An Introduction to the Multiple Benefits Pathway Approach Dr An Introduction to the Multiple Benefits Pathway Approach Dr. Youba Sokona Special Advisor on Sustainable Development, IPCC Vice-Chair and emeritus member of the CCAC Scientific Advisory Panel

The Multiple Benefits Pathway Approach attempts to limit: The rate of temperature rise in near- and long-term Other impacts on health and ecosystems By considering the integrated impact of short-lived climate pollutant, CO2, and air quality strategies It is supported by an analytical framework: To estimate emission scenarios and benefits of action Placed with the frame of the Paris targets Emphasizing the benefits to countries that take the action That supports national development priorities With tools that can help countries quantify benefits of action That can help to increase ambition in countries The purpose of my presentation is to provide a short introduction to the Multiple Benefits Pathway Approach that is being developed by the Climate and Clean Air Coalition and it’s Scientific Advisory Panel and explain the scientific The Multiple Benefits Pathway Approach is an analytical framework that integrates climate and air quality and allow us to quantify and compare the multiple impacts and benefits of our mitigation actions over multiple timescales. This analytical framework, which has been deployed successfully in a number of CCAC partners countries, begins by integrating climate and air quality inventories and scenarios, which allows us to quantify the multiple benefits of actions, how they contribute to the achievement of the Paris climate targets while simultaneously achieving near-term and tangible air quality and development benefits in the countries taking action. This approach can empower countries to harmonize air quality and climate strategies that achieve multiple national development priorities simultaneously, quantify the benefits of those strategies. By highlighting and quantifying these benefits, countries can increase mitigation ambition.

Why is the Pathway Relevant Now? There is an urgency to address emissions to: reduce & prevent additional premature deaths and other health impacts reduce impacts on crops, agriculture and forestry achieve socio-economic development goals take action to reduce current rate of warming and help put the World on a path that can achieve the Paris goals So why is it important to be thinking about this kind of approach now? According to the World Health Organization – every year 7 million people die prematurely from illnesses caused by exposure to air pollution, and this is jus the tip of the iceberg in terms of health impacts from air pollution We know that the sources of greenhouse gases are also the sources of short-lived climate pollutants and other air pollutants so we know that mitigating these sources can benefits the climate and human health But we also know that air pollutants, such as tropospheric ozone, also harm plants and ecosystems – there are significant gains in-terms of improved crop production by reducing these air pollutants All of this can be put in the context of how countries plan to achieve the socio-economic development goals they agreed to in the SDGs. By taking actions to reduce the emissions, for example if we follow the mitigation scenario in UNEP&WMO 2011 report, we could prevent 2.4 million premature deaths every year, more than 50 million tonnes of crop losses yield annually, and avoid 0.6 degrees C by 2050.

The Paris Agreement has enabled the CCAC to re-frame the SLCP message Source: UNEP/WMO (2011). Integrated Assessment of Black Carbon and Tropospheric Ozone. UNEP, Nairobi Paris Temperature targets This diagram is from the 2011 UNEP/WMO Assessment of Black Carbon and Tropospheric Ozone. Because these pollutants are short-lived in the atmosphere, we should have rapid benefits in terms of warming if we avoid the emissions of them. Removing CH4 and BC globally will reduce half a degree by 2050. This analysis lead the formation of the CCAC and the discussion of the idea of pathway. Now because of the Paris temperature target, the SAP reframed this narrative. Besides looking at the end-point temperature, it is now looking the problem as an integrated strategy in terms of climate perspective and SDGs. We need to consider to limit the near-term warming by looking at all of the substances, and understand the impact of this on near-term warming on the way to Paris target.

Countries really care about the health benefits of emission reductions Talking points: For most countries, climate change may not be the topic that has top priorities. Many country are motivated more by public health, crop yields and other topics. All these points could be treated as an entry-point to apply the pathway analysis. However, by applying the pathway analysis, we can integrated different benefits all together and make comprehensive analysis. The Paris agreement not only speak about the temperature goal but also link to near-term SGDs and other benefits. One of the key part of the CCAC is that reducing the rate of warming of the near-term also affecting some major sources of air pollutions, which could link to avoiding death and crop yields ect. By apply the multiple benefit pathway, we could consider all these impacts in an integrated way.

and countries care about any impact on agriculture and other development priorities Range of % global yield loss due to ozone Talk points Example: the effects of ozone to agriculture and human health.

Talking point: This concept of the pathway has been in development for several years. Last year, SAP published this paper to look at the importance of the pathways towards the Paris target. The narrative is we have the long-term targets from the Paris agreement and they are in different pathways that we can take to achieve it.

There are many Pathways to the Paris Agreement target Talking points: This plot present different pathways toward the Paris target. SLCP mitigation could happen late – and still help to achieve Paris targets; GHG actions need to happen now if there is any chance of meeting the targets Late SLCP mitigation would compromise attainment of many SDGs, due to: Air pollution impacts Impacts of cumulative warming The ‘Multiple Benefits Pathway’ attempts to limit the rate of temperature rise and other impacts on health and ecosystems by considering the integrated impact of strategies aimed at reducing CO2 and SLCPs protecting the near and long term

Cumulative warming differences matter Difference in Cumulative Warming Talking points: There are differences in cumulative warming between different pathways, and the cumulative warming will lead many climate issues such as ice caps melting, warming in the sea etc.

If we (continue to) follow the high rate of warming path we will cause: MILLIONS OF DEATHS But if we follow the lower path we can avoid these health and crop impacts MILLIONS OF TONNES Talking point: If we continue to follow the high rate of emissions, then we are going to have millions of death and losing millions of tons of crop yields in the next few decades. Therefore, there is a lot to be gained by moving down to the lower trajectory and it’s a better changes to achieve many societal goals as well as climate goals. This is why we recommend to choose a pathway that has more integrated benefits

Applying the Multiple Benefits Pathway Approach The Pathway approach aims at demonstrating the multiple benefits of mitigation, to: Slow the rate of warming Limit air pollution impacts Help achieve national development and SDG goals It’s practically applied by developing scenarios for a: Country, City, Region, etc. Local benefits can help drive ambitions Countries can support this approach more widely by calculating all emissions in mass of emissions (e.g. tonnes) and not just in CO2e Talking points: The pathway approach aims at making integrated analysis and demonstrate the multiple benefits of mitigations in terms of slowing the warming, limiting the impacts from air pollutions, and achieving national development goals and SDG goals. However, in order to make this analysis and quantify the benefits, it is better to use the original emissions (in tonnes) for different pollutants instead of only CO2e. Because all the pollutants has it’s own effects, only CO2e is not enough to make this integrated analysis. Therefore, we recommend everyone to move to the method that can make this analysis which integrated the air quality and the climate change. The pathway approach can be applied in different scales – it could be a country, a city, a region, even an single industry - once there are suitable tools to make the analysis. (For example, the LEAP-IBC can make the analysis for a whole country or a city. presenter can add there own examples) The local benefits is as important as the global benefits since it can help the country or a city to derive the ambitions.

Conclusions: Multiple Benefits Pathway Approach This is an integrated approach. It allows: CO2 mitigation, SLCP mitigation Air pollution mitigation to be put together in a meaningful way and can show relative influence of SLCP or CO2 mitigation for the achievement of multiple benefits. It Illustrates net global temperature change of all actions on path towards the Paris targets This is an action we should begin to take now to achieve multiple benefits in both climate change and air pollutions. Summary