House of Commons - Environmental Audit

Select Committee on Environmental Audit Written Evidence

APPENDIX 13

Memorandum submitted by Tearfund

Tearfund is a UK Christian relief and development organisation, working with over 400 partner groups around the world to tackle the causes and effects of poverty. Tearfund has considerable experience in disaster management including disaster risk reduction. The following evidence is provided in answer to the question of "what approach and specific objectives in relation to climate change the UK Government should adopt during its presidency of the G8 and EU in 2005".

INTRODUCTION

As a development agency Tearfund is particularly concerned about the effects that climate change will have on the poor. Climate change will increase the risk of extreme weather events, yet the communities with which we work are already struggling to cope with floods, droughts and cyclones. Climate change will also lead to food insecurity, reduced water availability, ill health, loss of forests and biodiversity, and economic decline, all of which will hit the poorest hardest. Therefore, Tearfund urges the UK government to take three specific actions on climate change in 2005 to help protect the poor and vulnerable:

1. Persuade the G8 to agree plans for a global, long-term, effective and equitable solution to climate change

2. Commit the UK government to mainstreaming climate and disaster risk reduction into its overseas development programming by a specific date, and urge the EU to do the same

3. Launch a plan of action to enable African countries develop in a way that is resilient to current and increasing climate-related risks

1. A GLOBAL, LONG-TERM, EFFECTIVE AND EQUITABLE SOLUTION TO CLIMATE CHANGE

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was created for the purpose of "stabilising greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the atmosphere at a level that will prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system" (Article 2). Embedded in the UNFCCC is the principle of global equity, both intergenerational and international. As the first step in realising the Convention the Kyoto Protocol was very welcome, but it does not yet fully meet the principles of the Convention:

Preventing dangerous interference: The emissions quotas decided under Kyoto were a result of political haggling rather than any obvious correlation with the level of cuts that scientists believe are needed to prevent dangerous climate change. Kyoto will reduce industrialised country emissions to no more than 1-2% below 1990 levels, and developing country emissions are not limited at all—the result is that global emissions are set to rise by some 70% during Kyoto's lifespan (International Energy Agency). Thus the global community continues to generate dangerous climate change faster than it tries to avoid it.

Equity: The Kyoto protocol is currently only applicable to industrialised countries. The rationale was that developed countries "take the lead" in tackling climate change because they are mainly responsible for it: the G8 are responsible for around 50% of world CO2 emissions. However, a global problem requires a global solution, and all countries now need to come on board if climate change is to be tackled effectively. Developing countries must participate in mitigating climate change within a managed and equitable framework.

The Kyoto Protocol is a reasonable first attempt at addressing the threat of climate change but it does not go far enough and a broader framework is needed. In order to mitigate climate change the international community must firstly set a cap on greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere and then decide a plan of action for how to remain below the level that is decided.

2005 presents the UK government with a key opportunity for realistic thinking and positive steps forward in avoiding dangerous climate change. There have been numerous discussions about the problem, but a genuine concerted effort to tackle it effectively is now needed. The UK government should use its presidency of the G8 and EU in 2005 to push for a solution to climate change that is global, long-term, effective and equitable.

2. MAINSTREAM CLIMATE AND DISASTER RISK REDUCTION

The UK government should commit to mainstreaming climate and disaster risk reduction into its overseas development programming by a specific date, and urge the EU to do the same.

Climate change risk reduction

In order to help protect the poor from the adverse effects of climate change, climate change risks should be assessed and mitigated within the design and implementation of development initiatives. DFID recognises this, stating, "Development must be based on understanding existing and future vulnerabilities to climate risk if it is to be resilient to the risks of climate change. . ." [10]In response, DFID's Global Environmental Assets team is "seeking to promote the integration of climate change risk into development planning".[11] However, progress with this needs to be accelerated. DFID needs a clear, time-bound strategy for mainstreaming adaptation to climate change that reflects the significant threat that climate change poses to poverty alleviation efforts.

The EU has been attempting to make progress with integrating climate change considerations into EC development co-operation since 1998. It is only now, in 2004, that the EU is expected to adopt an action plan on mainstreaming climate change within development. [12]The EU must be committed to full and effective implementation of this plan in order to help ensure the success of sustainable development.

"Natural" disaster risk reduction

The number of disasters, and those affected by them in the developing world, is steadily rising. With each new disaster in developing countries, precious gains in poverty eradication are lost. Thousands of lives could be saved each year and economic losses prevented if governments placed more emphasis on helping vulnerable communities reduce disaster risks.

Disaster risk reduction needs to be mainstreamed into relief and development processes in order to safeguard gains made with poverty alleviation and ensure that relief, rehabilitation and development models do not exacerbate the problem. Climate change is expected to increase the risk of extreme events such as floods and droughts over the 21st century, so climate change increases the urgency of mainstreaming disaster risk reduction.

Tearfund research undertaken in 2003[13] reveals that many institutional donors, including the UK and EC, do not give a high enough priority to reducing disaster risks within their development planning and programming. DFID states in its first White Paper published in 1997 that "disaster preparedness and prevention will be an integral part of our development co-operation programme. . .". Yet seven years on, DFID still does not systematically analyse and reduce disaster risks within its development processes. In November 2003 the National Audit Office confirmed this, recommending that DFID "make(s) sure strategies, particularly for disaster-prone regions, have explicitly consider the risks posed by humanitarian emergencies and whether prevention and reduction work could minimise those risks".[14] Since then DFID has commissioned a study on the role of disaster risk reduction within development, with the intention of developing a "forward strategy" based on the findings of this study. This is encouraging, but DFID still has no clear time-frame for mainstreaming, and in the absence of this we are concerned that DFID will continue to make very slow progress with it.

The European Commission has committed itself to "integrate disaster prevention into European Union development and environment policies".[15] Yet Tearfund's research[16] found that disaster risk reduction is not awarded sufficient attention outside of the European Commission Humanitarian Aid Office (ECHO). A recent working paper produced by ECHO confirms this, observing that disaster risk reduction is "not systematically enshrined in all EC external relations aid programmes and related legal documents. . . . As there is no coherent strategy within the Commission to address DPP (preparedness and prevention), the overall picture can therefore be described as piecemeal, ad-hoc, and partly overlapping".[17] As the world's largest donor of development aid and one of the main donors of humanitarian assistance, the EU needs to make significant and speedy progress with developing a coherent, systematic approach to disaster risk reduction.

Unless the UK government and the EU fully integrate disaster risk reduction into development policy and practice as a matter of urgency, disasters, exacerbated by climate change, will increasingly prevent millions of people from escaping the poverty trap.

3. LAUNCH A PLAN OF ACTION FOR AFRICA

Sub-Saharan Africa is the world's poorest continent: half of its 700 million people subsist on 65 US cents or less a day, and it is the only continent to have grown poorer in the past 25 years. [18]

The UK government should launch a plan of action to enable African countries develop in a way that is resilient to current and increasing climate-related risks.

The IPCC has predicted various climate change scenarios for Africa which include the following: [19]

— It is likely to get drier in the northern and southern latitudes, and wetter in the tropics.

— Climate variability and the frequency of severe weather events is likely to increase.

— Sea level is projected to rise by around 25 cm by 2050.

More data and research are needed to determine the precise impacts of these changes in climate. However there is no doubt that Africa is highly vulnerable to climate change, and its long-term effects will exacerbate poverty. Impacts of particular concern to Africa are related to the following areas: [20]

— Food security: the continent already suffers a major deficit in food production in many areas. Increases in extremes, changing rainfall patterns and desertification will worsen food security.

— Water resources: water resources are a key area of vulnerability for Africa. The combination of continued population expansion and global warming is likely to exacerbate water scarcity.

— Human health: temperature increases will extend disease vector habitats. Droughts and flooding would increase the frequency of water-borne diseases.

— Settlements and infrastructure: sea level rise and an increase in extreme weather events would degrade infrastructure and have a significant negative impact on African communities and economies.

Africa already struggles to cope with the impact of existing climate pressures. Adaptive capacity of human systems in Africa is low due to lack of economic resources and technology, and vulnerability is high as a result of heavy reliance on rain-fed agriculture, frequent droughts and floods, and poverty. [21]The question of how Africa will adapt to increasing climatic changes must be addressed urgently.

The following are suggestions for what could be included in an action plan for Africa, in line with the agreement made by all governments at the World Summit on Sustainable Development in 2002 to "Assist African countries in mobilising adequate resources for their adaptation needs relating to the adverse effects of climate change, extreme weather events, sea level rise and climate variability. . .": [22]

— Support African governments to assess and reduce climate change and disaster risks in national sustainable development and poverty reduction initiatives.

— Strengthen the capacity of African institutions to understand current climate variability and predict climate change impacts, and to communicate effectively with national and local government and civil society groups.

— Provide adequate social protection for the most vulnerable groups in Africa, ensuring access to sufficient food and safe water.

We ask the government to take this proposal into account within its work with the Africa Commission, to ensure coherence between all of the UK government's work in 2005.

18 October 2004