Niklas Höhne from NewClimate Institute presents good practices for the preparation of Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs), compatible with global emission pathways towards the 2°C target.

1. Global emission pathways
towards 2°C target
Good practices for the
preparation of INDCs
Seminar on International Climate Negotiations
13-14, November 2014, Berlin
Dr. Niklas Höhne
N.Hoehne@newclimate.org
www.newclimate.org

2. About NewClimate Institute
Non-profit research institute founded Nov. 2014 by 7 former Ecofys
colleagues
Offices in Berlin and Cologne (Germany)
Areas of expertise
Climate negotiations
Tracking clilmate action
Climate and development
Climate financing
Carbon market mechanisms
www.newclimate.org 2

3. Content
Global emission pathways towards 2°C
DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
Enhancing ambition in the major
emitting countries
Technical background report on analysis of current and potential climate
policies
Lead Authors:
Annemiek Admiraal (PBL), Michel den Elzen* (PBL), Hanna Fekete (Ecofys), Nicklas Forsell
(IIASA), Niklas Höhne (Ecofys), Anu Korosuo (IIASA), Mark Roelfsema (PBL), Thomas Day
(Ecofys), Heleen van Soest (PBL) [ORDER TBD]
Contributing Authors:
Andries Hof (PBL), Michael Obersteiner (IIASA)
* Corresponding author: michel.denelzen@pbl.nl
© Ecofys/PBL/IIASA 2014
DRAFT 16 October 2014
PLEASE DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE
Available soon
Good practice in preparation of INDCs
1
www.newclimate.org 3

4. Country results
www.newclimate.org 4

5. Country results
www.newclimate.org 5

6. New target of the USA
Source: Climateactiontracker.org
www.newclimate.org 6

7. New target of China
Source: Climateactiontracker.org
www.newclimate.org 7

8. Aggregating pledges and action
Source: Climateactiontracker.org
www.newclimate.org 8

9. Content
Global emission pathways towards 2°C
Good practice in preparation of INDCs
Intended Nationally Determined Contributions under the UNFCCC
Discussion paper
Niklas Höhne, Christian Ellermann and Lina Li
http://www.ecofys.com/en/publication/intended-nationally-determined-contributions-under-the-unfccc/
www.newclimate.org 9
Forthcoming:
Process guide for INDCs

10. What types of pledges were
presented?
Type Examples
Economy wide emission
reduction targets
To base year: USA, EU, Japan
To BAU: Brazil, Mexico, Chile, South Korea
To GDP: China, India
Energy targets China, Peru
Policies Brazil, Argentina
Projects Ethiopia
www.newclimate.org 10

11. Frist inspirational goal, then
national implementation
Type
Economy wide
emission
reduction
targets
Energy targets
Policies
Projects
Examples:
• Norway (40%)
• Japan (25%)
• Costa Rica (carbon neutral)
• Maldives (carbon neutral)
• South Korea (30% below BAU)
Requirements
• Ambitious global goal (2°C or phase out)
• Strong national political leadership
• Continued strong national implementation
www.newclimate.org 11

12. National implementation (then
national goal)
12
Type
Economy wide
emission
reduction
targets
Energy targets
Policies
Projects
Examples:
• Development of specific NAMAs
Requirements
• Time for policy development
• Knowing the options
www.newclimate.org

13. Process to derive an INDC
Political decision
regarding INDC
Prepare technical
information
Identify co-benefits
and
mitigation
opportunities
Evaluate costs
and support needs
www.newclimate.org 13
Package and
present
contribution
Evaluate ambition
Build leadership
Create efficient processes
Set up institutional arrangements
Engage stakeholders

14. Elements of a national
contribution
Type
Economy wide
emission
reduction
targets
Energy targets
Policies
Projects
• National long term emissions goal
• National short term emissions target
• Energy / sectoral targets
• Details on highlight policies and projects
• Resource needs for their implementation
• Intended provision of support
• Explanations on ambition and equity
www.newclimate.org 14

15. Examples on possible details
of contributions
Element
Country with high
capability
Country with medium
capability
Country with low
capability
Inspirational national
long term emissions goal
Year of intended phase out of
GHG emissions
Long-term peak and decline
pathway or range
-
National short term
emissions target
Precisely defined, economy
wide, multi-year target until
2025 and/or 2030
Indication of mitigation
ambition until 2025 and/or
2030 (below BAU, intensity,
range)
-
Energy / sectoral targets
National energy efficiency or
renewable targets
Targets related to land-use
and forestry
National energy efficiency or
renewable targets
Targets related to land-use
and forestry
National energy efficiency or
renewable targets, if existing
Highlight policies and
projects
Governance structures
Highlight policies / projects
with intended impacts
Governance structures
Highlight policies / projects
with intended impacts
Selection of a few, yet
ambitious policies and/or
projects
International support
needs for mitigation and
adaptation
-
Precise purpose and value of
support needed
differentiated from actions
without support
Order of magnitude of
support needed
Intended provision of
support for mitigation
and adaptation
Source, use and value of
intended support
Intended south-south
provision of support
-
Explanations
Detailed explanation why this
contribution is an ambitious
and equitable contribution to
the global goal
Explanation why this
contribution is an ambitious
and equitable contribution to
the global goal
-
15

16. Conclusions
Current emission reduction proposals and
nationally implemented policies for 2020 are not
yet sufficient for a 2°C pathway
First INDCs are being announced
Preparation of INDCs:
Stakeholder process
More than one target
Explanation why this is a fair and ambitious
contribution
www.newclimate.org 16

17. Backup
www.newclimate.org 17

18. Experience from the past on
mitigation commitments
Diverse: Pledges are very diverse (economy wide targets to individual projects)
Ambiguous: Pledges often were ambiguous and had to be clarified
2°C: Some pledges are influenced ranges needed for 2°C
Japan -25%, Norway -40%, Mexico and South Korea 30% below BAU…
National: Some pledges are also primarily driven by national discussions
EU, USA, …
Unchangeable: Pledges once made did not change
No major economy has changed its pledge of 2009, although the gap is widely accepted
Even countries that will over-achieve their pledge (new circumstances or more information) do not
change it
www.newclimate.org 18

19. What types of pledges were
presented?
Type Examples Characteristics
Economy wide
emission
reduction targets
To base year: USA, EU, Japan Full flexibility where to reduce emissions
To BAU: Brazil, Mexico, Chile,
South Korea
Full flexibility where to reduce emissions
Can factor in economic growth
Creates a “moving target” if baseline
changes
To GDP: China, India Full flexibility where to reduce emissions
Adaptive to changes in economic
development
Emission outcome uncertain
Energy targets China, Peru Closer to actual actions than emission
targets
Policies Brazil, Argentina Directly under control of the government
Projects Ethiopia Very detailed in scope
www.newclimate.org 19

20. Ways to assess mitigation
contributions by countries
Comparison
To BAU
To effort sharing
To mitigation potential
Of decarbonisation indicators
To good practice policy package / policy menu
www.newclimate.org 3

21. Comparison to BAU
BAU is counterfactual
BAU includes many different developments
Example Brazil
36.1% to 38.9%
below BAU in 2020
www.newclimate.org 21

22. Comparison to effort sharing
Large range of effort sharing approaches, e.g. per capita, carbon
budgets, equal costs, …
www.newclimate.org 5

23. Comparison to potential
Large uncertainties
Assumptions on base
line?
Assumptions on cost
elements?
Model used?
Source: Fekete et al. 2013. Climate
change mitigation in emerging
economies: From potentials to actions.
http://www.umweltbundesamt.de/sites/default/fil
es/medien/378/publikationen/cc_19_2013_vorabe
xemplar_fkz_3711_41_120_ueberarbeitet_12_12_
13_.pdf
www.newclimate.org 6

24. Comparison to
decarbonisation indicators
kWh/
cap Pledge
CO2/
kWh
Current policy
Current policy
Pledge
Activity
Required for
2°C
Current best
practice
Global
average
2010 2050
Required for
2°C
Global average
2010 2050
Current best
practice
Intensity
www.newclimate.org 7

25. Comparison to low carbon
policy package
Possible approach
1. Choose area of
intervention
2. Identify BP
incentives and
barriers
3. Develop
benchmarks
4. Rate policy against
benchmark
www.newclimate.org 25

26. Policy package (2) – example building
sector- energy efficiency
Indicator for incentives Benchmark for evaluating against best
practice
• Incentive (regulation, support and
information) for use of efficient appliances,
including air conditioning
4: 2-3% per year
0: No incentive
Method: fraction of appliance covered and stringency of
the standards (Japanese Top runner or ecodesign
directive). If air conditioning is a major consumer, then
buidling standards need to be considered)
• Efficiency standards for new buildings for all
types of buildings
4: Zero emissions buildings by 2014
2: Zero emissions buildings by 2020
0: No trajectory to zero energy buildings
• Incentive for high retrofit rates for all types of
existing buildings (for complete retrofit, i.e. full
building envelope & upgrade supply system)
4: > 3% per year (average 2010-2020) and >2% afterwards
0: < 1 % per year
• Policy for efficiency improvement for other
than heating fuel uses (cooking, hot water
use)
4: > 3% per year (average 2010-2020) and >2% afterwards
0: < 1 % per year
• Level of energy and/or CO2 taxes (applicable
to electricity fuel consumption in buildings)
4: tax is > 100% of energy price
0: no tax
www.newclimate.org 26

27. Policy package (cont.) – final
overview
www.newclimate.org
Source: Climate Action Tracker
country assessment example
10

28. Complexity of analysis
Comparison More
simple
>>>>>> More complex
To BAU
To effort sharing
To mitigation
potential
Of decarbonisation
indicators
To good practice
policy package /
policy menu
Downscale
regional BAU
Bottom up
development of BAU
Use IPCC effort
sharing ranges
Own effort
sharing model
Categorization of
measures
Bottom up
modelling of MACC
Use of existing
literature
Development of country
specific indicators
Application of existing
policy menues
Dev. of counrty spec.
policy menues
www.newclimate.org 11

29. Suitable approaches for
different types of commitments
Business as
usual (BAU)
Effort
sharing
Mitigation
potential
Decarboni-sation
indicators
Good
practice
policy
package
Inspirational
national long term
emissions goal
National short
term emissions
target
Energy / sectoral
targets
Highlight policies
and projects
www.newclimate.org
Legend
Primary
Secondary
12

30. Ways to assess contributions
Comparison Considerations
To BAU • BAU is counterfactual
To effort sharing • Wide rage of possible outcomes
To mitigation potential • Costs compared to a BAU, which is
counterfactual
Of decarbonisation indicators • Forward looking, no BAU necessary
• Indicators close to actions, specially on sectoral
level
To good practice policy package
/ policy menu
• Forward looking, no BAU necessary
• How is the package defined?
www.newclimate.org 13

31. Comparison to effort sharing
www.newclimate.org 31