The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) circulated its draft Fifth Assessment Report among peer reviewers last weekend. While the draft revises down the low-end of the range of this century’s projected temperature rise to 2.7°C, most scientists find that greater than 5°C is more likely, given the current trends that could double CO2 concentrations in the coming decades. This comes as the world is starting to gear up for the 19th Conference of the Parties (COP 19) to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in November.

Parties have just one week left to make their agenda requests to the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform (ADP)—where the bulk of the action in the climate change negotiations is right now. In its meetings at COP 19 the ADP will continue its work on stepping up emissions reductions before 2020 and developing the legal instrument that will come into effect in 2020.

The Parties have their sights set on keeping average temperatures from rising more than 2°C above pre-industrial levels. Yet, those same Parties are estimated to be subsidizing fossil fuels at a rate of US$523 billion per year.

Not surprisingly, the International Energy Agency (IEA) has found that phasing out fossil-fuel subsidies could have a profoundly positive effect on reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Based on Parties’ stated goals, then, it would be in their interest to delete these subsidy expenditures from their budgets as quickly as possible. Unfortunately the issue is rarely breached in the UNFCCC forum, where it could benefit greatly from a more prominent role.

The GSI has been looking at how the current processes and mechanisms available under the UNFCCC could incorporate fossil-fuel subsidy reform. Raising its profile in the climate negotiations would expand reform initiatives to a larger number of countries and could also increase and improve reporting. The GSI has the following recommendations that can be implemented in the short-term—without the need for consensus among 195 Parties.

First is getting the issue on the agenda of the ADP. Workstream 2 of the ADP is responsible for increasing Parties’ pre-2020 mitigation ambition—a perfect fit for fossil-fuel subsidy reform. Before the September 1 deadline, Parties should ask that reform be included on the ADP’s agenda and discussed in technical workshops.

Interested developing countries can play a key role by developing fossil-fuel subsidy reform into nationally appropriate mitigation actions (NAMAs). As the NAMA mechanism is scaled up, a country implementing reform as a NAMA can be considered for technical and financial support.

In the many meetings and discussions held in conjunction with the COPs, there is ample opportunity to include subsidy reform on agendas (in addition to the ADP’s). Parties should bring up the issue with the Subsidiary Body on Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA) and at high-level ministerial meetings, such as the one proposed for COP 19 on energy efficiency and renewable energy.

Lastly, Parties’ national communications, biennial reports, and biennial update reports are a perfect opportunity for countries to voluntarily report on fossil-fuel subsidies and steps taken toward reform. Assessing what subsidies exist and keeping a transparent record of them is imperative to getting the reform process started.

The colossal level of global spending on fossil-fuel subsidies is incompatible with the aspirations of Parties to slow climate change. Implementing these recommendations would only be the first step to eliminating this paradox, but all the more reason to start sooner rather than later.

Check out the GSI’s policy brief Prioritizing Fossil-Fuel Subsidy Reform in the UNFCCC: Recommendations for short-term actions for a more detailed analysis.