The Article 6 discussions focus on a handful of key issues that need to be resolved to continue their implementation within the Paris « regulatory framework. » The graph also shows how the draft texts of Article 6 seem to have receded after discussions in Bonn in June 2019 (right column in the graph). The draft legislation of Article 6.2, Article 6.4 and Article 6.8 includes, on the one hand, 41 pages containing 672 brackets. However, considerable progress has been made in Madrid on technical issues. It is also positive to note that, on the last day of the conference, a group of countries led by Costa Rica and Switzerland launched the « San José Declaration », which established quality standards for the integrity of transactions in accordance with Article 6 and quickly received support from 31 countries. It remains to be seen whether the principles agreed in the declaration can mark negotiations on the Article 6 regulatory framework and help overcome the political differences that prevail in abundance. The ongoing negotiations will be critical to the future role of market mechanisms and will also largely determine how the parties can cooperate in the implementation of their national contributions (CNN). Although Article 6.7 stipulates that the annual COP adopts rules, modalities and procedures for the carbon market in accordance with Article 6.4, there is disagreement over the extent of national control over its activities and the UN supervisory body signs each draft or methodology. The issue of accounting for emission reductions transferred under Article 6.4 remains a major problem. The soundness of the accounting rules is essential so that emissions reductions cannot be counted more than once (double counting) and that the environmental integrity of the Paris Agreement is preserved. Another sensitive point is how to deal with quotas produced under the Kyoto Protocol and whether countries can use them under the Paris Agreement. There was no agreement on the introduction of royalties to support adaptation measures, as was the case under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). In the face of these and other disputes, the parties postponed the Article 6 decision until the Glasgow climate change conference. The last unresolved element of the Paris « Regulatory Framework » agreement, the Article 6 negotiations have symbolic significance for the general regime, which is expected to enter into force in early 2020.
While draft negotiating texts for the other part of the regulation were gradually reduced during the two-week meeting, sections of Article 6 remained blocked, with 132 unresolved passages containing « hooks » shown in red in the table below. The arrival of a Paris agreement that satisfied everyone meant that a certain degree of « constructive ambiguity » would remain in the text. This means that there was room for a series of interpretations in the formulation of the rules. The challenge this presents stems from the fact that Article 6 was the only part of the Paris regulatory framework that could not be agreed at COP24 in December 2018. In addition to the conditions imposed in the context of the double counting of the text of the Paris Agreement itself, the parties also agreed to formulate additional formulations in paragraph 77, point d), of the Paris Regulation, which was signed at COP24 in December 2018 and presented below. In order to ensure the implementation of the Paris Agreement after 2020, as planned, it is necessary to put in place a detailed set of rules that insert the provisions of the agreement within the framework of the operation. With the adoption of the Katowice Climate Package, a comprehensive set of rules was agreed at the climate change conference in Katowice, Poland, in December 2018. However, the parties have not been able to agree on the modalities of Article 6, nor have they been able to find solutions to key issues at the climate change conference in Madrid at the end of 2019. This part of the regulation specifies that, as part of their