The Labor Day Discussions
Round Tables on Adaptation and MOI
From cramp halls of the Wasserwerk, the round tables shifted back to spacious Plenary Hall where parties held discussions (read: exchange of views) on  adaptation and  means of implementation (MOI).
On adaptation, developing country parties reaffirmed the following points for the 2015 agreement:  there must be an equal and balanced focus on mitigation and adaptation that will not require new commitments for developing countries;  the adaptation responsibilities of developed country parties must be clearly indicated;  the provision of stronger support for strengthening national capacities should be the cornerstone of the agreement which should indicate the sources for such;  operationalization of committed MOI for the provision of meaningful, practical, and concrete actions;  increasing mitigation action of developed countries to decrease adaptation costs;  mainstreaming adaptation as the overall strategy;  adaptation as a global responsibility and should support developing resiliency;  must incorporate domestically legally binding commitments;  should build on the adaptation architecture that has evolved since Cancun;  should be subject to a review mechanism;  should include developing economic diversification and resiliency; and  should articulate clear provisions on the delivery of new, additional, adequate, and predictable finance.
Developed countries on the other hand stressed the need to determine the added value of adaptation in the agreement and the need to refocus efforts, a common and coherent approach in addressing both adaptation and mitigation, the integration of low carbon development, and the focus on enhancing resilience.
Clearly, parties have a divergent perspective on adaptation at this point in time with developing countries demanding a stronger adaptation framework and action while developed countries preferring a more mitigation-oriented approach. The divergence is evident on the ensuing round table discussion on MOI where developing countries want a quantified, specified, and verifiable MOI on finance, technology transfer, and capacity development. Developing countries on the other hand want more mitigation action from developing countries, concrete policy frameworks and transparency of investments, incentives for ambitious actions, and consideration of the changing capacities of parties to contribute.
The Last Workshop
Workshop 3 (Opportunities for Adaptation and Mitigation Related to Land Use) followed the round tables where two experts, not some Skyped people this time, delivered presentations on  managing land use and forests and  an overview of experience on the ground in the area of land use and climate change including its challenges and opportunities.
It should be noted here that land use and land use change and forestry more popularly known as LULUCF has, from the side lines, suddenly taken center stage as a major arena of mitigation action. It is therefore imperative for Oxfam to consider this front for two reasons:  LULUCF is directly linked to agriculture and therefore food security and  the work on Workshop 3 might pre-empt and pre-judge the work of SBSTA in formulating a comprehensive work program on agriculture.
March 8, 2014, Cocoon Boutique Hotel
Quezon City, Philippines