International
Climate and Development
Cancún can deliver for Africa
This week the latest round of UN climate talks are starting in Cancún, Mexico. While the expectations are significantly lower than at last year’s Copenhagen gathering, the meeting will still be taking crucial decisions that affect the world’s poorest people. Discussions will include how to scale up financial support for developing countries, improving transparency and accountability of promises, and the promotion of green technology transfers to enable countries to achieve economic growth in a clean and sustainable way.
This video outlines why the Cancún meeting is important, and what ONE wants to see achieved:
You can also take a look at our new policy pitch: Green Economic Growth for Africa. The following is an extract:
Two of the challenges that will define this century are overcoming world poverty and managing climate change. The interplay between the two will be one of the critical factors in progress towards the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in Africa. Climate change has the potential to undermine recent gains in reducing extreme poverty, while the cost of reaching the MDGs rises by 40% when climate proofing is taken into account. Our approach to mitigating and adapting to climate change must therefore be ambitious, adequately funded, but also sensitive to Africa’s legitimate desire for economic development. Cancún can be a turning point at which countries signal a shift to more sustainable and equitable economic development and poverty alleviation – and in which the African Lion economies have a central role to play.
Over the next two weeks we’ll be blogging from Cancún on all the key issues as they relate to African development.
Climate change talks spark opportunities for MDGs, Africa
Climate change poses huge threats to development in Africa. It has the potential to undermine recent gains in reducing extreme poverty, while the cost of reaching the UN Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) rises by 40% when climate proofing is taken into account.
However, there are also opportunities if progress is made in the international climate talks taking place in Cancun, Mexico next month. Kenya, for example, has just launched Africa’s first carbon exchange, seeking to take advantage of trade in carbon credits. These credits are purchased by polluting industries in the West and go toward funding clean energy and green growth projects in developing countries.
Indeed, there is increasing realization that African countries could be the global pioneers for a new form of sustainable pro-poor economic development, that meets countries’ needs to reduce energy poverty and create jobs in a way that jumps the traditional carbon-intensive industrialization path.
ONE will be attending next month’s Cancun summit to push this vision and ask Western countries to partner with African governments to deliver the technology and investment needed to make climate-friendly progress toward the MDGs.
First African ‘energy week’ focuses on clean energy
Africa held its first All Africa Energy Week in Maputo, Mozambique last week. The African Union, the African Development Bank and the United Economic Commission for Africa joined forces to launch the conference, which focused on clean energy for sustainable development.
The fact that this event even happened shows tremendous progress. Electricity poverty is a huge problem in Africa, despite the fact that the continent has huge reserves of cheap fuels like coal and natural gas. Almost two-thirds of Africans do not have access to electricity, an unfortunate circumstance that impedes economic growth, slows down businesses and productivity and keeps the cycle of extreme poverty going ’round and ’round.
The solution? Amp up efforts to create a low-carbon infrastructure and encourage public-private partnerships to tap into Africa’s energy potential. Think strategically, using energy policy and regulations to help bridge the gap in the energy infrastructure. Consider biofuels, solar energy and hydropower.
Having a regular and affordable source of electricity can increase wealth and boost productivity. And investing a strong energy infrastructure can create jobs and attract investments. Either way, Africa’s energy sector is a priority and can help eradicate poverty for millions of Africans. In fact, it’s such a priority that it has made its way onto the agenda of this year’s G20 Summit in Seoul for the first time.
Concentrating on Africa’s energy sector is the right step in the right direction, and it’s great to see that African organizations are working to coordinate their efforts while staying environmentally conscious. Learn more about All Africa Energy Week on their website.
ONE writes to Bonn delegates calling for “better promises”
Politicians love standing up and making grand promises, often in the belief that people will soon forget and they will not be held to account. However, when those promises involve the livelihoods of some of the world’s poorest people we have a right to expect them to be met in full. That is one of the reasons why ONE has called for Silvio Berlusconi to be thrown out of the G8 after we found Italy had actually cut its aid budget to Africa since 2005, missing its promise by a massive $4bn.
Similar promises are now being made with climate finance – a total of $30bn in the 2010-12 period, and $100bn per year for developing countries by 2020. Yesterday in Bonn the EU attempted to shed some light on their contribution to the initial $30bn, a welcome step but one that raised as many questions as it answered. For example, every EU member country which presented details on their financial commitment had a different definition of ‘additionality’ – a technical term which has huge implications for sub-Saharan Africa. We know that if the money pledged proves to be recycled aid money then there will be cuts to vital health and education programmes, and a general transfer of resources away from Africa to South-East Asia where there is more existing expensive infrastructure to protect.
In short, all public money pledged to help developing countries cope with climate change should be new and additional to promised aid spending. After all, climate change is a new burden that requires new resources, and was not caused in the slightest by African countries.
In light of this ONE has written to all delegates at the Bonn UN climate conference calling for them to adopt a simple set of principles to scrutinise any financial promise from developed countries. They are called the TRACK principles – in other words is the promise Transparent, Results-oriented, Additional, are any Conditionalities clear, and how will we know whether it is being Kept?
We have also called for European Commissioners Hedegaard and Piebalgs to work urgently with EU governments to make sure all have a strong, consistent line on additionality, which takes into account:
- The EU’s 2005 commitment of member states to spend 0.7% of GNI on ODA
- The setting of a clear baseline based on current and existing aid promises, only above which climate finance should be counted
- A clear limit of the use of loans instead of grants
We should expect more from our elected officials than double-counting and broken promises. It’s time we all stepped up our efforts to hold them to account.
“Willing tone” brings hope to climate finance debate in Bonn
The first UN climate negotiations since the trauma of Copenhagen were always likely to be something of a healing process. Indeed, this week in Bonn, Germany, has often felt like the aftermath of an argument between friends, as delegates gradually try to find common ground while skirting the major areas of disagreement – most notably on emissions cuts.
However, yesterday’s plenary discussions did offer some hope as countries engaged in a wide ranging debate on different aspects of climate finance. Fundamental for the developing countries is new and additional funding for adaptation and mitigation, which does not come out of development aid. ONE supports this position knowing full well that cuts to life-changing programmes such as vaccine distribution are not the solution that would best serve the needs of the world’s poorest people.
Realising this problem, the UN Secretary-General appointed an advisory group earlier this year to examine all sorts of innovative sources of finance that could be used to reach the target of $100 billion annually for developing countries by 2020. It did not please everybody in Bonn that this panel was meeting outside the jurisdiction of the UNFCCC, but there was broad recognition that new thinking is drastically needed in this area. The presence of the advisory group does not preclude developed countries from meeting their commitment to provide substantial additional public resources to fight climate change in parts of the world such as Africa, which have done nothing to cause a crisis that is already hitting them hard.
As the Australian delegation pointed out towards the end of the session, “the willing tone in the room is very welcome”. It will hopefully pave the way for some concrete decisions on climate finance by the time of the next major climate conference in Cancun, Mexico, in November.
Additionality of climate finance still a top priority in 2010
Last Thursday the Overseas Development Institute hosted a lunchtime meeting on the topic of climate finance additionality. The presentations centred on the ODI/ONE paper produced in the run-up to the Copenhagen climate change summit last December, which showed that if climate finance was diverted from existing development assistance budgets then Africa would lose out.
Of course one of the major impacts of climate change is to make the Millennium Development Goals harder to achieve. One of the phrases that stood out at the event was that Africa is now essentially being forced to ‘develop in hostile circumstances’. This situation is not helped when politicians engage in dubious accountancy practices that simply repackage development assistance as climate aid.
For ONE’s Executive Director Jamie Drummond, a speaker at the event, the key is now to focus on how we can raise finance for climate adaptation and mitigation from outside of public budgets. For example, innovative finance ideas such as carbon taxes or aviation levies could raise large sums that could go directly to helping poor communities cope with climate change.
There are, though, opportunities associated with climate change for Africa. The continent has huge potential for renewable energy generation and to a large extent has not started down the path of carbon-driven industrialisation. A new green economic model for development could not only be the answer to growth and jobs in Africa, but also pioneer a low-carbon future for the world as a whole.
Turning climate challenges into development opportunities
“The two defining challenges of our century” Professor Lord Stern told a lunchtime audience yesterday, “are climate change and world poverty”. Indeed the interplay between the two will be one of the critical factors in progress towards the Millennium Development Goals in Africa. To paraphrase Stern: climate change has the potential to undermine and reverse recent gains in reducing extreme poverty, but actions to combat it must not be an obstacle to economic development in places like Africa.
As Director of Policy for the Commission for Africa and lead author of the Stern Review on the economics of climate change, Stern is well placed to make such a judgement. His emphasis on providing a low carbon development path is critical to avoiding accusations that Western countries are kicking away the ladder of coal and oil based economic growth that they all took. A window of opportunity in this area is the proposed IMF Green Fund announced by Dominique Strauss-Khan during his trip to Africa earlier this month. If realised, the Fund would focus on helping developing countries grow without large increases in their CO2 emissions.
A further opportunity will be the recommendations of the UN High Level Panel on Climate Finance, to which Stern was recently appointed. An idea of Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi at Copenhagen, the Panel’s role is to find ways to reach the Copenhagen Accord’s target of $100bn annually for poor countries by 2020. With public finances tight, and the risk of development assistance being diverted to climate very real, it makes sense that the Panel focus on finding innovative new sources of revenue. These will include carbon taxes, use of the IMF’s Special Drawing Rights, and aviation and maritime levies.
Stern’s defining challenges of poverty and climate could therefore be seen as an opportunity if taken together. Funding a ‘greening’ of Africa’s legitimate aspiration for economic growth is a sensible tool to both mitigate carbon emissions and intensify the battle against extreme poverty. It is now up to the developed world to keep their financial promises made at Copenhagen and let the process begin.
Climate change panel must be about action, not words
Tucked away in the accord agreed in December’s Copenhagen climate change summit was a promise to form a ‘High Level Panel’ to examine how exactly the target of mobilising $100bn a year for developing countries by 2020 would be reached. Now, after a frustrating delay, it appears that the Panel is finally up and running. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon announced last week that it would be chaired by Prime Minister Meles Zenawi of Ethiopia and Prime Minister Gordon Brown of Britain. Other members of the Panel will be announced shortly and are likely to be appointed for 10 month terms.
Now that the Panel is set up it is critical that it acts swiftly to come up with a range of options for raising substantial additional finance. For example, there is headway being made on new taxes of the financial sector and it may also make sense to authorise use of the International Monetary Fund’s Special Drawing Right to help make the transfer to a low carbon economy. New levies on aviation and shipping could also be part of the solution, whilst there will also be revenue raised from carbon certificates.
The Panel needs to look at all of these and come up with a realistic plan of action – possibly using a combination of the above options rather than one alone. What we know is that all of these ideas are technically feasible, but it is political will that is lacking. The Panel therefore needs to play its role in galvanising politicians across the world to make sure that promises to developing countries are kept.
There is no doubt the members of the High Level Panel will have one of the most challenging jobs in the world this year. However, as long as they are focused on action and not just talk, then they could be the people who restore trust in climate negotiations and deliver the vital extra resources to help Africa adapt to climate change.
In Davos
Met James Harding, editor of the Times, in the security line on the way in to main congress centre in Davos and we caught up. His paper is worried that the UK political parties aren’t having a straight conversation about the use of development aid, but the Times coverage is coming out as rather negative campaign about the UK’s Department for International Development, DFID. This is a shame as DFID is probably the world’s best development agency and something British taxpayers should know more about and be proud of. But James and the Times are partly right. It is the political season in the UK with elections coming up so the debate on aid is getting more politicised. The important thing is to support effective aid, and be constantly trying to improve its effectiveness, while knowing that aid is only part of the answer. Other things like good governance, investment and trade are all crucially important components of development. An effective UK development agency should be doing more on all these things whoever forms the next British government. Whoever that is, they must ensure the UK stays a global leader in development and keeps the word but also the spirit of the promise to spend 0.7% of national income on effective development assistance.
Among the speeches I’ve listened to were Canadian PM Stephen Harper (Head of G8-G20 first half this year), Korean leader Lee (head of G20 second half this year) and President Sarkozy (G8/G20 head next year). All underlined how important development and fighting poverty are. This is reassuring but it’s also clear, as discussed in a session with Mike Froman of the White House and Indra Nooyi of Pepsi on reinvigorating the state, that the Millennium Development Goals can’t be achieved by governments alone. They need the support and creativity of the private sector and civil society. But the state must provide the backbone of the plan. This is why President Obama’s speech at the UN last September pledging to do all he can to end extreme poverty, and calling for a new global plan for the Millennium Goals must soon start some real global planning. We need to see key stakeholders from all walks of life getting round the table – to help give a boost to the drive to fight poverty.
Finally I’ve been talking to anyone who will listen about ONE’s deep concern about the diversion or double counting of development funds as climate adaptation funds. We just commissioned a piece of research on this by the Overseas Development Institute. Bill Gates annual letter underlined the importance of this at the beginning of the week. It will be one of the very big issues to watch in 2010.
Africa a big loser if climate finance is not additional
Africa will lose out if money pledged by rich countries at the Copenhagen climate change meeting last December does not come in addition to their existing aid promises. This is the stark message in a research paper from leading development think tank the Overseas Development Institute (ODI), commissioned by ONE.
The report states that if finance for climate change adaptation were to come from existing and promised aid flows it would necessarily result in a money being taken away from health and education, and reallocated to sectors such as agriculture, coastal defence and water.
While sub-Saharan Africa receives 38% of global aid, the World Bank estimates that their share of adaptation needs is 22% – in part because there is less expensive existing infrastructure to protect. ODI conclude that “It is crucial to underline the importance of additionality of climate finance to aid. If this is not explicitly stated and implemented, the possibility of aid diversion allocated according to adaptation needs is likely to lead to the neglect of aid to Africa.”
The findings come just days after Bill Gates warned in his annual letter that health funding could be cut if the $100bn target set at Copenhagen took money out of other development priorities. “If just 1% of the $100bn goal came from vaccine funding, then 700,000 more children could die from preventable diseases” he wrote. If countries do not avoid this type of dangerous double counting, the already off track Millennium Development Goals will be dealt another heavy blow.
The millions of people around the world who took action in the run-up to Copenhagen, including tens of thousands of ONE members, will now be needed more than ever as we attempt to make sure that vital work on climate does not come at the expense of the world’s poorest people.
Read the report ‘Climate financing and Development – Friends or foes?’
Update: The Financial Times today published a letter from ONE’s co-founder and Executive Director Jamie Drummond on this important issue. Read the letter here.
- Previous Posts Older Entries
- Next Posts Newer Entries
 |
 |
 |
About the Blog
The International ONE Blog is a daily log of the anti-poverty movement. The site is operated by ONE staff, with guest contributions from ONE volunteers, members and allies.
The content of each post and each comment represents the views of that author and does not necessarily reflect the views of ONE. ONE does not support or oppose any candidate for elected office, and any post expressing support or opposition for a candidate is not endorsed by ONE.
TAGS: Climate and Development, ONE, Policy News