Written evidence submitted by Thomas Tanner,
Research Fellow, Institute of Development Studies (IDS) at the
University of Sussex[63]
1. It relates to two of the committee's
areas of investigation: Its primary focus is on "the extent
to which climate change adaptation is integrated into DFID's development
policies, while the evidence also bears upon the effectiveness
and coherence of the UK Government's approach to sustainable development
in developing countries".
2. DFID's policy for adapting development cooperation
to climate change is outlined in its Third White Paper, published
in 2006. It is driven in particular by the Gleneagles Plan of
Action, output of the G8 Gleneagles Summit in 2005. The Plan calls
on the World Bank to "develop and implement `best practice'
guidelines for screening their investments in climate sensitive
sectors to determine how their performance could be affected by
climate risks, as well as how those risks can be managed"
and invites other major multilateral and bilateral agencies to
adopt the World Bank guidelines, or develop and implement similar
guidance" (G8, 2005:10).
3. In considering the integration of climate
change adaptation into DFID's development policies, it is instructive
to outline some of the process-based elements that may be required
to ensure such integration. These can be considered in a range
of different areas, including:
a. Awareness-raising and knowledge sharing—to
ensure that DFID staff and partners are aware of climate change
issues, how these relate to their work, and options to manage
potential risks and take advantage of opportunities.
b. A supportive policy environment—to provide
high level backing regarding the importance and justify the resources
required for integrating adaptation into development policy.
c. Adequate levels of human resources—to
deliver adaptation as part of development policy.
d. Tools and methods for adaptation in a development
context—to assist with the process.
e. Institutional coordination mechanisms—to
ensure that policy is consistent across DFID, across HMG, and
across ODA members.
4. Taking this framework into consideration,
this submission briefly sets out a SWOT analysis (examining strengths,
weaknesses, opportunities, and threats) of the extent to which
processes are in place to ensure that climate change adaptation
is integrated into DFID's development policies.
5. STRENGTHS
a. High level policy guidance was provided by
the 3rd White Paper on International Development of 2006: Eliminating
World Poverty: Making Governance Work for the Poor, which
dedicated a chapter to climate change and a substantial section
on using natural resources for sustainable growth. This also includes
a commitment to develop guidance by 2008 to screen all development
investments for the effects of climate change. This is reinforced
by commitments made at EU level (eg EU Strategy on Climate
Change in the Context of Development Cooperation, 2004), at
the G8 (Gleneagles Plan of Action, 2005), and OECD (Declaration
on Integrating Climate Change Adaptation into Development Co-operation
Adopted by Development and Environment Ministers of OECD Member
Countries, 2006). b. DFID has undertaken a series of pilot
projects looking at the integration of disaster risk reduction
and climate change adaptation into development programming. Work
to develop and implement a methodology called ORCHID was undertaken
by IDS in collaboration with DFID offices in India and Bangladesh
(see Annex 1). Similar work was undertaken in DFID Kenya using
a related methodology and in China, a similar DFID-funded project
looked at integration within government of China water sector
programmes.
c. DFID has produced a range of awareness-raising
activities and outputs. These have been mostly directed at its
DFID staff, including a formative paper linking poverty and adaptation
(AfDB et al, 2003), the creation of a set of informational
keysheets in 2005 (DFID, 2005; currently being updated), and more
recent creation of country briefing notes for DFID offices.
d. Cross-Whitehall engagement has been significant,
particularly to input development perspectives into international
policies coordinated by DEFRA (now Department for Energy and Climate—DEC)
for the UN Framework Convention of Climate Change (UNFCCC).
e. DFID has developed a well-staffed group in
Policy Division on climate change including a specific team climate
change adaptation, and a virtual policy team on climate mainstreaming.
f. Increasing numbers of DFID advisory staff
are explicitly addressing climate change issues within their job
titles and job terms of reference.
6. WEAKNESSES
a. There is limited evidence of the integration
of adaptation with related issues of environmental management
and disaster risk reduction.b. Whilst there has been a rapid expansion
of resourcing and effort related to climate adaptation, this has
come at the same time as a reduction in human resource capacity
to tackle environment issues in the context of development. Advisory
capacity previously assigned to cover environmental issues now
has the additional burden of climate change.
c. Awareness raising materials and capacity building
activities have been primarily directed at DFID internally rather
than development partners. As DFID's work become increasingly
up-stream, the onus for mainstreaming increasingly falls on these
partners, yet they may be less well equipped to do so in terms
of knowledge, political support and tools.
d. Despite the growth in numbers of DFID staff
working on climate change, there have not been many externally
available communications and policy on climate change. The main
outputs have been limited to the White Paper in 2006, the climate
change elements of the research strategy in 2008 and statements
at the UNFCCC negotiations. This may have limited DFID's ability
to influence others regarding the issues around climate change
and development.
7. OPPORTUNITIES
a. DFID is currently taking stock of its mainstreaming
efforts across environment, disaster risk reduction, and adaptation.
This provides a major opportunity for an integrated approach that
builds all three issues into development cooperation in a way
that maximises synergies and minimises duplication.b. DFID has
included climate change as one of the central strands of its new
research strategy, with the Secretary of State committing over
£100 million to climate change research over the next ten
years. Mechanisms need to be in place to ensure that the results
of such research are brought to bear on DFID's own polices and
practice.
c. The creation of a low carbon development policy
team under the climate change group in DFID provides an opportunity
to ensure that adaptation efforts are coordinated with mitigation
efforts. Whilst not constraining the rights of developing countries
to grow, low carbon will need to be one of the considerations
around adaptation activities to ensure that adaptation does not
exacerbate the climate change problem.
d. As integrating adaptation into development
policy is a relatively new area of work, this submission focuses
primarily on the extent to which the conditions exist to enable
this process. A more rigorous results-based analysis of the extent
of integration is therefore required.
8. THREATS
a. The current public, political and media interest
around climate change may not be sustained, leading to the subject
dropping off the agenda. The food crisis and financial crisis
respectively demonstrate how other issues may divert attention
from the urgency of both adapting to and mitigating climate change.b.
Placing attention on adaptation is valued because of the need
to enable the most vulnerable citizens, who have had the smallest
role in creating the problem, to tackle climate shocks and stresses.
However, best available science (IPCC 4th assessment report, 2007)
emphasises that adaptation can only serve as a palliative measure,
and significant efforts are required to stabilise atmospheric
levels of greenhouse gases in order to minimise the disruption
to the climate system. Adaptation efforts must also therefore
avoid further locking development into high carbon intensity pathways;
integrating adaptation and mitigation of climate change is crucial.
c. Finance through UNFCCC mechanisms to assist
adaptation is likely to create parallel processes which are not
subject to the same checks and balances as Official Development
Assistance (ODA). DFID will need to ensure that UK development
cooperation complements other channels of adaptation funding to
avoid duplication.
d. A pressure to demonstrate and account for
funding streams on adaptation (perhaps due to commitments made
under the UNFCCC) may add to pressure to separate adaptation from
mainstream development rather than integrate it. Integration means
spending on adaptation is less easy to track and account for.
Annex 1
CLIMATE RISK SCREENING IN DFID PROGRAMMES
9. IDS has played a central role in assisting
DFID in undertaking climate risk assessments to integrate adaptation
into its portfolios of investments at country level.
10. Donor portfolio screening has emerged as
one of the dominant approaches for the integration of climate
change adaptation into development cooperation. The approach incorporates
lessons from mainstreaming other cross-cutting issues such as
gender and HIV/AIDS into development activities. It also draws
on the risks and opportunities framework currently used in environmental
screening of development projects, which derive from concepts
of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Strategic Environment
Assessment (SEA). A distinguishing feature of the climate risk
assessment approach developed here is the direction of impact:
the approach assesses the potential impacts of climate-related
events and processes on programme objectives and activities, rather
than of programme activities on the environment.
11. In response to these policy drivers,
pilot climate risk assessments (CRA) of DFID country programmes
in Bangladesh, India, and Kenya, were initiated in 2007. These
assessments aimed to:
a. Estimate the extent of fiduciary risk to the
development cooperation programme.
b. Develop adaptation options to mitigate this
risk and assess their feasibility, costs and benefits.
c. Develop a methodology to build institutional
capacity to manage climate change related risks and opportunities
for development cooperation investments.
12. A methodology was developed (known as
ORCHID) to enable development cooperation actors themselves to
assess current and future climate risks and to develop adaptation
and disaster risk reduction options to manage these risks where
necessary. In Kenya, the methodology was modified somewhat to
incorporate a broader sector level analysis.
13. The methodology involves the active
participation of programme managers and staff in determining risks,
in evaluating current risk management, and in developing and prioritising
adaptation options. This process is guided by a resource person
with a broad understanding of development, disaster management
and climate change. It considers climate change adaptation as
an ongoing process of risk management rather than as a single
discrete output, and emphasises on raising awareness and disseminating
knowledge.
14. The screening compares project objectives
and activities with historic climate records, future climate trends,
impact projections, and vulnerability analysis. For each programme
objective and activity, a list is made of those activities that
already contribute, to some extent, to mitigating risks from climate
change. In addition, a wide range of potential adaptation options
are identified to tackle residual or unmanaged risks and to exploit
opportunities to strengthen adaptive capacity. These potential
options draw on existing experiences and emerging good practice
in disaster risk reduction and adaptation, as well as on expert
and stakeholder review processes.
15. The screening showed how the DFID programmes
already contribute to vulnerability reduction and building of
broader adaptive capacity, both as part of good development practice
and some existing targeted activities relating directly to climate
shocks and stresses.
16. In Bangladesh, the risk assessment identified
a prevailing level of risk to almost all projects from regular
catastrophic disaster events. DFID-B already supports disaster
risk reduction and climate change adaptation initiatives through
targeted interventions such as the Comprehensive Disaster Management
Programme.
17. Current and future climate risks are
already being managed by existing activities of the Chars Livelihoods
Programme, including the raising of homesteads on earth mounds
above the 20-year flood line. Other recommended options for managing
risks included greater attention to infrastructure design in health,
education and private sector development programmes, as well as
non-structural measures such as livelihoods diversification, education,
training, and improved research and monitoring.
18. The ORCHID assessment of climate risks
in suggests that DFID programmes as a whole should:
a. Continue to support dialogue on disaster risk
reduction and climate change adaptation in key sectors.
b. Seek to integrate adaptation priorities elaborated
by national governments in future programme development.
c. Increase emphasis on urban areas, given that
existing levels of rural-urban migration are likely to be reinforced
by climate change impacts.
d. Develop a UK government, multi-donor approach
to stimulate international dialogue around crucial but complex
and politically-charged issues of mass migration and trans-boundary
water issues.
19. For more information on climate risk
screening of DFID programmes, please visit: www.ids.ac.uk/climatechange/orchid
63 This submission is from the perspective of Dr Thomas
Tanner and should not be treated as representative of the Institute
of Development Studies as a whole. Back
|
