OPINION: After Paris – “Going from intended to implemented, that is the question” says Margaret Kamau, Kenya

Kenya aims to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 30% by 2030 relative to Business As Usual. This goal is subject to international support in the form of finance, investment, technology development and transfer, and capacity building. Margaret Kamau, CDKN´s Country Engagement and Project Manager talks to Miren Gutiérrez about what this target means for her country. This is part of a CDKN series on implementing the Paris Agreement: read more at www.cdkn.org/after-paris-perspectives

 

The Paris Agreement created an ambitious mandate for the global community. Does it change the national conversation in Kenya about action on climate change? If so, how?

Well before, for much of 2015, there has been quite a momentum in Kenya around preparations for COP21[Editor: 21^st Conference of the Parties for the UNFCCC], the INDCs [Climate plans which countries submitted to the conference] and the Paris Agreement. A number of stakeholders were quite involved in the ‘road to COP’ process. I think that this kind of momentum has carried on in 2016.

From meetings that we had this February and March, we can tell there is a bit of uncertainty about “what next” with regards to the Paris Agreement. But the Government of Kenya is taking steps to clarify this. For example, in mid-February there was a meeting on the post-Paris situation with a wide range of civil society organisations and other stakeholders, where the government was able to explain what the next steps were and what the COP21 meant.

In two weeks, there is another stakeholder consultation session, now addressed towards developing the next steps after Paris. Now we are waiting to hear what the government has planned and what they need support for. I know they are also looking at the implications for Kenya’s growth and sustainable development. So I think the main influence COP21 has had is creating momentum before, during and after the event.

UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon visits a geothermal power facility in Kenya; courtesy UNEP.

Are these consultations with civil society and stakeholders binding in any way, has the government been gathering their feedback, or are they just informative?

They have been mainly for information purposes, not to get feedback or to pass clear information on what the next steps are. But I believe the intention of the government is that the next meeting is to be more action oriented. Kenya’s civil society has challenged the government to take action to implementing the agreement. But not openly in the media.

As for coverage, media articles and news stories on climate change tended to be published before and during COP21, with different sectoral approaches. Since the Paris conference, we haven’t seen as much. Although that is not necessarily negative…

Kenya indeed submitted an ‘Intended Nationally Determined Contribution’ (INDC). What will it take to get from ‘intended’ to ‘implemented’? What are the big opportunities and challenges?

That is the question. In terms of implementation, we believe the next step the government should take is to lay out the key priority actions in the climate action plan, and take them forward. There is the realisation that the actions contained in the INDC have been ongoing actions. So it is about accelerating investment to support implementation in those areas.

The big opportunities are first at a sectoral level. The energy sector, the forestry sector, the transport sector have all seen significant growth in the last few years. So those would be quick wins: sectors where there has been ongoing work.

In the energy sector, for example, there is already significant investment [in low carbon energy], but there is room for more. The next steps would be: identifying the actions, the key people and institutions to take those actions and accessing the finance required.

Another opportunity would be leveraging the momentum that the Paris Agreement has created to make sure that all stakeholders are aware of it, and employing this ongoing interest and buy-in for activities.

Finance presents both an opportunity and a challenge. We have different financing opportunities, such as Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs) and the Green Climate Fund (GCF), which may be accessed to implement the country’s NDC. A Kenyan entity has just been accredited as the National Management Authority to access direct funding from the GCF. These are opportunities that the government is already taking.

NAMAs are being developed for the bus rapid transit system, another one for a grid of renewable energy and waste management. A geothermal NAMA was developed and is explored in CDKN’s Inside Story on Climate Compatible Development.

In addition, there is bilateral and multilateral funding: the governments of the UK and Japan and institutions such as the World Bank are funding elements of the NDC as well.

In the finance arena, the Government of Kenya has faced hurdles in producing investment plans and proposals that actually attract funding. Here, some investment may be needed in enhancing capacity for proposal development. A current CDKN project is supporting the government to write an adaptation proposal for the GCF. We are responding to a direct government request to help them fill a gap.

Other challenges include coordination. Over the past years, I think the government has improved its coordinated approach towards climate change and development. This has been particularly evident recently during the INDC process. But coordination across government remains a challenge which they continue to address.

Skyline of Nairobi, Kenya’s capital; courtesy Jonathan Stonehouse

The Paris Agreement calls for limiting average global temperature rise well below 2C, as close to 1.5C as possible. Kenya’s emissions are not huge, but they are growing fast – what hope to see economic growth and human development with lowered emissions in the specific case of Kenya?  

Using the energy sector is a good example. We have seen a significant increase in investments in the renewable energy sector, particularly in geothermal and wind power. About 50% of Kenya´s electricity[1] comes from renewable sources, and this is a number that is increasing on a daily basis. We think that this it is not actually hampering economic growth, because before geothermal power became the focus, hydroelectric power was being produced from dams. Obviously, that meant that during the power crisis electricity was quite erratic because of the reliance on hydropower [Editor: linked to reduced rainfall and river levels – the CDKN Inside Story explains further]. So the focus on this new generation of renewables is actually supporting growth because it is a more reliable source of power and businesses now have more reliable sources of power.

In agriculture, initiatives such as the one led by COMESA (Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa) to reduce agricultural emissions across Kenya and several other African countries will help combat climate change while addressing food security, from the policy level to the farm level.

We have seen initiatives and interventions to improve forest cover and to improve forest conservation resulting in a better environment for people and the communities living around forests. And this translates to improved human development and better economic growth. So far it has not limited economic growth either.

This will continue being a trend for the next couple of years. We still have untapped solar and wind resources. We are expected to have a large 300 megawatt solar farm in the next few years, which will only reduce our reliance on fossil fuels and promote economic growth.

Technology hub, Kenya; courtesy UNDP.

If you check most INDCs from developing countries their emission reduction targets are subject to technology development, international climate finance and capacity building. What would happen if these ‘means of implementation’ do not flow? 

Countries like Kenya have taken some steps towards building internal capacity and using domestic financial national resources to put in place climate change initiatives. This is evident in some government-enabled food security projects, as well as in the setting up of research institutions, industrial research institutions, with technology development. If the means are not put forward, it is not to say that countries such as Kenya will not take action anyway. But the view is that action will be slower because obviously there are other pressing needs that the domestic budget needs to serve. It won’t be a large allocation for a long time, so this will slow the process in achieving sustainable development.

Why are some countries more successful than others in attracting international resources to support climate compatible development? Does their ability to negotiate have anything to do with it? How would you rate Kenya´s performance so far?

Definitely the ability of a country to negotiate in the international arena plays a huge role in attracting climate finance. But also, one thing that stands out looking at these countries have taken initiatives on their own. Brazil, Mexico and Morocco may have allocated domestic resources towards climate change initiatives. And this can help make a case before they go and negotiate climate finance. I believe part of making the case is showing what you can do with our own resources. I think that these have been countries that have been successful in doing this, and when they go to international arena they are not just asking for money. They are saying: this is what we have done and now we need more money to grow this pilot initiate.

Finally, Kenya not very well known for its negotiation power, but I think being part of the African Group of Negotiators has helped Kenya and fellow African countries to try to negotiate collectively. But [its influence] could be improved with further international support.

The SDGs have many climate-related components, as well as a dedicated climate goal. What are some of the ways that the SDGs will influence the planning and practice of development in Kenya in the coming years?

There has not been a lot of communication on the SDGs locally, since the New York summit last September. CDKN helped convene an SDG dialogue process in 2014 – to provide a platform for Kenyan voices in developing the goals. And what came out of this process is that Kenya would need more integrated planning, not just for key economic sectors, making integrated planning a habit if the SDGs are to be achieved. Kenya is also in the process of writing up a green economy strategy, which looks at how to maintain sustainable development while growing the economy.

 

Image: Kenya, courtesy DFID.

[1] Kenya is looking to geothermal energy to power its growth and reduce reliance on imports. As of 2015, geothermal accounted for 51% percent of Kenya’s energy mix (up from only 13% in 2010). Kenya´s also investing on wind, with Africa’s largest wind farm (310 MW) set to provide another 20% of the country´s installed electricity generating capacity. Those two combined will help Kenya generate 71% of its electricity with renewables in the future, according to CleanTechnica.

by: CDKN Global, Miren Gutierrez, Margaret Kamau | on: 12pm, March 27, 2016

OPINION: After Paris – A shift in Colombia’s climate change conversation

Colombia is possibly one of the most vocal, expert and committed governments internationally, in the fight against climate change. Has anything changed after the Paris Agreement last year? What does the future look like? Claudia Martinez, CDKN’s senior strategic advisor for Colombia, talks with Miren Gutierrez about the outcome of the Paris Agreement in her country. This is part of a series of developing country perspectives: www.cdkn.org/after-Paris-perspectives.

The Paris Agreement created an ambitious mandate for the global community. Does it change the national conversation in Colombia about action on climate change? If so, how?

The Paris Agreement was a big incentive to change the conversation about climate change in Colombia.

First, Colombia has had an office of climate change since 2000, earlier than many countries in the world. Colombia has a National Institute of Environmental Information and Meteorology (IDEAM), which has followed the process of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in terms of producing accurate information on climate change. IDEAM developed the new climate change scenarios (2015) as well as the new emissions estimates to produce the business as usual (BAU) model. Understanding emissions and making robust greenhouse gas abatement curves to support decision-making processes has been very important.

Second, based on accurate data, the Colombian INDC process involved a cross-sectoral participatory process where all the main economic sectors were convened to understand the sources of greenhouse gas emissions and to work together on new options to reduce them. This joint work ended in developing Sectoral Action Plans for Mitigation with concrete options. The following process of committing to an INDC built upon this previous work, and presented three different scenarios for decision-makers. The final decision involved high level discussions, leading finally to the chosen target, which is logical for the country and the world: to reduce emissions by 20% below projected BAU emissions by 2030.

The strong technical capacity, the skill to translate science and numbers into comprehensible commitments and the political will to continue leading the importance of the climate change negotiations were certainly an asset in building the INDC. Colombia is the first country in South America to release a consistent INDC adopting a wide emissions reduction target for the first time. The conversation has changed because there is an evident commitment that sets the future actions for the private and public sectors in Colombia.

But what will it take to get from ‘intended’ to ‘implemented’? What are the big opportunities and challenges?

Colombia’s NDC target to reduce emissions by 20% by 2030 could get to 30% below BAU, with international support. The country also provides clear adaptation goals, reaffirming the need to work hard on understanding vulnerability and strengthening sectors and territories in their adaptation pathways.

The NDC depends on the understanding of the commitments by all sectors and subnational authorities and the willingness to act accordingly. At the sectoral level, Colombia is promoting the development of departmental plans including opportunities for resilience and low carbon economies. Colombia is also undertaking a climate finance strategy in order to assure concrete investments to implement the NDC.

There are three big challenges. The first is to assure that all sectors understand their commitments and use public resources in an efficient way in order to make clear choices to lower emissions in a cross-cutting manner. The second is to start making agreements with the private sector with strong commitments that are most effective starting with the low hanging fruits. For example, Colombia`s emissions are mostly related to agriculture, forests, and other land uses (AFOLU). Agreements with the big agriculture sectors (palm, soy, coffee, sugar cane, cattle ranging) are needed and they should be made in a pragmatic manner with concrete indicators and financial commitments. On the other hand, deforestation is a big threat that needs strong actions to control the expansion of the agricultural frontier.

Currently, the third most important challenge would be to change Colombia’s long term energy outlook. Colombia`s energy matrix is weighted mostly towards hydropower. However, because of the El Niña and El Niño effects there has been, during 2016, a big challenge to assure energy security. In this context, there is big pressure to start using coal to power and other thermal options. In that scenario, it would be difficult to assure energy security and at the same time lower emissions. Therefore, assuring energy security and allowing the expansion of more alternative energies in future energy scenarios is a big challenge.

The Paris Agreement calls for limiting average global temperature rise well below 2C, as close to 1.5C as possible. Colombia’s emissions are not huge, but they are growing – what hope is there to see economic growth and human development with lowered emissions?

Colombia is passing through a peace negotiation process with strong emphasis on rural development including food security and economic development. The negotiations place a strong emphasis in land tenure equity, and alternative options for the most vulnerable communities. However, climate change factors or sustainability options have not been part of the peace dialogues. Therefore there is a big challenge to start understanding that the long term, sustainable, productive options depend on understanding the future realities of climate change, preparing communities to adapt and respond to the climate of the future.

In terms of increasing productivity, Colombia is promoting the creation of “Zidres”, which are special interest zones for economic and social rural development. These zones are mostly remote, vast areas that have little infrastructure and need major investments to become productive. In the end, these zones could end up being in the hands of agricultural conglomerates that are willing to invest with little consideration towards climate change or social equity. However, the future of agriculture productivity depends on a strong understanding of climate change, and there is evidence that climate-smart agriculture investments are starting to be a reality, basically due to the dramatic challenges the sector is facing under current climate conditions. [See CDKN’s Inside Story on a climate vulnerability assessment in the Upper Cauca Basin of Colombia, which outlines climate effects in more detail.]

If you check most INDCs from developing countries, their emission reduction targets are subject to technology development, international climate finance and capacity building. What would happen if the means of implementation does not flow?

Colombia will start facing some constraints to implement the NDCs, but has the capacity to act with its national human and financial resources. In terms of climate change finance, Colombia is relying mostly in its internal resources, promoting a financial strategy for climate change (a CDKN finance project) that analyses the flows and efficiency of international resources.

However, technology transfer and innovation is much needed in order to start innovating different options to develop agriculture, transport, energy and waste, as well as making industries more effective and innovative. In terms of capacity building, Colombia counts on strong institutions that are capable of making national decisions on climate change.

Have you any reflections on how the process Colombia went through to come up with its INDC will affect what happens next?

Juan Manuel Santos, the President of Colombia, has been a strong supporter of the NDC. He had the last word on deciding from among the INDC scenarios. The fact that there was a strong research and participatory process behind the scenarios helped him in making the political decisions. What happens next depends on the capacity to make the NDC commitments into a process demanding legal or political compliance, and upon putting an internal price on carbon to align with a financial strategy.

The INDC is totally aligned with the 2014-2018 National Development Plan that lays a strong emphasis on working at the subnational level to ensure climate compatible development. In this context, Colombia will continue to develop integral subnational climate change plans including strategic actions on land use planning, management of water resources, climate smart agricultural options and reduced deforestation. There are some cross-cutting goals including education and science and technology to improve innovation and competitiveness.  At the sectoral level, the trend will have to be towards promoting climate plans and innovations that could prove to be cost-effective and even profitable in the medium term.

A climate change law has been prepared and is yet to be submitted for approval by the senate and the president. I see a way forward if the law passes with strong complying commitments that rely on abatement curves and options that where addressed in the INDC process.

It also depends on pushing forward an early action to create pre-2020 domestic target markets align with the capacity to mobilise internal and international resources to implement NDC targets.

The SDGs have many climate-related components, as well as a dedicated climate goal. What are some of the ways that the SDGs will influence the planning and practice of development in Colombia in the coming years?

Colombia is involved in three major processes: Complying with the NDC commitments, developing a green growth plan as part of the pathway towards joining the OECD, and finally, addressing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that were pushed forward by the country, which was a leader on promoting SDGs as well.

Internally, the general public is a bit confused about what the targets and terminology are in relation with these three processes. But at the end, climate change, green growth and SDGs will have to merge in one common agenda with long term goals. The planning and practice of development will therefore need to develop that long term agenda that addresses real indicators at the sectorial and territorial level that can measure improvements on SDGs, and at the same time progress in fulfilling the NDC and green growth actions.

Are there any development initiatives in Colombia that, for you, provide perfect examples of how the country can meet the high aspirations of the Paris Agreement and the SDGs?

At the subnational level, Colombia is developing several climate change plans at the city and territorial levels. Examples such as the CDKN-funded “Cartagena Plan 4C”or the “Huila 2050”* plan have produced lessons learned that will guide new efforts. Currently seven new plans are being developed in different departments, including CDKN-funded project on green growth and CCD (climate compatible development) in the eastern Antioquia region of Colombia. These examples establish the strategies at the territorial level to implement the Paris agreements, as well as provide concrete actions on different territorial priorities that address SDGs compliance.

At the sectorial level there are important advances on the agricultural sector that started to develop a vulnerability analysis of crops in the Alto Cauca region, and can later be scaled up in the rest of the country, with concrete actions that could advance the achievement of the NDC and SDG goals. In terms of the transport sector, the Plan Vias CC, another CDKN-funded plan to adapt the primary road system of Colombia, will make this sector more competitive. The 2014 law on alternative energies also opens the door to include alternative energies in the future energy matrix of Colombia.

In Colombia, initiatives such as these follow the spirit of both the Paris Agreement and SDGs goals, so we are in a good position.

 

* The departmental government of Huila is developing an action plan for a comprehensive approach to addressing climate change and development challenges, the Huila 2050 Vision for Climate Change, which incorporates the Low Emission Development Strategy (LEDS) with REDD+ and activities on changing land use.

 

Image: Students in Antioquia, Colombia, courtesy World Bank.

by: Claudia Martinez, CDKN Global | on: 8am, April 7, 2016

OPINION: After Paris – “For El Salvador, this is a matter of survival”, Jorge Rodríguez

On her return from the Paris climate talks (COP21) last December, El Salvador’s Minister of Environment Lina Pohl seemed satisfied that the new agreement embraces old demands of the Central American region and other vulnerable countries, writes CDKN’s Miren Gutierrez. Among these: the fact that the agreement is legally binding, and that it includes efforts to maintain temperatures below 1.5C of warming; the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities; and an explicit distinction between adaptation, and loss and damage. Countries vulnerable to climate change seized the moment at the start of the UN climate talks in Paris by challenging Europe, the U.S. and China to increase their aspirations and establish a long-term temperature goal of 1.5C, rather than the 2C, of warming. The Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities (CBDR–RC) is a principle within the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) that recognises the dissimilar capabilities and responsibilities of countries facing climate change. Before the Paris Agreement, the issue of loss and damage had been previously treated as a sub-category of adaptation.

In this interview, Jorge Rodríguez, country representative, offers a view on the future of El Salvador´s climate change commitments:

The Paris Agreement created an ambitious mandate for the global community. Does it change the national conversation in El Salvador about action on climate change? If so, how?

In Paris, El Salvador presented qualitative contributions related to its mitigation plans. The Ministry of Environment is expected to start work on its quantitative contributions this year. For the Government of El Salvador, the issue of the Intended Nationally Determined Contribution is very important because it is a way of putting the issue on the table at a national level. Their strategy is to establish the contributions of the country, to have them ratified by Congress, and from there on, to apply the commitments to different sectors.

As you said, El Salvador submitted its INDC – what will it take to get from ‘intended’ to ‘implemented’? What are the big opportunities and challenges?

El Salvador is one of the most vulnerable countries in the world to climate change. Besides, it is a country that has failed to grow economically for the past 20 years (the GDP growth rate is similar to the population growth rate). In this context, decisions about how to employ our resources generate a lot of socio-political conflict and tension, and this has become the biggest challenge El Salvador is facing right now.

On the one hand, climate change and weather-related disasters are generating great losses at social and economic levels in El Salvador, as well seriously affecting key sectors, such as agriculture and infrastructure. On the other hand, opportunities are being created as well, since solutions to this quandary can be found in green growth, with the possibility also to access climate finance: this way both economic development and a reduction of vulnerability would be produced.

The Paris Agreement calls for limiting average global temperature rise well below 2C, as close to 1.5C as possible. El Salvador’s emissions are very low, what hope is there to see economic growth and human development with low emissions in the specific case of El Salvador? Concretely how do you go about reducing greenhouse gas emissions, addressing food security and economic development, and climate change, as well as sustainably increasing food productivity?

El Salvador’s motivation is not fighting against global warming per se; this is a matter of survival. The increase in average temperatures in this country already exceeds 1.5 C. Most ecosystems, as well as the soil, are already degraded. We are also experiencing problems with water availability, along with droughts and extreme rainfall, which are causing havoc in the country’s economy.

In this regard, El Salvador does not have a commitment with the world, but a commitment with itself to reduce its vulnerability to climate change. That is why an approach to mitigation based on adaptation has been assimilated.

Under the Bonn Challenge[1], the Minister of Environment pledged to restore one million degraded hectares. In a 24,000 km2-country, this is more than a relevant dimension. With this initiative, the idea is to reduce the emissions of greenhouse gases, but really its main purposes are bolstering our water resources, restoring soils so they regain their productive capacity and generating spaces that are safer for the people living in them, among other benefits.

If you check most INDCs from developing countries their emission reduction targets are subject to technology development, international climate finance and capacity building. What would happen if the means of implementation does not flow? 

While international support is important, El Salvador is taking steps as far as its own resources allow it. Some examples include the creation, at an institutional level, of a space for interinstitutional coordination, called Office of Environmental Sustainability and Vulnerability. This highlights how high this matter is in the political agenda. There are other initiatives, for instance, to create funds to encourage the restoration of ecosystems and landscapes, to which the private sector is contributing. The government is changing the regulatory framework as well in order to facilitate these measures.

El Salvador is a highly vulnerable country that has suffered the human and economic impact of a string of tropical storms in the past few years… Meanwhile, the SDGs have many climate-related components, as well as a dedicated climate goal. What are some of the ways that the SDGs will influence the planning and practice of development in El Salvador in the coming years?

The SDGs are already beginning to be incorporated into the planning processes of different areas. This is a process that is just beginning, and I cannot say that it is widely established. It is expected to gather more speed in the coming years. One of the important effects is envisioning is that, unlike the MDGs (Millennium Development Goals), the SDGs have a more holistic approach and reflect interconnections within different issues. In this sense, they are likely to foster joint initiatives, both at nationally and at regional levels.

 

References and further reading:

Read more about CDKN’s work in the country on the El Salvador page (in English or Spanish)

El Salvador is satisfied with the results of the universal climate change agreement in Paris (in Spanish)

Environmental sustainability and vulnerability cabinet (in Spanish)

Image: maize and beans for sale, El Salvador, courtesy Neil Palmer, CIAT.

 

[1] The Bonn Challenge is a global aspiration to restore 150 million hectares of the world’s deforested and degraded lands by 2020.

by: CDKN Global, Miren Gutierrez | on: 8am, May 2, 2016

El Salvador, Latin America and the CaribbeanAdaptation, Climate change adaptation, Climate change impacts, Climate compatible development strategies and plans, Climate finance, Climate mitigation,Forestry and REDDclimate vulnerability, common but differentiated responsibilities, emissions, human population growth, specific financing mechanisms, temperature, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, water resourcesBlog postNews, events, opinions and features

OPINION: After Paris – A shift in Colombia’s climate change conversation

Colombia is possibly one of the most vocal, expert and committed governments internationally, in the fight against climate change. Has anything changed after the Paris Agreement last year? What does the future look like? Claudia Martinez, CDKN’s senior strategic advisor for Colombia, talks with Miren Gutierrez about the outcome of the Paris Agreement in her country. This is part of a series of developing country perspectives: www.cdkn.org/after-Paris-perspectives.

The Paris Agreement created an ambitious mandate for the global community. Does it change the national conversation in Colombia about action on climate change? If so, how?

The Paris Agreement was a big incentive to change the conversation about climate change in Colombia.

First, Colombia has had an office of climate change since 2000, earlier than many countries in the world. Colombia has a National Institute of Environmental Information and Meteorology (IDEAM), which has followed the process of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in terms of producing accurate information on climate change. IDEAM developed the new climate change scenarios (2015) as well as the new emissions estimates to produce the business as usual (BAU) model. Understanding emissions and making robust greenhouse gas abatement curves to support decision-making processes has been very important.

Second, based on accurate data, the Colombian INDC process involved a cross-sectoral participatory process where all the main economic sectors were convened to understand the sources of greenhouse gas emissions and to work together on new options to reduce them. This joint work ended in developing Sectoral Action Plans for Mitigation with concrete options. The following process of committing to an INDC built upon this previous work, and presented three different scenarios for decision-makers. The final decision involved high level discussions, leading finally to the chosen target, which is logical for the country and the world: to reduce emissions by 20% below projected BAU emissions by 2030.

The strong technical capacity, the skill to translate science and numbers into comprehensible commitments and the political will to continue leading the importance of the climate change negotiations were certainly an asset in building the INDC. Colombia is the first country in South America to release a consistent INDC adopting a wide emissions reduction target for the first time. The conversation has changed because there is an evident commitment that sets the future actions for the private and public sectors in Colombia.

But what will it take to get from ‘intended’ to ‘implemented’? What are the big opportunities and challenges?

Colombia’s NDC target to reduce emissions by 20% by 2030 could get to 30% below BAU, with international support. The country also provides clear adaptation goals, reaffirming the need to work hard on understanding vulnerability and strengthening sectors and territories in their adaptation pathways.

The NDC depends on the understanding of the commitments by all sectors and subnational authorities and the willingness to act accordingly. At the sectoral level, Colombia is promoting the development of departmental plans including opportunities for resilience and low carbon economies. Colombia is also undertaking a climate finance strategy in order to assure concrete investments to implement the NDC.

There are three big challenges. The first is to assure that all sectors understand their commitments and use public resources in an efficient way in order to make clear choices to lower emissions in a cross-cutting manner. The second is to start making agreements with the private sector with strong commitments that are most effective starting with the low hanging fruits. For example, Colombia`s emissions are mostly related to agriculture, forests, and other land uses (AFOLU). Agreements with the big agriculture sectors (palm, soy, coffee, sugar cane, cattle ranging) are needed and they should be made in a pragmatic manner with concrete indicators and financial commitments. On the other hand, deforestation is a big threat that needs strong actions to control the expansion of the agricultural frontier.

Currently, the third most important challenge would be to change Colombia’s long term energy outlook. Colombia`s energy matrix is weighted mostly towards hydropower. However, because of the El Niña and El Niño effects there has been, during 2016, a big challenge to assure energy security. In this context, there is big pressure to start using coal to power and other thermal options. In that scenario, it would be difficult to assure energy security and at the same time lower emissions. Therefore, assuring energy security and allowing the expansion of more alternative energies in future energy scenarios is a big challenge.

The Paris Agreement calls for limiting average global temperature rise well below 2C, as close to 1.5C as possible. Colombia’s emissions are not huge, but they are growing – what hope is there to see economic growth and human development with lowered emissions?

Colombia is passing through a peace negotiation process with strong emphasis on rural development including food security and economic development. The negotiations place a strong emphasis in land tenure equity, and alternative options for the most vulnerable communities. However, climate change factors or sustainability options have not been part of the peace dialogues. Therefore there is a big challenge to start understanding that the long term, sustainable, productive options depend on understanding the future realities of climate change, preparing communities to adapt and respond to the climate of the future.

In terms of increasing productivity, Colombia is promoting the creation of “Zidres”, which are special interest zones for economic and social rural development. These zones are mostly remote, vast areas that have little infrastructure and need major investments to become productive. In the end, these zones could end up being in the hands of agricultural conglomerates that are willing to invest with little consideration towards climate change or social equity. However, the future of agriculture productivity depends on a strong understanding of climate change, and there is evidence that climate-smart agriculture investments are starting to be a reality, basically due to the dramatic challenges the sector is facing under current climate conditions. [See CDKN’s Inside Story on a climate vulnerability assessment in the Upper Cauca Basin of Colombia, which outlines climate effects in more detail.]

If you check most INDCs from developing countries, their emission reduction targets are subject to technology development, international climate finance and capacity building. What would happen if the means of implementation does not flow?

Colombia will start facing some constraints to implement the NDCs, but has the capacity to act with its national human and financial resources. In terms of climate change finance, Colombia is relying mostly in its internal resources, promoting a financial strategy for climate change (a CDKN finance project) that analyses the flows and efficiency of international resources.

However, technology transfer and innovation is much needed in order to start innovating different options to develop agriculture, transport, energy and waste, as well as making industries more effective and innovative. In terms of capacity building, Colombia counts on strong institutions that are capable of making national decisions on climate change.

Have you any reflections on how the process Colombia went through to come up with its INDC will affect what happens next?

Juan Manuel Santos, the President of Colombia, has been a strong supporter of the NDC. He had the last word on deciding from among the INDC scenarios. The fact that there was a strong research and participatory process behind the scenarios helped him in making the political decisions. What happens next depends on the capacity to make the NDC commitments into a process demanding legal or political compliance, and upon putting an internal price on carbon to align with a financial strategy.

The INDC is totally aligned with the 2014-2018 National Development Plan that lays a strong emphasis on working at the subnational level to ensure climate compatible development. In this context, Colombia will continue to develop integral subnational climate change plans including strategic actions on land use planning, management of water resources, climate smart agricultural options and reduced deforestation. There are some cross-cutting goals including education and science and technology to improve innovation and competitiveness.  At the sectoral level, the trend will have to be towards promoting climate plans and innovations that could prove to be cost-effective and even profitable in the medium term.

A climate change law has been prepared and is yet to be submitted for approval by the senate and the president. I see a way forward if the law passes with strong complying commitments that rely on abatement curves and options that where addressed in the INDC process.

It also depends on pushing forward an early action to create pre-2020 domestic target markets align with the capacity to mobilise internal and international resources to implement NDC targets.

The SDGs have many climate-related components, as well as a dedicated climate goal. What are some of the ways that the SDGs will influence the planning and practice of development in Colombia in the coming years?

Colombia is involved in three major processes: Complying with the NDC commitments, developing a green growth plan as part of the pathway towards joining the OECD, and finally, addressing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that were pushed forward by the country, which was a leader on promoting SDGs as well.

Internally, the general public is a bit confused about what the targets and terminology are in relation with these three processes. But at the end, climate change, green growth and SDGs will have to merge in one common agenda with long term goals. The planning and practice of development will therefore need to develop that long term agenda that addresses real indicators at the sectorial and territorial level that can measure improvements on SDGs, and at the same time progress in fulfilling the NDC and green growth actions.

Are there any development initiatives in Colombia that, for you, provide perfect examples of how the country can meet the high aspirations of the Paris Agreement and the SDGs?

At the subnational level, Colombia is developing several climate change plans at the city and territorial levels. Examples such as the CDKN-funded “Cartagena Plan 4C”or the “Huila 2050”* plan have produced lessons learned that will guide new efforts. Currently seven new plans are being developed in different departments, including CDKN-funded project on green growth and CCD (climate compatible development) in the eastern Antioquia region of Colombia. These examples establish the strategies at the territorial level to implement the Paris agreements, as well as provide concrete actions on different territorial priorities that address SDGs compliance.

At the sectorial level there are important advances on the agricultural sector that started to develop a vulnerability analysis of crops in the Alto Cauca region, and can later be scaled up in the rest of the country, with concrete actions that could advance the achievement of the NDC and SDG goals. In terms of the transport sector, the Plan Vias CC, another CDKN-funded plan to adapt the primary road system of Colombia, will make this sector more competitive. The 2014 law on alternative energies also opens the door to include alternative energies in the future energy matrix of Colombia.

In Colombia, initiatives such as these follow the spirit of both the Paris Agreement and SDGs goals, so we are in a good position.

 

* The departmental government of Huila is developing an action plan for a comprehensive approach to addressing climate change and development challenges, the Huila 2050 Vision for Climate Change, which incorporates the Low Emission Development Strategy (LEDS) with REDD+ and activities on changing land use.

 

Image: Students in Antioquia, Colombia, courtesy World Bank.

by: Claudia Martinez, CDKN Global | on: 8am, April 7, 2016

https://cdkn.org/2016/04/opinion-paris-shift-colombias-climate-change-conversation/?loclang=en_gb

OPINION: After Paris – “Going from intended to implemented, that is the question” says Margaret Kamau, Kenya

Kenya aims to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 30% by 2030 relative to Business As Usual. This goal is subject to international support in the form of finance, investment, technology development and transfer, and capacity building. Margaret Kamau, CDKN´s Country Engagement and Project Manager talks to Miren Gutiérrez about what this target means for her country. This is part of a CDKN series on implementing the Paris Agreement: read more at www.cdkn.org/after-paris-perspectives

 

The Paris Agreement created an ambitious mandate for the global community. Does it change the national conversation in Kenya about action on climate change? If so, how?

Well before, for much of 2015, there has been quite a momentum in Kenya around preparations for COP21[Editor: 21^st Conference of the Parties for the UNFCCC], the INDCs [Climate plans which countries submitted to the conference] and the Paris Agreement. A number of stakeholders were quite involved in the ‘road to COP’ process. I think that this kind of momentum has carried on in 2016.

From meetings that we had this February and March, we can tell there is a bit of uncertainty about “what next” with regards to the Paris Agreement. But the Government of Kenya is taking steps to clarify this. For example, in mid-February there was a meeting on the post-Paris situation with a wide range of civil society organisations and other stakeholders, where the government was able to explain what the next steps were and what the COP21 meant.

In two weeks, there is another stakeholder consultation session, now addressed towards developing the next steps after Paris. Now we are waiting to hear what the government has planned and what they need support for. I know they are also looking at the implications for Kenya’s growth and sustainable development. So I think the main influence COP21 has had is creating momentum before, during and after the event.

UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon visits a geothermal power facility in Kenya; courtesy UNEP.

Are these consultations with civil society and stakeholders binding in any way, has the government been gathering their feedback, or are they just informative?

They have been mainly for information purposes, not to get feedback or to pass clear information on what the next steps are. But I believe the intention of the government is that the next meeting is to be more action oriented. Kenya’s civil society has challenged the government to take action to implementing the agreement. But not openly in the media.

As for coverage, media articles and news stories on climate change tended to be published before and during COP21, with different sectoral approaches. Since the Paris conference, we haven’t seen as much. Although that is not necessarily negative…

Kenya indeed submitted an ‘Intended Nationally Determined Contribution’ (INDC). What will it take to get from ‘intended’ to ‘implemented’? What are the big opportunities and challenges?

That is the question. In terms of implementation, we believe the next step the government should take is to lay out the key priority actions in the climate action plan, and take them forward. There is the realisation that the actions contained in the INDC have been ongoing actions. So it is about accelerating investment to support implementation in those areas.

The big opportunities are first at a sectoral level. The energy sector, the forestry sector, the transport sector have all seen significant growth in the last few years. So those would be quick wins: sectors where there has been ongoing work.

In the energy sector, for example, there is already significant investment [in low carbon energy], but there is room for more. The next steps would be: identifying the actions, the key people and institutions to take those actions and accessing the finance required.

Another opportunity would be leveraging the momentum that the Paris Agreement has created to make sure that all stakeholders are aware of it, and employing this ongoing interest and buy-in for activities.

Finance presents both an opportunity and a challenge. We have different financing opportunities, such as Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs) and the Green Climate Fund (GCF), which may be accessed to implement the country’s NDC. A Kenyan entity has just been accredited as the National Management Authority to access direct funding from the GCF. These are opportunities that the government is already taking.

NAMAs are being developed for the bus rapid transit system, another one for a grid of renewable energy and waste management. A geothermal NAMA was developed and is explored in CDKN’s Inside Story on Climate Compatible Development.

In addition, there is bilateral and multilateral funding: the governments of the UK and Japan and institutions such as the World Bank are funding elements of the NDC as well.

In the finance arena, the Government of Kenya has faced hurdles in producing investment plans and proposals that actually attract funding. Here, some investment may be needed in enhancing capacity for proposal development. A current CDKN project is supporting the government to write an adaptation proposal for the GCF. We are responding to a direct government request to help them fill a gap.

Other challenges include coordination. Over the past years, I think the government has improved its coordinated approach towards climate change and development. This has been particularly evident recently during the INDC process. But coordination across government remains a challenge which they continue to address.

Skyline of Nairobi, Kenya’s capital; courtesy Jonathan Stonehouse

The Paris Agreement calls for limiting average global temperature rise well below 2C, as close to 1.5C as possible. Kenya’s emissions are not huge, but they are growing fast – what hope to see economic growth and human development with lowered emissions in the specific case of Kenya?  

Using the energy sector is a good example. We have seen a significant increase in investments in the renewable energy sector, particularly in geothermal and wind power. About 50% of Kenya´s electricity[1] comes from renewable sources, and this is a number that is increasing on a daily basis. We think that this it is not actually hampering economic growth, because before geothermal power became the focus, hydroelectric power was being produced from dams. Obviously, that meant that during the power crisis electricity was quite erratic because of the reliance on hydropower [Editor: linked to reduced rainfall and river levels – the CDKN Inside Story explains further]. So the focus on this new generation of renewables is actually supporting growth because it is a more reliable source of power and businesses now have more reliable sources of power.

In agriculture, initiatives such as the one led by COMESA (Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa) to reduce agricultural emissions across Kenya and several other African countries will help combat climate change while addressing food security, from the policy level to the farm level.

We have seen initiatives and interventions to improve forest cover and to improve forest conservation resulting in a better environment for people and the communities living around forests. And this translates to improved human development and better economic growth. So far it has not limited economic growth either.

This will continue being a trend for the next couple of years. We still have untapped solar and wind resources. We are expected to have a large 300 megawatt solar farm in the next few years, which will only reduce our reliance on fossil fuels and promote economic growth.

Technology hub, Kenya; courtesy UNDP.

If you check most INDCs from developing countries their emission reduction targets are subject to technology development, international climate finance and capacity building. What would happen if these ‘means of implementation’ do not flow? 

Countries like Kenya have taken some steps towards building internal capacity and using domestic financial national resources to put in place climate change initiatives. This is evident in some government-enabled food security projects, as well as in the setting up of research institutions, industrial research institutions, with technology development. If the means are not put forward, it is not to say that countries such as Kenya will not take action anyway. But the view is that action will be slower because obviously there are other pressing needs that the domestic budget needs to serve. It won’t be a large allocation for a long time, so this will slow the process in achieving sustainable development.

Why are some countries more successful than others in attracting international resources to support climate compatible development? Does their ability to negotiate have anything to do with it? How would you rate Kenya´s performance so far?

Definitely the ability of a country to negotiate in the international arena plays a huge role in attracting climate finance. But also, one thing that stands out looking at these countries have taken initiatives on their own. Brazil, Mexico and Morocco may have allocated domestic resources towards climate change initiatives. And this can help make a case before they go and negotiate climate finance. I believe part of making the case is showing what you can do with our own resources. I think that these have been countries that have been successful in doing this, and when they go to international arena they are not just asking for money. They are saying: this is what we have done and now we need more money to grow this pilot initiate.

Finally, Kenya not very well known for its negotiation power, but I think being part of the African Group of Negotiators has helped Kenya and fellow African countries to try to negotiate collectively. But [its influence] could be improved with further international support.

The SDGs have many climate-related components, as well as a dedicated climate goal. What are some of the ways that the SDGs will influence the planning and practice of development in Kenya in the coming years?

There has not been a lot of communication on the SDGs locally, since the New York summit last September. CDKN helped convene an SDG dialogue process in 2014 – to provide a platform for Kenyan voices in developing the goals. And what came out of this process is that Kenya would need more integrated planning, not just for key economic sectors, making integrated planning a habit if the SDGs are to be achieved. Kenya is also in the process of writing up a green economy strategy, which looks at how to maintain sustainable development while growing the economy.

 

Image: Kenya, courtesy DFID.

[1] Kenya is looking to geothermal energy to power its growth and reduce reliance on imports. As of 2015, geothermal accounted for 51% percent of Kenya’s energy mix (up from only 13% in 2010). Kenya´s also investing on wind, with Africa’s largest wind farm (310 MW) set to provide another 20% of the country´s installed electricity generating capacity. Those two combined will help Kenya generate 71% of its electricity with renewables in the future, according to CleanTechnica.

by: CDKN Global, Miren Gutierrez, Margaret Kamau | on: 12pm, March 27, 2016

https://cdkn.org/2016/03/opinion-after-paris-going-from-intended-to-implemented-that-is-the-question-says-margaret-kamau-kenya/?loclang=en_gb