Adaptation to Climate Change in Developing Countries

Toespraak | 26-11-2009

Ladies and gentlemen,

It’s a great pleasure and honour for me to speak to you this morning. I would like to thank the organisers, the “DAAR Campagne”, an initiative of the “Hier Klimaatcampagne” and NCDO; the Klimaatbureau and Worldconnectors. Thank you for the opportunity to address this conference on adaptation to climate change in developing countries. You are all familiar with the effects of climate change: hotter days, more intense rainfall, droughts, fire and higher sea levels – to name only a few.

We are at a crucial moment. With only two weeks to go to Copenhagen, climate change is on everyone’s mind, and widely covered by the media. Scientists and most governments agree that an average global warming over 2 degrees will result in dangerous and irreversible climate change with significant economic, social and environmental impact. Not long ago, environment and development were considered separate issues. Climate change put the interlinkages squarely on the political agenda – and made action a moral imperative.

The stakes are high. If Copenhagen does not succeed, it will be an enormous blunder. We need a strong, politically binding agreement. And we need it now! The Dutch government will be stronly represented in Copenhagen by Prime Minister Balkenende, Minister Cramer of Housing, Spatial Planning & the Environment and myself. We are firmly committed to the 30% reduction of emissions within our own borders.

Adaptation in the Netherlands

The climate in the Netherlands is expected to change significantly over the coming decades. The possible consequences have been identified by various studies, most of them publicly funded. Four ministries – Housing, Spatial Planning & the Environment, Transport, Public Works & Water Management, Agriculture, Nature & Food Quality, and Economic Affairs – have provided the knowledge and capacity needed to assess the impact of climate change and develop adaptation strategies. The most alarming consequences of climate change for the Netherlands include wetter winters, drier summers, less biodiversity and rising sea levels.

Already, sea levels have risen 20 centimetres over the past century; they are expected to rise further by an average of 60 centimetres. River discharges and precipitation are increasing, while the land is subsiding. In response, the Dutch government is implementing a comprehensive Delta Programme to protect the country. To give only a few examples: some 700 million euros has been reserved for maintenance of inland waterways from 2004 to 2010. After 2010 another 10 billion euros will be made available to widen, deepen and maintain the waterways. This spring the government decided to speed up planned spending on coastal protection. The Minister of Transport expects to spend 15 million euros a year from 2012 to 2013 on safety.

In short, adaptation to climate change is costly. It requires research, assessment, solid institutional frameworks and interministerial cooperation. And in the Netherlands, adaptation measures fall mostly within the public domain.

Adaptation in developing countries

How different this is from the situation that vulnerable developing countries now face. These countries are already feeling the effects of climate change. Effects that may threaten lives, industries and jobs, biodiversity, sustainable agricultural production and ecosystems. It all sounds frightening even in the abstract. We should not forget that climate change has a real impact on real people. And that impact is mostly felt by the 1.5 billion people living on one dollar a day or less – the majority of whom are women.

This is very clear in Bangladesh, which I visited last July. Dhaka, just a few metres above sea level, is between a rock and a hard place – facing danger in the rear from the rising rivers of the delta, including the mighty Brahmaputra, and on the other side from rising sea levels. A recent WWF study said that of all the cities in the world, Dhaka is the most vulnerable to climate change. I spoke in Bangladesh to poor people who depend on agriculture for a living, who risk going hungry or losing their livelihoods when droughts strike and rains become unpredictable. I heard the stories of people living in marginal areas, vulnerable to floods, who fear for their future because of rising seas and storms. The nexus between poverty, the complex effects of climate change, and lack of adequate capacity and money to implement adaptation policies will lead to internal displacement, loss of jobs and increased poverty in its many dimensions: loss of income, loss of dignity, hunger. We cannot allow this to happen.

The nexus of mitigation, adaptation and development cooperation

Mitigation, adaptation and development are closely linked, and these links could be strengthened. Mitigation prevents complete change from getting completely out of hand. Adaptation is needed in any case to deal with the effects climate change is already having on developing countries. Development gives people access to the resources, knowledge and health care that they need to survive climate change. Mitigation, adaptation and development are all essential and urgent if we are to prevent unacceptable risks. So it is important that the nexus between them be strengthened.I am convinced that the NGOs that are looking into the interfaces between development cooperation, environment and climate are making a major contribution to strengthening this nexus. I plan to put this issue on the agenda of the development ministers in Copenhagen.

Current affairs

With the Copenhagen conference fast approaching, climate change is on everyone’s mind and widely covered by the media. Scientists and most governments agree that an average global warming of more than two degrees will lead to dangerous, irreversible climate change with a significant economic, social and environmental impact. Not long ago, environment and development were considered separate issues. Climate change has put the linkages squarely on the political agenda and made action a moral imperative. So your conference on adaptation to climate change in developing countries could not be timelier.

As you know, the Netherlands is working for a significant political deal in Copenhagen. I think that the importance of this summit remains undiminished, even if its outcome will not be what we once expected. We need to take advantage of the new situation. In my view, it gives developing countries new opportunities to stress and advance their specific interests. For example, as the discussion moves forward on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD), we can see clearly that there can be no one-size-fits-all programme. The instruments that emerge from the process should be feasible and accessible for everyone, including middle-income countries with vast forest regions.

A triple crisis

The developing world faces a triple crisis. Already hard hit by the effects of other global crises – the economic crisis, the food crisis, the fuel crisis – it is arguably the most vulnerable to climate change. Climate change and climatic variability have impacted and will continue to impact all sectors, from national and economic security to human health, food production, infrastructure, water and ecosystems. The world is facing major challenges with respect to poverty, hunger, climate change and energy supply. The rapid increase in the world’s population and changes in consumption patterns are raising demand for food, water and energy.

In many places the overburdened ecosystems are no longer reliable sources of food and water for the mushrooming population. There is a growing imbalance between the supply of the basic necessities of life and demand for them. This creates scarcity, leading to sharp increases in food, raw materials and energy prices and heightened tensions between countries and population groups. Poor people, who spend a large part of their income on food and energy, are especially vulnerable and least able to defend themselves.

Effects of climate change on developing countries

The impact of climate change, in the form of droughts, flooding and failed harvests – and migration by climate refugees out of areas where they can no longer eke out a meagre living – is likely to turn growth rates negative and undermine development prospects.

The least developed countries and the small island developing states, often heavily dependant on a single sector like agriculture or tourism, face major socioeconomic setbacks. With the impact of climate change becoming more pronounced, it is seen as a growing threat to global stability and peace. Developing countries’ fate is all the more unfair because they had no part in the triple crisis of rising emissions, economic downturn and staggering food prices. They are suffering the consequences of our unbridled consumption, corporate greed and emissions boom.

Adaptation to climate change

The Western world’s success in reducing emissions is crucial to the future of humanity. Equally crucial is the extent to which developing countries are able to adapt to climate change – or, more accurately, are enabled to adapt to climate change. As Minister for Development Cooperation, I care deeply about this issue. While much work has been done on the origins of climate change and the need for ambitious mitigation policies, much less is known about how national governments can best protect their most vulnerable people. Nor is it clear what financing mechanisms are needed so that developing countries can respond adequately to climate change. As a first step towards this goal, together with the UK and Switzerland, I have initiated and financed a comprehensive World Bank study on the costs of adaptation. The results, compiled in the report The Costs to Developing Countries of Adapting to Climate Change, were presented a few weeks ago.

[The report is available via the website www.worldbank.org/eacc ]

The economics of adaptation

By enhancing our understanding of the global costs of adaptation, this study should inform the international community’s efforts to provide new and additional resources to developing countries. Equally important, the study will help decision-makers at national level to better cost, prioritise and sequence robust adaptation strategies. In a climate of high uncertainty, competing needs and limited financial resources, this will help decision-makers integrate adaptation into their development plans and budgets. The study’s conclusions are sobering. The World Bank estimates that between 75 and 100 billion dollars per year will be needed from 2010 to 2050 to tackle the consequences of climate change in all developing countries.

In other words, the costs of adapting to a world that is two degrees warmer are of the same order of magnitude as current Overseas Development Assistance. These numbers are not completely new to us, but this is the first time they have been calculated so precisely, on the basis of such detailed research. Another of the study’s key conclusions is that economic growth and social development are the most effective form of adaptation. However, this does not mean that business as usual is an acceptable course of action. Adaptation minimises the impact of climate change, but it does not address its causes. While developing countries should maintain or preferably accelerate their growth rates, they should also make their growth less carbon intensive. Development policy and climate policy are thus not competing objectives, but reinforce each other.

A people-centred solution

There can be no doubt that transfer of green technology is urgently needed. However, the best way to achieve climate-resilient development is by combining human development based on people-centred solutions with technology to combat climate change. This implies, in my view, that women should be an integral part of any agreement that emerges from Copenhagen or beyond – not as an afterthought or because it’s politically correct, but because it’s the right thing to do. Women are indeed victims of climate change – more likely than men to die in natural disasters, and more affected when drought strikes and water tables fall. But let us not forget another crucial fact: that women are fundamental agents of change. The recent UNFPA report State of the World Population 2009 demonstrates that investment in women and girls – particularly in their education and health – boosts economic development, reduces poverty and benefits the environment.

In general, resilient countries and well-organised societies are more likely to succeed in protecting themselves from natural disasters. If slum dwellers are able to build better, sturdier houses, this not only improves their living conditions and standards but also their chances of surviving natural disasters like hurricanes and floods. This is why Haiti, for instance, one of the world’s poorest countries, suffers more damage from cyclones than a relatively more developed country like Cuba.

Example of Ethiopia

I came back only a few weeks ago from a trip to Ethiopia. African countries in general are heavily dependent on their natural resources and have less capacity to take the measures needed to cope with climate change; Ethiopia is no exception. Here again I could see with my own eyes the hardship and havoc wreaked by the climate crisis. Farmers in Ethiopia rely heavily on their harvests for their daily food needs. Due to changing weather patterns, these harvests have been failing since 2007. Consequently, 42% of the people in Ethiopia’s Somali Region, 1.8 million people, are now dependent on food aid. This is an example of how climate change is an integral part of the issues that developing countries face. So climate change policy should be integrated into national development plans by making these plans climate proof. Managing the inevitable through adequate adaptation measures and charting a new, green development path for the future is an enormous challenge. Institutional weaknesses, lack of data, vulnerability to external economic shocks, lack of access to technology – all these elements of the development deficient compound the climate crisis at local level.

Obligation to pay for adaptation to climate change

Addressing climate change requires unprecedented global cooperation across borders. In my view, climate change is not merely an energy or environmental issue; it is also a moral issue of equity. All nations and people have the right to development. At this point, to judge by the GDPs of rich countries, the international community can still manage the costs of adaptation, but for poor countries these costs are unacceptably high. Mitigation, adaptation and development cooperation are more vital than ever to make the poor less vulnerable to climate change. Within the EU, we agreed at the last Council that roughly 100 billion euros a year will be needed by 2020 to tackle climate change in developing countries. In the short term we will need 5 to 7 billion euros a year for urgent capacity building as well as adaptation and mitigation.

The Netherlands has pledged 100 million euros a year until 2013 to ensure short-term, decisive action that must be taken. Equally important is that these funds are in addition to our structural commitment of spending 0.7% of our GDP on ODA and another 0.1% on non-ODA development cooperation. When we discuss the costs of adaptation to climate change, we are not talking about traditional poverty reduction or development cooperation. We are talking about additional investments in development that are needed due to emissions from developed and rapidly growing developing countries. It would be unfair to burden the poorest countries with these additional costs.

In these times of international financial crisis, I may not have made myself popular in the West by saying that international public financial support for adaptation in the poorest developing countries should as far as possible be new and additional, so as not to jeopardise the Millennium Development Goals. But I strongly feel that common concerns should be met with international solidarity.

Innovative Finance Mechanisms

Financing the investments to address climate change requires a combination of private flows, public domestic resources and external public resources. In addition to the Adaptation Fund, which will receive funding through the CDM-mechanism, I envisage fund flows through existing sources such as the Global Environment Fund (GEF) and a reformed Climate Fund under World Bank fiduciary norms. However, I would like to emphasise that a substantial part of this new and additional funding for climate change should be generated by innovative mechanisms, such as the auctioning of emission rights and proceeds generated by levies on international aviation and shipping. Such instruments are still under discussion in Copenhagen. In my view, such resources should be channelled directly into a UNFCCC Strategic Fund. This fund will increase the overall predictability of climate change funding as it can be used to address underfunded priorities through existing mechanisms. By creating a strategic fund we can address concerns by developing countries about directing funding where they need it most, without establishing a new institution, thus contributing to overall aid effecicieny and effectiveness.

Mitigation

Although this conference is about adaptation, let me also speak briefly about mitigation. To reduce CO2 emissions, the Dutch government has adopted an extensive, ambitious programme for renewable energy in developing countries. We are providing 500 million euros above our regular ODA to promote investments and develop capacity in new forms of renewable energy like small hydropower plants, biogas and thermal energy. The current negotiations in Copenhagen seem to be leading towards the establishment of Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs). I strongly support the notion of ownership reflected in NAMAs. At the same time, I recognise that charting a low-carbon growth path and building energy security will require not only access to other forms of energy but also capacity to develop and implement policies. I am pleased to let you know that I’m considering to contribute to the World Bank programme for Scaling-Up Renewable Energy.

Urgency of acting now

The World Bank study makes plain that taking action in favour of adaptation now can result in future savings and reduce unacceptable risks. Investing now in making developing countries, their societies and their people more resilient will pay off – literally, by saving future costs, and figuratively, in terms of human development, by preventing suffering and loss of life. In short, paying our share of adaptation in developing countries is not only a moral obligation; it is also more economical to invest now than to wait for the effects to worsen and the costs to spin out of control. The Netherlands and the EU have shown leadership and strong commitment with our emission reduction target – 20 to 30% by 2020 – and our pledge of 22 to 50 billion euros for adaptation and mitigation in developing countries.

Copenhagen

Let me be very clear: there is no alternative to a far-reaching agreement at the Copenhagen COP in December 2009. I can assure you that the Netherlands remains committed to a comprehensive, legally binding instrument – that is, one that will require ratification. But we need to be realistic. There is simply not enough time left before Copenhagen to ‘seal the deal’ in a legal text. However, Obama’s statement yesterday that he will attend the Copenhagen summit brings new momentum. While the package of emissions reductions may be less ambitious than we would have liked, his participation is critical because many delegates are looking to the United States to come forward. It has now been confirmed that Chinese premier Wen Jiabao will also attend. The importance of their participation cannot be underestimated: only high level leaders can take the decisions on the broad range of issues, such as finance, technology and trade, that are necessary to reach a strong framework agreement on climate change. Strong action and inspirational leadership will be required in Copenhagen. I believe that despite scepticism, we do have a global responsibility and a historic opportunity and to ensure Copenhagen will be remembered as a decisive, bold, action-oriented summit.

Conclusion

Ladies and gentlemen,

To sum up, the Netherlands is firmly committed to reducing emissions by 30% within our own borders. We are convinced of the need for additional funding to cope with the extra costs of adaptation and mitigation, and have earmarked 100 million euros a year for the period until 2010. I strongly believe that we should strive for binding commitments on all the building blocks – mitigation, adaptation, finance and technology ­– elaborating concrete targets, actions and mechanisms. Articulating the nexus between development, adaptation and mitigation will help build new bridges and trust between the UNFCCC parties.

The lack of progress in the run up to Copenhagen is indeed disappointing. I know many of you here today see the global prospects for concerted action with skepticism. Why indeed is it that the international community can act swiftly and decisively in response to the financial crisis, while on the climate crisis key players are dragging their feet? However complex the factors involved, ultimately the answer is simple: short-term costs and only long-term benefits – or should I say: short-sightedness versus long-term vision? Drastic measures to combat climate change cost money. They are not popular with a large part of the electorate nor, generally, with politicians. But if we don’t act now, the future costs will be even higher and the human costs will be unacceptable. For me, inertia is not acceptable. Failing to ‘seal the deal’ in December must not lead to further delay. In particular, it is vital that the many active groups and individuals, like you, push on with your actions. We have to take our responsibility and bite the bullet now, even in times of economic crisis. If we in the Western world have to adapt our lifestyle, so be it. We need to help developing countries to pursue a sustainable, low-carbon, climate-resilient future.

Thank you.