Transcript enerbal show - World Resources Institute

Sustainable development
policies and measures
Harald Winkler, Randall Spalding-Fecher,
Stanford Mwakasonda & Ogunlade Davidson
Energy & Development Research Centre
University of Cape Town
What is the SD-PAMs approach?
•
•
2
Sustainable development (SD) policies and measures
(PAMs)
Backcast from desired future state of development, not
GHG reduction goal or cap
 define more sustainable paths to meet development
objectives
•
Climate change as ‘ancillary benefit’ of achieving SD
 Developing countries (DC) focused on basic
development needs; climate change not a priority
 commit to implementing SD policies in practice
•
Basis in Article 3.4 of the Convention – the right to
sustainable development
Emissions from development path matter at least
as much as mitigation policy
IPCC Emission Scenarios (grey) versus emissions path needed for stabilisation (red)
40
40
IPCC SRES A1T Scenarios
A1T
35
35
30
30
25
25
20
20
15
15
10
A1T
650
550
450
5
0
2000
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
2060
2070
2080
2090
A
10
750
6
550
450
5
2100
1990
2000
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
2060
2070
2080
2090
IPCC SRES B1 Scenarios
35
B1
30
25
25
20
20
15
15
IPCC SRES B2 Scenarios
B2
B2
10
10
650
550
450
B1
550
450
5
0
1990
3
2100
40
40
30
A1FI
0
1990
35
IPCC SRES A1FI Scenarios
2000
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
2060
2070
2080
2090
2100
5
0
1990
2000
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
2060
2070
2080
2090
2100
Source: IPCC 2001 Third Assessment Report, WG3, p. 151
Steps in applying SD PAMs
4
1.
Country outlines future development objectives
 backcasting from long term goals where possible
2.
Identify PAMs to achieve development objectives more
sustainably, for reasons other than CC
a. Existing policy not fully implemented; or
b. New policies and / or more stringent measures
3.
4.
Quantify the changes in GHG emissions from individual PAMs
5.
Summarise the net impact of a basket of SD-PAMs on
development and GHG emissions
Identify PAMs with synergies or conflicts between SD benefits and
GHG limitations
Disadvantages of SD-PAMs approach
•
•
5
Does not ensure a global reduction or cap on GHG
emissions
 reduces emissions from BAU, not from 1990 levels
Analytically hard to summarise net impacts of basket of
PAMs on GHGs
 See SA case study in the chapter in the book
Advantages of SD-PAMs approach
•
•
•
•
6
Starts from SD, which DC policymakers prioritise
 Extend and implement existing domestic policies
 synergies are ‘win-win’ or ‘no-regrets’ policies
 Builds DC leadership by showing what DC are doing
Takes account of national circumstances
 builds in domestic energy resource endowment,
climate, levels of industrialisation and motorisation,
income
 develops capacity to mitigate
Create incentives for early DC action – differentiated
responsibility and action
Helps build a climate of trust for potential future
commitments
Institutional challenge: Formalising the approach
•
Accountability in a pledge-based approach
 How does this link to the UNFCCC / KP system?
 Countries make pledges to implement
SD-PAMs


7
Commitments under UNFCCC
Article 4.1 b and 4.1 f
Mandatory reporting under new
registry versus reporting in National
Communications
The funding challenge: Who pays?
•
•
•
8
For PAMs that reduce emissions
 Annex II already have commitment for incremental
costs of implementing mitigation measures and full
costs of formulation and reporting (Article 4.3)
 For additional funds, access GEF,
CDM, new Convention and KP funds
 Broader than CDM – need national,
sectoral baselines to assess impact
For PAMs that do not reduce emissions
 Access ODA, Dev Banks, private capital
Since it promotes development, may mobilise domestic
funding more readily
What you won’t find in this presentation …

•
More detailed ideas about implementing SD-PAMs
 Defining and formalising the commitment
 What might baselines for SD be?
 Timing and graduation issues

•
•
•
9
… but can read in the chapter in the book!
How should SD-PAMs be reviewed and accounted for?
Link between climate policies and SD policies
More on funding
Case study: SD-PAMs applied to South African situation
Concluding remarks
•
•
•
10
Climate change negotiations have to address the political
priorities of DCs
SD PAMs is an possible first step in DC participation
Can start now and continue in parallel to negotiations
around second commitment period
Thank you for listening
www.edrc.uct.ac.za
Which developing countries might find it attractive?
•
•
•
12
Least Developed Countries in particular?
Rapidly industrialising countries
 would not have surplus under top-down allocation schemes
Analytical
 grouping by emissions intensity
(CO2 / GDP), ability to pay (GDP / pop),
Human Dev Index?
Equity and future commitment regimes
•
•
•
13
One major question: How to set up a framework for global participation in
the effort to combat climate change?

Top-down approaches: can guarantee an environmental outcome

Bottom-up approaches: politically more likely to bring DCs into the
system

Could include this slide, leave out points on slide 7? And what
about the graphic?
Consider both
responsibility of
countries, and their
capacity to meet
targets
SD-PAMs a bottom-up
approach that builds
capacity in DCs
Implementation challenges: conceptual
•
What is the baseline for SD? Business-as-usual?
 Conventional development / dirty development
 Current policy? Or implementation?
 Multi-sectoral - how many baselines can you monitor
 How to prevent gaming

•
14
countries claiming existing policies as ‘new’ SD-PAMs
Link between SD-PAMs and climate mitigation policies
 end up dealing with energy services, transport, housing
 difference in the motivation / starting
point - to achieve development
or to reduce GHGs