No abstract

Climate mitigation credits have mobilized considerable resources for projects in developing countries, but similar funding to adapt to climate change has yet to emerge. The Copenhagen Accord targets up to US$50 billion per year in adaptation funding, but commitments to date have been trivial compared to what is needed. Although there are some studies and suggestions, it remains unclear where the money will come from and how it will be disbursed. Beyond this, many development experts believe that the main hurdle in climate adaptation is effective implementation. A framework, based on the polluter pays principle, is presented here regarding the mobilization of resources for adaptation in developing countries using market mechanisms. It is assumed that mitigation and adaptation are at least partly fungible in terms of long-term global societal costs and benefits, and that quantifying climate vulnerability reductions is possible at least sometimes. The scheme's benefits include significant, equitable and flexible capital flows, and improved and more efficient resource allocation and verification procedures that incentivize sustained project management. Challenges include overcoming political resistance to historical responsibility-based obligations and scepticism of market instruments, and, critically, quantifying climate impact costs and verifying investments for vulnerability reduction credits.Les crédits liés à la mitigation climatique ont mobilisé des ressources considérables pour les projets dans les pays en développement, mais un financement similaire pour l'adaptation liée au changement climatique reste encore à se matérialiser. L'Accord de Copenhague cible jusqu'à US$50 milliards par an de financement pour l'adaptation, mais les engagements à ce jour ont été insignifiants comparés à l'effort requis. Alors que des études et suggestions ont été avancées, la source des fonds et la manière dont ils seront alloués reste incertaines. En outre, plusieurs experts sur le développement pensent que l'obstacle principal à l'adaptation liée au climat concerne la mise en vigueur. Un cadre basé sur le principe du pollueur-payeur est présenté pour la mobilisation de ressources sur la base des mécanismes de marché pour l'adaptation dans les pays en développement. Il est supposé que la mitigation et l'adaptation sont au moins partiellement fongibles en termes de coûts et bénéfices sociétaux planétaires à long terme et qu'une quantification de la diminution de la vulnérabilité au changement climatique est au moins parfois possible. Les bénéfices du système comprennent: flux de capitaux considérables, équitables, et flexibles; une allocation des ressources meilleure et plus efficace et des processus de vérification qui favorisent une gestion soutenue des projets. Les défis incluent: surmonter la résistance politique aux obligations liées à la responsabilité historique et le scepticisme vis-à-vis des instruments de marché, et, de prime importance, la quantification des coûts liés aux impacts climatiques et la vérification des inv...

participants from nearly 30 countries to address opportunities and issues related to methane mitigation. Methane is a potent greenhouse gas, and, depending on the source, implementing reduction strategies can improve operational efficiency, provide a viable energy source, or improve agricultural productivity. During the conference, participants developed a stronger understanding of the specific measures that can lead to the most pragmatic and cost-effective emission reductions, and set forth recommendations to improve conditions for the development of projects. The Conference, jointly organized by the Russian Academy of Sciences and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, with co-sponsorship by a number of private and governmental bodies, included presentations on a variety of topics related to greater project realization, such as project finance, markets for emission credits, institutional barriers, technical options, and project opportunities. During the conference's source-specific technical sessions, participants shared information and experiences on mitigating methane emissions from coal mining, natural gas systems, solid waste landfills, and agricultural and natural sources. This exchange of information was further developed during field trips, where conference participants had the opportunity to visit methane sources in southwestern Siberia, and to meet with local experts to discuss technical merits of different methane mitigation measures. Throughout the conference, participants were asked to seek answers to these four basic questions: 1) Analyses indicate that methane mitigation is often very cost-effective. What steps are necessary for greater project realization? 2) International institutions are looking for greenhouse gas reduction projects that are reliable and measurable. How well do methane mitigation projects meet these criteria, and what work needs to be undertaken to make this clear? 3) How are technical advances impacting project attractiveness? What is in store for the future? 4) What roles can industry, governments, multilateral institutions, and researchers play to promote methane mitigation? What collaborative efforts should be undertaken? At the end of each source-specific technical session, participants gathered to formulate findings, conclusions, and recommendations to present during the concluding plenary session. These recommendations are presented in the next section.

Adaptation projects may be difficult to prioritize and finance, as the results of projects are difficult to quantifiably measure and compare across project types, and no singular "unit" for adaptation outcomes exists. The Higher Ground Foundation is developing the Vulnerability Reduction Credit (VRC™), which incorporates cost/benefit analysis and per capita vulnerability equalization tools to measure the outputs of climate adaptation projects. The VRC quantifies in a singular unit measures to reduce vulnerability to climate change. This chapter summarizes the structure and utility of VRCs and shows through a case study from Talle, Niger, how VRCs are created and integrated into Sahelian community adaptations to heterogeneous climate risks such as flooding and droughts. VRC analysis and crediting may serve as a monitoring and evaluation tool and as an instrument to help secure project finance while supporting sustained adaptation. The chapter further considers the potential benefits to governments, donors and economies. VRC financing has advantages over standard development assistance models, particularly for project risk management, project preparation, enhanced transparency of adaptation spend, and scaling of successful pilot projects throughout an economy. Keywords IntroductionClimate change is happening and it is impacting communities around the world. While all nations will be impacted by climate change, primarily for the worse, the poorest countries face the most human vulnerability.Sub-Saharan Africa is both particularly vulnerable to climate change and lacking sufficient adaptive capacity to address many of the impacts on agriculture, the built environment, health, and other sectors. The economic impact of climate change will be considerable; by the end of the century climate change is estimated to cost 10% of Africa's GDP, and the costs of effective adaptation could be between $US 10 billion and £UK 30 billion per year by 2030 (Pan African Climate Justice Alliance 2009). Africa will bear the highest costs per capita in terms of GDP (Watkiss et al. 2016).In the context of planning processes, research has shown few examples of climate information being integrated into the planning of long-term development. Reasons given for this include short-term development challenges focusing decision-makers' attention on shorter timescales, a lack of both serviceable medium-to long-term climate information and integrated assessments of climate impacts, vulnerability, or adaptation, and a communication mismatch between the producers and users of climate information (Jones et al. 2015).Although expenditures are generally viewed as insufficient, a considerable amount of adaptation investment is already taking place in developing countries. Overseas development assistance is considerable, but the traditional approach (as typified by the Paris Climate Agreement) for financing climate adaptation in developing countries is to set a global monetary target, rather than focus on vulnerability reduction as the measure o...

No abstract