Written evidence submitted by Research
Councils UK (RCUK)
SUMMARY
Addressing the challenge of development
in a changing climate will require strong collaboration across
research, policy and practice. Climate change and sustainable
development should not be carved up into silos. There
is a growing fragmentation of climate governance internationally;
it is not clear how UK based initiatives and programmes might
interact with this "architecture" beyond the UNFCCC.
RCUK notes the active role DFID and other government
departments have played in establishing relevant international
networks and programmes, as well as cross Research-Council programmes
in the UK.
An aspect of climate change requiring
adaptation is changing sea level; RCUK supports research to help
predict such changes. Further integrated research programmes on
local and regional impacts of climate change are required to inform
climate change adaptation policies.
It is essential that developed countries
continue to take steps to mitigate climate change. However, livelihoods
of poor and marginalised people can be negatively affected by
schemes to mitigate climate change, as can be experienced with
the conversion of food crop land for biofuels. Mitigation policies
must therefore be well formulated to deliver "win-win"
solutions for both mitigation and poverty reduction.
Post-2012 more attention needs to
be given to genuine technology transfer of low carbon technologies
especially to the smallest and poorest developing counties eg
sub-Saharan Africa.
There is genuine technological choice
available in favour of low carbon options at reasonable cost.
If ambitious carbon reduction targets for 2050 are to be reached,
the power sectors of at least developed countries will need to
be essentially completely de-carbonised by then.
Commitments to coal fired electricity
in developed and developing countries highlights the need to develop
effective and reasonably cheap carbon capture and storage (CCS)
technology, an area being pursued by RCUK.
Improvements in transportation and
infrastructure can help to promote development eg by reducing
transport costs on exports from developing counties. However,
there is a trade-off between using and developing transport systems,
and climate change mitigation.
Promoting pro-poor exploitation of
natural resources eg minerals, forestry and water, will require
multilevel governance approaches to address conflicts across local,
national, regional and global scales, between poor and wealthy
groups, and between private and public interests.
The Research Councils have expertise
to offer DFID in regard to its priority theme of water resources
management, including translating this into assistance for developing
countries.
There is little evidence to suggest
that carbon trading is a sustainable approach in developing countries.
Costs and benefits of carbon trading will be researched in greater
detail by Research Council funded activities.
INTRODUCTION
1. Research Councils UK (RCUK) is a strategic
partnership set up to champion research supported by the seven
UK Research Councils. RCUK was established in 2002 to enable the
Councils to work together more effectively to enhance the overall
impact and effectiveness of their research, training and innovation
activities, contributing to the delivery of the Government's objectives
for science and innovation. Further details are available at www.rcuk.ac.uk.
2. This evidence is submitted by RCUK on behalf
of all Research Councils and represents their independent views.
It does not include or necessarily reflect the views of the Science
and Innovation Group in the Department for Innovation, Universities
and Skills. The submission is based on contributions from the
following Councils:
Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC)
Natural Environment Research Council (NERC)
3. ESRC is the UK's leading research funding
and training agency addressing economic and social concerns. ESRC
funds work both on, and in, the developing world, and also work
on social and economic studies of science and technology. Details
are available at www.esrc.ac.uk.
4. NERC funds and carries out impartial
scientific research in the sciences of the environment and trains
the next generation of environmental scientists through support
to universities and its research and collaborative centres. Details
are available at www.nerc.ac.uk. NERC's contribution is based
on input from the British Geological Survey (BGS), the Proudman
Oceanographic Laboratory (POL), the UK Energy Research Centre
(UKERC), the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology (CEH) and NERC science
Theme Leaders.
5. The Research Councils are co-operating
with one another and with relevant government departments in the
United Kingdom Collaborative on Development Sciences (UKCDS).
UKCDS has climate impacts considerations at the heart of its current
set of work-streams. Further details are available at http://www.ukcds.org.uk/.
Theme 1. The effectiveness and coherence of
the UK Government's approach to sustainable development in developing
countries
1.1 Addressing the challenge of development
in a changing climate will require strong collaboration across
research, policy and practice. Looking forward, the UK Government
must respond by engaging with the relevant stakeholders, both
in the UK and internationally, to ensure the response is needs-based,
flexible and coordinated.
1.2 Investments in development must be informed
by a sound evidence base. In the case of climate change and development,
there are large gaps on climate change impacts, vulnerability
and processes. Relevant Government bodies must engage with civil
society and the research and funding communities to support the
generation of necessary conceptual frameworks, evidence and learning
processes. The Government must also recognise that different groups
in society may hold different views of sustainable development
problems and goals. Negotiation, deliberation and explicit consideration
of trade-offs must become part of the research and policy process.
1.3 Unless policy strategies in relation
to trade, energy, transport, agriculture and development are aligned
with the goal of bringing down greenhouse gas emissions, they
will systematically undermine the effectiveness of UK climate
policy strategy. The agenda cuts across so many stakeholders and
so many disciplines that Government departments must be open to
cooperation and collaboration nationally and internationally and
to new approaches and new ways of doing things. The Global Health
Strategy is a realisation of this in terms of health. The new
Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) should give due
regard to the development agenda in its work and engage more fully
with the Department for International Development (DFID). Climate
change and sustainable development should not carved up into silos.
1.4 Policy must reflect that this is a complex
problem with probably no "silver bullets". There is
a need to be prepared to challenge policy framings and approaches
that are over-simplifying the problem, or pointing in problematic
directions. Government should not rush into rigid policy decisions
(use a "Do no harm first" approach), as occurred with
recent biofuels target setting and subsequent links with food
price crises[26].
1.5 One specific issue is a growing multiplicity
or "fragmentation" of climate governance internationally/trans-nationally[27]
and it is not clear (in the UK and indeed elsewhere) as to how
UK based programmes and initiatives might interact with this "architecture"
beyond the UNFCCC[28]
(eg from the World Bank, Type II Partnerships, Foundations such
as Rockefeller and Clinton, urban-based networks eg C40[29],
and many networks established by private and community actors).
This is a big challenge for the effectiveness and value added
of UK government policy and intervention.
1.6 DFID engagement in the relevant cross
research council programmes is welcome eg Living With Environmental
Change (LWEC)[30]
(in which it is a partner), Global Uncertainties; security for
all in a changing world[31]
Energy[32]
and Ecosystem Services for Poverty Alleviation programme (ESPA)[33],
which is part of LWEC. It should continue seek to influence the
agenda setting to ensure development needs are considered where
appropriate. DFID should also consider appropriate mechanisms
to ensure that the evidence generated from this research informs
its policy and programmes. Government should put greater emphasis
on getting research into use to maximise the impact of its important
investments in research.
Theme 2. The extent to which climate change
adaptation is integrated into DFID's development policies
2.1 Climate change may reverse "development
gains", and hit the poorest hardest. Funding for adaptation
is very important. Capacity and resource transfers will be critical
in adequately supporting developing countries embed climate change
adaptation within national development strategies, tackling both
the short and long-term shocks and stresses associated with climate
change. Adequate social protection mechanisms, including emergency
preparedness, early warning and response systems must be in place
to support the most vulnerable. Evidence on trade-offs between
alternatives must be made explicit.
2.2 Innovative research collaborations are required
to ensure that the needs of those who are adapting can be effectively
and efficiently met. Thinking and approaches from resilience studies,
understandings of complex systems, and technology studies all
have roles to play. The research community should be fully representative
and mechanisms should be put in place to enable (even require)
the community to work together rather than in silos. Resources
must be dedicated to "shaping the research questions"
and not just answering what researchers feel the questions should
be. UK sponsored research undertaken in developing countries must
engage fully with local partners and put in place effective legacy
strategies. Knowledge exchange should leave a tangible footprint
and be central to generating developing country buy-in to adaptation
policies.
2.3 A problem with implementing adaptation
strategies is that the scientific community does not always have
sufficient understanding of the actual environmental impacts of
local and regional climate change, and how such impacts provide
positive and negative feedbacks to the climate system. Further
fully integrated programmes of environmental impact studies are
required to properly inform adaptation policies. This is a priority
area for LWEC research, although the amount of work to be undertaken
in developing economies is uncertain at present, but international
links are being created to provide opportunities for these economies
to be able to benefit.
2.4 DFID is currently in the process of
integrating adaptation into its development planning through numerous
capacity building approaches. It has been pro-active in participating
in international networks, such as the multi-agency VARG (Vulnerability
and Adaptation Resource Group). It has also participated in the
development of tools to assist in the delivery of development
assistancenotably ORCHID[34].
DFID has also invested in training for its country desk officers;
two courses on climate change have been run by the University
of East Anglia Overseas Development Institute in the past two
years. Starting with capacity building within the development
agency is critical to ensure that adaptation to climate change
is fully understood by those people in charge of delivering assistance
to others, so to ensure that climate change is always factored
into development assistance.
2.5 Climate Change Adaptation Africa (CCAA)
is a joint programme of the International Development Research
Centre, Canada (IDRC) and DFID.
2.6 Changing sea level is one climate change
impact requiring adaptation. DFID should be interested in any
science that will predict regional variations of sea level as
a refinement of estimates of global sea level rise. A sea level
rise even as little as 1m is serious eg for Bangladesh, with regional
differences of this order possible.
2.7 NERC, ESRC and DFID have joined forces
in a multi-disciplinary research programme ESPA to address how
to achieve sustainably managed ecosystems. This work aims to contribute
to reducing poverty and improving well being in developing countries.
ESPA is part of the cross council LWEC initiative. Eight themes
have been developed from the outputs of commissioned scoping studies,
focussing on areas where the collaboration between NERC, ESRC
and DFID has the potential to make a significant impact on the
research and poverty alleviation agendas. In parallel with developing
these themes ESPA has undertaken a funding round to strengthen
research capacity. The aim of the call was to build equitable
and sustainable networks and partnerships between individuals
and organisations in Southern and Northern locations in advance
of the planned full research programme. There was considerable
interest in the call, with 58 full proposals received. Eleven
proposals were funded, totalling £1.4 million.
Theme 3. Potential adverse impacts for developing
countries of steps by developed countries to mitigate climate
change, including in the context of the "post-2012"
negotiations, and potential benefits for developing countries
of related technology transfers
3.1 It is worth emphasising the costs developing
countries will bear if developed countries do not take action
to mitigate climate change. Many of the preceding points make
clear (as does World Bank research and the latest Human Development
Report) that climate change has the ability to reverse decades
of development progress[35],[36].
Although it can be complex (as the following paragraphs illustrate)
there is no fundamental reason why well formulated climate mitigation
policies will impact on poor people adversely.
3.2 The livelihoods of poor and marginalised
people can be hit hard and negatively by developments aimed at
mitigating climate change, as experienced with the conversion
of food crop land for biofuels, and with forest protection/afforestation
schemes that exclude local users. Attention within schemes eg
under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) of the UNFCCC and
voluntary carbon markets needs to focus on identifying combinations
of technology and institutions that are "win-win" in
both mitigation and poverty-reducing terms.
3.3 There is considerable concern that the
economic costs of climate mitigation will deepen poverty and result
in a net loss in the standard of living in poorer parts of the
world. For example, climate change itself may increase the incidents
of vector borne disease; but to abate climate change may divert
resources away from people eg health care, which in itself would
put those at further risk from vector borne disease[37].
3.4 Trade offs between mitigation and adaptation
to climate change are particularly important in terms of food
production and consumption. There is significant potential that
mitigation policy could undermine food security in poor parts
of the world. Also, any specific mitigation policy needs to be
explored in a broad context of poverty and economic globalization.
This is illustrated by the following example (paragraph 3.5):
3.5 Promoting "local" food systems
seems to be an obvious policy choice to help reduce carbon emissions.
However, "local" food systemsdefined in terms
of the distance between producers and consumersare likely
to be vulnerable to climatic related problems such as droughts
or floods that may reduce harvests in affected areas. In this
case, a global food system, where the food trade allows produce
to move easily around the world, may be better adapted to more
volatile climatic conditions[38].
However, the idea that "local" food systems are better
for mitigation while "global" food systems are better
for adaptation must include an understanding of the underlying
incomes of different groups of consumers. History suggests that
in times of economic volatility, when poor and rich consumers
are both competing for the same food supply, it only takes a very
minor climatic problem to spark massive problems. This was apparent
during the Victorian period when el Niño induced droughts
sparked a massive famine across much of India, not because the
rainfall anomaly was particularly harsh but because this was when
the poor Indian consumers were being included in the European
market for food[39].
3.6 The CDMthe main potential international
mechanismformally has both emissions reduction and technology
transfer objectives. However in practice emissions reduction is
primary and technology transfer is limited. This makes the attractiveness
of CDM to developing countries much more limited than it could
be. In future reforms post-2012, much more attention needs to
be given to genuine technology transfer within emissions reduction
initiatives. Appropriate support must be provided to developing
countries to engage in the "post-2012" negotiation process,
also building relevant capacities within different stakeholders.
Climate change is a global problem that requires global solutions.
Reaching a deal through the UNFCCC process is critical.
3.7 Technology transfer of low carbon technology
is a potentially powerful way of both mitigating emissions and
improving the capacity of developing countries in low carbon industry.
The UK government could work with UK corporations operating outside
of the UK in terms of reducing their contributions to greenhouse
gas emissions in developing countries, creating scope for technology
transfer, and developing appropriate technology solutions.
3.8 While developed countries have deployed
a wide range of mitigation policies, they now (especially the
EU) make emissions trading central to their overall strategy.
Through various linking initiatives, this allows some incorporation
of developing countries into mitigation commitments made by developed
countries, especially via the CDM. Here, developed-country-financed
mitigation projects in developing countries can be credited against
developed country commitments. This has both positive and negative
impacts; positive, in that developing countries can contribute
to worldwide mitigation without significant cost to themselves
and because they may benefit from at least a limited amount of
technology transfer; but, negative, insofar as the CDM overwhelmingly
concentrates on larger and/or middle-income countries, especially
India and China. Correspondingly smaller, poorer countries (eg
nearly all of sub-Saharan Africa) hardly feature in CDM and there
is correspondingly less opportunity for technology transfer of
low carbon technology.
3.9 A more general point is that diversity
in developing countries resources, environment, and vulnerability
makes a top down assessment of adverse impacts potentially unreliable.
Assessment of both risk, and inversely opportunities, of new technology
to individual developing countries can only be made robustly when
considered at a local level. Enabling local-level assessment is
reliant on knowledge and people capacity within developing countries,
and a willingness by the translating partner to enter into technologically
open collaborations.
Theme 4. The impact of choices about power
generation and energy sources in both developed and developing
countries and the linkages between these
4.1 There is genuine technological choice
available in favour of low carbon options at reasonable cost and
Governments have substantial control over power sector investmentswhich
are often very large. If ambitious carbon reduction targets for
2050 are to be reached, the power sectors of at least the developed
countries will need to be essentially completely de-carbonised
by then.
4.2 There is a need to support the scale-up of
low carbon solutions: IPCC found that assessed stabilisation levels
can be achieved by the adoption and scale-up of a set of technologies
that are either already available or expected to be on the market
in the next decades. Narrowing the gap in energy efficiency between
developed/developing countries would provide benefits in both
climate change mitigation and development.
4.3 In relation to support to the scale-up
of low carbon solutions, the role of the UK's own Energy Technologies
Institute is about demonstrating and supporting new energy efficiency
and renewable energy technologies. The NERC supported UKERC has
created roadmaps for the development and deployment of a number
of technologies including marine renewables, photovoltaics and
carbon capture and storage. These refer mainly to the UK but may
have wider application. Decisions to lock in to high carbon solutions
by developed countries are both incompatible with long-term power
sector needs for abatement, and may justify commitments to coal
fired electricity in developing countries eg India, China and
Brazil plan to build many more plants in the next 20 years. The
UK can also use its influence with the World Bank- as a major
contributor to its funds- to steer the institution away from support
to the fossil fuel industry[40],[41].
4.4 Commitments to coal fired electricity
in developed and developing countries highlights the need for
intensive developed country efforts to develop effective and reasonably
cheap carbon capture and storage technology (CCS). If plants in
developing countries are built capture-ready and if the geological
and engineering research for sequestration is done very soon,
then some of the effects of this massive coal build can be mitigated.
Without such measures, the efforts of the developed world in carbon
abatement will be almost meaningless. The UK and EU have already
made a reasonable start in developing CCS (the EU hopes for 12
demonstration plants within a few years) but more urgency and
public commitment is needed if the technology is to be developed
in time. There is a concentration of CCS expertise within RCUK.
The NERC centre BGS has been working in China (NZEC[42]
and COACH[43])
and recently in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. BGS is at present
proposing new projects in India (for Defra), and China, in response
to an Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC)
call for proposals on "Collaborative Research with China
on Cleaner Fossil Fuels"[44].
UKERC is supporting an interdisciplinary PhD studentship held
at Edinburgh University on "Sites, regulations and policies
for CCS in India".
4.5 There are signs that developed countries
may be returning to new nuclear power investment as a carbon mitigation
strategy. Finland and France are already constructing new reactors
and the UK, USA and others may follow. This will make a (probably
quite small) contribution to mitigation in developed countries
but it raises significant issues for relations with developing
countries, who are likely to argue that they can legitimately
have access to the same nuclear technology for climate change
reasons. While some countries (China, India) are already pursuing
new nuclear investments, many developed countries are reluctant
to allow some developing countries access to nuclear technology
because of proliferation concerns. Where "sensitive"
technologies are denied to specific developing countries this
may hamper efforts at co-operation between developed and developing
countries and strengthen the ideaalready common if not
always fully justified in developing countries like Indiathat
the developed world and its associated multinational companies
are systematically depriving developing countries of the best
(low carbon and other) technologies.
Theme 5. The role of transport, including
aviation, in economic development in developing countries, particularly
freight and exports, and the impact of such transport on the environment
5.1 There is a trade-off between reducing
our carbon footprint by buying fewer food and other products from
overseas and the development imperative of supporting smaller
producers in export-led economies, as well as difficulty in trying
to address both issues simultaneously.
5.2 Theories of economic geography suggest that
more remote locations have to pay higher transport costs, which
reduces per capita income. Improvements in transportation and
infrastructure can therefore help to promote development and cost-benefit
analyses need to take into account general equilibrium effects
through improvements in market access.
5.3 Nonetheless, it is important to keep
in mind that the fundamental problem for development in many parts
of the world (eg much of Africa) is not remoteness but weak institutions,
and the associated problems of expropriation that reduce incentives
for investment and development. Good institutions are therefore
a necessary condition for development. Once this necessary condition
has been fulfilled improved integration into the regional and
international economy can elevate economic prosperity.
Theme 6. The role of tourism in economic development,
and the potential for sustainable tourism
6.1 The role of tourism in economic development
is threatened by climate change impacts which may include sea
level rise wiping out tourism beaches. Sea level rise and its
impacts is an area covered by research institutes such as the
NERC research centre POL.
6.2 The overall use of productive coastal areas
and continental shelves by developing countries is wider than
just tourism; NERC areas of operational oceanography and hydrology
are relevant here.
Theme 7. Pro-poor exploitation of natural
resources, including minerals and forests, and the regulatory
framework for exploitation
7.1 Promoting the pro-poor and sustainable
exploitation of natural resources will require governance approaches
that recognise local (including informal) institutional and tenure
arrangements, and address the wider circumstances of poverty and
conflict that sometimes push poor people into unsustainable use
practices. Multi-level governance and regulatory frameworks are
required, that explicitly address the conflicts and trade-offs
between goals and institutions across local, national, regional
and global scales, between poor and wealthy groups, and between
private and public interests.
7.2 Earlier efforts to commercialise the use
of natural resources in developing countries have often resulted
in inequitable outcomes, leaving disproportionally small share
of benefits to local communities whilst at the same time exposing
them to increased environmental burdens and risks. This has been
the case with for example shrimp aquaculture in Asia[45]
and mineral extraction throughout the developing world[46].
7.3 Wealth released as a result of minerals
extraction is simultaneously an opportunity and a threat to developing
countries. Although mineral endowments should enable poorer countries
to embark on a path to sustainable economic development, the evidence
shows that without effective governance and a transparent fiscal
environment, resource-rich developing countries can often move
in the opposite direction toward poverty and instability. The
wealth created by mining can also cause more localised social
impacts on communities, as can the environmental impacts which
inevitably arise as a result of the extraction and processing
of minerals.
7.4 Although formalised extraction by large,
medium and small enterprises is the familiar face of mining in
the West, informal artisanal and small-scale mining (ASM) is a
major activity for poor people in the developing world. An estimated
100 million people worldwide are economically dependent on ASM
for some or all of their livelihoods, and the social, environmental
and economic issues associated with ASM pose a considerable challenge
to governments and donors alike.
7.5 In the past, local communities have
used communally accessible natural resources such as forests,
wetlands and pastures as safety nets during periods of environmental
stress such as droughts[47].
The role of natural resource base is particularly important as
a safety net to the poorest and most vulnerable people in local
communities. As climate change will primarily be experienced as
increased climate variability and more intense extreme weather
events, natural resources will continue to play an important role
in the future as safety nets for those who are unable to climate-proof
their livelihoods. Therefore, effective environmental governance
aimed at sustaining physical stocks of natural resources should
form an important part of a strategy for adaptation to climate
change in developing countries, alongside measures such as the
promotion of market access, income growth and increase in human
capital calculated to reduce the climate sensitivity of livelihoods[48].
It has also been shown that sustained stocks of natural resources
can help to recover from the effects of natural hazards such as
the 2004 tsunami in Asia[49].
7.6 The impact of climate change on the
hydrological cycle is receiving growing attention. This is to
be welcomed given the Fourth IPCC Assessment Report's gloomy outlook
on waterparticularly in Africa. But, there is a real danger
that debates on climate change water links become detached from
local realities. First, water security is not determined by water
availability; extending access and affordability remain key, particularly
to the natural storage provided by groundwater aquifers in sub-Saharan
Africa (SSA). Second, other pressures on water resources will,
in many cases, dwarf the impacts of climate change. In SSA, for
example, population growth, urbanisation and the push for irrigation
development will shape demand, at least until mid-century[50].
It is therefore important that DFID maintains a balanced perspective,
recognising that the political economy of water access (rather
than absolute availability) will continue to shape poor people's
water security, and that climate change is one of a number of
pressures on water pressures (and often not the most important).
7.7 On regulatory frameworks, DFID support
for water resources management (WRM) (a priority theme under DFID's
new water and sanitation policy) is welcome. Drawing on the arguments
above (and those in the Stern Report), the best approach will
be to strengthen water resources management to build resilience
to climate variabilityin terms of both scarcity and floodsrather
than look for "new" climate change policies and approaches.
Current thinking on WRM emphasises the need for pragmatic, flexible
approaches that are tailored to local hydrological, institutional
and political contexts. Key questions concern how DFID "support"
for WRM will be translated into assistance for developing countries
and, related to this, how DFID will maximise use of UK expertise
in this area. The research councils (in particular, NERC research
centres BGS and CEH) have a much to offer in this respect. The
SPLASH EraNet may be helpful in this area[51].
7.8 Better WRM is underpinned by better
resource assessment and monitoring. In SSA in particular, assessment
and monitoring have been chronically under-funded, and capacity
in these areas is low. DFID could make a real difference here,
drawing on the scientific expertise and experience of institutes
such as BGS and CEH to help shape its WRM assistance, and facilitating
(and funding) north-south capacity building and twinning arrangements
between UK centres and developing country governments, research
institutes and training centres. New RCUK centres in China, India
could have an important role to play here. A key need is to build
capacity in the area of groundwater resource assessment, monitoring
and management given SSA's growing dependence on groundwater storage.
Even without the prospect of climate change, further and much
needed development of groundwater to meet the Millenium Development
Goals and support growing irrigation demand needs to be informed
by a much sharper understanding of geology and recharge processes[52].
7.9 ESPA (aligned to LWEC) aims to address
the challenge of how to sustainably manage ecosystems, which contribute
to poverty reduction. The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment showed
that the loss of services from ecosystems is a significant barrier
to reducing poverty, hunger and disease. By achieving sustainably
managed ecosystems, the work aims to reduce poverty and improve
well being in developing countries.
Theme 8. Opportunities for developing countries
presented by sustainable approaches, such as carbon trading, direct
fiscal transfers and addressing the needs of increasingly environmentally-sensitive
consumers
8.1 There is no evidence as of yet to suggest
that carbon trading is a sustainable approach in developing countries.
In fact, evidence from research at UEA, notably by Professor Katrina
Brown and Dr Esteve Corbera suggests that there are few if any
trickle-down benefits from the Clean Development Mechanism in
South America[53].
Costs and benefits of carbon trading will be researched in greater
detail as part of the work programme of the ESRC funded Centre
for Climate Change Economics and Policy at London School of Economics
and at the University of Leeds.
8.2 Beyond community forestry, there needs to
be more attention to innovative combinations of technology/institutional
arrangements that are both pro-poor and sustainable. Emerging
approaches to biofuels, renewable energy technologies and "biochar"
soil management exemplify opportunities that warrant further exploration.
8.3 Across sectors governance of forestry
and clean development is absolutely critical to securing outcomes
favourable to poorer groups. This is the central focus of Prof
Newell's ESRC Climate Change Leadership fellowship on The Governance
of Clean Development[54].
Flows of finance and investment do not automatically go where
they are needed most; instead they need to be steered, regulated
and managed by the correct combination of actors, institutions
and an inclusive policy-making process.
RCUK
November 2008
26 http://www.ifpri.org/PUBS/ib/FoodPricesPolicyAction.pdf Back
27
Biermann et al working paper from IVM, Free University Amsterdam.
http://www.glogov.org/images/doc/WP34.pdf. Accessed 13/11/2008 Back
28
The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Back
29
http://www.c40cities.org Back
30
http://www.nerc.ac.uk/research/programmes/lwec/ Back
31
http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/research/ccprog/security.htm Back
32
http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/research/ccprog/energy.htm Back
33
http://www.nerc.ac.uk/research/programmes/espa/ Back
34
http://www.ids.ac.uk/UserFiles/File/poverty_team/climate_change/ORCHID_Bangladesh_Summary_Research_Report_2007.pdf Back
35
World Bank Group, (2003) Poverty and Climate Change: Reducing
the Vulnerability of the Poor through Adaptation Washington D.C:
World Bank Group. Back
36
UNDP (2007/2008) Fighting Climate Change: Human Solidarity in
a Divided World Palgrave. Back
37
Tol, R., and Dowlatabadi, H. 2001. Vector-Borne Diseases, Development
& Climate Change. Integrated Assessment 2: 173-181. Back
38
Fraser, E., Mabee, W. and Figge, F. 2005. A Framework for Assessing
the Vulnerability of Food Systems to Future Shocks. Futures 37:
465-479. Back
39
Fraser, E. 2007. Travelling in Antique Lands: Studying Past Famines
to Understand Present Vulnerabilities to Climate Change. Climate
Change 83: 495-514. Back
40
World Resources Institute (2008) Correcting the World's greatest
market failure: Climate change and multilateral development banks
http://www.wri.org/publication/correcting-the-worlds-greatest-market-failure Back
41
Tellam, I. (ed), (2000) Fuel for Change: World Bank Energy Policy-
Rhetoric and Reality London: Zed Books Back
42
http://www.nzec.info/en/ Back
43
http://www.co2-coach.com/ Back
44
http://www.epsrc.ac.uk/CallsForProposals/Archive/CleanerFossilFuels.htm Back
45
W. N. Adger, P. M. Kelly, N. H. Ninh, Eds., Living with Environmental
Change: Social Vulnerability, Adaptation and Resilience in Vietnam
(Routledge, London, 2001). Back
46
Muradian, R., Martinez-Alier, J. and Correa, H. 2003. International
capital vs. local population: the environmental conflict of the
Tambogrande mining project, Peru. Society and Natural Resources
16 (9): 775-792. Back
47
Paavola, J. 2008. Livelihoods, Vulnerability and Adaptation to
Climate Change in Morogoro, Tanzania. Environmental Science &
Policy 11: 642-654. Back
48
Paavola, J. 2008. Livelihoods, Vulnerability and Adaptation to
Climate Change in Morogoro, Tanzania. Environmental Science &
Policy 11: 642-654. Back
49
Adger W.N., Hughes, T.P., Folke, C., Carpenter, S. et al. 2005.
Social-ecological resilience to coastal disasters. Science 309
(5373): 1036-1039 Back
50
ODI, 2008. Future directions in water and sanitation. Calow R
C. Opinion No. 114, Overseas Development Institute, London. Back
51
http://www.splash-era.net/ Back
52
ODI, 2008. Future directions in water and sanitation. Calow R
C. Opinion No. 114, Overseas Development Institute, London. Back
53
Corbera, E., Kosoy, N. and Mart-«nez Tuna, M. 2007. Equity
implications of marketing ecosystem services in protected areas
and rural communities: Case studies from Meso-America. Global
Environmental Change 17: 365-380. Back
54
http://www.esrcsocietytoday.ac.uk/esrcinfocentre/viewawardpage.aspx?awardnumber=RES-066-27-0005 Back
|