Upload
others
View
2
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Cities and Climate Change
Harnessing the Potential for Local ActionNagoya Symposium, 16 February 2009Jan Corfee-Morlot, www.oecd.org/env/cc/[email protected]: P.J. Teasdale, I. Cochran, S. Hallegatte
OECD: the Economics of Climate Change & OECD: the Economics of Climate Change & Environmental SustainabilityEnvironmental Sustainability
Economic Aspects of Economic Aspects of Adaptation to Adaptation to
OECD OECD Environmental Environmental
OutlookOutlookCities & ClimateCities & Climate
Change Change Climate ChangeClimate Change
Outlook Outlook gg
2
Cities and Climate ChangeCities and Climate Change
1 Policy context & why1. Policy context & why cities?
2 Multilevel governance2. Multilevel governance, climate change and cities
3 I i th t lb3. Improving the toolbox:i. GHG inventoriesii. Impact assessment & its
role in policymaking4. Concluding points
Policy ContextThe pace of climate change is quickeningquickeningLimiting climate change requires radical change, reversing GHG trendsradical change, reversing GHG trendsPolicy gap is widening
Policy ContextPolicy ContextWhy is progress slow?Diverse & diffuse emission sources:• Pre-existing policy and
institutions• Vested interests• Incentives for mal-adaptation & p
mal-mitigationReforming institutions and gpolicies takes time
Policy challenge
Climate policy is about choicePro-active climate protection will be driven by engagement and through communication: citizens, cities and nations
• What type of economic growth?• What does a low carbon pathway look like &
how do we get there?g• How to build resilience to inevitable climate
change?• What balance between now vs later?What balance between now vs later? • Between adaptation and mitigation?
Why worry about cities?• By 2010, urban population will exceed the rural share
and continue to grow in share worldwideg
Source: Based on data from the United Nations (2006) as cited in OECD 2008.
Why cities?Cities are motors of economic growth and drive ti l inational economies
Urban economic activity is more energy & emission intensive than is rural activityintensive than is rural activity
Land, population and GDP of selected cities as a share of the country total
Cit B l B d t Li b M i Cit N Y k P i S l S dCity Brussels Budapest Lisbon Mexico City New York Paris Seoul Sydney
Percent of land 2 3 0 8 3 2 0 1 0 1 0 5 0 6 0 02Percent of land 2.3 0.8 3.2 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.6 0.02
Percent of population 10 25.3 26.3 23.9 7.8 21.2 25 24.4
Percent of GDP 44.4 45.6 38 26.7 8.5 27.9 48.6 23.5Sources: Land: Klein Goldewijk and Van Drecht, 2006; population: UN, 2006; and GDP: OECD, 2006.
2. Multilevel governance perspectives
Unique advantages of local action
Localising climate change • more effective communication and engagement
with decision-makersCo-benefits of mitigation largest in cities –raises motivation, lowers net costs of action Cities as “laboratories” of social change• Testing new ideas, policy approachesg , p y pp
Key opportunities embedded in local government functions & roles
V b ti l t t b t i l dVary by national context but may include:• Zoning, and land use planning & management• Transport planning, congestion management
including public transport• Infrastructure development: plan, commission &
implement local and regional roads, flood protection local parks water etcprotection, local parks, water, etc.
What are some of the barriers to effective action in cities?to effective action in cities?
National frameworks may not devolve power & y pauthority to citiesStrong transnational (horizontal) linking but vertical integration between cities & nations is underdevelopedFunding is constrainedCities lack tools, expertise & capacity
3. Developing the toolbox3. Developing the toolbox
Developing a toolbox: 1) inventories as a monitoring tool1) inventories as a monitoring tool
Standardised accounting for emissions gacross cities will make local efforts “real”
• Bring rigour and structure into efforts to measure g gprogress & compare
• Raise visibility, transparency of achievementsLi k i l i• Link up to national strategies
Access GHG emission trading & off-set k & fi imarkets & financing
The inventory challenge: reliable performance dataperformance data
National scaleNational scale• one set of harmonised methods (IPCC)• Standard reporting framework (FCCC AIP)• Standard reporting framework (FCCC, AIP)
At local scale - a number of competing t l f hi h ffi i llprotocols, none of which officially
sanctioned internationally:ICLEI US CCAR Th Cli t R i t• ICLEI – US, CCAR – The Climate Registry
• Bilan Carbone• C-40• C-40• Clinton Climate Initiative
Unresolved technical issuesUnresolved technical issues
Limit comparability and reliabilty of city-Limit comparability and reliabilty of cityscale inventories:• Different definitions of the city• Different definitions of the city• Different years reported• Different boundaries of the inventory• Different boundaries of the inventory• Different definitions of source categories &
other methodological issuesother methodological issues
Incommensurate city data even with same protocol: North American examples
Towards harmonised reporting and bl it d t ?comparable city data?
The ICLEI CCP campaign, The Climate R i tRegistryThe Climate Alliance’s Local Governments Climate PartnershipClimate Partnership
Still no national government or international ownershipinternational ownership
Multi-year effort to develop & put in place a standard GHG protocola standard GHG protocol
Developing a toolbox (2): regional science & impact
assessmentassessmentLocal science-policy dialogue to assess impacts, understand & manage risk• Cities will benefit from an
iterative, deliberative process –&engaging scientists & decision-
makers -- to focus what climate change means in thechange means in the local/regional context
City Studies: A Review
London
New York/Boston
Mumbai/Kochi
AthensVancouver
Shanghai
Toronto Paris
Lisbon Rome
AthensVancouverDhakaSeattle
(Los Angeles)California
Tokyo
C t
Manila
California
Mexicocity
Cotonou
S P l /Alexandria
Singapore
Melbourne/Sydney/ Brisbane
Key
Capetown
Sao Paulo/Rio de Janerio
Sante Fe/Chascomús
Caracas Wellington
20
Quantitative impactsQualitative/partial/historic
Source: Alistair Hunt and Paul Watkiss (2007). OECD. ENV/EPOC/GSP(2007)10
Assessing local impacts of high & l b f t t f i tilow carbon futures: cost of inaction
Assessing local impacts through sub-ti l i li hnational science-policy exchange
H li t h ill ff tHow climate change will affect cities?Dialogue about choices - what are the implications of: • Mitigation: high vs low emission
pathways, urban form?• Adaptation: climate resilient urban
development?• How much will this cost & how to
pay for it?
Assessing local impactsAssessing local impactsVariety of institutional delivery models• Examples: IRI, UK CIP, ViTeCC, Ouranos
National/sub-national public funding, p galso private funding for regional scienceBuild on local/regional research gcapacity, universities, institutesSuppliers and customers of information pp– interaction is valuable
Communicating risk & the use of i C lif i limage: California examples
4. Conclusions?4. Conclusions?
Conclusion: what policy priorities at urban scale?
R i i d t diRaise awareness, increase understandingDevelop a common vision: a low-carbon, climate resilient cityresilient cityEstablish goals & instruments to bring about changechange• Emphasis market instruments, subsidy reform & other
policy reformsp y• Public private partnerships
Develop common metrics to assess progressp p gWork closely with regional & national governments
Policy, Actors & Politics Intertwined: Local-National
Policy ActionAction
• Persuasion• Sanction &Sanction &
incentives• Regulation
PoliticsInterests
Multiple Actors
Regulation
Visit our website:Visit our website:
www oecd org/envwww.oecd.org/envwww.oecd.org/env/cc/cities
Thank you!
Assessing local impacts: institutional models vary
Assessing local impacts: institutional models vary