House of Commons - International Development Committee

Sustainable Development in a Changing Climate - International Development Committee Contents

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 assistance—notably 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 systems—defined in terms of the distance between producers and consumers—are 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 CDM—the main potential international mechanism—formally 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 investments—which 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 idea—already common if not always fully justified in developing countries like India—that 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 water—particularly 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 variability—in terms of both scarcity and floods—rather 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