By Charles Ogallo in Durban, South Africa.
United Nations Climate Change Conference enters its final week in Durban, South Africa, with delegates rushing to reach agreement, on whether to save or burry forever the most loved, hated and debated Kyoto Protocol, an internationally binding agreement on climate change.
The Seventeenth Conference of Parties popularly known as COP17 has been organized by United Nation Framework convention on Climate Change-UNFCCCand hosted by South Africa.
The conference may have come at a better time especially for Africa, where many countries are faced with severe effects of climate Change and global warming. And when top world scientists have just predicted scary and devastating climate events such as heavy storms, droughts and floods in the near future due to climate change.
The scientific prediction may have also been fulfilled within a shorter period to many COP17 negotiators whose arrivals in Durban were met with some harsh realities of climate change. This followed heavy storms and floods that hit parts of the city the previous night, sending severs among scientists, environmentalists, Journalists and Climate Change activists converging at the venue of the Conference.
These realities could be felt deep inside the voices of main speakers among them UNFCCC executive secretary Christiana Figuere’s as they presided over the official opening of the two week Conference at the International Conference Center in Durban.
The UNFCCC boss however emphasized the need for the COP17 delegates to reassure the venerable especially those already suffered and all those who will still suffer from climate change of a better world tomorrow today.
The same sentiments were echoed by South African President Jacob Zuma who openly challenged members of the international community to stop taking climate change as any other environmental problem and help save the world today.
With main agenda focusing on discussions over proposed extension of the Kyoto Protocol beyond 2012, as while as removing deadlocks on Green Climate Fund talks, Durban Conference success will relay on the approval of outcomes of the COP16 in Cancun which spelt out far reaching international responce to climate change the world had ever seen to reduce carbon emissions and build a system which made all countries accountable to each other for those reductions .
According to many climate change activists, Africa has bared the greatest brunt of climate change and global warming , with over 12 million of her people having been displaced from their homes and suffering from famine and poverty, and that it was time for them to come together and use the Durban conference to demand to be heard.
John Kioli , the Chairman of Kenya Climate Change Working Group who features as one of delegates in the COP17 called for the international community to listen to the Africa's Voice in Durban . He added that the Durban conference should be a success story for Africa if the World agrees to extend the Kyoto Protocol, whose first phase comes to an end later next year.
African countries have listed fair share of allocations of Green Climate Fund among their demands. Their fears has been that the Agreement they much agitated for may be thrashed and buried in the African own soil thus leaving them more vulnerable to devastating effects of climate change and global warming.
Developed Nations among them US, Japan and the EU had however pledge over 30 billion dollars to go to the fund by 2015 and another 100 billion dollars by 2020. US and Japan are also among countries championing some sort of reviews on the Kyoto Protocol demands that many developing countries are opposed to.
The Green Climate Fund is expected to help promote sustainable developments as well as mitigating diverse effects of climate in emerging economies such as Africa and Asia.
Sunday, December 4, 2011
Friday, December 2, 2011
Patience running out over Climate Change talks in Durban as Civil Societies plan Mass Demos.
By Charles Ogallo in Durban, South Africa.
The youth constituency at the UN climate negotiations In Durban,South Africa is putting on an action to engage and encourage delegates to “aim for a Robin Hood Tax at COP17.”
Costumed Robin Hoods are displaying a giant bull’s eye as delegates pass by as they offer a bow and arrow to shoot towards the target, just like Robin Hood.
Participant Barry McCarron from the UK stated: “I’m taking part in the action after listening to stories from African young people about how climate finance could make so much difference to them at grassroots level.”
The action is part of the ongoing Robin Hood Campaign from the group calling itself YOUNGO, and run in tangent with the “Robin Hood Champion Awards.”
This award praises commitment to equity and foresightedness to fill the Green Climate Fund. It is presented in person to state delegates who commend or encourage a Financial Transaction Tax at COP17. Read more at: http://youthclimate.org/projects-and-actions/cop17-durban/robinhood/
Sierra Club, Sierra Student Coalition, Canadian Youth Delegation and other members of the global TckTckTck campaign have also gathered on the beach at North Beach in Durban - with their heads in the sand wearing the flags of Nations across the globe that are failing to act effectively to address climate change.
Their message to countries obstructing progress on climate action is: Get your heads out of the sand! And in the case of Canada and Great Britain: Get your heads out of the Tar Sands!
Elsewhere the COP17 civil society committee (C17) has issued a rallying call to all South Africans to join civil society, organised labour, faith-based organisations, artists and musicians in a peaceful march through Durban on Saturday 3rd December.
This comes as world leaders struggle to reach agreement at the COP17 negotiations. Ordinary people from across Africa and the World are coming together to make sure their voices are heard.
Some of those most affected by the impacts of changing climate will be taking part in the march, including peasant farmers from across the continent and hundreds of women from South African rural communities.
C17 Global Day of Action committee convenor Desmond D’sa: “World leaders are discussing the fate of our planet but they are far from reaching a solution to climate change. If they fail to make progress we will see drought and hunger blight our country and continent even further”
Expections remain high in Durban Climate Change Conference
By Charles Ogallo in Durban, South Africa
United Nations Climate change Conference enters its second week in Durban, South Africa with a long list of activities awaiting the over 10 thousand delegates attending the seventeenth Conference of Parties commonly known as COP17/CMP 7
Representatives of heads of states from COP member countries have started arriving in the city ready to join the Durban talks currently facing deadlocks over proposals to extend the Kyoto Protocol, an international agreement binding countries to commit themselves to greenhouse gas emissions targets set out by the United Nation framework convention on Climate Change UNFCCC in the process of limiting climate Change and global warming.
This comes as World Bank releases its score card on Clean Development Mechanism –CDM, one of the robust mechanisms created under the Kyoto Protocol to limit gases emissions as well as encourage sustainable development and transfer of technologies between developed Nations and emerging economies.
Addressing Climate Change Journalists in Durban, World Bank’ Climate Change Practice Manager Neeraj Prasad praised CDM’s vital role terming its as catalyst of low emission investment across many developing countries.
Mr Prasad was however reserved on the primary share of CDM in the market following a significant drop in number of projects beingundertaken by the mechanism. According to World Bank, the market share has dropped from 25 percent in 2005 to 1 percent last year. CDM market value also halved within the last four years with African countries lagging behind.
MrParad also warned that CDM may see a constraint demand between 2013 and 2020 as economic gaintsscramble to dominate the market value. He challenge Africa to take an advantage of Cop17 being hosted in African Soil to increase its market share in the green investments project.
Africa only has a 5 percent share in CDM projects compared to China and India which has over 70 percent of such projects.
CDM has brought a total of 100billion Dollars of earnings to the global economy, from 360 million tonnes of carbon gases invested.
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
African Cities facing threats from rapid Urban population increase
By Eliakim Mwachoni
World population now exceeds 7 billion, and the United Nations has estimated that, by 2050, that number will reach 9 billion.
In Africa, where there are many developing countries, current population exceeds 1 billion and estimated to reach 2 billion by 2050.
Large increase in people has increased labour market, and thus African countries are now facing biggest challenges in food security, education, health and employment.
Currently the population of Africa is increasing by 2.3 percent per year, which is higher than that of 1 percent in Asia.
The increase in the number of people in countries of south Sahara is much larger than the North African country.
The results of the census conducted by the ministry of planning in Kenya shows , that Kenya's population between 1999 to 2009 has increased by 35 percent, where on average each woman bore five children, and every day 7, 150 children are born.
According to this increase, the population of Kenya will exceed 80 million by 2050.
Large numbers of Africans are young, and they will be more moderate as days move. Meanwhile, the urban population is increasing rapidly.
According to history, the expansion and globalization of cities and an increasing number of people brings progress, because it helps increase the production capacity and expand the market and demand, which would be very helpful for people in rural areas.
But an increasing number of people also poses a clear challenge. While the number of people increase faster, it increases activity, consistent with the requirements of natural resources.
Problems of food insecurity and environmental degradation continues to be negative.
The African continent has a large number of poor people, and 25 percent dependent on imported food from abroad.
Irrigated agriculture is not implemented in many places because of lack of irrigation system, so agriculture in many countries in Africa depends on the weather.
And that's just too easy to influence and natural disasters of drought and floods.
This year the countries of the Horn of Africa including Somalia, Ethiopia has been both affected by drought, and residents of the river basins of the Zambezi and Senegal are facing the threat of flooding.
To fulfill the goal of independence in food production and ensure sustainable economic development, African countries need to develop modern agriculture, improve productivity in the agricultural sector, and the capacity of governments in dealing with climate change.
They also need to have good communication and marketing of agricultural products.
Fulfilling these objectives requires a lot of money and expertise.
Meanwhile, the capacity of urban managers in the provision of housing, infrastructure and employment opportunities does not meet the needs of growing numbers of cities in the world.
This problem is complicated by a confusion over the African countries with weak economic foundation and a large increase in people.
Some of the governments of African countries has recognised the effect of increasing excess of population, and have enacted policies to achieve a balance between population growth and economic and social development.
World population now exceeds 7 billion, and the United Nations has estimated that, by 2050, that number will reach 9 billion.
In Africa, where there are many developing countries, current population exceeds 1 billion and estimated to reach 2 billion by 2050.
Large increase in people has increased labour market, and thus African countries are now facing biggest challenges in food security, education, health and employment.
Currently the population of Africa is increasing by 2.3 percent per year, which is higher than that of 1 percent in Asia.
The increase in the number of people in countries of south Sahara is much larger than the North African country.
The results of the census conducted by the ministry of planning in Kenya shows , that Kenya's population between 1999 to 2009 has increased by 35 percent, where on average each woman bore five children, and every day 7, 150 children are born.
According to this increase, the population of Kenya will exceed 80 million by 2050.
Large numbers of Africans are young, and they will be more moderate as days move. Meanwhile, the urban population is increasing rapidly.
According to history, the expansion and globalization of cities and an increasing number of people brings progress, because it helps increase the production capacity and expand the market and demand, which would be very helpful for people in rural areas.
But an increasing number of people also poses a clear challenge. While the number of people increase faster, it increases activity, consistent with the requirements of natural resources.
Problems of food insecurity and environmental degradation continues to be negative.
The African continent has a large number of poor people, and 25 percent dependent on imported food from abroad.
Irrigated agriculture is not implemented in many places because of lack of irrigation system, so agriculture in many countries in Africa depends on the weather.
And that's just too easy to influence and natural disasters of drought and floods.
This year the countries of the Horn of Africa including Somalia, Ethiopia has been both affected by drought, and residents of the river basins of the Zambezi and Senegal are facing the threat of flooding.
To fulfill the goal of independence in food production and ensure sustainable economic development, African countries need to develop modern agriculture, improve productivity in the agricultural sector, and the capacity of governments in dealing with climate change.
They also need to have good communication and marketing of agricultural products.
Fulfilling these objectives requires a lot of money and expertise.
Meanwhile, the capacity of urban managers in the provision of housing, infrastructure and employment opportunities does not meet the needs of growing numbers of cities in the world.
This problem is complicated by a confusion over the African countries with weak economic foundation and a large increase in people.
Some of the governments of African countries has recognised the effect of increasing excess of population, and have enacted policies to achieve a balance between population growth and economic and social development.
Wednesday, November 16, 2011
Faith Communities Want their Voices Heard at Climate Change Conference.
By Charles Ogallo
The faith communities in Africa have united to present a united front at COP 17 in Durban, South Africa. Faith communities feel they have a moral obligation to ask the negotiators to look beyond their own countries' selfish interests and, even though it may cost them in economic terms, to come up with a solution for the whole world.
The religious community has also vowed to ensure its voice is heard during the 17th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP17) to take place in Durban, later this Month.
African faith leaders including South Africa's Archbishop Desmond Tutu have however rallied the faith communities including Youths from around the globe through several activities calling on world governments to take a committed moral stand and reach an agreement to curb climate change, through the ‘We Have Faith Act Now for Justice’ campaign.
"We, the people of the world, have lost our moral compass, and reduce all economic decisions to maximising profit and consumption, and so as faith communities we must renew our commitment to compassion for other living beings and the principle of justice” Says the leaders.
They are hosting a serious of event, concerts, rallies and actions throughout Africa, linked together by a convoy of buses traveling from Kenya to South Africa to get the message across that COP17 must deliver a fair and ambitious climate treaty that secures the future of the continent.
The idea came from two meetings of representatives of religious organizations from across Southern Africa gathered in Lusaka, Zambia, from 5-6 May 2011, and in Nairobi, Kenya, from 7th to 8th June 2011, where discussion on the response of faith communities to climate change and their response to the UN climate change negotiations in Durban, COP 17 was reached.
South African Interfaith leaders have already signed "We Have Faith" climate petitions a heard of the Durban Conference , in which they demand action and not just talk from this year's COP17.
They called on COP17 negotiators to treat the Earth with respect, resist disorder and live in peace with each other, including embracing a legally binding climate treaty. Calling on Africa to unite, and with one voice speak out for the justice of the poor in Africa and beyond!"
COP 17, or the 17th meeting of the Conference of the Parties will be run by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in Durban, South Africa in November and December 2011. The conference aims to negotiate an international agreement on greenhouse gas emissions to prevent worsening global warming and climate change.
The United Nations Climate Change Conference, Durban 2011, brings together representatives of the world's governments, international organizations and civil society. The discussions will seek to advance, in a balanced fashion, the implementation of the Convention and the Kyoto Protocol, as well as the Bali Action Plan, agreed at COP 13 in 2007, and the Cancun Agreements, reached at COP 16 last December.
The faith communities in Africa have united to present a united front at COP 17 in Durban, South Africa. Faith communities feel they have a moral obligation to ask the negotiators to look beyond their own countries' selfish interests and, even though it may cost them in economic terms, to come up with a solution for the whole world.
The religious community has also vowed to ensure its voice is heard during the 17th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP17) to take place in Durban, later this Month.
African faith leaders including South Africa's Archbishop Desmond Tutu have however rallied the faith communities including Youths from around the globe through several activities calling on world governments to take a committed moral stand and reach an agreement to curb climate change, through the ‘We Have Faith Act Now for Justice’ campaign.
"We, the people of the world, have lost our moral compass, and reduce all economic decisions to maximising profit and consumption, and so as faith communities we must renew our commitment to compassion for other living beings and the principle of justice” Says the leaders.
They are hosting a serious of event, concerts, rallies and actions throughout Africa, linked together by a convoy of buses traveling from Kenya to South Africa to get the message across that COP17 must deliver a fair and ambitious climate treaty that secures the future of the continent.
The idea came from two meetings of representatives of religious organizations from across Southern Africa gathered in Lusaka, Zambia, from 5-6 May 2011, and in Nairobi, Kenya, from 7th to 8th June 2011, where discussion on the response of faith communities to climate change and their response to the UN climate change negotiations in Durban, COP 17 was reached.
South African Interfaith leaders have already signed "We Have Faith" climate petitions a heard of the Durban Conference , in which they demand action and not just talk from this year's COP17.
They called on COP17 negotiators to treat the Earth with respect, resist disorder and live in peace with each other, including embracing a legally binding climate treaty. Calling on Africa to unite, and with one voice speak out for the justice of the poor in Africa and beyond!"
COP 17, or the 17th meeting of the Conference of the Parties will be run by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in Durban, South Africa in November and December 2011. The conference aims to negotiate an international agreement on greenhouse gas emissions to prevent worsening global warming and climate change.
The United Nations Climate Change Conference, Durban 2011, brings together representatives of the world's governments, international organizations and civil society. The discussions will seek to advance, in a balanced fashion, the implementation of the Convention and the Kyoto Protocol, as well as the Bali Action Plan, agreed at COP 13 in 2007, and the Cancun Agreements, reached at COP 16 last December.
Tuesday, November 1, 2011
Kenya blamed over false Climate Change Projects.
By Charles Ogallo.
Transparency International launched a Global Corruption Report on Climate Change Thursday with scathing attacks specifically directed to the Kenya Government over inadequate measures in place to curb corruption in climate change projects in the country.
The attacks come as Kenya prepares to present her case over climate change fundings at the Seventeenth session of the Conference of the Parties -COP17 set to be held in Durban, South Africa later this Month.
Hundreds of representatives of the world's governments, international organizations and civil society will gather in Durban to discuss issues that seek to advance, in a balanced fashion, the implementation of the Convention and the Kyoto Protocol, as well as the Bali Action Plan, agreed at COP 13 in 2007, and the Cancun Agreements, reached at COP 16 last December.
The report titled: A Global Corruption Report: Climate Change in Kenya will be used to monitor funds meant for programs aimed at mitigating climate change effects across the globe.
It is estimated that by 2020 over 700 billion US Dollars will have been channeled to climate change initiatives.
Vice chairperson of Transparency International Rachel Mbai says that unless proper measures are put in place to curb corruption, efforts to tackle climate change will forever remain a mirage.
Speaking at the launch of the report in Nairobi, Mbai however said that it is imperative to put in place robust monitoring mechanisms to avoid fraudulent activities which might hamper climate change mitigation efforts saying that its only through tracking the monies put in these projects that the developing world can be impacted positively.
A lot of funds from the private, public and Governments has since been channeled to Climate Mitigation Programs globally even as it is predicted that by 2020 climate change mitigations investments will be at 700 billion US Dollars mark.
The Corruption Report however identified Kenya among the countries claiming credits for fictitious forest plantation projects.
The report says that a number of African governments, Kenya included , have already claimed credits for fictitious forest plantation projects.
"When responses to climate change are then partially or substantially lost to corruption, not only does the quality of projects suffer, but the result is that the ongoing effects of climate change are worst for those who can least afford it," read part of the report.
Kenya like many other countries earmarked to receive significant climate finance has serious challenges in addressing corruption and diversion of public resources.
Transparency International- Kenya said that under global climate agreements, substantial new funding from governments and multilateral agencies will be made available to finance the mitigation of climate change.
Transparency International-Kenya chapter Executive Director Samuel Kimeu said that the government must facilitate greater public participation to access information and accountability to make climate governance more effective.
Transparency International launched a Global Corruption Report on Climate Change Thursday with scathing attacks specifically directed to the Kenya Government over inadequate measures in place to curb corruption in climate change projects in the country.
The attacks come as Kenya prepares to present her case over climate change fundings at the Seventeenth session of the Conference of the Parties -COP17 set to be held in Durban, South Africa later this Month.
Hundreds of representatives of the world's governments, international organizations and civil society will gather in Durban to discuss issues that seek to advance, in a balanced fashion, the implementation of the Convention and the Kyoto Protocol, as well as the Bali Action Plan, agreed at COP 13 in 2007, and the Cancun Agreements, reached at COP 16 last December.
The report titled: A Global Corruption Report: Climate Change in Kenya will be used to monitor funds meant for programs aimed at mitigating climate change effects across the globe.
It is estimated that by 2020 over 700 billion US Dollars will have been channeled to climate change initiatives.
Vice chairperson of Transparency International Rachel Mbai says that unless proper measures are put in place to curb corruption, efforts to tackle climate change will forever remain a mirage.
Speaking at the launch of the report in Nairobi, Mbai however said that it is imperative to put in place robust monitoring mechanisms to avoid fraudulent activities which might hamper climate change mitigation efforts saying that its only through tracking the monies put in these projects that the developing world can be impacted positively.
A lot of funds from the private, public and Governments has since been channeled to Climate Mitigation Programs globally even as it is predicted that by 2020 climate change mitigations investments will be at 700 billion US Dollars mark.
The Corruption Report however identified Kenya among the countries claiming credits for fictitious forest plantation projects.
The report says that a number of African governments, Kenya included , have already claimed credits for fictitious forest plantation projects.
"When responses to climate change are then partially or substantially lost to corruption, not only does the quality of projects suffer, but the result is that the ongoing effects of climate change are worst for those who can least afford it," read part of the report.
Kenya like many other countries earmarked to receive significant climate finance has serious challenges in addressing corruption and diversion of public resources.
Transparency International- Kenya said that under global climate agreements, substantial new funding from governments and multilateral agencies will be made available to finance the mitigation of climate change.
Transparency International-Kenya chapter Executive Director Samuel Kimeu said that the government must facilitate greater public participation to access information and accountability to make climate governance more effective.
UN Warns on Current Climate Mitigation Efforts.
Kojanews.net
A new United Nations report has warned that international efforts to mitigate climate change are insufficient to meet the goal of keeping global warming to below 2degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.
Also, plans for a multi-billion dollar fund to help developing countries deal with climate change, has hit a big barrier, as countries could not agree on the design of the fund.
The report, released just a month before a major conference on the issue is held in Durban, South Africa, laid out a list of options to achieve the target.
These include more cuts in greenhouse gases from additional sectors, stronger accounting rules both within the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and through other multilateral and domestic strategies, sharing mitigation efforts based on countries’ capacities or contributions to the problem, and legally binding commitments.
The report, ‘Building the Climate Change Regime: Survey and Analysis of Approaches’, was published by the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Resources Institute (WRI), a global environmental think tank with the support of the Irish Government.
It reviewed more than 130 proposals put forward by governments, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), and academics to design a climate regime capable of delivering adequate mitigation, according to a UN release.
At the upcoming climate meeting in Durban, countries have the opportunity to turn these ideas into action and start to bridge the ambition gap needed to truly have an impact.
It is the latest in a long series of UN warnings that world is falling behind in the battle against global warming. Just last month, at a Leaders’ Dialogue on Climate Change on the eve of the high-level session of the General Assembly, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon urged governments to show greater commitment.
Scientists say that keeping to the 2-degrees Celsius limit over the course of the 21st century is crucial to avert widespread disasters, from the disappearances of low-lying island nations under rising seas and searing droughts, famines, extreme storms and flooding, to the extinction of species.
“The analysis provided in this new report offers many options that can happen either in the formal negotiations or as complementary measures elsewhere, options that can assist the more than 190 United Nations Member States move quickly to harvest the opportunities of a transition to a climate resilient, low-carbon, resource-efficient Green Economy,” UNEP Executive Director, Achim Steiner, said.
The report highlighted the need to mobilise a range of public and private sector groups at the international, national and sub-national levels, who
can contribute to climate governance, emission reductions and adaptation investment.
It stressed that the issue of legally binding commitments is central to debates ahead of Durban and noted that it is possible to build upon existing UNFCCC processes to strengthen the climate regime and raise the overall level of ambition to reach the target.
In a related development, the decision on the stalled climate change fund came on Tuesday at a meeting of an international committee tasked with designing the fund in time for governments to approve the design at next month’s UN climate change conference in Durban, South Africa.
Last year, negotiators from 194 nations agreed to create the ‘Green Climate Fund’ to channel up to US$100 billion a year by 2020 to developing countries, according to a release by the National Coordinator, Climate Change Network Nigeria (CCN Nigeria), Port Harcourt, Rivers State, Mr. Surveyor Efik.
The statement noted that developing countries had warned that control of the fund by the donor nations – and the burden of bureaucracy that entails - would limit their ability to make good use of it.
The Least Developed Countries -- 48 of the poorest nations in Africa and Asia that are particularly vulnerable to climate change – were represented on the committee by Bangladesh and Zambia, whose negotiators had, from the outset, called for a radically new approach.
They argued that national climate-change trust funds in developing nations should be able to access the Green Climate Fund directly, rather than going through a third party such as the World Bank – which entails long delays, excessive paperwork.
After six months of tense negotiations, the Least Developed Countries seemed to have succeeded in their demand for provisions for direct access to be included in the final text.
But in the committee’s final meeting on 18 October, the United States and Saudi Arabia withdrew their support for the overall design supported by all other countries because of concerns about other aspects of the text.
Trevor Manuel the former finance minister of South Africa, who co-chaired the meeting with Kjetil Lund of Norway, called the outcome "sub-optimal".
Germany also expressed frustration and disappointment, and said that the committee’s failure to agree a design “will likely result in not having the Green Climate Fund this year or the next”.
At the sixteenth Conference of Parties (COP16) to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change in Cancun in December 2010 the developed countries agreed to set a new Green Climate Fund (GCF) to channel up to US$100 billion a year starting from 2020
A new United Nations report has warned that international efforts to mitigate climate change are insufficient to meet the goal of keeping global warming to below 2degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.
Also, plans for a multi-billion dollar fund to help developing countries deal with climate change, has hit a big barrier, as countries could not agree on the design of the fund.
The report, released just a month before a major conference on the issue is held in Durban, South Africa, laid out a list of options to achieve the target.
These include more cuts in greenhouse gases from additional sectors, stronger accounting rules both within the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and through other multilateral and domestic strategies, sharing mitigation efforts based on countries’ capacities or contributions to the problem, and legally binding commitments.
The report, ‘Building the Climate Change Regime: Survey and Analysis of Approaches’, was published by the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Resources Institute (WRI), a global environmental think tank with the support of the Irish Government.
It reviewed more than 130 proposals put forward by governments, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), and academics to design a climate regime capable of delivering adequate mitigation, according to a UN release.
At the upcoming climate meeting in Durban, countries have the opportunity to turn these ideas into action and start to bridge the ambition gap needed to truly have an impact.
It is the latest in a long series of UN warnings that world is falling behind in the battle against global warming. Just last month, at a Leaders’ Dialogue on Climate Change on the eve of the high-level session of the General Assembly, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon urged governments to show greater commitment.
Scientists say that keeping to the 2-degrees Celsius limit over the course of the 21st century is crucial to avert widespread disasters, from the disappearances of low-lying island nations under rising seas and searing droughts, famines, extreme storms and flooding, to the extinction of species.
“The analysis provided in this new report offers many options that can happen either in the formal negotiations or as complementary measures elsewhere, options that can assist the more than 190 United Nations Member States move quickly to harvest the opportunities of a transition to a climate resilient, low-carbon, resource-efficient Green Economy,” UNEP Executive Director, Achim Steiner, said.
The report highlighted the need to mobilise a range of public and private sector groups at the international, national and sub-national levels, who
can contribute to climate governance, emission reductions and adaptation investment.
It stressed that the issue of legally binding commitments is central to debates ahead of Durban and noted that it is possible to build upon existing UNFCCC processes to strengthen the climate regime and raise the overall level of ambition to reach the target.
In a related development, the decision on the stalled climate change fund came on Tuesday at a meeting of an international committee tasked with designing the fund in time for governments to approve the design at next month’s UN climate change conference in Durban, South Africa.
Last year, negotiators from 194 nations agreed to create the ‘Green Climate Fund’ to channel up to US$100 billion a year by 2020 to developing countries, according to a release by the National Coordinator, Climate Change Network Nigeria (CCN Nigeria), Port Harcourt, Rivers State, Mr. Surveyor Efik.
The statement noted that developing countries had warned that control of the fund by the donor nations – and the burden of bureaucracy that entails - would limit their ability to make good use of it.
The Least Developed Countries -- 48 of the poorest nations in Africa and Asia that are particularly vulnerable to climate change – were represented on the committee by Bangladesh and Zambia, whose negotiators had, from the outset, called for a radically new approach.
They argued that national climate-change trust funds in developing nations should be able to access the Green Climate Fund directly, rather than going through a third party such as the World Bank – which entails long delays, excessive paperwork.
After six months of tense negotiations, the Least Developed Countries seemed to have succeeded in their demand for provisions for direct access to be included in the final text.
But in the committee’s final meeting on 18 October, the United States and Saudi Arabia withdrew their support for the overall design supported by all other countries because of concerns about other aspects of the text.
Trevor Manuel the former finance minister of South Africa, who co-chaired the meeting with Kjetil Lund of Norway, called the outcome "sub-optimal".
Germany also expressed frustration and disappointment, and said that the committee’s failure to agree a design “will likely result in not having the Green Climate Fund this year or the next”.
At the sixteenth Conference of Parties (COP16) to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change in Cancun in December 2010 the developed countries agreed to set a new Green Climate Fund (GCF) to channel up to US$100 billion a year starting from 2020
Rethinking climate change as a security threat.
By Corinne Schoch (IIED)
Over the past five years, climate change has moved from being a purely environment and development issue to being a matter of national and international security.
For years we have understood that civil wars generally break out as a result of political instability, a poor national economy, weakened infrastructures and, in the case of African states, the collapse of the Cold War.
Now it seems that environmental shocks can be added to that list - journalists, academics, policymakers, security institutions and heads of states repeatedly tell us that the impacts of climate change pose a grave security threat.
As a result, the idea that prolonged heat waves, rising sea levels, more variable climates and more frequent disasters such as cyclones or droughts will result in more civil conflicts has taken firm root in the public’s imagination. The popular belief that climate change will soon spark ‘water wars’ between water-scarce regions and countries is just one example.
But while the notion that climate change could lead to conflict is widespread, it is based on very little evidence and questionable sources.
The debate tends to be characterised by conjecture, extrapolations and a limited set of facts that make assumptions about how the climate will change in years to come, and how people will respond - for example, that increased climate variability automatically causes inter- and intrastate migration, or that a drop in rainfall is what led to the Darfur crisis. The links between what causes conflict have been simplified.
The truth is that there are, as yet, no concrete examples of violent conflicts induced by climate change, and a limited understanding of what the future holds.
Take the example of water wars: Many researchers argue that it is not climate change that is to blame, but rather it is issues such as poor governance of water resources that are the driving factor behind such conflicts.
Just how useful is it to reframe the climate change debate as a security issue?
A seat at the table
The debate on links between climate change, diminishing resources, violent conflict and security is not new but it wasn’t until the fall of the Soviet Union that discussions around them really became possible.
Up until the early 1990s, security agendas on both sides of the Atlantic were dominated by measures to protect the state and support military institutions. But in the aftermath of the Cold War, the new political landscape demanded a broader, wider approach to the term ‘security’.
A 1994 report by the UN Development Programme articulated this need and gave birth to the term ‘human security’, shifting the emphasis away from a state-centric approach towards one that focuses on securing individual people.
This created the space to incorporate ‘non-traditional’ threats - such as the environment, health and human rights - into the security agenda, alongside longstanding issues of military defence and state interests. In this way, climate change was ‘securitised’.
Attaching a security label to climate change has certain advantages. For a start, it gives the state or government power over the issue and can end up mobilising vast amounts of political and financial resources to address it.
But perhaps the biggest ‘win’ in securitising climate change has been raising awareness of this environmental issue and capturing the attention of Northern countries. There is little doubt that climate change is now firmly in the sights of decision makers at all levels - in a way that would have been much harder to achieve with an environment and development framework alone.
Prominent leaders, including Barack Obama, Al Gore, Nicolas Sarkozy and Ban Ki-moon, have all cited climate change as an international security threat.
Within the global security community, climate change has also been given a seat at the table - it was discussed within the UN Security Council, both in 2007 and 2011. On both occasions the push to include climate change under the council’s remit met with fierce opposition from China, Russia and much of the developing world.
At what cost?
Despite the reticence from some countries, the world has embarked upon a path that will be difficult to turn back on.
It is true that securitisation can, in theory, be ‘reversed’. But in practice, because security institutions such as NATO and others have begun actively engaging in the debate, new political power dynamics are taking shape that will make it hard to simply take climate change off the security agenda.
By turning climate change into a security issue, advocates may have got the attention of governments, but the question we must ask is: at what cost?
Climate change is filled with uncertainty. As with other highly politicised debates, uncertainty tends to breed anxiety, which could lead to fear and result in a set of policies that merely mirror sensationalist academic and media headlines.
The military of Northern countries argue that the world cannot afford to wait for 100 percent certainty before it acts to diminish the climate change security threat. But what form that action should take is already being discussed in many forums, such as the annual UN climate negotiations.
Bypassing these to bring enforceable action through the UN Security Council would leave many of the most climate-vulnerable countries, who are not part of the council, out of the decision-making process.
Focus on people
There are other risks associated with turning climate change into a security issue, particularly when it comes to addressing the full spectrum of challenges posed by climate change.
Deciding action based on the engagement of a limited pool of security institutions risks sidelining or missing out completely issues such as adaptation, mitigation, development, economic growth, equity, justice and resilience, which do not figure as priorities on the security agenda but which are integral to addressing climate change.
In today’s world - filled with talk about ‘human-induced climate change’, ‘compensation’, ‘responsibility’ and ‘global justice’ - it is also important to ask ourselves to what extent the reframed climate-security debate is tackling the real drivers of climate change. And we must similarly ask ourselves whose interests we are serving.
The impacts of climate change will be felt first and foremost by some of the most vulnerable communities across the globe. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), for example, warns that Africa is one of the most vulnerable continents to climate change. Agricultural yields could fall by up to 50 percent by 2050 in some countries and, by 2020, up to 250 million people are projected to face increased water stress due to climate change.
Will steps to involve security institutions and the military protect the interests of the most vulnerable - or merely the interests of the powerful? To what extent are we prepared to devolve responsibilities of a humanitarian or developmental nature to these new actors?
Ensuring that the most vulnerable are protected is not just a moral obligation but is a question of justice and equity. There is surely a great risk that the human security needs of the most vulnerable could be undermined.
NEXT STEPS
Perhaps the first step in moving forward must be to gather more evidence about the links between climate change and violent conflict. Stepping up the research in this area would enable policymakers, heads of state and security institutions to garner a much more accurate understanding of the issues at hand and allow for more informed decision making.
There is also a clear need to reshape the climate change and security debate to focus on protecting not ourselves but those most vulnerable to future impacts.
Climate change is not the first issue to be linked to security: issues such as HIV/AIDS and migration have both also been cast as a security matter in the past.
Reflecting on these experiences - teasing out what worked, where and why, the impacts on different groups involved, the political ramifications - could provide important lessons for ensuring the success of securitising climate change.
Corinne Schoch is a research in the International Institute for Environment and Development’s climate change group.
Over the past five years, climate change has moved from being a purely environment and development issue to being a matter of national and international security.
For years we have understood that civil wars generally break out as a result of political instability, a poor national economy, weakened infrastructures and, in the case of African states, the collapse of the Cold War.
Now it seems that environmental shocks can be added to that list - journalists, academics, policymakers, security institutions and heads of states repeatedly tell us that the impacts of climate change pose a grave security threat.
As a result, the idea that prolonged heat waves, rising sea levels, more variable climates and more frequent disasters such as cyclones or droughts will result in more civil conflicts has taken firm root in the public’s imagination. The popular belief that climate change will soon spark ‘water wars’ between water-scarce regions and countries is just one example.
But while the notion that climate change could lead to conflict is widespread, it is based on very little evidence and questionable sources.
The debate tends to be characterised by conjecture, extrapolations and a limited set of facts that make assumptions about how the climate will change in years to come, and how people will respond - for example, that increased climate variability automatically causes inter- and intrastate migration, or that a drop in rainfall is what led to the Darfur crisis. The links between what causes conflict have been simplified.
The truth is that there are, as yet, no concrete examples of violent conflicts induced by climate change, and a limited understanding of what the future holds.
Take the example of water wars: Many researchers argue that it is not climate change that is to blame, but rather it is issues such as poor governance of water resources that are the driving factor behind such conflicts.
Just how useful is it to reframe the climate change debate as a security issue?
A seat at the table
The debate on links between climate change, diminishing resources, violent conflict and security is not new but it wasn’t until the fall of the Soviet Union that discussions around them really became possible.
Up until the early 1990s, security agendas on both sides of the Atlantic were dominated by measures to protect the state and support military institutions. But in the aftermath of the Cold War, the new political landscape demanded a broader, wider approach to the term ‘security’.
A 1994 report by the UN Development Programme articulated this need and gave birth to the term ‘human security’, shifting the emphasis away from a state-centric approach towards one that focuses on securing individual people.
This created the space to incorporate ‘non-traditional’ threats - such as the environment, health and human rights - into the security agenda, alongside longstanding issues of military defence and state interests. In this way, climate change was ‘securitised’.
Attaching a security label to climate change has certain advantages. For a start, it gives the state or government power over the issue and can end up mobilising vast amounts of political and financial resources to address it.
But perhaps the biggest ‘win’ in securitising climate change has been raising awareness of this environmental issue and capturing the attention of Northern countries. There is little doubt that climate change is now firmly in the sights of decision makers at all levels - in a way that would have been much harder to achieve with an environment and development framework alone.
Prominent leaders, including Barack Obama, Al Gore, Nicolas Sarkozy and Ban Ki-moon, have all cited climate change as an international security threat.
Within the global security community, climate change has also been given a seat at the table - it was discussed within the UN Security Council, both in 2007 and 2011. On both occasions the push to include climate change under the council’s remit met with fierce opposition from China, Russia and much of the developing world.
At what cost?
Despite the reticence from some countries, the world has embarked upon a path that will be difficult to turn back on.
It is true that securitisation can, in theory, be ‘reversed’. But in practice, because security institutions such as NATO and others have begun actively engaging in the debate, new political power dynamics are taking shape that will make it hard to simply take climate change off the security agenda.
By turning climate change into a security issue, advocates may have got the attention of governments, but the question we must ask is: at what cost?
Climate change is filled with uncertainty. As with other highly politicised debates, uncertainty tends to breed anxiety, which could lead to fear and result in a set of policies that merely mirror sensationalist academic and media headlines.
The military of Northern countries argue that the world cannot afford to wait for 100 percent certainty before it acts to diminish the climate change security threat. But what form that action should take is already being discussed in many forums, such as the annual UN climate negotiations.
Bypassing these to bring enforceable action through the UN Security Council would leave many of the most climate-vulnerable countries, who are not part of the council, out of the decision-making process.
Focus on people
There are other risks associated with turning climate change into a security issue, particularly when it comes to addressing the full spectrum of challenges posed by climate change.
Deciding action based on the engagement of a limited pool of security institutions risks sidelining or missing out completely issues such as adaptation, mitigation, development, economic growth, equity, justice and resilience, which do not figure as priorities on the security agenda but which are integral to addressing climate change.
In today’s world - filled with talk about ‘human-induced climate change’, ‘compensation’, ‘responsibility’ and ‘global justice’ - it is also important to ask ourselves to what extent the reframed climate-security debate is tackling the real drivers of climate change. And we must similarly ask ourselves whose interests we are serving.
The impacts of climate change will be felt first and foremost by some of the most vulnerable communities across the globe. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), for example, warns that Africa is one of the most vulnerable continents to climate change. Agricultural yields could fall by up to 50 percent by 2050 in some countries and, by 2020, up to 250 million people are projected to face increased water stress due to climate change.
Will steps to involve security institutions and the military protect the interests of the most vulnerable - or merely the interests of the powerful? To what extent are we prepared to devolve responsibilities of a humanitarian or developmental nature to these new actors?
Ensuring that the most vulnerable are protected is not just a moral obligation but is a question of justice and equity. There is surely a great risk that the human security needs of the most vulnerable could be undermined.
NEXT STEPS
Perhaps the first step in moving forward must be to gather more evidence about the links between climate change and violent conflict. Stepping up the research in this area would enable policymakers, heads of state and security institutions to garner a much more accurate understanding of the issues at hand and allow for more informed decision making.
There is also a clear need to reshape the climate change and security debate to focus on protecting not ourselves but those most vulnerable to future impacts.
Climate change is not the first issue to be linked to security: issues such as HIV/AIDS and migration have both also been cast as a security matter in the past.
Reflecting on these experiences - teasing out what worked, where and why, the impacts on different groups involved, the political ramifications - could provide important lessons for ensuring the success of securitising climate change.
Corinne Schoch is a research in the International Institute for Environment and Development’s climate change group.
Friday, July 15, 2011
CDM-Projects verses impacts of Climate Change in Kenya
By Charles Ogallo
Kenya has been taking Clean Development Mechanism -CDM projects seriously since Kyoto Protocol came into being despite indications that she was lagging behind in advancing to the category of nations with a satisfactory or good climate rating.
Kenya ratified the Kyoto protocol in 2005, paving the way for the country to engage with developed countries in CDM projects.
This comes as environmental experts list the country among the extremely vulnerable to Climate Change.
Stockholm Environment institute study report of 2009 on Kenya indicates that existing climate variability has significant economic cost on the country and that further climate change may lead to additional and potentially very large economic costs.
These include potential threats to coastal zones (sea-level rise), health burdens, energy demand, Infrastructure, water resources, agriculture and loss of ecosystem services.
Kenya’s economy heavily relies on Climate Vulnerable sectors, such as agriculture and tourism, and is among countries with experience in projects relevant to climate change in Africa.
“Emissions of greenhouse gases could double by the year 2030. Moreover, plans across the economy could ‘lock-in’ Kenya into a higher emission pathway” According to the study.
Kenya currently has relatively low emissions of greenhouse gases and has already introduced a range of low carbon options across many sectors. These include renewable energy in the electricity sector, more efficient use of biomass and sustainable land use management.
However, it’s estimated that energy related emission savings of 22% could be achieved by 2020.
Based on principles of the Kyoto Protocol, CDM Projects must result in demonstrable reduction in Green House Gases, sustainable development and new profit making opportunities for developing countries companies.
The country has quite a substantial number of projects in the pipeline, an indication of high priority the Kenya Government has attached to CDM, which is seen as an instrument for mobilizing investments in the country and advancing the development of new industrial projects.
Current CDM projects stem largely from the energy sector, and are undertaken by Kenya Electricity Generating Co. (KenGen), a public company mandated by the government to oversee general energy production in the country.
According to KenGen, more CDM projects were in preparation for which Letters of Intent (LoI) have been signed by the World Bank to purchase certified emission reductions.
Most of KenGen's ongoing geothermal, hydropower and combined cycle projects could qualify under the CDM since they generate less or no carbon dioxide at all in comparison to alternative fossil fuelled plants.
”KenGen’s interest in CDM started in 2000 when the company wrote to the UNFCC, through the Ministry of Environment seeking support in obtaining benefits from CDM for some of the projects. However, not much progress was made” says KenGen’s Chief Executive officer Engineer Eddy Njoroge.
Njoroge disclosed that the Company has six selected CDM projects, among them are Eburru Geothermal Project, Olkaria II Geothermal Expansion Project, Redevelopment of Tana Power Station Project, Optimisation of Kiambere Power Project, Kipevu Combined Cycle Power Project and Sondu Miriu Power Project.
These projects are anticipated to assist in the displacement of approximately 0.66 million tones of CO2 equivalent annually.
They are expected also to generate annual cash flow revenue to KenGen in the range of Kshs million 500 per annum up to the year 2012.
KenGen has already signed a Letter of Intent with the World Bank for sale of the emissions credits.
The Bank is expected to purchase one Certified Emission Reduction (CER) at price of US$ 10.5 for Olkaria II geothermal expansion, 13.9 US $ for Kiambere Optimisation, Redevelopment of Tana Power station and Eburru geothermal and 12.9 US $ Kipevu Combined Cycle and Sondu Miriu.
Most of these projects are eligible to receive a further 1 US $ per one tonne of CO2 from the carbon fund as direct benefits to the communities in surrounding areas where they are located.
“ Kipevu Geothermal Power project alone is expected to have an annual abatement of 122,650 tons of carbon dioxide equivalent, which when sold as Certified Emission Reductions (CERs) will earn the company annual revenues of about US$ 1 million” added Njoroge.
Kipevu combined cycle is an efficiency improvement project which qualifies to earn Emission Reduction credits under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) arrangement of the Kyoto Protocol.
The €40 million (Shs 3.6 billion) thermal plant has been upgraded by a capacity of 30 megawatts, from 60 –90 megawatts, through external funding from French Development Agency.
Kenya has been taking Clean Development Mechanism -CDM projects seriously since Kyoto Protocol came into being despite indications that she was lagging behind in advancing to the category of nations with a satisfactory or good climate rating.
Kenya ratified the Kyoto protocol in 2005, paving the way for the country to engage with developed countries in CDM projects.
This comes as environmental experts list the country among the extremely vulnerable to Climate Change.
Stockholm Environment institute study report of 2009 on Kenya indicates that existing climate variability has significant economic cost on the country and that further climate change may lead to additional and potentially very large economic costs.
These include potential threats to coastal zones (sea-level rise), health burdens, energy demand, Infrastructure, water resources, agriculture and loss of ecosystem services.
Kenya’s economy heavily relies on Climate Vulnerable sectors, such as agriculture and tourism, and is among countries with experience in projects relevant to climate change in Africa.
“Emissions of greenhouse gases could double by the year 2030. Moreover, plans across the economy could ‘lock-in’ Kenya into a higher emission pathway” According to the study.
Kenya currently has relatively low emissions of greenhouse gases and has already introduced a range of low carbon options across many sectors. These include renewable energy in the electricity sector, more efficient use of biomass and sustainable land use management.
However, it’s estimated that energy related emission savings of 22% could be achieved by 2020.
Based on principles of the Kyoto Protocol, CDM Projects must result in demonstrable reduction in Green House Gases, sustainable development and new profit making opportunities for developing countries companies.
The country has quite a substantial number of projects in the pipeline, an indication of high priority the Kenya Government has attached to CDM, which is seen as an instrument for mobilizing investments in the country and advancing the development of new industrial projects.
Current CDM projects stem largely from the energy sector, and are undertaken by Kenya Electricity Generating Co. (KenGen), a public company mandated by the government to oversee general energy production in the country.
According to KenGen, more CDM projects were in preparation for which Letters of Intent (LoI) have been signed by the World Bank to purchase certified emission reductions.
Most of KenGen's ongoing geothermal, hydropower and combined cycle projects could qualify under the CDM since they generate less or no carbon dioxide at all in comparison to alternative fossil fuelled plants.
”KenGen’s interest in CDM started in 2000 when the company wrote to the UNFCC, through the Ministry of Environment seeking support in obtaining benefits from CDM for some of the projects. However, not much progress was made” says KenGen’s Chief Executive officer Engineer Eddy Njoroge.
Njoroge disclosed that the Company has six selected CDM projects, among them are Eburru Geothermal Project, Olkaria II Geothermal Expansion Project, Redevelopment of Tana Power Station Project, Optimisation of Kiambere Power Project, Kipevu Combined Cycle Power Project and Sondu Miriu Power Project.
These projects are anticipated to assist in the displacement of approximately 0.66 million tones of CO2 equivalent annually.
They are expected also to generate annual cash flow revenue to KenGen in the range of Kshs million 500 per annum up to the year 2012.
KenGen has already signed a Letter of Intent with the World Bank for sale of the emissions credits.
The Bank is expected to purchase one Certified Emission Reduction (CER) at price of US$ 10.5 for Olkaria II geothermal expansion, 13.9 US $ for Kiambere Optimisation, Redevelopment of Tana Power station and Eburru geothermal and 12.9 US $ Kipevu Combined Cycle and Sondu Miriu.
Most of these projects are eligible to receive a further 1 US $ per one tonne of CO2 from the carbon fund as direct benefits to the communities in surrounding areas where they are located.
“ Kipevu Geothermal Power project alone is expected to have an annual abatement of 122,650 tons of carbon dioxide equivalent, which when sold as Certified Emission Reductions (CERs) will earn the company annual revenues of about US$ 1 million” added Njoroge.
Kipevu combined cycle is an efficiency improvement project which qualifies to earn Emission Reduction credits under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) arrangement of the Kyoto Protocol.
The €40 million (Shs 3.6 billion) thermal plant has been upgraded by a capacity of 30 megawatts, from 60 –90 megawatts, through external funding from French Development Agency.
Climate Change to Cost Kenya heavily- a Key Finding Reveals.
By Charles Ogallo.
An independent study has revealed that Kenya was in-adequately adapted to deal with existing climate risks as the country faces heavy Costs from effects of climate change.
The immediate needs for building adaptive capacity and starting to enhance Climate Change resilience are estimated may cost Kenya between $100 – 150 million annually by next year -2012.
Costs include potential threats to coastal zones (sea-level rise), health burdens, energy demand, Infrastructure, water resources, agriculture and loss of ecosystem services.
According to the Stockholm Environment Institute report, a much higher value of $500 million/year or more is warranted if the categories of social protection and accelerated Development to address the current adaptation needs are included.
The above categories are associated with current climate variability – such as the existing vulnerability to droughts and floods.
However, investment in these areas provides greater resilience for future change and they are essential in reducing future impacts.
The report estimated that costs of adaptation may rise in future years, with aggregated estimates providing a possible range, with implications for the source and level of finance required.
Estimates of medium-term costs to address future climate change are typically of the order of $250 – 1000 million per year for Kenya by 2030, focused on enhancing climate resilience. Noted that the investment in 2030 builds resilience for future years when potentially more severe climate signals occur, according to the report.
However, higher values (a total of up to kshs 160 billion ($2000million) per year are plausible if continued social protection and accelerated development are also included, noting that these are primarily development activities.
According to the report, adaptation could reduce the economic costs of climate change but it has a cost with a warning that the costs of adaptation was still emerging. A number of categories of adaptation have been identified that relate to the balance between development and climate change.
The cost of adaptation by 2030 is likely to be in the range of $1 to 2 billion per year, an equivalent to kshs 160 billion, against the climate change cost of $500 annually.
.
The study has also prioritized early adaptation across the sectors. Potentially very large benefit in reducing present and future damages.
Periodic floods and droughts which are extreme events have already caused major socio-economic impacts and reduce economic growth in the country. Recent major droughts occurred in 1998-2000, 2004/05 and in 2009. Major floods occurred in 1997/98 and 2006.
The economic costs of droughts affect the whole economy. The 1998-2000 event was estimated to have economic costs of $2.8 billion from the loss of crops and livestock, forest fires, damage to fisheries, reduced hydro-power generation, reduced industrial production and reduced water supply.
The 2004 and 2005 droughts affected millions of people and the recent 2009/10 drought has led to major economic costs from restrictions on water and energy.
The study has also undertaken bottom-up assessments of the impacts and economic costs of climate change for a number of sectors, using climate and socio-economic projections.
According to the study dubbed the Economics of climate Change in Kenya, Kenya already has a complex existing climate, with wide variations across the country and very strong seasonality.
It has two wet seasons and strong patterns of climate variability and extremes, not least due to the periodic effects from ENSO: El Niño and La Niña, which are associated with extreme rainfall and flooding and droughts respectively.
The projections of climate change on temperature indicate future increases in mean annual temperature (average monthly temperatures) of broadly 1 to 3.5 ºC over the range of models by the 2050s (2046 -2065).
Coastal Flooding.
The study reveals that there will also be increases in sea level which would have advanced effects on the Kenyan coast.
It has considered the range of projections for sea level rise from the IPCC, plus an additional scenario based on some of the more recent literature, which reports potentially higher values.
The analysis shows that coastal flooding from sea level rise is estimated to affect 10,000 to 86,000 people a year by 2030 (across the scenarios), as well as leading to coastal wetland loss and coastal erosion.
The associated economic costs in 2030 are estimated to be $7 – 58 million per year (current prices, no discounting) including flooding. By 2050, these costs could increase to $31 - 313 million per year.
Be Ready and Act Now!
However, the report submitted in advance of COP15 recommended that the Kenya Government should adequately adapt to the climate risks by fully undertaking a deeper analysis to further explore coastal risks, health burdens, agriculture, water/flood risks, energy supply and demand and ecosystem services.
This would need a multi-stakeholder assessment of adaptation pathways at different scales, with estimates of costs, focused on short- and medium priorities that are most relevant for policy.
For both adaptation and mitigation, analysis of the costs, including government, private sector and individuals would provide both adaptation and low carbon costs in detail and as part of an investment and financial flow analysis (by sector). Matching the costs against the wide range of potential finance is a prerequisite for a viable investment plan.
Taken together, the report predicts that this analysis could form the basis of an expanded climate strategy that links national policy to sectoral objectives and targets, with effective mechanisms for implementation, monitoring, reporting and verification.
There is also a need for regional collaboration and co-operation across the areas of low carbon growth and adaptation, to benefit from economies of scale and to enhance regional resilience. These steps would provide national action on a low-carbon, climate resilience investment plan and would establish Kenya as an international leader, with ‘early mover advantage’ in negotiations and securing finance.
An independent study has revealed that Kenya was in-adequately adapted to deal with existing climate risks as the country faces heavy Costs from effects of climate change.
The immediate needs for building adaptive capacity and starting to enhance Climate Change resilience are estimated may cost Kenya between $100 – 150 million annually by next year -2012.
Costs include potential threats to coastal zones (sea-level rise), health burdens, energy demand, Infrastructure, water resources, agriculture and loss of ecosystem services.
According to the Stockholm Environment Institute report, a much higher value of $500 million/year or more is warranted if the categories of social protection and accelerated Development to address the current adaptation needs are included.
The above categories are associated with current climate variability – such as the existing vulnerability to droughts and floods.
However, investment in these areas provides greater resilience for future change and they are essential in reducing future impacts.
The report estimated that costs of adaptation may rise in future years, with aggregated estimates providing a possible range, with implications for the source and level of finance required.
Estimates of medium-term costs to address future climate change are typically of the order of $250 – 1000 million per year for Kenya by 2030, focused on enhancing climate resilience. Noted that the investment in 2030 builds resilience for future years when potentially more severe climate signals occur, according to the report.
However, higher values (a total of up to kshs 160 billion ($2000million) per year are plausible if continued social protection and accelerated development are also included, noting that these are primarily development activities.
According to the report, adaptation could reduce the economic costs of climate change but it has a cost with a warning that the costs of adaptation was still emerging. A number of categories of adaptation have been identified that relate to the balance between development and climate change.
The cost of adaptation by 2030 is likely to be in the range of $1 to 2 billion per year, an equivalent to kshs 160 billion, against the climate change cost of $500 annually.
.
The study has also prioritized early adaptation across the sectors. Potentially very large benefit in reducing present and future damages.
Periodic floods and droughts which are extreme events have already caused major socio-economic impacts and reduce economic growth in the country. Recent major droughts occurred in 1998-2000, 2004/05 and in 2009. Major floods occurred in 1997/98 and 2006.
The economic costs of droughts affect the whole economy. The 1998-2000 event was estimated to have economic costs of $2.8 billion from the loss of crops and livestock, forest fires, damage to fisheries, reduced hydro-power generation, reduced industrial production and reduced water supply.
The 2004 and 2005 droughts affected millions of people and the recent 2009/10 drought has led to major economic costs from restrictions on water and energy.
The study has also undertaken bottom-up assessments of the impacts and economic costs of climate change for a number of sectors, using climate and socio-economic projections.
According to the study dubbed the Economics of climate Change in Kenya, Kenya already has a complex existing climate, with wide variations across the country and very strong seasonality.
It has two wet seasons and strong patterns of climate variability and extremes, not least due to the periodic effects from ENSO: El Niño and La Niña, which are associated with extreme rainfall and flooding and droughts respectively.
The projections of climate change on temperature indicate future increases in mean annual temperature (average monthly temperatures) of broadly 1 to 3.5 ºC over the range of models by the 2050s (2046 -2065).
Coastal Flooding.
The study reveals that there will also be increases in sea level which would have advanced effects on the Kenyan coast.
It has considered the range of projections for sea level rise from the IPCC, plus an additional scenario based on some of the more recent literature, which reports potentially higher values.
The analysis shows that coastal flooding from sea level rise is estimated to affect 10,000 to 86,000 people a year by 2030 (across the scenarios), as well as leading to coastal wetland loss and coastal erosion.
The associated economic costs in 2030 are estimated to be $7 – 58 million per year (current prices, no discounting) including flooding. By 2050, these costs could increase to $31 - 313 million per year.
Be Ready and Act Now!
However, the report submitted in advance of COP15 recommended that the Kenya Government should adequately adapt to the climate risks by fully undertaking a deeper analysis to further explore coastal risks, health burdens, agriculture, water/flood risks, energy supply and demand and ecosystem services.
This would need a multi-stakeholder assessment of adaptation pathways at different scales, with estimates of costs, focused on short- and medium priorities that are most relevant for policy.
For both adaptation and mitigation, analysis of the costs, including government, private sector and individuals would provide both adaptation and low carbon costs in detail and as part of an investment and financial flow analysis (by sector). Matching the costs against the wide range of potential finance is a prerequisite for a viable investment plan.
Taken together, the report predicts that this analysis could form the basis of an expanded climate strategy that links national policy to sectoral objectives and targets, with effective mechanisms for implementation, monitoring, reporting and verification.
There is also a need for regional collaboration and co-operation across the areas of low carbon growth and adaptation, to benefit from economies of scale and to enhance regional resilience. These steps would provide national action on a low-carbon, climate resilience investment plan and would establish Kenya as an international leader, with ‘early mover advantage’ in negotiations and securing finance.
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
Kenya’s historical Fort Jesus now joins the World Heritage list.
By Charles Ogallo.
The UNESCO’s World Heritage committee has finally inscribed Fort Jesus National Monument into the World Heritage sites list after a spirited campaign from Kenya.
The fort formally received recognition from the World body in its 35th Session held recently in Paris, France, for its outstanding Universal Value.
This will be the sixth Kenyan heritage site to make into the UNESCO list. The other sites are the Mijikenda Sacred Kaya Forests, Lamu Island, Lake Turkana National Parks, Mt Kenya National Parks and the lakes systems of the Rift Valley.
The historical Fort Jesus widely known for its visible reminder of the once powerful Portuguese presence in the Kenyan Coast, but by far most impressive is the only Portuguese fort in the coastal city of Mombasa.
Fort Jesus , Mombasa has been an exceptional symbol of the interchange of cultural values and influences between and among people of African , Arabs, Asians , Turkish , Persians and European origins whose lives have been touched by the presence and role of this imposing structure.
The fort was built by the Portuguese at the end of the 16th century and used by them for over 100 years, and bears testimony of the first successful attempt by Western civilization to control the Indian Ocean trade routes which had remained under Eastern influence over several millennia.
According to the Museum chief Curator Jimbi Katana ,the fort in its over 400 years of existence has remained unchanged in its original design and layout throughout the various periods of occupation and use , thus maintaining its integrity and originality.
Gazetted as a national monument by Kenya Government under the National Museums and Heritage Act and managed by the National Museums of Kenya, the custodian of the country’s heritages, Fort Jesus stands guard at the entrance of the dhow harbor overlooking the Mombasa City’s Old Town as the most complete and the finest example of a 16th century fortress to survive in the Eastern part of Africa.
Before the World Heritage committee could inscribe the Fort into the list of the World Heritage sites, the Kenyan delegations led by her permanent Secretary, Ministry of state for National Heritage and Culture Dr Jacob Ole Marion is said to had put a strong defence in its favor.
In his statement later, the Kenyan Permanent Secretary said the listing of Fort Jesus will bring sharp focus , both at the national and international levels, the conservation status of the fort.
He added that the inscription will allow for the ownership and greater participation by the local communities around Mombasa Old Town and the entire city.
The area residents recieved the news of insciption with joy and expectations. A number of them said they expect the fort to attract many tourists across the globe to visit the heritage site and in return leave them with direct and indirect earnings.
"This is our Fort, if many Wazungus (Tourists)are going to come here, we are going to benefit alot. I shall sell alot of my wares to them" Said Mohamed, a hawker at Fort said.
The UNESCO’s World Heritage committee has finally inscribed Fort Jesus National Monument into the World Heritage sites list after a spirited campaign from Kenya.
The fort formally received recognition from the World body in its 35th Session held recently in Paris, France, for its outstanding Universal Value.
This will be the sixth Kenyan heritage site to make into the UNESCO list. The other sites are the Mijikenda Sacred Kaya Forests, Lamu Island, Lake Turkana National Parks, Mt Kenya National Parks and the lakes systems of the Rift Valley.
The historical Fort Jesus widely known for its visible reminder of the once powerful Portuguese presence in the Kenyan Coast, but by far most impressive is the only Portuguese fort in the coastal city of Mombasa.
Fort Jesus , Mombasa has been an exceptional symbol of the interchange of cultural values and influences between and among people of African , Arabs, Asians , Turkish , Persians and European origins whose lives have been touched by the presence and role of this imposing structure.
The fort was built by the Portuguese at the end of the 16th century and used by them for over 100 years, and bears testimony of the first successful attempt by Western civilization to control the Indian Ocean trade routes which had remained under Eastern influence over several millennia.
According to the Museum chief Curator Jimbi Katana ,the fort in its over 400 years of existence has remained unchanged in its original design and layout throughout the various periods of occupation and use , thus maintaining its integrity and originality.
Gazetted as a national monument by Kenya Government under the National Museums and Heritage Act and managed by the National Museums of Kenya, the custodian of the country’s heritages, Fort Jesus stands guard at the entrance of the dhow harbor overlooking the Mombasa City’s Old Town as the most complete and the finest example of a 16th century fortress to survive in the Eastern part of Africa.
Before the World Heritage committee could inscribe the Fort into the list of the World Heritage sites, the Kenyan delegations led by her permanent Secretary, Ministry of state for National Heritage and Culture Dr Jacob Ole Marion is said to had put a strong defence in its favor.
In his statement later, the Kenyan Permanent Secretary said the listing of Fort Jesus will bring sharp focus , both at the national and international levels, the conservation status of the fort.
He added that the inscription will allow for the ownership and greater participation by the local communities around Mombasa Old Town and the entire city.
The area residents recieved the news of insciption with joy and expectations. A number of them said they expect the fort to attract many tourists across the globe to visit the heritage site and in return leave them with direct and indirect earnings.
"This is our Fort, if many Wazungus (Tourists)are going to come here, we are going to benefit alot. I shall sell alot of my wares to them" Said Mohamed, a hawker at Fort said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
