1. Asia Pacific Initiative (API)
Climate, Energy and Food Security
Responding to the Challenge of
Climate Change
From an international perspective
24 December, 2010
Hironori Hamanaka
Professor, Keio University
Graduate School of Media and Governance
Chair, Board of Directors
Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES)

2. Outline
Compelling scientific evidence
From Bali to Copenhagen to Cancun
Beyond Cancun
A way forward: taking actions toward
a transition to low‐carbon societies
2
Source Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution

3. Increasingly frequent
extreme weather events
Heat wave and forest fire in Russia, source
National Geographic News, 12 August 2010
Flooding in southern Pakistan ( picture taken in 5
August 2010), source AFP

4. Retreating Himalayan Glaciers
Source: Nagoya University

5. “Climate‐gate”: the results of
independent reviews
• The Independent Climate Change E‐mails Review (July 2010)
– “We did not find any evidence of behaviour that might
undermine the conclusions of the IPCC assessments.”
• IPCC press release in view of the findings from the review
conducted by the Netherlands Environmental Assessment
Agency (July 2010)
– “The key conclusions of the IPCC 4th Assessment Report are
accurate, correct and supported entirely by the leading
science in the field.”
• Findings of the InterAcademy Council (August 2010)
– “IPCC assessment process has been successful overall.
However, the IPCC must continue to adapt to … changing
conditions in order to continue serving well in the future.”

6. Warming of the climate system
is unequivocal.
Source: Martin Manning, “Climate Change 2007: Observations and Drivers of
Climate Change”

7. Global and continental temperature change
Most of the observed increase in global Source: IPCC
average temperatures since the mid-20 th
Fourth
century is very likely due to the observed Assessment
increase in anthropogenic GHG concentrations. Report, Climate
Change 2007:
Synthesis
Report,
Summary for
Policy Makers,
2007
Models using only natural forcings Observations
Models using both natural and anthropogenic forcings

8. Global anthropogenic GHG emissions
Source: IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, Climate Change 2007: Synthesis
Report, Summary for Policy Makers, 2007

10. Emission allowances in 2020/2050 for various
GHG concentration levels (relative to 1990 emissions)
Source: IPCC AR4 WGIII Report, Chapter 13, p776.

11. Climate Change Politics
• Divided world: developed vs. developing countries
– Historical responsibility and equity
– Universal participation needed for effective response
“Common but differentiated responsibilities”
• Challenge of altering “carbon‐intensive” practices
intensive
– Policies advocated by scientists and environmentalists
often conflict with business interests.
business interests
– Impact of “green politics” in Europe, particularly in
Germany
– “No‐regret policy” vs. cost effective market mechanisms
regret policy
vs. environmental integrity

12. Kyoto Protocol (1997)
• Legally binding targets for developed country
Parties: Japan –6%, U.S. –7%, EU –8%, etc.
8%
• GHGs: CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs,SF6.
• Base year: 1990 (Any developed country Party may
use 1995 for HFCs, PFCs and SF6)
• Commitment period: 2008 2012.
• Use of GHG removals by LULUCF (land use, land use
change and forestry) activities.
• Introduction of flexible mechanisms:
Emissions trading, joint implementation (JI) and
Emissions trading
the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM).
the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM

13. Chronology of climate politics after
the Kyoto Protocol entered into force
• Kyoto Protocol entered into force (2005)
• MOP1 (Montreal, 2005)
– Formally adopted the Marrakech Accords, setting
Protocol implementation in motion.
Protocol implementation in motion
• IPCC 4th Assessment Report (2007)
• Bali Action Plan (COP13, 2007)
– Decided to launch a comprehensive process …
in order to reach an agreed outcome and
adopt a decision at COP15 in Copenhagen.
• Copenhagen Accord (COP15, 2009)
• Cancun Agreement (COP16, 2010)

14. Bali Action Plan
(2007)
• Parties launched a comprehensive process to address:
Parties launched
– A shared vision for … a long‐term global goal for
emission reductions,
– Enhanced … action on mitigation of climate change:
• Measurable, reportable and verifiable (MRV) …
commitments or actions, … by all developed country
Parties, while ensuring the comparability of efforts
among them,
• Nationally appropriate mitigation actions by developing
country Parties in the context of sustainable
development, supported and enabled by technology,
development,
financing and capacity‐building, in a MRV manner.

15. Bali Action Plan (continued)
• Parties launched a comprehensive process:
Parties launched
– Enhanced action on mitigation (continued): REDD, etc.
(continued):
– Enhanced action on adaptation to climate change
– Enhanced action on technology development and
transfer
– Enhanced action on the provision of financial resources
and investment
• Parties have been conducting negotiations mainly
through two negotiating tracks:
– AWG‐LCA
– AWG‐KP

16. Negotiation process under the Bali Action Plan
How it differs from that on the Kyoto Protocol ?
• Negotiation process on the Kyoto Protocol
– Focused on the strengthening of the Annex I Parties’
commitments
– Impact of the Protocol on the overall emission reduction
is limited, since it covers less than 30% of global
emissions
• Negotiation process under the Bali Action Plan
– Aims at enhancing actions by developing countries and
by the US, in addition to enhanced actions by developed
country Parties to the Protocol
– Enhancing actions by developing countries is closely
linked to support by developed countries
16

17. Politically agreed goal for
climate protection
• G8 leaders at L’Aquila Summit (2009):
– Recognized the broad scientific view that global average
temperature ought not to exceed 2 ,
– Reiterated their willingness to share with all countries
the goal of achieving at least a 50% reduction of global
emissions by 2050,
emissions by 2050
– Supported a goal of developed countries reducing GHG
emissions in aggregate by 80% or more by 2050.
80% or more by 2050
• The Copenhagen Accord (COP15, Copenhagen, 2009):
– Recognized that the increase in global temperature
should be below 2 .

18. Staying under the 2 threshold will require a very
stringent goal, and the longer the delay in
implementation, the steeper the trajectory required …
And yet, there are large differences
in per capita emissions among
regions and countries …
Source: Global Environment Outlook GEO4 environment for development,
UNEP, 2007

19. Halving global GHG emissions and ensuring
carbon space for development

20. Is it possible for developing countries to
take pathways towards low‐carbon
leapfrog‐development?
It is important to avoid the
risk of locking in more
CO2-intensive energy
technologies, and to capture
an opportunity to leapfrog
towards a low-carbon economy
Source: Dr. Shuzo Nishioka, Dr. Mikiko Kainuma, NIES, 2008

21. Concerns over pledging targets and
taking mitigation actions
• Developed countries
– How big the economic burden they would have to
bear?
– Are their efforts comparable to those of other major
economies? Would they hurt their international
competitiveness?
competitiveness
• Developing countries
– How much impact pledged actions would have on their
policies to eradicate poverty and achieve sustainable
development?
development
– Whether and how the support pledged by developed
countries would actually be delivered?

22. Copenhagen
Accord (2009)
• At COP15, most Parties supported the
“Copenhagen Accord”, in that they:
– Recognized that the increase in
global temperature should be below 2 .
– Annex I Parties commit to implement emissions
targets for 2020, to be submitted by 31 January
2010.
– Non‐Annex I Parties will implement mitigation
actions, including those to be submitted by 31
January 2010, that will be subject to their domestic
measurement, reporting and verification (MRV) …

23. Copenhagen Accord
(Continued)
• Non‐Annex I Parties… the result of (domestic MRV)
will be reported through their national
communications every two years, with provisions for
international consultations and analysis (ICA) under
clearly defined guidelines. Mitigation actions seeking
international support will be subject to international
MRV.
• The collective commitment by developed countries
is to provide new and additional resources,
approaching USD 30 billion for the period 2010–2012.
Developed countries commit to a goal of mobilizing
jointly USD 100 billion dollars a year by 2020 to
address the needs of developing countries.

24. Copenhagen Accord
and Its Implementation
• Copenhagen Accord , while not being formally adopted
by the COP, and only taken note of, is a step forward
to enable developing countries to take mitigation
actions, and to ensure transparency of these actions,
in addition to enhancing mitigation commitments by
developed countries.
• The Accord has been signed up by nearly 140
countries and more than 80 countries have submitted
their mitigation targets/ actions.

25. Mitigation targets/ actions
submitted by Parties
Country Mitigation targets / actions
Japan 25% reduction from 1990 level
EU 20% reduction from 1990 level
US 17% reduction from 2005 level
China 40‐45% reduction of CO2/GDP from 2005 level
Korea 30% reduction from BAU level
Indonesia 26% reduction from BAU level
India 20‐25% reduction of CO2/GDP from 2005 level
Brazil 36.1‐38.9% reduction from BAU level

26. Major Challenges remained after
Copenhagen
• Building trust and confidence is essential:
– To restore faith in multilateral process
– To achieve an agreement on a new international
climate regime that is inclusive, effective and
equitable, and
– To ensure stronger mitigation actions that will be
necessary to fill the gap still remaining between
targets and actions pledged by Parties and GHG
emissions pathways that can limit the global
temperature increase below 2 .

27. Cancun Agreement (2010)
• COP16 adopted the Cancun Agreement
and restored faith in multilateral process:
– “Transparency and inclusive” process
– The main Copenhagen outcomes have been formally
brought under the UNFCCC
• On mitigation, COP16:
– Created a process for anchoring mitigation pledges by
developed and developing countries,
– Established a registry for NAMAs by developing
countries and enhanced procedures on MRV/ICA
• Other important outcomes include on REDD+,
adaptation, finance, and technology.

28. Beyond Cancun
• Big challenges to be tackled include:
– Raising developed countries’ level of ambition of their
targets, with a view to reducing their aggregate
emissions in accordance with the range indicated by
the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report.
– The legal form of the outcome to be adopted by
COP17 in 2011 still remains open. Major options are
the Kyoto Protocol (2nd commitment period) plus COP
decision or plus new protocol.
– The issue of the continuation of the Kyoto Protocol
remains unresolved.

29. A way forward
• Scientific evidence indicates serious impact of
climate change:
– We need to avoid disastrous consequence.
• Transition to low‐carbon societies requires a
fundamental change addressing the very root
cause of the problem.
• We need to take decisive actions and to seek to
gain the advantage of early movers.
• Recognizing our carbon and other ecological
footprint is one of the important first steps to
take action …

30. Global ecological overshoot
depleting the very resources on which human life and
biodiversity depend…
“Today humanity uses the equivalent of 1.3 planets to
provide the resources we use and absorb our waste”
Source: World Footprint Do we fit on the planet?, Global Footprint Network,
http://www.footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/GFN/

31. Ecological Footprint Quiz
Source: http://myfootprint.org/en/

32. “Eco‐Home Diagnosis”
• An interesting experimental programme being
promoted by the Hyogo Prefectural Government in
collaboration with IGES.
4 steps:
1. Recognize your position
2. Choose/ set your target
3. Know sources and
quantities of CO2
emissions from your
daily life at home
4. Develop customized
actions at home to
achieve your target
Source: http://enviroscope.iges.or.jp/modules/envirolib/view.php?docid=2482

33. Where is your family’s carbon emissions ranked?
Carbon emissions
Power rates Gas rates Your family is ranked at
Among 100 families.
Your Average Your Average
family family
Source: http://www.uchi-eco.com/index.php?mode=uchieco

34. Carbon emissions at home:
from what sources and how much amount?
Use of
hot water
Use of
motor
vehicle If you choose
“modest eco-action”,
you need to reduce
your CO2 emissions
by 17%.
Other
sources

35. Actions for reducing CO2 emissions
CO2 Energy cost
Choose your actions for CO2 reduction reduction reduction
Target Target
Purchase efficient hot water supply system
achieved!
Reduce the use of motor vehicle by half

36. Thank you very much
Hironori Hamanaka
Professor, Keio University
Graduate School of Media and Governance
Chair of the Board of Directors
Institute for Global Environmental Strategies
hamanaka@iges.or.jp