KEY CLIMATE CHANGE POLICIESAND POLICY APPROACHES

REPORTED BY ANNEX I PARTIESIN THE THIRD NATIONAL

COMMUNICATIONS

Katia Simeonova Programme OfficerUNFCCC secretariat

Pre-sessional Consultations on “Good Practices” in Policies and Measures

21 October, 2002, New Delhi, India

2

Outline of the presentation• Overview of policies reported

• Policies and measures, and emission trends of Annex I Parties

• Evolution of climate change policies between NC2 and NC3:

• A new integrated approach to climate policy formulation and implementation

• Criteria used for climate change policy design and implementation

• Monitoring and evaluation

• Role of new technologies

• Some policy trends by sector

• Conclusions

3

Overview of the policies reported• Continuity with policies from NC1 and NC2

• New policies having climate change mitigation as a primary objective

• Mitigation of CO2 from energy and transport the most important

• Significant emission reductions from non-CO2 gases: cost-effective measures, or cost associated with other objectives

• Wider involvement of regional and local governments in CC

• EIT Parties: role of charmonization with the EU legislation

4

PaMs and emission trends: changes in aggregated emissions of Annex I

-90.0%-80.0%-70.0%-60.0%-50.0%-40.0%-30.0%-20.0%-10.0%

0.0%10.0%20.0%30.0%40.0%

without LUCF %1995/1990

with LUCF %1995/1990

without LUCF %2000/1990

with LUCF %2000/1990

5

PaMs and emission trends: main drivers Annex II

• The EC, Finland, France, Sweden, Switzerland and the U.K. contributed significantly to the aim of the Convention

• Main drivers: proactive climate policy (energy efficiency, fuel switching, nuclear power, economic slow down

• More specifically: the U.K. (fuel switch), France (reduction of N2O from chemical industry and nuclear), Finland (fuel shift, renewables, nuclear, transportation strategy)

6

PaMs and emission trends: main drivers EIT

• Emission levels in 2000 far below 1990 levels (66% for Latvia and 23% for Czech Republic)

• Evidence of success towards decoupling of emission growth from economic growth

• Poland: GDP 6.6 % annual growth (1995 and 1997) and 4.3 % (1998 and 1999), emissions continue to decline

7

Evolution of CC policy: overview

• The importance of the KP in shaping CC policy: target driven approach

• CC has risen in importance in the policy agenda

• Diversified policy portfolios with shift towards economic instruments

• Energy sector saw the most significant changes

8

Evolution of CC policy: PaMs portfolios

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Energy Transport Industry Waste Agriculture LUCF Cross-Sectoral

Other Total

Mix [%]

Other

Policy Process

Information/Education

Research

Voluntary Agreement

Fiscal

Economic

Regulatory

9

Evolution of CC policy: a new integrated approach to climate policy

• Emphasize placed on portfolio approach

– Different portfolios even when national circumstances are similar

• Phased approach (initial and reserve packages of PaMs)

• Greater involvement of local and regional governments and stakeholders

• Examples of integrated approach

10

Evolution of CC policy: some important issues, such as...

• Criteria used for climate change design and implementation

• Monitoring and evaluations

• Role of new technologies

11

Some policy trends by sector: share of emissions

Shares of aggregated GHG emissions in 1990 by sector

Energy industries28%

Energy use in industry

15%

Energy use in other sectors

11%

Fugitive emissions

4%

Transport21%

Industrial processes6%

Agriculture8%

Waste4%

International bunkers3%

Shares of aggregated GHG emissions in 2000 by sector

Energy industries31%

Energy use in industry14%

Energy use in other

sectors11%

Fugitive emissions

3%

Transport23%

Industrial processes5%

Agriculture

7%

Waste

3%

International bunkers

3%

12

Some policy trends by sector: emission trend by sector, 1990-2000

80

85

90

95

100

105

110

115

120

125

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

International bunkers

Transport

Energy industries

Energy use in other sectors

Agriculture

Energy use in industry

Waste

Industrial processes

Fugitive emissions

13

Some policy trends by sector: overview of key PaMs

Key policies and measures reported by Parties in all sectors AUTBELCANCHECZEESPESTEURFINFRAGBRHRVJPNLVA NLDNORNZLPOLSVKSWEUSACombined heat andpowerXXXXXXXXXXRenewable energysourcesXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXFuel switch (mainlyto natural gas)XXXXXXXEnergy efficiencyimprovementsXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXVehicle andfuel taxesXXXXXXXXXXIntegrated transportpolicy frameworksXXXXXXPollution preventionin industryXXXXXXXXXXXXXXLandfill site gasrecoveryXXXXXXXXXXXXXXFertilizer andmanuremanagementXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXCommonAgriculturalPolicyXXXXXXXAfforestation andreforestationXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

14

Some policy trends by sector: energy

• Effective mitigation measures stand out: – energy and CO2 taxes, quotas and portfolio standards for

renewables and CHP, mandatory regulations for energy efficiency, NGA,

– innovative and replicable approached: green certificate trading, emission trading, promoting sustainable life-style.

• Mix of policies was somewhat fragmented in the past

• Now, more rigorous approaches designed to reduce emissions substantially below the base-line level

• Integration of PaMs: e.g. emission trading, energy tax, negotiated agreements and IPPC

15

Some policy trends by sector: transport

• Important sector in terms of emission share and growth

• Difficult for policy intervention• Main drivers: intensity, fuel mix, activity and

structure, technical and non-technical measures

• Integrated transport policies frameworks seem to be promising, e.g. Finland

16

Some policy trends by sector: industrial processes and waste

• Industrial processes: more attention in this sector especially on fluorinated gases

• Waste: integrated waste management approach: waste minimization and recycling, controlling emissions from landfills, regulating the waste going to the landfills, improving landfills structure, waste incineration

17

Some policy trends by sector: agriculture and LUCF

• Agriculture: PaMs with wider objectives, PaMs targeting specific activities and research based PaMs

• LUCF: LUCF helped to slow down emission growth (e.g. CHW, SWE), expectation for contributions from LUCF to achieve the KP targets (e.g. NZ and JPN), national forest strategies, afforestation and reforestation

18

Conclusions

• Is there evidence that Annex I Parties were successful in finding a mix of effective policies to control GHG emissions?

• Were these policies sufficient to change the emission trends in the past and to achieve the aim of the Convention?

• Are these policies sufficient to form a framework and set a path to achieve significant emission reductions in the future?