Transcript Bild 1 - CEMUS COURSE PORTAL

Climate finance
Johanna Sandahl
March 26 2012
The South’s dilemma
Baer, P., Athanasiou, T., Kartha, S., 2009
HDI and energy access
Global effects of climate change
(IPCC FAR 2007)
Risks worse than expected
(IPCC TAR 2001, Smith et al 2009)
Food production and climate change
+ Increased CO2, higher temperature, longer seasons, increased
precipitation sounds good
Potential yield increase of wheat, rice, maize and soybean
But.....
A number of negative effects likely to
occur
Not only a ”South’s dilemma”
Landslide at Enafors, E 14 between Åre and Storlien, 2006
Political reaction is slow
(Sårbarhetsutredningen, 2006)
Mitigation and adaptation will cost!
How much?
Globally: trillions of USD investments
South: several hundred billions per year
... but peanuts compared to the costs in the future
if we don’t pay now!
WHO SHOULD PAY?
Common but differentiated
responsibilities (CBDR)
UNFCCC, art 4, §3:
• The developed country Parties /…/ shall provide new and
additional financial resources to meet the agreed full costs
incurred by developing country Parties /…/ . They shall also
provide such financial resources, including for the transfer
of technology, needed by the developing country Parties to
meet the agreed full incremental costs of implementing
measures that are covered by paragraph 1 [adaptation,
mitigation etc] /…/ The implementation of these
commitments shall take into account the need for adequacy
and predictability in the flow of funds and the importance of
appropriate burden sharing among the developed country
Parties.
What about China?!
What about China?
What about China?
• IMF: China is still a developing country (2010:
GDP/capita USD 4,382). No 91 of the world's
184 countries (USA no 12)
• 6 African counties higher (Equatorial Guinea,
Gabon, Botswana, Mauritius, South Africa,
Namibia), less than a tenth of that of the United
States (USD 46,860).
• No 101 in HDI (USA no 9)
• No 84 in per capita CO2 emissions (USA no 5)
CBDR -> Bali Action Plan
Bali Action Plan calls for improved access to
finance that is:
•
•
•
•
Adequate
Predictable
Sustainble
New and additional
Additionality?
• UNFCCC: no further definition
• AGF (the Secretary-General’s High-level
Advisory Group on Climate Change Financing):
“refers to the extent to which new resources add
to the existing level of resources /…/ politically
and analytically very difficult /…/a potential
perspective is to treat the newness of a source
as a useful, if partial, proxy for additionality”
Innovative sources
Financial Transactions Tax
Air/maritime transport: carbon market auctioning/levy
Fossil fuel subsidies
~700 bn USD/year
And there is more...
• Auctioning of carbon credits (2-10%)
• CDM
• Global carbon tax
• ....
Key issues
• Political will!
• Carbon market price (emission reduction
commitments)
• Share devoted to international climate
financing
• Earmarking (conflict other national needs)
Institutional arrangements:
north vs south
China
Canada
EU
AOSIS
Japan
G77
Australia
USA
• Donor control
• Well developed systems to:
– ensure funds used for
intened purposes
– measure and manage
impacts
LDC
• New institutions needed:
– Lack of trust
– Lack of influence
NGO/south: key principles
• Legitimacy: under the authority of the
UNFCCC
• Democracy, transparency
• Capacity, effectiveness, direct access
• Grants, not loans
• National ownership
Green Climate Fund
• support projects, programmes, policies
and other activities in developing country
Parties
• a board of 24 members comprising an
equal number of members from
developing and developed country Parties
• World Bank trustee
• Lessons to be learnt from Adaptation Fund
Why not the World Bank?
• Founded in 1944
• Mission:
– economic growth, development, poverty
reduction
– long term support
• 184 member countries
• Board of 24 Executive Directors
• President: Robert B. Zoellick (always
american)
World Bank: power structures
• Size of shareholding
= voting power
• USA veto-power
• G8 almost 50% of
voting power
Guinea
Bissau/Equatorial
Guinea
Argentina/Chile
Brazil
Uganda/Nigeria
USA*
Spain/Venez/Mex
Australia
Thailand/Indonesia
Japan*
India
Germany*
China*
Kuwait/Egypt
Pakistan/Morocco
France*
UK*
Saudi Arabia*
Canada
Switzerland
Netherlands
Italy
Nordic
Austria/Belgium
Russia*
Poor track record
- legitimacy, effectiveness
• Voice: undemocratic
governance
structures
• Conditionality
• Bypass principles of
country ownership
Poor track record:
climate and environment
• Fossil fuel projects
dominant role in
energy portfolio
• 2007-2009: 22%
increase
• No methodology to
assess GHG
emissions from
projects
World Bank supports Eskom coal
fire plant
• April 2010: World
Bank approves USD
3,75 bn loan
• 26 mill tonnes
CO2/year
• Sweden in favor
• UK, US, Netherlands
etc abstain from
voting
Global Marshall Plan
Feed-in tariffs
100-150 bn USD/year over 10-15 years may solve problem
31
Websites
www.naturskyddsforeningen.se
www.climnet.org (Climate Action Network)
www.twnside.org.sg (Third World Network)
www.eurodad.org
www.brettonwoodsproject.org
www.worldbank.org
www.unfccc.int
World Bank:
Climate Investment Funds
• Cynics’ response: ”it was all very well
planned”
• ”sunset clause”
• Clean Technology Fund:
– USD 6 bn pledged
– what is ”clean”?
Coming up: COP 16 Cancún
• Sources of innovative
finance
• Establishment of
Copenhagen Green Climate
Fund / New Global Climate
Fund / ?
• Operational?
”The climate negotiations are
back on track - Cancún a step
forward towards what is
needed” Andreas Carlgren, Minister
for the Environment
”Stop playing russian roulette
with the climate!”
Swedish Church Aid/Diakonia
”…we express our outrage and disgust
at the agreements that have emerged
from the COP16 talks…”
Climate Justice Now
Climate agreements
1992 UN Framework Convention on
Climate Change (UNFCCC)
1997
Kyoto Protocol
2007
Bali Action Plan
2009
Copenhagen Accord
2010
COP 16 Cancún, Mexico
2011
COP 17 South Africa
- new agreement?
2012
Rio +20??
Find it, build it, spend it
• Find it – innovative sources
• Build it – legitimate institutions
• Spend it – using scarce resources
effectively
Climate finance vs ODA?
1. Above existing levels?
2. Above UN pledges
0,7%/GNI?
3. Above pledged levels?
(Sweden 1%/GNI)
4. Other?