070227 REN21 Voluntary Commitments and the IAP

VOLUNTARY COMMITMENTS AND THE INTERNATIONAL ACTION PROGRAMME: 

VOLUNTARY COMMITMENTS AND THE INTERNATIONAL ACTION PROGRAMME Presentation to a side event At the Intergovernmental Preparatory Meeting for CSD-15 New York, 27 February 2007 Philippe Lempp

Content of Presentation: 

Content of Presentation International Action Programme IAP follow up: procedure, response IAP follow up: implementation status Impacts of IAP Features of IAP-type commitments Feasibility, quality, costs of IAP Merits of IAP Conclusion

International Action Programme: 

International Action Programme Major outcome of the International Conference for Renewable Energies, held in Bonn in June 2004 („renewables 2004“) 197 concrete commitments for developing RE Submitted by all participating stakeholder groups (governments, IGOs, civil society, private sector) Voluntary commitments to goals and targets by Actors within their own spheres of responsibility

IAP Follow Up: Procedure : 

IAP Follow Up: Procedure REN21 mandated by Bonn conference Conveners to carry out follow up Self-reporting by Actors through a simple submission format Principle of voluntary reporting, encouraged by: Frequent interaction with partners (verification of contacts) Opportunity to showcase good examples with ‘Real time’ disclosure on website Printed interim publications for wide audience Newsletters Result: database of best practices on website (www.ren21.net)

IAP Follow Up: Response Rates: 

IAP Follow Up: Response Rates March 17 2006: begin of follow up April 27: 42% June 1 (2nd anniversary): 56% October 15: 69% (=135 responses) Expected maximum: 70% - 80%

IAP Follow Up: Response Structure: 

IAP Follow Up: Response Structure Balanced structure of responses: Most regions of origin (of leading Partner) and target regions (where Action is implemented) are represented All types of actors showed strong participation (e.g. governments, IGOs, NGOs, research, industry, finance…) Responses received for all types of actions (e.g. policies, deployment, R&D, financing…) Result: The sample of responses received can be considered fairly representative for all of the Actions put forward in the IAP

IAP Follow Up: Implementation Status : 

IAP Follow Up: Implementation Status Encouraging results: Most (79%) reports show that the commitments are being or have been implemented. They are either completed (15%) or underway (64%) Others are still under preparation (16%) 2 actions not yet begun Only 4% of reported commitments have been abandoned

Impacts of IAP: 

Estimated impacts of the IAP implementation as a whole (content study 2005; Öko Institute): additional 163 GW capacity from RE by 2015 this corresponds to investments of USD 326 billion estimated CO2 reduction of 1.2 billion ton/annum in 2015 access to energy to a large number of people by 2015 Forthcoming: Updated study based on IAP follow up Impacts of IAP

IAP Features vs. Other Commitments: 

IAP-type commitments a ‘third way’ between multilaterally agreed binding targets unspecific declarations of intent Evade lengthy negotiations (risk of failure or insignificance) Initiative of one government, outside UN Flexible complement to formal institutions + procedures Accountability through peer group and public exposure Multi-stakeholder ‘deal’ that goes beyond governments Individual, measurable, impact-oriented commitments Bottom-up approach (leading then to a common goal) IAP Features vs. Other Commitments

Feasibility, Quality, Cost: 

IAP not ‘all-embracing’, but proved feasibility of a considerable catalogue of far-reaching commitments with enormous scope and impact. IAP was established in a short period of time without requiring negotiations => very low transaction costs Monitoring proved possible at reasonable cost. To the surprise of some, the follow-up was straight forward! Feasibility, Quality, Cost

Merits (1): 

Commitment programmes can be the most important outcome of international conferences. Association to a visible event important! Supports timely submission and meaningful content of commitments Creates incentives to present something: catalyst Opportunity to announce national RE programmes: amplifier Opportunity to seize interest and external support Renders the event itself more effective Additionality is a challenge: delineation difficult in case of IAP: How can additionality be ensured? Merits (1)

Merits (2): 

Catalogue: programme more than the sum of its pieces: Mutual assurance: “You are not alone” => silent agreement increases readiness to submit courageous measures Mutual support: Actions often interdependent, require synergies to work Mutual encouragement: monitoring (internal and external) prolongs mutual assurance & support throughout implementation Merits (2)

Merits (3): 

IAP Action catalogue is a Reference: …for policies and programmes to be expected in near future Online presentation exposes good practices/successful policies Exchange of experience provides basis for new partnerships to be forged between Actors with related projects …and may inspire further Action by other Actors. Information for investors, consultants, researchers (IAP pages on website visited 3000 times/month during follow up) Opportunities for anyone to follow Action development may increase Actors perseverance, preventing ‘slow death’ Successful IAP monitoring established a reference methodology, can be applied in further international policy processes related to RE or beyond. Merits (3)

Conclusion: the way forward!: 

Voluntary commitments are politically feasible. Positive experiences made, and reporting system in place => this kind of “policy-motivation” recommends itself for the future, calling for further rounds of commitments. Focus should be on policy commitments, the other ‘Actions’ to follow as a result. Conclusion: the way forward!

Thanks for your attention!: 

Thanks for your attention! Paul H. Suding, Philippe Lempp www.ren21.net