2014 cop20-ccxg-adaptation-side-event-m. mullan and j. corfee-morlot
•Transferir como PPTX, PDF•
0 gostou•502 visualizações
COP 20 CCXG-Adaptation side event
Recomendados
Recomendados
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Mais procurados
Mais procurados (20)
Destaque
Destaque (15)
Semelhante a 2014 cop20-ccxg-adaptation-side-event-m. mullan and j. corfee-morlot
Semelhante a 2014 cop20-ccxg-adaptation-side-event-m. mullan and j. corfee-morlot (20)
Mais de OECD Environment
Mais de OECD Environment (20)
Último
Último (20)
2014 cop20-ccxg-adaptation-side-event-m. mullan and j. corfee-morlot
- 1. ROLE OF 2015 AGREEMENT FOR ADAPTATION Michael MULLAN – Environment Directorate Jan CORFEE-MORLOT – Development Co-operation Directorate
- 2. Source: Based on Mullan et al (2013) – National Adaptation Planning: Lessons from OECD Countries 2 Progress in adaptation planning from 2006 to 2013 in OECD countries
- 3. Source: OECD country survey – preliminary results; mutliple choice; 13 respondents 3 Focus on measures that deliver co-benefits in OECD countries
- 4. Source: Mullan et al (2013) – National Adaptation Planning: Lessons from OECD Countries 4 Mainstreamed financing of domestic adaptation amongst OECD countries • Understanding of resource needs increasing, but patchy • No systematic collection of data on finance requirements, current spending or extreme events
- 5. 1. Common vision: political will and development of institutional structures; 2. Evolutionary approach: focus on current problems, with initial thinking about longer-term vulnerabilities; 3. Evidence to guide “transformational” changes is very limited; 4. Finance and capacity constraints remain major barriers. 5 Emerging findings in national planning for Non-Annex 1 countries
- 6. 1) Conditions for adaptation should be viewed as an “ecosystem” Political commitment • Resonance with political imperatives and constraints • Engagement of external actors Institutions and processes • Identification of key interdependencies • Data presentation aligned to responsibilities • Stakeholder input as a means of raising awareness and building capacity Tools and data • Making tools easier to use • Providing rich underlying data for more sophisticated analyses Resources • Making the case for funding adaptation measures • Identifying the scale of contingent liabilities / residual risks Source: OECD (2015, forthcoming) – developed from Persson and Klein (2009) 6
- 7. 2) Importance of pragmatism in measuring success Climate risk and vulnerability assessments Indicators for monitoring prioritised climate change risks and vulnerabilities Learning from adaptation approaches National audits and climate expenditure reviews 7 1 2 3 4 • New OECD working papers: • Methodological challenges • National approaches • Based on analysis of the systems used in Germany, UK, Mozambique and Nepal
- 8. 8 1. Climate and development – two-way relationship: an example from South East Asia 2. Evolution of climate change adaptation at the international level & implications for action in developing countries 3. Official Development Assistance to Climate Change Adaptation 4. DAC-EPOC Task Team on Climate Change and Development Co-operation PART TWO – Adaptation, Development and Development Co-operation
- 9. Climate change threatens growth and development: impacts to vary by region-- a Southeast Asia example • Costly impacts, e.g. in the agricultural sector (figure). Coastal flooding costly for growing cities, even with significant investment in adaptation • Air pollution problems threaten health and well-being • Need to integrate climate, adaptation and disaster risk reduction into land use and infrastructure planning, align and strengthen local-national responses 2% 1% 0% -1% -2% -3% -4% -5% -6% Climate change could have a large impact on GDP in Southeast Asia in 2060 OECD America Percent change in GDP compared to baseline (OECD, 2014) OECD Europe OECD Pacific Rest of Europe and Asia Latin America Middle East & North Africa South & South- East Asia Sub- Saharan Africa World Fisheries Energy Ecosystems Health Tourism Sea level rise Agriculture GDP
- 10. Evolution of adaptation at the international level: implications for development policy Slow integration of climate change adaptation into development planning and policy in developing countries Mainstreaming in development co-operation practice is mainly driven by UNFCC-related processes: • First through National Adaptation Programmes of Action NAPAs (2001) for LDCs (by 2013 all LDCs had a NAPA); • Most recently (as of 2010) through National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) in all developing countries. Development co-operation and development finance for adaptation is increasing: • GEF (Trust Fund, LDCF, SCCF) and soon the GCF (50:50 adaptation/mitigation allocation of finance over time) • CIFs (e.g. the Strategic Climate Fund provides resources to the Pilot Program for Climate Resilience (PPCR)) • Bilateral financial support
- 11. Official Development Finance to Climate Change Adaptation 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 Source: OECD DAC Statistics, December 2014 • Total bilateral and multilateral adaptation-related finance reached over USD 14 bn in 2013. • Total bilateral adaptation-related aid by DAC members reached USD 10.8 bn p.a. over 2012-13, or 7% of bilateral commitments, about 45% of climate-related ODA • For bilateral aid, 70% targets adaptation as a significant objective, reflecting mainstreaming within on-going development activities Total adaptation-related finance 2010-13, bilateral and multilateral commitments, USD billion, constant 2012 prices, annual and 2-year annual average 6% 7% 8% 7% 6% 5% 4% 3% 2% 1% 0% 0 2010-11 2012-13 2013 (total) Share of total ODA commitments USD billion Principal Significant % of total ODA commitments Bilateral Multilateral
- 12. Adaptation-related bilateral aid is concentrated in a few sectors and activity types… Adaptation-related ODA by sector 2010-13, bilateral commitments, USD billion, constant 2012 prices 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Source: OECD DAC Statistics, December 2014 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% The top 5 sectors receive 86% of adaptation-related development finance. In 2013, multilaterals focused on General Environment Protection (17%); agriculture, forestry and fishing (17%); and disaster risk reduction (10%) General Environmental Protection reflects focus on adaptation planning and policy formulation, research and education, and capacity-building 0% 0 Water Supply and Sanitation Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Rural Development General Environmental Protection Multisector Transport and Storage Disaster Risk Reduction and Response Share of total ODA commitments USD billion Principal Significant % of total ODA commitments
- 13. DAC-EPOC Task Team on Climate Change 13 and Development Co-operation Since 2006, supports adaptation and development policy dialogue : • Sharing experience from policy practice; • Promoting better adaptation in partner countries (e.g., alignment, data collection, monitoring and evaluation); • Identifying, agreeing and communicating ways to improve development co-operation for adaptation; • Producing guidance (e.g., Integrating Climate Change Adaptation into Development Co-operation, OECD 2009). Recent work: • Harmonising Climate Risk Management: Risk Screening & Assessment Tools for Development – working paper • Monitoring and Evaluation for Adaptation: Methodological and Country Challenges – 2 new working papers Future (2015-16) work to focus on national-local adaptation planning and policy linkages, in the context of NAPs: • Mechanisms to reduce, transfer and share climate risks; • Climate-resilient urban development in developing countries. Integrating Climate Change Adaptation into Development Co-operation (2009)
- 14. THANK YOU! jan.CORFEE-MORLOT@oecd.org michael.MULLAN@oecd.org OECD ENV – Adaptation to Climate Change www.oecd.org/env/cc/adaptation.htm OECD DCD Climate Change and Development www.oecd.org/dac/environment-development/climate-change-development.htm OECD DAC-CRS - Methods and data on climate change financing www.oecd.org/dac/stats/rioconventions.htm
- 15. ROLE OF DEVELOPMENT CO-OPERATION 15
- 17. What evidence influenced the prioritisation of adaptation strategies? Includes multiple responses 2 4 7 3 13 Stakeholder engagement/consultation Expert judgement Uncertainty based approaches Multi-criteria analysis Cost-effectiveness analysis • Expert judgement and involvement of stakeholders are the most widely used techniques for prioritisation • Limited uptake of cost-benefit / cost-effectiveness tools 13 Cost-benefit analysis Source: OECD country survey – preliminary results; multiple choice; 13 respondents had undertaken 17 some form of prioritisation
- 18. Source: OECD country survey – preliminary results; mutliple choice; 13 respondents 18 Criteria used for prioritisation
- 19. Priority areas for improving data Source: survey of OECD countries 19 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 For which sectors is it a priority to improve the evidence base? (multiple choice)
- 20. • Setting of baselines should be transparent – e.g., treatment of autonomous adaptation • Greater emphasis on the social aspects of adaptation • Identification of poorly-understood, but potentially significant risks – flexibility in the choice of methods for analysis Source: Mullan et al (2013) – National Adaptation Planning: Lessons from OECD Countries 20 Lessons learned from quantitative studies to date
- 21. 3 PRIORITIES FOR SUPPORTING IMPLEMENTATION 21
Notas do Editor
- Good morning all. In terms of where I’m coming from – I’m an economist by training and (I fear) by temprement. I’ve been at the OECD for the past 3 years, and prior to that I was the economic advisor for the adapting to climate change team at Defra during the production of the first climate change risk assessment. In both these roles, I’ve really valued the work produced under the auspices of the tyndall centre so it is a pleasure now to be with you all today. Just to note that I’m speaking in a personal capacity this morning.
- Doubling to fivefold 23 of 34 countries have produced formal national strategies – 6 more in progress Few strategies have concrete actions or timescales
- Synergies – an interesting one, as it links both into the uncertainty and the way that climate risks are entangled with other drivers of change. The other notable aspect is the limited treatment of distributional considerations – which is striking given the well-established links between social vulnerability and vulnerability to climate change.
- We recently published a study looking in depth at this process in Ethiopia and Colombia. Despite very different country circumstances, you see some common themes. Attention to both mitigation and adaptation. Taking a systematic view of the drivers of risk. In dealing with uncertainty - both countries are “crossing the river by feeling the stones” at the moment. Some of the rhetoric is transformational but the details are incremental.
- The approach taken to managing climate risks is based on mainstreaming. There’s different ways of framing the issue, but here are four aspects that need to be in place. Research can
- This is really fundamental – yet often comes at a late stage at the planning process. No single way of measuring success. In the paper we present 4 tools or sources of information that countries may wish to draw up as they formulate their national approach to monitor and evaluate adaptation. None of these are new or revolutionary but reflect systems or mechanisms that often will be in place when a country has gone through a national adaptation planning processes. The emphasis is therefore not on establishing a new framework, but rather to build on what is already there The applicability of the four tools is nonetheless contingent on the pre-conditions being right: Data availability and capacity Co-ordination The potential contribution of development co-operation providers is also discussed in the paper. N.B 4 countries with system (Norway, UK, Turkey, Portugal), 15 underway.
- 1-4 Jan to present 5-8 Michael to present
- In modelling of the impact of climate change on GDP (CIRCLE), South and Southeast Asia are expected to experience the greatest losses to GDP, due mainly to losses in the agricultural sector. The region’s fast-growing coastal cities are also at risk. Coastal flooding in Southeast Asian cities cost an estimated USD 300 million in average annual losses in 2005; even with significant investment in adaptation the price tag could climb to USD 6 billion a year by 2050. Installing climate-resilient infrastructure now and being much more ambitious in adaptation and disaster risk management efforts could limit the damage and attract businesses to make long-lasting, resilient investments. These projected losses point to a need to mainstream adaptation in public and private sector investment. A review of Southeast Asian national development plans reveals that resilience to climate change and other natural disasters is the most commonly mainstreamed green growth objective. Every country is enhancing its resilience as part of its medium-term national development plan. However there is variation in the extent to which climate change is considered a cause of natural disasters. The Philippines Development Plan in particular stands out for the degree to which it mainstreams climate change adaptation and resilience to natural disasters across different sectoral strategies (Box 2.2). Box 2.2. Mainstreaming climate change adaptation in the Philippines The Philippines Development Plan 2011-2016 mainstreams resilience to climate change and natural disasters into sectoral strategies for agriculture, infrastructure, environmental protection and energy (Philippine National Economic and Development Authority, 2011): • Agriculture: In the strategy for a Competitive and Sustainable Agriculture and Fisheries Sector, increasing resilience to climate change risks is one of three identified goals, in addition to increasing agricultural income and food security, and enhancing policy environment and governance. In addition, climate-responsive agriculture is a sectoral objective and food security is the first priority of the National Framework Strategy on Climate Change 2010-2022 (NFSCC) (Philippines Office of the President, 2010). A legislative agenda has also been proposed to support the strategy, in addition to the existing Climate Change Act (2009) and the People’s Survival Fund Law which enacts climate action. • Infrastructure: As part of the cross-cutting strategy for Accelerating Infrastructural Development, resilience to climate change is mainstreamed into the sector strategies on transport, water, energy and social infrastructure. • Environmental protection: The strategy for environmental protection aims to enhance resilience of natural systems as well as to improve their capacity to cope with environmental hazards and climate related risks, through enhancing the adaptive capacity of institutions, communities and ecosystems. • Energy: The Philippines is the only country whose energy strategy also identifies adaptation actions for energy security, namely to assess the vulnerability of existing hydropower plants to the impacts of climate change, and to assess the vulnerability of energy facilities to natural disasters caused by periodical oscillations due to El Niño and La Niña, as well as man-made climate change. Disaster risk outcomes and goals have been further included, albeit less explicitly, in the strategies for industry and services, social development, and peace and security. Sources: Philippines Office of the President (2010 and 2011); Philippine National Economic and Development Authority (2011).
- 10
- In 2013…. For the first time, the OECD DAC statistics capture an integrated picture of both bilateral and multilateral climate-related external development finance flows. Bilateral donors prioritised: Water supply and sanitation (31%); agriculture, forestry, fishing & rural development (26%) and transport and storage (12%). Africa (47%) and Asia (33%) LDCs and LICs (35%) followed by LMICs (26%) Multilateral donors prioritised: General Environment Protection (17%); agriculture, forestry and fishing (17%); and disaster risk protection (10%). Asia (56%) and Africa (34%) Primarily focus on LDCs and LICs (69%), followed by LMICs (26%)
- The DAC EPOC Task Team on Climate Change and Development Co-operation was created in 2006 to support dialogue across development co-operation partners (developing countries, providers and CSO partners) on adaptation policy by: Promoting sharing experience, learning from policy practice Supporting better adaptation in partner countries through efforts to build domestic capacity, promoting alignment and harmonisation, data collection, etc. Identifying, agreeing and communicating ways to improve development co-operation for adaptation Producing key guidance for development co-operation and environment ministries/agencies in their co-operation with developing country partners For example, the OECD 2009 report: Integrating Climate Change Adaptation into Development Co-operation facilitates the integration of adaptation within development processes by: Promoting understanding of the implications of climate change on development practice and of the need to mainstream adaptation Identifying approaches for integrating adaptation into development at national, sectoral and project level, and in urban and rural contexts Identifying entry points for donors to support developing countries’ efforts to reduce vulnerability Recent work streams: Use of risk screening tools (working paper: Harmonising Climate Risk Management: Adaptation Screening and Assessment Tools for Development Co-operation) Studying monitoring and evaluation in development co-operation practice (builds upon 2011 survey Monitoring and Evaluation for Adaptation: Lessons from Development Co-operation Agencies)
- Going into more detail now. We surveyed government officials in all 34 oecd countries plus the Euro Commission on a variety of topics – I’d like to cover one focus point, which is the use of evidence to inform the development of their policy response to adaptation. In particular, how this has contributed to the prioritisation within their national adaptation strategies. This can be explicit – e.g. the austrian national strategy but it can also be implicit as with the UK.
- To recap – the mitigation situation is gloomy, climate is one of a number of interrelated social and environmental pressures arising over the course of the century and we have the challenge of trying to make sensible decisions in the presence of pervasive uncertainty
- The interesting point here is the limited use of quantitative approaches. uncertainty-based approaches – (such as real options approaches) and economic tools.
- Synergies – an interesting one, as it links both into the uncertainty and the way that climate risks are entangled with other drivers of change. The other notable aspect is the limited treatment of distributional considerations – which is striking given the well-established links between social vulnerability and vulnerability to climate change.
- This was a multiple choice selection. Notable the limited attention paid to “private sector” broadly construed.
- I was involved in the previous CCRA The point about baselines loops back to my initial point about the interconnected nature of climate change. I think it’s pretty iffy to view these trends as exogenous – or at least not to provide some sensitivities. Social aspects – I suspect that I’m preaching to the choir here, but ensuring that adequate attention is paid to vulnerability in OECD contexts. If you accept the argument that the tail risks are part of the motivation for action, then it seems pretty fundamental that they be included in the analysis. A follow-on from this is that it’s necessary to be catholic in the choice of methods