“Gain vs Pain” Political economy of climate change negotiations

1. “Gain vs Pain”Political economy of climate change negotiations Michael Zammit Cutajar Ambassador for Climate Change, Malta Dublin Lecture no. 6

2. Outline • Political agenda (slides 3-8) • Players and playing field (9-11) • Features of negotiation (12-21) • Political outlook (22-25) Dublin Lecture no. 6

3. Climate change at 20: a strategic issue • MET + ENV => Economy => Finance, FA => Heads • Security impacts: • Water and food; energy • Natural disasters, territorial integrity (SLR) • Population movements • IPCC messages now widely recognized • “Our understanding has come a long way” • SG/UN High-level event Sept. 2007 Dublin Lecture no. 6

4. Key messages IPCC AR4, Stern Review • Human-induced change is unequivocal • Faster than expected • Impacts generally negative • Compounding poverty, fragility, inequality • Warming beyond 2°C = “danger” (EU) • Prevention is cheaper than cure (globally) Dublin Lecture no. 6

5. Pain … • For fighting chance of “safety” (<2°C) • Global emissions should peak around 2020 … • And fall below 50% of 1990 levels by 2050 • ENORMOUS CHALLENGE! Dublin Lecture no. 6

6. Dublin Lecture no. 6

7. … Gain • Early action costs less than inaction • Stern: 5 to 20 times less (global estimate) • Pathway to “safety” will knock <3% off global GDP growth to 2030 • <0.12% per annum Dublin Lecture no. 6

8. Political questions • Not whether? But … • What? How much? When? • BY WHOM? Dublin Lecture no. 6

9. Top 25 « footprints »(WRI/Pew Center; data for 2004 - LUCF 2000) Top 25 in Population Top 25 in GDP (Taiwan), Netherlands, Argentina Turkey Egypt, Nigeria, Vietnam, Philippines, Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Pakistan USA, China, EU25, Russia, India, Japan, Germany, Brazil, UK, Italy, France, Mexico, Indonesia, Iran, Thailand Canada, Rep. Korea, Australia, S. Africa, Spain, Poland Myanmar, D.R.Congo Top 25 in CO2 emissions (incl. LUCF) Saudi Arabia, Malaysia

10. Negotiating framework • 1988-1992: Convention (UNFCCC, 190+ Parties) • Objective, principles, cooperation, reporting • Aim for developed countries: 2000 = 1990 • 1995-2001: Kyoto Protocol (175+ Parties) • Targets for developed countries (2008-2012) • Market mechanisms => Marrakech rules • 2005-2009: Montreal & Bali processes • Protocol and Convention tracks • “Bali Action Plan” - “Bali Road Map” Dublin Lecture no. 6

11. Strategic parameters • Aim: avoid “dangerous interference” • Two prongs: Mitigation + Adaptation • To limit climate change to “safe” (tolerable) levels • So that the challenge of adaptation is manageable • & sustainable devt. and food security not impaired • Criteria: • Inclusiveness (=> effective, fair) • Solidarity • Urgency • Question: “safe”, “tolerable”, “manageable” FOR WHOM?

12. Assessing the problem • Negotiations are driven by science • Growing confidence in IPCC assessments • Caveat: re “Summary for policy-makers” • Motivation to act is highly variable • Low spatial correlation between cause and effect • Large variation in capacity to cope • Many losers - but some short-term winners Dublin Lecture no. 6

13. Projected patterns of precipitation changes2090/2099 : 1980/1999Dec-Feb Jun-Aug Dublin Lecture no. 6

14. Greenland is melting!  Dublin Lecture no. 6

15. Arctic sea ice Median Sept. Extent 09.09.2007 1979-2000 Dublin Lecture no. 6

16. Shaping the response • Mitigation vs Adaptation • Mitigation = division, confrontation • Vulnerability = unifying condition • Adaptation = unifying message • Adaptation first? Dublin Lecture no. 6

17. Mitigation strategy: responsibilities 4. Responsibility • “common but differentiated responsibilities” • historical responsibility (equity) • responsibility for the future • NB. national circumstances,“respective capabilities” • NB. burdens or opportunities Dublin Lecture no. 6

18. Effectiveness, fairness, responsibility, potential (Data for 2000, 6 KP gases - except 1950-2000)Source: WRI/CAIT

19. Effectiveness, fairness, responsibility, potential (Data for 2000, 6 KP gases - except 1950-2000)Source: WRI/CAIT

20. Mitigation strategy:options 5. Targets • National OR sectoral • Absolute OR intensity 6. Policies • Market-based (top-down) OR • Technology-driven (bottom-up) 7. Vision • Low-hanging fruit (energy efficiency, reducing deforestation) OR • Low-carbon “future technologies” Dublin Lecture no. 6

21. Dublin Lecture no. 6

22. Signs of promise • EU: CC & Energy package • USA: States, Business, Congress, Candidates • G.8/ “Major Economies”: 2050 reduction goal • Developing country plans & programmes • China, 11th 5-year plan + CC programme • Mexico, 1st. National CC Strategy => Devt. Plan • Brazil, Indonesia: reducing deforestation • India: CC programme in preparation Dublin Lecture no. 6

23. Bali Action Plan • Inclusive and comprehensive • Mitigation + Adaptation • Enabled by Technology + Finance • Framed by “shared vision” • Demanding political judgement • Verifying and comparing national efforts • Open as to form of “agreed outcome” • Ambitious (2009 deadline) Dublin Lecture no. 6

24. Shared vision … differentiated future • Long-term mitigation goal (50:50) • Low-carbon future: technology, markets and finance • 2020 peak with current technologies (efficiency) • New technologies: market share or shared remedies? (IPRs) • Market incentives vital but not enough • Need for green FDI and more public finance • Differentiated commitments in common framework of accountability Dublin Lecture no. 6

25. War on two fronts • Fight both CC and poverty • Energy access for bottom billion(s) • Integrate climate change and sustainable development • Don’t ignore climate change losers • Don’t subsidize development winners Dublin Lecture no. 6

26. Contacts • www.unfccc.int • www.ipcc.ch • www.cait.wri.org • http://nsidc.org/index.html • mzc@waldonet.net.mt Dublin Lecture no. 6