As United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) talks end each year with measured progress, carbon emissions are rising rapidly, with the International Energy Agency (IEA) estimating record high emissions in 2010.
Meanwhile, domestic plans for implementing low carbon economies are pushing forward. Whether it is because of climate change, energy security, or job creation, both developing and developed countries are lowing emissions and switching energy policies to more sustainable means on a domestic level.
In May, India released a report on how it will balance its eight to nine percent growth with low carbon development.
The options considered suggest that, with Determined Efforts, we can bring down emission intensity of India’s GDP by 23 to 25 percent over the 2005 levels, and with Aggressive Efforts, we can bring it down by as much as 33 to 35 percent over the 2005 levels… We also intend to identify barriers, if any, to the adoption of these measures and the policies needed to overcome them. Our emphasis would be on measures that create incentives to self-motivate the economic agents to adopt a low carbon growth path.
As national plans move ahead, there is a clear need for donors to coordinate to increase efficiency and nations with similar issues to consult each other in the planning, policy design and implementation of low emission development strategies. For example, Brazil, which has been successful at curbing deforestation, is consulting Indonesia on similar policies.
Climate Advisors president, Brookings non-resident fellow and RFF visiting scholar Nigel Purvis along with Abigail Jones and Christian Downie, suggest a more immediate coordinating mechanism that can supplement UNFCCC mechanisms, such as the Technology Mechanism and Green Climate Fund, which could take years to become fully operational.
The design of a Consultative Group on Low Emissions Development (CGLED) would include a Partnership Council that would consist of public and private donors, recipients, and representative stakeholders. Funds from donors would flow to recipients, not through a global fund. Assistance to developing countries would become more flexible and adjusted to fit each country’s needs, and the CGLED would ensure that investments in technical assistance would flow to a balanced portfolio of approaches.
The CGLED is not the silver bullet that will solve climate finance or all of the coordination issues in global climate policy, nor is it a replacement of the UNFCCC system. But as climate talks move slowly and nations are looking at building energy efficiency and low-carbon economies on a domestic level, the CGLED can act as a supplement to these programs.
