Concerning finance, the same issues surrounding sources, methodologies, recipients, insurance mechanisms, and governing bodies arose.

As far as sources are concerned, Norway's proposal to auction off AAU's (assigned amount units, 1 = 1 tonne carbon dioxide emissions, the things Kyoto Protocol caps are made of)) and use the proceeds to fund mitigation and adaptation remains the strongest. Parties still proposed however, using voluntary contributions and other market mechanisms.

The advantages of the Norwegian plan is that it is constant, reliable, and would contribute to reduction targets at home (AAU's can only be auctioned of if a country reduces its emissions and has credits left over). Many of the other proposed plans are at the whims of international governments, and based on historical responsibility (which adds ambiguity) or deregulated market prices (which as we all know now, are thoroughly unpredictable).

Having an executive board to develop and monitor activities on tech transfer and a global insurance mechanism were also tossed around as potential institutions to ratify.

And in other matters, despite only confirming the drafting of a 2009 work programme yesterday, parties have already requested an extension to the deadlines for submissions. Headway was made however, as two workshops on developed country mitigation commitments and developing country mitigation actions would be held during the first session of 2009.

Back shortly with goings on in the KP.

Rhiya