Joyeeta Gupta Climate change and development cooperation

2 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.

3 Conceptual framework – 1

4 Conceptual framework – 2 AspectClimate changeDevelopment cooperation Ideological/ principles Common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities Altruistic and strategic ResourcesNew and additional0.7% of GNI FocusEmission reduction and adaptation Millennium Development Goals SectorsCommon sectors like energy & industry, biodiversity & forestry, agriculture Actors (mitigation)Those who emit; generally bigger and richer, but not always Different segments of society depending on the aid agency; In recent years, a stronger focus on the poorest, Actors (adaptation)The poorest are the most vulnerable

5 Conceptual framework – 3 Climate change cooperationDevelopment cooperation NorthCommon problem; jointly to be addressed. US – feels strongly that China and other rapidly developing countries should also commit, irrespective of their current average development level. EU differs from the US. Development challenges in the developing world are unfortunate and need to be dealt with. The developed countries have a role in helping. Individual developed countries have a number of specific motives for helping – security, strategic reasons, economic reasons, etc. SouthPrimarily caused by the North and the North should compensate the South and lead the way out. The ability to pay principle should determine assistance to the South to be able to cope with post-colonial poverty.

6 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

7 The Evolution of the Right to Development

8 Global governance: The evolution of the 0.7% target

9 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.

10

11 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.

12 Challenges in the aid process Donor: decision-making, instrumental, planned Partner: Poor governance Substitution effect Policy substitution Donor recipient process Mismatch between priorities and partners Poor diagnosis Technical assistance Administrative burden

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 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

15 Linking climate change to other issues

16 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 If emission levels are to be kept within safe levels – the world budget for the 21 st century is over by Impacts more severe in the South – both location wise; and because vulnerability is the greatest.

17 Climate change: The North-South deal Leadership paradigm N S N helps S via CDM Leadership sans US EU S CEITS US JSCaNZ Development N S Pollution Inverted U-curve may be a zig-zag curve Conditional leadership US EU S N mainstreams cc help in development cooperation US Leadership competition

18 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

19 Ideological level - ODA subsidizes market mech. - ODA levels below 0.7%; Organization level + ODA helps cap. building esp. in poorest countries; - ODA diverted from DC priorities to help IC purchases CDM and ODA Project level + ODA leverages SD; synergy - ODA diverted

20 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;

21 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)

22 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

23 Mainstreaming: Driving Converging Forces Mainstreaming CC In devp. coop Acade mics NGOsUNDAF OECD EU Aid agencies Devp. Banks DCs

24 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.”

25 From Ad hoc approaches to mainstreaming Ad hoc full From ad approaches to mainstreaming Inte- gration Focus on win Climate proofing Ad hoc projects Politically Easy Difficult Climate change taken into account Climate change ignored Development agenda Main- streaming Climate change taken into account

26 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

27 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

28 The link between development paradigms and development aid

29 The link between development paradigms and development aid

30 Resources needed Current ODA Additional ODA needed for MDGs ODA needed for Agenda 21 Aid for climate change Total USD billion Comment<0.4% of donor GNI Clemens et al Ch. 33, Agenda 21 Lit.Overlaps Assump- tions

31 Political sensitivities Development cooperationClimate assistance 1.0% of GNI 0.7% of GNI Time Mainstreaming Actual climate assistance Expectations/ needsActual assistance

32 Diverging beneficiaries of assistance Rich Poor Development cooperation Climate Mitigation Climate Adaptation

33 Mainstreaming: the stages of mainstreaming Ad hoc full The stages of mainstreaming Inte- gration Focus on win Climate proofing Ad hoc projects Politically Easy Difficult Climate change taken into account Climate change ignored Development agenda Main- streaming Climate change taken into account US aidOECDEU PL IT DK, NL UK

34 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.

35 Conclusion – 2: If Mainstreaming is inevitable ….