Workshop on the preparation of the fourth national communications by Parties included in Annex I to the Convention 30 September - 1 October 2004, Dublin, Ireland Impact of national circumstances on policy-making process & Key drivers underlying emission trends in Belgium Etienne Hannon Federal DG Environment Belgium

Belgian federal structure equal from the legal point of view but powers and responsibilities for different fields Flemish region Flemish community Brussels- Capital region Walloon region French community German community  1 Federal State  3 Communities  3 Regions

Overview of competences TransportNational airport & Railways Taxes on vehicles and fuels Technical standards for vehicles Highways, waterways, seaports, regional airports Public transport School transport EnergyMajor infrastructure & planning in electricity and gas sectors Tariffs & taxes Nuclear Off-shore wind energy Local distribution and transport of gas & electricity RUE & energy efficiency RES + heat networks, energy recovery, … Federal StateRegions EnvironmentCoordination of the international environmental policy Regulating marketing of products (standards, labels,…) + waste transit, marine environment, radioactive waste Environmental policy (air, water, soil, forest) Waste management + dangerous installations, nature and hunting conservation,…

The challenge of climate policy  Climate policy = complex issue: energy, transport, fiscality, agriculture, waste, …  Belgian federal structure adds extra dimension to complexity: -Federal and regional competencies in most cc-related policy domains -Federal and regional levels are sovereign regarding their competences => Need for extensive coordination

Cooperation agreement for climate policy  Parties : Federal State, Flemish region, Walloon region, Brussels-Capital region  Main objective : reduce GHG emissions, as determined by KP and decision 2002/358/EC (EU burden sharing) (-7.5%)  Specific objectives : -implementation and follow-up of the National Climate Plan -ensure compliance with reporting obligations (UNFCCC, KP & Mechanism for monitoring EC GHG emissions (decision 280/2004/EC)

 Executive body : National Climate Commission  Provisions related to reporting : -to make sure that methodologies, procedures, data analysis, projections used by the Parties to the agreement are compatible and, if possible, harmonised -Regions are committed to deliver yearly to the NCC a report containing the relevant information allowing the federal government to report data in accordance with the UNFCCC guidelines, and decision 280/2004/EC Cooperation agreement for climate policy

National Burden Sharing agreement 1.Regions are assigned a target 2.Regions are each responsable for closing the difference between emissions and Assigned Amount on their territory, through: Fl. Wa. Br.  reducing their emissions Belgian Assigned Amount under K.P.  using flexibility mechanisms

National Burden Sharing agreement Regional Assigned Amounts under the burden sharing Walloon Region:1990 emissions minus 7,5 % Flemish Region:1990 emissions minus 5,2 % Brussels Capital Region:1990 emissions plus 3,475 %  Total exceeds Belgian Assigned Amount under the Kyoto Protocol  Federal Government will cover the difference through use of the Kyoto Flexibility Mechanisms  2,46 Mton CO 2 -eq/yr.in  Financed by 25 M€/yr. Kyoto Fund (operational since 2003)

Greenhouse gas emission in Belgium (2002) Sectoral contributions: Total GHG emissions = Mt CO 2 eq CO 2 emissions = 84.2% of total emissions

Belgian emission trends ( )

In-depth review of the 3 rd Nat. Com.  “The review team [..] noted the following trends: a substantial increase in the emissions from transport, an increase in the “other” emissions [..]”  “The emission trends are presented well in the NC3 but not all factors leading to these trends are clearly explained.”  [..] no data to support explanations [that freight transport by road grew faster than GDP] were available at the time of the review; [..]. The review team encouraged Belgian experts to continue studies in this area”  “The review team identified some areas for further improvement: identification of key drivers for emissions growth”  “The Belgian NC3 is, in general, in compliance with the UNFCCC reporting guidelines”

How to improve the reporting of information on key drivers ?  Solution = development of indicators  Criteria for the selection of indicators: -clear definition & common understanding -be policy relevant -soundly founded -transparent (well documented and of known quality) -comparable -easily available (cf. data & resource demand)

Indicators : developments within the EU  European Energy Agency : « core set of indicators » -37 indicators on 11 topics, among which energy (5) & CC (4) -Basis for EEA reports (« Environment signals »)  Eurostat : « structural indicators » on environment -15 indicators, based on latest national statistics, available on the web  Mechanism for monitoring EC GHG emissions (decision 280/2004/EC) -15 (+13) indicators to be reported annually (CO 2 intensities)  ODYSSEE-SAVE European project on energy efficiency indicators -Objective: to review national achievements in energy efficiency and CO 2 emissions at a sectoral level -Network of 15 national Agencies -Products : common database on energy efficiency indicators, workshops, annual reports

Energy intensity of GDP before climate correction after climate correction Source : ECONOTEC (The ODYSSEE Project Results for Belgium) toe / M EUR 95 (1990 = 100)

Final energy intensity by sector * Source : ECONOTEC (The ODYSSEE Project Results for Belgium) industry transport tertiary residential * Final energy use (toe) / activity variable (M EUR 95) (1990 = 100) value added (industry, tertiary) private consumption (households) GDP (transport)

Energy intensity : a good proxy for energy efficiency ?  Not appropriate to identify and assess the contributions of the main factors responsible for the changes in energy consumption Energy (CO 2 ) intensity : -consumption (CO 2 emissions) / GDP (or value added) -« economic approach » -easily available but encompass other effects than energy efficiency (structure)

Contributions to changes in energy intensities Evolution of the energy intensity can be expressed as the sum of two different contributions:  structural effect: effect of a change in the structure of the consumption sector e.g. shift of industrial output from energy intensive industries to less energy intensive industries  unit consumption effect: change in consumption per unit of activity (proxy for the energy efficiency) Unit consumption effect = EI t - EI 0 - SE t Structural effect =

Key drivers of the energy consumption in road transport (passenger) Source : NIS, ODYSSEE (calculations by ECONOTEC) (% of the consumption in 1990)

Key drivers of the energy consumption in road transport (freight)* * Wallonia Source : NIS, ODYSSEE (calculations by ECONOTEC) (% of the consumption in 1990)

Conclusions  Institutional complexity is not an obstacle to the implementation of climate policies or the compliance with reporting obligations but need for extensive cooperation and institutional arrangements  Analysis of key drivers of emission trends allows for identifying problems, highlighting good practices and tuning PAMs  Sets of widely used indicators are currently available, which allow for a thorough analysis of key drivers

Thank you !