DOCSLIB.ORG

Combining Economic Recovery with the Climate

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

COMBINING ECONOMIC RECOVERY WITH THE CLIMATE ANNUAL REPORT 2019/2020 Une initiative de la Caisse des Dépôts et de l’Agence Française de Développement EDITORIAL “BEING ABLE TO MOBILIZE EXPERTISE OUR QUICKLY, THAT IS THE Contents MISSION - ADDED VALUE OF EDITORIAL The Institute for Climate THINK TANKS” Pierre Ducret 1 Economics is a think tank with expertise in economics THEMES and finance whose mission Investsment 2 is to support action against Budget 4 climate change. Territoiries 8 Through its applied research, Adaptation 10 the Institute contributes to HE ECONOMIC CRISIS THE EXPERTS AT I4CE WERE Finance 12 the debate on climate-related ASSOCIATED WITH ABLE TO RISE TO THIS COVID-19 HAS SHAKEN CHALLENGE RIGHT FROM THE Carbone market 16 policies. It also publicizes UP THE PUBLIC POLICY EARLY MONTHS OF THE CRISIS, Fiscality 18 T research to facilitate the AGENDA, PARTICULARLY IN and will continue to do so. They have Agriculture 20 analysis of financial TERMS OF FUNDING THE FIGHT formulated numerous proposals and AGAINST CLIMATE CHANGE. The analyses, which you can read about Entreprises 22 institutions, businesses and huge injection of public funding has in this activity report. They were the territories and assists with created new opportunities, and first to make the case for a green Publications 23 equally big risks. With the full brunt of PIERRE DUCRET recovery and set out how it can be the practical incorporation Clubs 24 the crisis being felt by sectors that are President I4CE done. Since early April, I4CE’s climate of climate issues into key to the low-carbon transition, the investment plan for the economic their activities. need to protect jobs may mean that sectors that recovery has been presented to about one hundred INFORMATIONS OUR EXPERTISE should be changing are maintained as they are. members of parliament, the same number of Governance 26 businesses and about fifty members of civil society. THE CHALLENGE FOR I4CE HAS BEEN TO Budget 27 REACT QUICKLY AND CONTRIBUTE TO THE THIS RESPONSIVENESS WOULD NOT HAVE Team 28 STRATEGIC DEBATE ON ECONOMIC RECO- BEEN POSSIBLE WERE IT NOT FOR I4CE’S VERY, mobilising the expertise it has carefully LONG STANDING AND SUPPORTIVE PARTNERS. developed over time on the economic and financial It is thanks to them, and in particular CDC, AFD, issues involved in the low-carbon transition. Develo- ADEME, CDG and the Banque de France, that we had ping expertise over long periods and being able to the human and financial means to develop the mobilise it quickly when the need arises is the expertise that has proved so valuable in the current challenge of all public policy research organisations, situation. We thank them all. of all think tanks. Taking on this challenge is their added value, their raison d’être. IV — I4CE / 2019 - 2020 — OUR ADDED VALUE: I4CE KEY FIGURES ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL EXPERTISE 27 CLIMATE INVESTMENT VOLUNTARY CARBON PUBLIC FINANCE Team members AND TRANSITION CERTIFICATION INSTITUTIONS FINANCING AND THE LOW-CAR- BON STANDARD 30 + Events annually TERRITORIES PRIVATE FINANCE ADAPTATION AND + AND LOCAL RESILIENCE 40 AUTHORITIES Publications annually 7000 + Twitter Followers FINANCIAL AGRICULTURE PUBLIC BUDGETS, REGULATION FOR AND FOOD TAXATION AND THE CLIMATE CARBON TAX +6000 OUR EXPERTISE Newsletter subscribers FORESTRY AND EU ETS BUSINESS AND 400+ TIMBER INDUSTRY AND REGULATORY INDUSTRY Press articles CARBON MARKETS #Investment KEY FIGURES - ECONOMIC RECOVERY PLAN How to finance 9 1 PUBLIC INVESTMENT 2 PUBLIC CO-FINANCING particularly in public grants, subsidized loans billion 7 euros/year buildings and transport climate action of public stimulus in : networks OBLIGATIONS FINANCIAL 13 MECHANISMS 6 3 4 key sectors of MEASURES to carry out retrofitting of enabling projects to start the low-carbon transition existing buildings, with little or no upfront targeted and phased over capital (“zero out-of- to generate time pocket”) In the context of the economic 21 TAX INCENTIVE TECHNICAL SUPPORT billion euros/year 5 6 recovery, I4CE has proposed a public a medium-term tax integrated into financial of additional INVESTMENT incentive specific to each tools, for local govern- funding package of an additional sector to make low-carbon ments, households and projects cost-effective companies 9b€ per year for the climate. The real “In the coming @I4CE_ challenge will be to keep increasing months, debt will not be as easy a solution this funding post 2020. as it is today.” — Further Are we going to make the same And yet the recovery plan reading on mistakes again and try to rebuild proposed by I4CE shows that this topic: HADRIEN HAINAUT PROJECT MANAGER INVESTMENT an economy that pollutes and a green recovery is possible, for excludes exactly as it did before? a reasonable amount of additional public investment Or will we seize the unique given the amounts invested to he crisis is affecting incentives. Many key sectors in the low- with the rising number of projects opportunity represented by help the economy recover. recovering from this crisis to Investing in Climate a number of eco- carbon transition were analysed, and the development of low-carbon can Help France Drive its Economic Recovery Paris, nomic sectors that starting with building renovation, rail markets. According to our estimations, redirect our economies towards The priorities put forward by April 2020 Authors: Hadrien Hainaut | Maxime Ledez | Quentin Perrier | Benoit Leguet (I4CE) | are essential in the infrastructures, urban public transport the 9 billion euros required today will a model that is more sustainable I4CE - thermal renovation, Patrice Geoffron, Université Paris Dauphine - PSL low-carbon and renewable heat and gas. more than double by 2024. and more inclusive, in line with electromobility, rail and urban transition, like rail the international climate public transport - can mostly be commitments made during found among the 149 proposals Investing in climate and urban public ACCORDING TO OUR ESTIMATIONS, PUBLIC AUTHORITIES, STARTING can help France drive COP21? from the Citizens’ convention its economy recovery transport among many others. These THIS PACKAGE WOULD RELEASE WITH THE STATE, could provide T for climate. It is clear, and both are sectors in which France and its ROUGHLY 20 BILLION EUROS OF visibility by committing to a budget Laurence Tubiana This is what the majority of experts and citizens agree; people were already investing too little INVESTMENT for the climate each over several years in the next budget CEO of the European citizens want. Studies carried what is missing is political will. before the crisis began. Whether to year, for 9 billion euros of additional bill, and clarifying how they plan to Climate Foundation out over the past few months insulate buildings, buy a low-carbon public funding. A significant amount meet these growing needs. In the show that the health crisis has Let us remember that another vehicle, build sustainable transport which nevertheless remains modest coming months, debt will not be as GREEN RECOVERY: not detracted from concern recent study, carried out by EY Landscape of infrastructures, or produce low-carbon in view of other public expenditure easy a solution as it is today. Climate Finance WHAT ARE WE about the environment and the France for WWF France, shows in France energy, the French government, and potential rewards in terms of Edition 2019 WAITING FOR? climate, which is still at record that a green recovery would Hadrien Hainaut | Maxime Ledez | Ian Cochran businesses and households invested the economy, air pollution and energy levels. On the contrary: support a million jobs by the end 46 billion euros in 2018, when the insecurity. according to a study by Destin of the quinquennium, which is country needed to invest at least 15 commun (published in two times more than a traditional Landscape of climate finance in France billion more to put itself on the path to THE REAL FINANCIAL CHALLENGE Never let a good crisis September), 65% of French recovery. Not to mention the carbon neutrality. To bridge this gap WILL BE TO CONTINUE TO PROGRES- go to waste, said Winston people want to see ‘big other benefits, in particular for and help the economy recover, I4CE SIVELY INCREASE CLIMATE-FRIENDLY Churchill after the Second changes’ in the aftermath of health and quality of life. has proposed a public and private PUBLIC FUNDING POST 2020. Even World War. This idea has rarely Covid-19. But at the same time, So, what are we waiting for? finance package, underpinned by a if the leverage of public funding is been as relevant as it is now. 70% think this will not happen. range of economic and regulatory improved, this funding must grow 2 — I4CE / 2019 - 2020 — — I4CE / 2019 - 2020 — 3 #Budget G20 PUBLIC MONEY COMMITMENTS IN RECOVERY PACKAGE, AS OF 15TH OF G20: 151b$ for fossil JULY 2020 (USD BILLION) United States Germany France fuels since the start India China United Kingdom Fossil unconditional Canada of the crisis Indonesia Fossil conditional Republic of Korea Brazil Clean unconditional Italy Mexico Clean conditional Turkey Aid granted by G20 countries since Australia Other energy Russia the start of the pandemic has so far South Africa favoured the production and use of Saudi Arabia fossil fuels over clean energy. “We need a second Japan wave of measures to Argentina combine the recovery 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 with climate” @I4CE_ source: EnergyPolicyTracker.org LOUISE KESSLER DIRECTOR OF ECONOMY PROGRAM ince the start of and to generate electricity from fossil The predominance of aid given to The international consortium the health crisis, sources. Part of this assistance was fossil fuels of course reflects the fact behind EnergyPolicyTracker.org is govern ments made conditional on the industries that the economy, broadly speaking, made up of: around the world involved committing to reduce still depends too heavily on carbon.
Recommended publications
  • Greening Recovery Efforts for People, Planet and Prosperity

    Greening Recovery Efforts for People, Planet and Prosperity

    Greening Recovery Efforts for People, Planet and Prosperity UN Development Group Task Team on the Socio-Economic Response to the Covid-19 Pandemic 9 April 2021 1. Why a Green Recovery? 2. A Future Possible - Country Examples 3. Navigating Forward - possible UN Responses 2 Overview of a ‘Once in a Generation’ Crisis 3 Source - World Bank Why a Green Recovery? • Spending on clean energy has an impact on GDP that is about 2x – 7x stronger—than spending on non-eco- friendly energy. (IMF, 2021) • Investing in nature conservation has multipliers of up to 7x over five years. Spending to support unsustainable land uses has negative returns. (IMF, 2021) • investments in renewable energies, building efficiency and green transport would add 20.5 million jobs by 2030, compared to 3 million jobs under BAU (ILO) • Green R&D spending has high growth and positive climate/nature/pollution multipliers. Source: Hepburn et al. 2020 4 Global Green Recovery Response to Date USD 14.6 trillion (excl. EC) USD 1.9 trillion USD 341 billion 5 Source - UNEP-Oxford Smith School, 2021 // *data for 2020 - does not cover spending announced in 2021 Global Green Recovery Response to Date … Green recovery spending as a percentage of total Total debt stock for 19 EMDE countries over time recovery spending, versus recovery spending as % GDP (AE spending 17x higher than EMDE spending) Source - UNEP-Oxford Smith School, 2021 // *data 6 for 2020 - does not cover spending announced in 2021 …and limited options for many with looming debt vulnerability Source: UNDP, April 2021. Sovereign 7 Debt Vulnerabilities in Developing Economies A Future Possible - Country Examples The Self Starters Some Green Recovery Examples GREEN ENERGY Argentina – USD 390K to finance the incorporation of renewable energy into the fishery industry Colombia – USD 4.3 million funding for 27 strategic renewable energy and transmissions projects, including the generation of 55 thousand jobs, include 9 wind, 5 solar, 3 geothermal and one hydrogenation, as well as 9 energy transmission lines.
  • TOWARDS a SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH to CLIMATE NEUTRALITY in the CORPORATE SECTOR Discussion Paper

    TOWARDS a SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH to CLIMATE NEUTRALITY in the CORPORATE SECTOR Discussion Paper

    TOWARDS A SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO CLIMATE NEUTRALITY IN THE CORPORATE SECTOR Discussion paper Draft for initial feedback - Version 1.0 September, 2019 Alberto Carrillo Pineda, Pedro Faria ABSTRACT The Special Report on 1.5°C (SR15) released by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 2018 confirmed that, in order to limit global warming to 1.5°C, we need to reach net-zero CO emissions at the global level by mid-century. Since then, the concept of ​2 net-zero emissions has been gaining prominence in the climate policy and climate action arena with a number of countries and non-state actors increasingly setting long-term goals to reach net-zero emissions. According to the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit (ECIU), by August 2019, nearly 20 ​ countries had agreed to set long-term pathways to reach net-zero emissions, and some of them had already net-zero legislation in place (Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom and France). In the corporate sector, by September, 2019, over 50 companies had committed to reach net-zero emissions by 2050 as part of the Business Ambition for 1.5°C campaign. ​ ​ 1 To date, the concept of climate neutrality in the corporate sector has been approached in different, and sometimes divergent ways. The various approaches to climate neutrality differ in at least four aspects: (1) the time frame of the target (e.g. short vs long-term targets); (2) the scope of the activities included in the target (e.g. operational emissions vs value-chain emissions); (3) the climate impacts from those activities (e.g.
  • A Green Economic Recovery: Global Trends and Lessons for the United States

    A Green Economic Recovery: Global Trends and Lessons for the United States

    A Green Economic Recovery: Global Trends and Lessons for the United States Jonas Nahm Assistant Professor for Energy, Resources, and Environment School of Advanced International Studies Johns Hopkins University Statement before the House Foreign Affairs Committee Subcommittee on Europe, Eurasia, Energy, and the Environment Hearing on Green Recovery Plans for the COVID-19 Crisis The economic recession caused by efforts to contain the global Covid-19 pandemic has, in the short- term, led to a drop of global greenhouse gas emissions. Yet three factors caution against optimism that the economic recession could trigger substantial shifts toward long-term decarbonization. First, emissions reductions during the current economic recession have been small and are unlikely to have a lasting impact on efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Past recessions have been followed by rapid increases in emissions that have offset much of the downturn and the 2020 recession has begun to follow a similar pattern. Second, while economic stimulus spending in the recovery offers an opportunity to invest in long-term climate policies that also create jobs and deploy capital in the economy, G20 economies have thus far spent far less on programs with environmental co-benefits than in the aftermath of the 2009 recession. Third, the Covid-19 pandemic has further strained economic and political relationships with China, a key producer of technologies urgently needed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the global economy. This is detrimental to short-term efforts to address the global climate crisis. The United States is uniquely equipped to be at the global frontier of clean energy technology innovation.
  • Biomass Carbon Neutrality

    Biomass Carbon Neutrality

    Biomass Carbon Neutrality Position As EPA continues to consider how to regulate biogenic CO2 emissions, International Paper (IP) urges policymakers and the EPA to recognize our biomass use as carbon neutral. The efficient use of biomass residuals for energy produced and used by IP enables us to manufacture paper-based products people use every day while yielding significant carbon benefit. Policy Request International Paper encourages the Senate and the House to support a potential biomass carbon amendment to the Interior Appropriations bill and potential year-end omnibus package IP’s Efficient Use of Carbon Neutral Biomass Forest and manufacturing residuals are integral to manufacturing IP’s products and our primary energy source. A study by the National Council for Air and Stream Improvement (NCASI) shows substantial benefits in using manufacturing residuals for energy by the forest products industry. The industry’s use of biomass avoids the emissions of 218 million metric tons of CO2 annually - equivalent to removing over 40 million cars from the road. By procuring wood from suppliers who certify their forest sustainability, IP voluntarily contributes to a successful market-based system of biomass use in the U.S. that perpetuates positive carbon benefits and co- benefits including: Efficient use of forest and manufacturing residuals through combined heat-and-power (CHP) Reduction of fossil fuel and related GHG emissions at IP – down 16% since 2010 Limiting emissions of other GHGs, like methane, that could occur from residue disposal Robust recycling of paper fiber to reuse valuable biomass resources Employment of 32,000 people throughout the United States International Paper’s Role in the Carbon Cycle How Does the EPA View Biomass Carbon Neutrality? The carbon neutrality of biomass that is harvested from sustainably managed forests has been recognized repeatedly by numerous studies, agencies, institutions, legislation and rules around the world.
  • The Ecological and Inclusive Transition Towards Carbon Neutrality

    The Ecological and Inclusive Transition Towards Carbon Neutrality

    The ecological and inclusive transition towards carbon neutrality Summary March 2020 1 THE ECOLOGICAL AND INCLUSIVE TRANSITION TOWARDS CARBON NEUTRALITY The National Low-Carbon Strategy Implemented via the law of 17 August 2015 relating to energy transition for green growth, the National Low-Carbon Strategy (SNBC) serves as France’s policymaking road map in terms of climate change mitigation. It is one of the two prongs of French climate policy, along with the National Adaptation to Climate Change Plan: This second edition of the SNBC puts into action the Government’s ambition, presented in July 2017 via the Climate Plan and enshrined in the law (n° 2019-1147 of 8th November 2019 relating to energy and climate), to accelerate the implementation of the Paris Agreement by setting a target of achieving carbon neutrality by 2050 within French territories, this being understood as achieving a balance between anthropogenic emissions and anthropogenic absorption of greenhouse gas, i.e. that which is absorbed by the natural environment managed by man (forest land, grassland, agricultural soils, wetlands, etc.) and certain industrial procedures (carbon capture, storage and reuse). On the basis of a forward-looking trajectory to 2050, it defines short- and medium-term greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction targets for France: carbon budgets. These are greenhouse gas emission ceilings not to be exceeded at the national level over five-year periods, expressed in millions of tons of CO2 equivalent1. It is consistent with France’s commitments to the European Union under the Paris Agreement, as well as national commitments including the 40% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) by 2030 compared to 1990.
  • Tracking Nordic Clean Energy Progress 2020

    Tracking Nordic Clean Energy Progress 2020

    Progress towards Nordic Carbon Neutrality Tracking Nordic Clean Energy Progress 2020 April 2020 Tracking Nordic Clean Energy Progress 2020 Ea Energy Analyses: Anders Kofoed-Wiuff, Kirsten Dyhr-Mikkelsen, Ida Stokkebye Rueskov, Andrea Pasquali, Karla Brunak Gaia Group: Marika Bröckl, Markku Hagström Copyright © Tracking Nordic Energy Progress 2020 Nordic Energy Research, Stensberggata 27, NO-0170 Oslo, Norway Originally published in August 2019, Updated April 2020 by Ea Energy Analyses Front page photo credit: © “Is” by Johannes Jansson/norden.org Back page photo credit: Visme, Aaron Burden / Unplash Nordic Energy Research Nordic Energy Research is an institution under the Nordic Council of Ministers which manages and finances international research programs and projects that add value to national work in the Nordic countries. In addition, we perform certain secretariat and analytical functions in the energy policy cooperation under the Nordic Council of Ministers. The board of Nordic Energy Research comprises representatives from the authorities and ministries responsible for energy research funding in the five Nordic countries Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden, who also contribute to the majority of the organisation’s funding. Download publications at www.nordicenergy.org/publications Foreword The Nordic countries have a common vision of a carbon neutral region expressed in the Declaration on Nordic Carbon Neutrality adopted by the Nordic prime ministers in Helsinki in January 2019. One the one hand, most of the present CO2 emissions worldwide are energy related. On the other hand, the Nordic energy sectors are frontrunners for the green transition. Therefore, the transition of the energy system is an important part of the pathway towards a carbon neutral Nordic region.
  • Introduction to Energy Transition and Green New Deal in Korea

    Introduction to Energy Transition and Green New Deal in Korea

    Introduction to Energy Transition and Green New Deal in Korea Kwanghee Yeom BERLIN, NOVEMBER 2020 Who is Agora Energiewende? Agora Energiewende: An independent and non-partisan Think Tank & Policy Lab ~ 50 experts on energy system transformation Diverse financing structure (primarily philanthropic foundations) Vision: A prosperous & carbon neutral global economy by 2050 We advise & inform policy decisions to deliver clean power, heat & industry – in DE, EU and around the globe 3 The role of Agora in policy debates The Policy funnel Agenda setting Solution development Legislation Climate and energy topics Solution entering the space Acceptable corridor political process for outcome Agora Narrowing down the solution space to ensure decisions within an acceptable NGOs, interest groups, corridor through thought leadership, companies, others strategic anticipation, joint fact finding Advocacy, campaigning, etc. & strategic communication time Agora Energiewende The role of Agora in policy debates Towards a Climate-Neutral Germany A Clean Industry Package for the EU 5 Our global partners: The International Network of Energy Transition Think Tanks 6 Energy Transition in Korea Korea and Brazil at a glance Korea and Brazil Comparative indicators between Korea and Brazil KOR BRA Surface area [km²] 100,284 8,515,767 Population [thousand, 2019] 51,225 211,050 Population density [per km², 2019] 529.8 25.3 GDP [billion current USD, 2019] 1,530.7 2,055.5 GDP per capita [current USD, 2019] 30,025.2 9,821.4 GDP growth rate [annual %, const. 3.1 1.1 2010
  • Green Stimulus Index an Assessment of the Orientation of COVID-19 Stimulus in Relation to Climate Change, Biodiversity and Other Environmental Impacts

    Green Stimulus Index an Assessment of the Orientation of COVID-19 Stimulus in Relation to Climate Change, Biodiversity and Other Environmental Impacts

    Green Stimulus Index An assessment of the orientation of COVID-19 stimulus in relation to climate change, biodiversity and other environmental impacts The Green Stimulus Index (GSI) assesses the effectiveness of the COVID-19 stimulus efforts in ensuring an economic recovery that takes advantage of sustainable growth opportunities, and is resilient to climate and biodiversity. It provides a method to gauge the current impact of the COVID-19 responses, to track countries’ progress over time, and to identify and recommend measures for improving the effectiveness of those responses. This assessment is updated regularly – please use the latest version. This note is part of a series looking at economic responses to COVID-19. Other notes relate to corporate bailouts, international assistance flows into developing countries and job-creating fiscal stimulus. This work was undertaken by the Finance for Biodiversity Initiative (F4B) and funded by the MAVA Foundation. Spokesperson is Mateo Salazar. Contact email: [email protected] Executive summary Across 17 major economies, announced economic stimulus packages will pump approximately USD 3.5 trillion directly into sectors that have a large and lasting impact on nature. These flows present an opportunity to support these sectors through the current COVID-19 crisis, while increasing their sustainability and resilience in the face of the parallel climate and biodiversity crises. So far, government responses have largely failed to harness this opportunity, disregarding the broader sustainability and resilience impacts of their actions. In 13 of the 17 countries considered, potentially damaging flows outweigh those supporting nature. Of the more developed countries, the United States stands out as the largest scale risk, with $479 billion USD providing unrestricted support to sectors proven to be environmentally harmful in the past amidst several rollbacks on environmental regulation.
  • The Pathway to a Green New Deal: Synthesizing Transdisciplinary Literatures and Activist Frameworks to Achieve a Just Energy Transition

    The Pathway to a Green New Deal: Synthesizing Transdisciplinary Literatures and Activist Frameworks to Achieve a Just Energy Transition

    The Pathway to a Green New Deal: Synthesizing Transdisciplinary Literatures and Activist Frameworks to Achieve a Just Energy Transition Shalanda H. Baker and Andrew Kinde The “Green New Deal” resolution introduced into Congress by Representative Alexandria Ocasio Cortez and Senator Ed Markey in February 2019 articulated a vision of a “just” transition away from fossil fuels. That vision involves reckoning with the injustices of the current, fossil-fuel based energy system while also creating a clean energy system that ensures that all people, especially the most vulnerable, have access to jobs, healthcare, and other life-sustaining supports. As debates over the resolution ensued, the question of how lawmakers might move from vision to implementation emerged. Energy justice is a discursive phenomenon that spans the social science and legal literatures, as well as a set of emerging activist frameworks and practices that comprise a larger movement for a just energy transition. These three discourses—social science, law, and practice—remain largely siloed and insular, without substantial cross-pollination or cross-fertilization. This disconnect threatens to scuttle the overall effort for an energy transition deeply rooted in notions of equity, fairness, and racial justice. This Article makes a novel intervention in the energy transition discourse. This Article attempts to harmonize the three discourses of energy justice to provide a coherent framework for social scientists, legal scholars, and practitioners engaged in the praxis of energy justice. We introduce a framework, rooted in the theoretical principles of the interdisciplinary field of energy justice and within a synthesized framework of praxis, to assist lawmakers with the implementation of Last updated December 12, 2020 Professor of Law, Public Policy and Urban Affairs, Northeastern University.
  • IFC Carbon Neutrality Committment Factsheet

    IFC Carbon Neutrality Committment Factsheet

    Carbon Neutral Commitment for IFC’s Own Operations IFC, along with the World Bank, are committed to making our internal business operations carbon neutral by: IFC’s Carbon Neutrality 1. Calculating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from our operations Commitment is an integral 2. Reducing carbon emissions through both familiar and innovative conservation measures part of IFC's corporate 3. Purchasing carbon offsets to balance our remaining internal carbon footprint after our reduction efforts response to climate change. IFC’s carbon neutrality commitment encourages continual improvement towards more efficient business operations that help mitigate climate change. It is also consistent with IFC’s strategy of guiding our investment work to address climate change and ensure environmental and social sustainability of projects that IFC finances. This factsheet focuses on the carbon footprint of our internal operations rather than the footprint of IFC’s portfolio. IFC uses the ‘operational control approach’ for setting its CALCULATING OUR GHG EMISSIONS organizational boundaries for its GHG inventory. Emissions are included from all locations for which IFC has direct control over IFC has calculated the annual GHG emissions for its internal business operations, and where it can influence decisions that impact GHG operations for headquarters in Washington, D.C. since 2006, and for emissions. IFC’s global operations since 2008 including global business travel. IFC’s annual GHG inventory includes the following sources of The methodology IFC formally used is based on the Greenhouse Gas GHG emissions from IFC’s leased and owned facilities and air Protocol Initiative (GHG Protocol), an internationally recognized GHG travel: accounting and reporting standard.
  • Climate Change: Green Recovery and Trade

    Climate Change: Green Recovery and Trade

    UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT CLIMATE CHANGE, GREEN RECOVERY AND TRADE UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT CLIMATE CHANGE, GREEN RECOVERY AND TRADE Geneva, 2021 ii © 2021, United Nations This work is available through open access, by complying with the Creative Commons licence created for intergovernmental organizations, at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/igo/. The findings, interpretations and conclusions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations or its officials or Member States. The designations employed and the presentation of material on any map in this work do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Photocopies and reproductions of excerpts are allowed with proper credits. This publication has not been formally edited. United Nations publication issued by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. UNCTAD/DITC/TED/2021/2 eISBN: 978-92-1-005630-4 iii Contents Note ........................................................................................................................................................iv Acknowledgements ..................................................................................................................................iv Acronyms and abbreviations ......................................................................................................................v
  • ARE THERE DOWNSIDES to a GREEN ECONOMY? the Trade, Investment and Competitiveness Implications of Unilateral Green Economic Pursuit

    ARE THERE DOWNSIDES to a GREEN ECONOMY? the Trade, Investment and Competitiveness Implications of Unilateral Green Economic Pursuit

    UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT ARE THERE DOWNSIDES TO A GREEN ECONOMY? The Trade, Investment and Competitiveness Implications of Unilateral Green Economic Pursuit New York and Geneva, 2013 ii ARE THERE DOWNSIDES TO A GREEN ECONOMY? Note Symbols of United Nations documents are composed of capital letters combined with figures. Mention of such a symbol indicates a reference to a United Nations document. The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Material in this publication may be freely quoted or reprinted, but acknowledgement is requested, together with a reference to the document number. A copy of the publication containing the quotation or reprint should be sent to the UNCTAD secretariat. The views expressed in this publication are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations. Acknowledgements This paper was prepared by Aaron Cosbey ([email protected]), Associate and Senior Climate Change and Trade Advisor of the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) within the framework of the activities of the UNCTAD Climate Change Programme. The author would like to thank a number of reviewers for their valuable input on this text, including Lucas Assunção, Daniel De La Torre Ugarte, Eugenia Nunez, David Vivas-Eugui and Chris Beaton, as well as the participants of the UNCTAD/UNEP/DESA Ad Hoc Expert Meeting on The Green Economy: Trade and Sustainable Development Implications, Geneva, 7-8 October 2010.