CBDR and respective capabilities. On the pre-2020 period, he stressed that developed countries must meet their commitments and define a clear roadmap to achieving the US$100 billion goal.

    36. Flexibility LDCs [and SIDS][and African states] may communicate their [NDMC*][INDC] at their discretion, including information on strategies, plans and actions for low GHG development, reflecting their special circumstances.

      The Republic of Korea, for the ENVIRONMENTAL INTEGRITY GROUP, called for the adoption of an agreement that is applicable to all, includes a flexible approach to differentiation, and has common rules and a mechanism to increase ambition over time.

    37. Hold the increase in the global average temperature [below 1.5 °C] [or] [well] [below 2 °C] above preindustrial levels by ensuring deep cuts in global greenhouse gas [net] emissions;

      On ambition, Tine Sundtoft (Norway) outlined the questions posed to parties, including on how to: frame a possible reference to a 1.5 °C limit; identify an acceptable long-term goal for mitigation over different timeframes; have a common “global moment” every five years for taking stock and informing future nationally-determined efforts on mitigation, adaptation and support; and provide reassurances that the global stocktake would not impinge on national determination of commitments.

      James Fletcher (Saint Lucia) said that, while several developed and developing country parties indicated willingness to refer to a 1.5 °C limit, others reaffirmed the temperature limit in the Cancun Agreements. He said there is general interest to express a collective long-term goal for mitigation, which could be expressed in quantitative or qualitative terms, such as a transformation to carbon neutrality or decarbonization. He also reported convergence on a common “global moment” every five years to take stock and review aggregate progress, and provide an opportunity to confirm or raise targets, but without an obligation to do so.

    38. Hold the increase in the global average temperature [below 1.5 °C] [or] [well] [below 2 °C] above preindustrial levels by ensuring deep cuts in global greenhouse gas [net] emissions;

      Angola, for the LDCs, stated that the 2°C limit is inadequate and should be strengthened to 1.5°C.

      Maldives, for the ALLIANCE OF SMALL ISLAND STATES (AOSIS), called for the agreement to establish, inter alia, medium- and long-term emission reduction pathways capable of delivering less than 1.5°C of warming.

      WOMEN AND GENDER urged countries to limit temperature rise to 1.5°C and avoid concepts such as net zero, carbon neutrality and offsetting.

      LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND MUNICIPAL AUTHORITIES highlighted the contributions of local governments to mitigation and adaptation, while calling for a 1.5°C temperature limit.

    39. Emphasizing the need to respond to the urgent threat of climate change on the basis of the [best available] [reliable] scientific knowledge, in particular, the assessment reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,

      Saudi Arabia, for the ARAB GROUP, emphasized that setting a goal for governments’ efforts “needs to be substantiated by proven science,” provided by the IPCC.

    40. [Each Party’s [intended] nationally determined contribution will represent a progression in the light of Parties’ differentiated responsibilities and commitments under the Convention.] [The extent to which developing country Parties will effectively implement this Agreement will depend on the effective implementation by developed country Parties of their commitments on the provision of finance, technology development and transfer and capacity-building.]

      On differentiation, Vivian Balakrishnan (Singapore) characterized the INDCs as an “innovation” allowing all parties to operationalize their diverse starting points and make continuous improvements over time. He said that assurances of no backsliding and that developed countries would continue to take the lead “resonated strongly.”