Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Climate change and development cooperation Joyeeta Gupta Messages Development and climate change are closely linked; However, the politics in both arenas are highly charged on a North-South basis; Linking climate change to development cooperation is possible, but mainstreaming is a problem. 2 Climate change and development Mitigation • Development generally coupled with increased emissions; wise policy can change that especially in sectors that are less productive and less efficient. Beyond that there are trade-offs • Mitigation can have ancillary benefits for development Adaptation • Development can exacerbate adaptation through (mal) development • Development may have synergies with enhancing resilience • Adaptation activities can have ancillary benefits for development 6 The Evolution of the Right to Development Year 1948 Event Universal Declaration on Human Rights 1960s Developing countries seeking NIEO 1966 1960s Covenant on Political Rights Rights Covenant on Social-Economic Rights 1970s 1981 Articulation of the concept by developing and developed country experts Banjul Charter 1986 UN Declaration on the Right to Development 1993 Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action (#10) Working group on the Right to Development Millennium Declaration (#11) Durban Declaration and Programme of Action (#19, 28) UN Human Rights Council 1998 2000 2001 2008 Item Sets the stage for human rights issues (western perspective) Sets the stage for demanding a change in the global order (southern, non-aligned movement perspective) Legally binding, first generation rights (western demand) Legally binding, second generation rights (Communist and developing countries) Articulation of the Right to Development – third generation rights Adoption of the Right as the right of peoples by African countries Adoption by UN Human Rights Commission, Opposed by US, 8 states abstained from voting; mentions NIEO Adopted by 172 countries at World Conference on Human Rights Monitors progress made at UN level on this right. Adopted by 147 countries Discussed the right to development in the context of racism and Establishment of a process to study the human right with respect to climate change, water and sanitation. 7 Global governance: The evolution of the 0.7% target Year 1958 1960 1964 1965/8 1967 1968 Venue/Proposer World Council of Churches General Assembly Resolution UNCTAD meeting OECD DAC reaffirm support for UNCTAD target G-77 asks for separate minimum target for official flows Tinbergen, chair UN Committee on Development Planning proposal 1969 World Bank - Pearson Commission Report: Partners in Development, based on new OECD definitions, methods and data: International Development Strategy for the Second United Nations Development Decade UNGA 2626 UNGA 3517 International Conference on Financing for Development World Summit on Sustainable Development EU-15 agreed Gleneagles UN Summit G20 1970 1970 1975 2002 2002 2005 2005 2008 2009 Percent of national income 1% (included private income) 1% 1%; 1% 0.75% (including only official concessional and non-concessional flows) by 1972 0.7% (including only official concessional flows (ODA)) by 1975 –1980 1%/ 0.7% (although DCs kept arguing for 1%) 1% 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% 0.7% by 2015. 0.7% 0.7% Respective ODA commitments 8 Development cooperation The Right to Development: • Accepted but under-emphasized The 0.7 percent target: • Accepted, emphasized but not achieved The link between the right to development and the 0.7 percent target: • Contested The MDGs and development cooperation: • New emphasis on achieving MDGs; but resources have to double if these are to be achieved. 9 Period Context 2000 Environmental crises Development theory Solutions Government important Develop infrastructure Economies of scale Import substitution Increase GDP & Pricing policy, employment; promote Balanced growth balance of payment Export promotion equilibrium Regional integration Sectoral plans Increase per capita GDP Improve entrepreneurship Minimize governments Integrated rural devp. Employment strategies Redistribution of wealth Governments and markets Increase macroeconomic Improve policies and stability and fiscal discipline instruments Privatisation & liberalisation Enhance human Enhance social capital development & reduce Improve institutions poverty Promote good governance Increase entitlements and Stakeholder participation capability Improve markets Enhance freedom Deregulate Promote sustainable Generate ideas development No simple solutions 2008 Credit crises ? 1950s Post-war reconstruction 1960s UNDP, IDA, OECD/DAC 1970s North South dialogue 1980s Debt crises of developing countries Fall of the Berlin Wall 1990s Goals Increase GDP ? Development cooperation Focus Reconstruction Technical assistance Community Development To fill trade and investment gaps Development assistance Bridge savings investment and balance of payment gap Basic human needs Conditional aid: Structural adjustment & debt relief; “Washington consensus” Humanitarian assistance Democratic governance Good governance Greening of aid Country ownership of policies emphasised Aid only to countries with good governance; Aid for developmental & environmental issues Reduced resources for aid 10 Development and development cooperation Donors have had multiple objectives; Delivery was often based on simple theoretical formulae Aid recipient do not respond in predictable manners (e.g. conditionality); Aid evaluation through quantitative indicators is questionable Aid coordination has been donor driven. 11 Challenges in the aid process Donor recipient process Donor: Partner: decision-making, instrumental, planned Poor governance Substitution effect Policy substitution Mismatch between priorities and partners Poor diagnosis Technical assistance Administrative burden 12 Development and Development Cooperation Lessons from aid: • • • • • • • • • • Goal: broaden objective Nature of aid: Not necessarily catalytic Indicators: not just macro, but also micro Aid aligned to country type Aid should be demand driven and not lead to distortions: Not conditional Form of assistance should match need Aid to NGOs subject to caveats Quantity of aid: avoid dependency Balanced aid: poor and other sectors Donors need to take partnership seriously 13 Development and Development Cooperation Lessons from aid: • • • • • • • • • • Goal: broaden objective Nature of aid: Not necessarily catalytic Indicators: not just macro, but also micro Aid aligned to country type Aid should be demand driven and not lead to distortions: Not conditional Form of assistance should match need Aid to NGOs subject to caveats Quantity of aid: avoid dependency Balanced aid: poor and other sectors Donors need to take partnership seriously 14 Linking climate change to other issues Gender mainstreaming Including mainstreaming disasters Environmental destruction Environmental mainstreaming Gender neglect 15 Climate change: Classical North-South issue Formal divisions in Convention that both recognizes differences and fosters differences Structural differences: • In emission levels between average Northern and average Southern country especially in the past – and this is the most serious determining factor for climate impacts until 2050. • If emission levels are to be kept within safe levels – the world budget for the 21st century is over by 2032. • Impacts more severe in the South – both location wise; and because vulnerability is the greatest. 16 Climate change: The North-South deal Leadership paradigm Conditional leadership Pollution N N S EU US S S Development Inverted U-curve may be a zig-zag curve Leadership competition Leadership sans US CEITS US JSCaNZ EU US S N helps S via CDM N mainstreams cc help in development cooperation 17 The context of the North-South deal 1992: North reduces emissions and helps developing countries (tech transfer and aid) with new and additional resources (above existing aid) 1997: North reduces emissions partly via help to developing countries (new and additional?) 1997: Adaptation funding comes from a tax on North-South cooperation 2007: North reduces emissions partly via help and climate change is mainstreamed in ODA 18 CDM and ODA Ideological level Organization level Project level + ODA leverages SD; synergy - ODA diverted + ODA helps cap. building esp. in poorest countries; - ODA diverted from DC priorities to help IC purchases - ODA subsidizes market mech. - ODA levels below 0.7%; 19 CDM and SD: An Illusion? An illusion • When SD is dependent on host country approval and there is competition between host countries; • When contract success is not based on achievement of the SD component; • When SD component is not verified: • When IC buy CERs without checking SD component; • When SD component is vague and all-encompassing A fact: • When SD is translated into quantitative goals that can be measured?? • When contract success and CER approval is based also on achievement of SD component; • When ICs purchase CERs that have a clear SD component; • When a percentage of the project costs are used for the SD component; 20 Climate Change Regime: Paradigm Shift 1990s • • • • Abstract Global Future issue Economic and technical issue 2000s • Real, interfering with daily activities and needs (MDGs) • Multi-level • Current issue • Development issue: Climate change is the defining development issue of our generation (UNDP 2007) 21 Policy evolution towards mainstreaming Development • • • • • 2002: Donor report 2005: Gleneagles plan 2005: EU 2006: World Bank- CEIDF 2007: OECD Declaration Climate change regime • 1995: AIJ includes national priorities • 1997: CDM includes sustainable development • 2000: IPCC links cc with sd • 2007: IPCC links cc with sd 22 Mainstreaming: Driving Converging Forces Aid agencies EU Devp. Banks DCs Mainstreaming CC In devp. coop Acade mics OECD NGOs UNDAF 23 Mainstreaming defined “Mainstreaming of climate change into development cooperation is the process by which existing development processes are redesigned and reorganized, improved, developed and evaluated from the perspective of climate change mitigation and adaptation. Mainstreaming implies involving all social actors – government, civil society, industry, local communities - into the process. Mainstreaming calls for changes in policy as far upstream as possible.” 24 From Ad hoc approaches to mainstreaming Politically Easy ---------------------------------------------------- Difficult Climate change ignored Climate change taken into account Ad hoc projects Focus on win win Climate proofing Integration Mainstreaming Ad hoc -------------------------------------------------- full From ad approaches to mainstreaming 25 Climate change and international cooperation International cooperation is needed to help developing countries: • Adopt modern technologies and policies to avoid taking the past emission route of the North; • Adopt measures that will enhance the ability of the South to adapt to the impacts of climate change International cooperation includes: • Climate cooperation • Development cooperation 26 Practical arguments in favour of mainstreaming cc in aid Efficiency of use of development resources enhanced since climate change affects development and development affects climate change There is aid fatigue and no extra money is politically very feasible Money is clearly needed for climate change and it is more easily justified to spend developed countries on climate change than on development per se Transaction costs lower if mainstreamed 27 IC DC GDP per capita Pollution per capita Pollution per capita The link between development paradigms and development aid IC DC GDP per capita 28 Pollution per capita The link between development paradigms and development aid IC 1 1 2 DC 3 GDP per capita 29 Resources needed Current ODA Additional ODA needed for MDGs ODA needed for Agenda 21 Aid for climate change Total USD billion 100 60-135 125 40-250 315-611 Comment <0.4% of donor GNI Clemens et al. 2007 Ch. 33, Agenda 21 Lit. Overlaps Assump-tions 30 Political sensitivities Development cooperation Climate assistance 1.0% of GNI 0.7% of GNI Actual assistance Expectations/ needs Actual climate assistance Mainstreaming 31 Diverging beneficiaries of assistance Rich Poor Development cooperation Climate Mitigation Climate Adaptation 32 Mainstreaming: the stages of mainstreaming Politically Easy ---------------------------------------------------- Difficult Climate change ignored PL IT DK, NL UK US aid Ad hoc projects Focus on win win OECD EU Climate Climate change change taken taken into into account account Climate proofing Integration Mainstreaming Ad hoc -------------------------------------------------- full The stages of mainstreaming 33 Conclusion - 1 Mainstreaming of climate change in development cooperation does not make sense; it will lead to a diversion of resources. However, mainstreaming of climate change in development does make sense! Instead, a search for win win options, climate proofing and climate integration make more sense in relation to development cooperation. This is not the case for development. 34 Conclusion – 2: If Mainstreaming is inevitable …. Concern Political Nature Will mainstreaming avoid the new and additional argument? Who controls the aid? Development economics If ODA does not reach the poor, will mainstreaming do so? Will mainstreaming in ODA distort markets and create perverse incentives? Sustainability Will mainstreaming make aid dependency worse? Will mainstreaming within existing development paradigm create structural sustainability problems? Conditions of success 1. Additionality: Increase ODA to 0.7% and raise new and additional resources above this amount and mainstream all assistance subject to conditions below 2. Partnership between OECD DAC countries and partners in all relevant forums – UNDG, OECD/DAC, EU, in C&D decision-making processes 3. Ownership by developing countries of C&D agenda at programme and project level. 4. Joint accountability of partners: The system should promote mutual accountability in terms of both appropriate provisions and use of climate change funds. 5. Prioritise the poorest: In recent years, development cooperation has tried to focus on helping the poorest. 6. Avoid market distortion where appropriate, consider cash transfers to compensate for climate impacts as a substitute for mainstreamed ODA projects 7. Design mainstreamed projects with as little market distortion as possible. 8. Limit ODA dependency: Ensure that ODA to countries is below a certain % of partner GNI; 9. Climate aid should be seen independent of this. 10. Ensure tripartite decision-making between stakeholders, private parties and governments of both ODA countries and partners to design context relevant, locally owned policies. Avoid focus on formulae, efficiency, rationality and conditionality and accept clumsy solutions. 35