IISD Tools for Prioritizing NAMAs and the Kenyan Experience

1. IISD Tools for Prioritizing NAMAs and the Kenyan Experience David Sawyer and Deborah Murphy International Institute for Sustainable Development dsawyer@iisd.ca; dmurphy@iisd.ca

2. Low Carbon, Climate Resilient Development and NAMAs • IISD has developed a Practitioners Guide for Developing NAMAs and Low Carbon, Climate-Resilient Development • It sets out the conceptual framework for implementing low carbon, climate-resilient development, under which NAMAs can be prioritized; and • It provides a step-by-step methodology for screening NAMA opportunities, both within and outside a low carbon development planning process, with one component of the methodology designed specifically for developing NAMA concepts, and another for developing NAMA proposals. • Designed to be a simple, easy to follow guide for identifying and prioritizing NAMAs either nestled within a low carbon planning process or outside, and advancing potential NAMAs to the next stage of development.

3. Conceptualizing Low Carbon Climate-Resilient Development • An LCCRD framework starts with a realization that development is the priority and that mitigation and adaptation efforts need to complement development actions. Three elements, • Understanding governance for low carbon development. Need for high-level government leadership, effective stakeholder engagement, alignment with existing development plans and the involvement of relevant government ministries with clear delineation of roles and responsibilities. • Envisioning development to accommodate mitigation and adaptation aspirations. A planning effort to envision alternative development pathways involves the development and application of knowledge, tools and processes that help planners and decision-makers understand future risks and opportunities.. • Planning for the transition to low carbon resilient development. Support the practical application of policies, programs and measures that facilitate climate compatible development at different scales (from community to national levels). Roadmaps for implementation.

4. Building Financeable NAMAs within Low Carbon Development Strategies

5. NAMA tools: “Quick Screen” for NAMA Concepts • Qualitative assessment to identify a list of low-carbon interventions that could potentially be NAMAs, organized by the mitigation sectors in Article 4.1 of the UNFCCC (energy, transport, industry, waste, agriculture and forestry). Can also adopt other sector aggregations. • Useful because it: • Forms the basis of factsheets on high-priority NAMAs to begin discussions with potential donors and funders; • Identifies sectors and technologies that require further investigation and information; • Identifies information and data gaps for reporting on GHG emissions and climate change actions; • Produces formal NAMA concepts that can be submitted to the UNFCCC registry so that funding for further analysis can be sought; and • Raises awareness of NAMA opportunities with development partners by submitting concepts to the NAMAs registry. • .

6. NAMA tools: “Quick Screen” for NAMA Concepts (cont.) • Qualitative assessment that identifies potential NAMAs that: • Medium or high mitigation potential • Alignment with government priorities • Evidence of existing action • Sustainable development co-benefits that outweigh any negative impacts • Possible climate resilience (adaptation) co-benefits • Five steps: • Research and Categorization – Collect, review and categorize • Long List – Develop a long list of NAMA opportunities • Short List – Screen the long list of potential NAMAs against a set of criteria. • Quick Screen Report –Report provides context ; long and short list of NAMAs. • Validation and Finalization – Validate the short list of priority NAMA opportunities with key stakeholders; and revise short list and Quick Screen Report based on expert input.

7. NAMA tools:NAMAs Proposals or “Deep Screen” • Identify the most promising NAMA opportunities, quantitatively assessing abatement potential and calculating abatement costs, and qualitatively examining sustainable development and climate resilience co-benefits. This screen is useful to policy makers because it: • Provides the same benefits of the Quick Screen, but with more in-depth accompanying information; • Informs the updating of the GHG inventory and provides information for reporting to the UNFCCC, including the biennial update report that is due to the UNFCCC by 1st January 2014; • Provides the evidence base for the need for financing of NAMAs, which is especially important to bilateral and multilateral donors; • Produces formal NAMA proposals that can be submitted to the UNFCCC registry in order to seek funding for their implementation; and • Raises awareness of NAMA opportunities with development partners by submitting proposals to the NAMA registry. • .

8. NAMA tools:NAMAs Proposals or “Deep Screen” (cont.) • Reference case GHG emissions • GHG emission reduction potential • Abatement costs • Sustainable development and climate resilience co-benefits • Six steps: • Selection of Deep Screen Action – identify short list of potential actions for further analysis from the short list developed under the NAMAs Quick Screen • Development of Reference Case – determine historical and projected emissions • Elaboration of Potential NAMA Options – calculate emission reduction potential and abatement costs • Assessment of Sustainable Development and Climate Resilience Benefits – assess the co-benefits and potential negative impacts of the action • Development of Deep Screen Report – present NAMAs information in a country • Validation and Finalization – validate assumptions and analysis with local experts; and revise analysis based on expert input • .

9. Example of Kenya: Low Carbon Scenario Assessment and NAMAs Identification • Aim: Identify low-carbon development opportunities, providing the evidence base for NAMAs • Scenario assessment of NAMAs and REDD+ actions across six sectors of UNFCCC, Article 4.1: energy, transport, industry, waste, forestry and agriculture • Work builds on priorities and planning processes of the GoK to identify potential activities that can bend down emissions from the proposed BAU emissions • KenyaVision 2030 was the starting point – low-carbon actions to help meet Kenya’s development aspirations

10. Approach to NAMAs Prioritization in Kenya • Create a structure that can assess a broad range of low carbon development futures • Long list of potential NAMAs used to identify mitigation options to 2030 • Based onfeasibility in current context; abatement potential; alignment with GoK objectives; and co-benefits. • Two approaches to Historical and Forecast Emissions to 2030 • Detailed assessment of emissions inventory • CGE modeling • Two approaches to Mitigation Potentials and Costs • Detailed technical assessments by sector – wedge analysis • Literature review from Kenyan sources • CDM, long-term electricity plan, etc. • Unified Scenarios, Priority Opportunities • Expert Validation • Build a consensus view

11. Identification of Priority Low-Carbon Options

12. Visualization of development impacts of household energy demand options Adapted from the visualization tool for sustainable development impacts developed by the LEDS Global Partnership

13. Lessons Learned: The Kenyan Experience • National development plans – Kenya Vision 2030 – need to be the starting point • High-level buy-in needed - Senior level champions help to maintain interest and momentum, as well as buy-in across departments and ministries • Stakeholder engagement is critical: • Analysis and assumptions need to be verified and approved by local experts • Improves information base • Helps build understanding of how to transition to a low-carbon economy

14. Lessons Learned: The Kenyan Experience • Process and results need to be locally owned • The analysis and the process have been a major catalyst in starting a conversation about how to think about low-carbon development and NAMAs in various sectors • Prioritization is not easy, and often political • Scenario assessment and NAMAs prioritization are planning tools that needs to be revisited – NCCAP has recommended that the analysis be updated every five years to feed into planning process • Move process from Ministry of Environment to a beachhead in the Ministry of Planning