MDG7: progress, regress, moving forward Isagani R. Serrano PRRM President Presentation at the International Conference on MDG+10, 5-7 May 2010, Madrid,

MDG7: progress, regress, moving forward

Isagani R. SerranoPRRM President

Presentation at the International Conference on MDG+10, 5-7 May 2010, Madrid, Spain organized by Coordinadora in

cooperation with EU and Spanish Government

Millennium Declaration & MDGs

• Millennium Summit of 2000: commitment to human rights (UDHR) and enlargement of freedoms

• Millennium Development Goals: ‘synthesis’ of international commitments to end poverty, reduce inequalities, and protect the environment

• MDGs: 8 goals, 18 targets, 48 indicators (4 more targets and corresponding indicators added during World Summit 2005 or MDG+5 Summit)

MDG7—ensuring environmental sustainability

• Target 9. Integration of sustainable development principles into policies and programs & reversal of environmental decline

• Indicators25. Forest cover (FAO)26. Protected area for biological diversity (UNEP-WCMC)27. Energy use (kg oil equivalent) per $1 GDP (PPP) (IEA, World Bank)28. CO2 emissions per capita (UNFCCC, UNSD) and ODS consumption (UNEP)29. Population using solid fuels (WHO)

MDG7—ensuring environmental sustainability

• Target 10. Sustainable access to safe drinking water & basic sanitation

• Indicators30. Proportion of population with sustainable access to an improved water source, urban and rural (UNICEF-WHO)31. Proportion of population with access to improved sanitation, urban and rural (UNICEF-WHO)

MDG7--ensuring environmental sustainability

• Target 11. Significant improvement in the lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers by 2020

• Indicator32. Proportion of households with access to secure tenure (UN-HABITAT)

10 years after

• From 1990 to 2006, increase in CO2 emissions: developed countries from 11.2 billion mt to 12.2 billion mt; developing countries from 6.8 bn mt to 13.8 bn mt; worldwide from 21.9 bn mt to 28.7 bn mt

• Reduction in consumption of ODS or progress in the implementation of Montreal Protocol

10 years after

• Alarming deforestation rate: 13 M hectares/year equivalent to land area of Bangladesh

• Only 18 M km2 of land and 3 M km2 of territorial marine waters protected = 12 % of Earth’s surface.

• Forestry accounts for 17.4% of world’s CO2 emissions.

10 years after• Depletion rate of fisheries up from 70% in 1995

to 80% in 2006• Water withdrawal rate for agriculture up from

70% in 1990 to 78% in 2000.• 1.1 B gained access to improved sanitation from

1990 to 2006 but 1.4B more must have access by 2015

• 18% or 1.2B people still defecate in the open• On track in drinking water target but 884 M more

rely on unsafe sources, 84% or 746 M of them in rural areas

10 years after

• Almost half of urban dwellers in developing countries lived in slums in 1990, reduced to 36% by 2005.

• Improvement in the lives of slum dwellers in almost all regions but current housing and energy crisis may slow or even reverse progress.

Why that progress, shortfall & reversal?

1. What can we learn from them?2. How would new issues and challenges

impact on meeting the MDGs by 2015?3. How to accelerate progress in next 5

years? What to do and who’s responsible for what?

UNFCCC COP15 legacy

After 15 COPs and chasing climate justice for 20 years :

Copenhagen Accord(!?)

A problematic ‘Accord’

• Stabilization target: <2°C means nothing without firm commitment to urgent & deep cuts.

• Mitigation across the board: quantified economy-wide emissions targets for 2020 by Annex 1 Parties and NAMAS of developing (non-Annex 1) country Parties undermines principle of common but differentiated responsibilities.

• Uncertain, indicative, inadequate climate financing: $10bn/yr or $30bn in three years (2010- 2012); $100bn/yr by 2020; Copenhagen Green Climate Fund

So what now?

• Can UNFCCC still prevent dangerous human interference in the climate system?

• Can it still bind industrialized (Annex 1) countries to cut their GHG emissions (mitigation) and help developing (non-Annex 1) countries to adjust (adaptation) through finance and technology transfer?

• Can it still be an instrument for enforcing carbon justice and achieving SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT?

Over 40 billion of this in the air now…maybe more.

How on earth can we do it?

• 47 billion tons of CO2 up there to be captured• Not a ton more than that by 2015• Must come down to 44 billion by 2020• Under 35 billion by 2030• Further down to below 20 billion by 2050• For a 50:50 chance to keep GW at <2°C

• Numbers are from Sir Nicholas Stern, British MP and economist.

No excuses: cut now, cut deep!

Consider:• US – 305 m people @ 23.6 tons

CO2eq/person=over 7 billions tons CO2eq• EU– 830 m people @ 12tons CO2eq

/person=about 10 billion CO2eq• China—1.3 billion or one of six of humanity @

6 tons CO2eq/person=about 7.8 billion tons CO2eq

Is it possible?

Cochabamba 2010: who’s listening?

• A binding agreement on a “Universal Declaration of Mother Earth Rights”

• A “Climate Justice Tribunal” to hear cases and try violators

• “Climate Debt” of rich countries to poor countries who had little responsibility for the climate crisis

• “World People’s Referendum on Climate Change” as the means to air people’s views and legitimizing decisions

MITIGATION: fair share & recounting our carbon footprint

• Differentiating emissions by region/country and by class (eg. ‘over-emitters’, ‘under-emitters’, ‘sustainers’) and levy corresponding taxes.

• Accounting for sustainable practices in agriculture, fisheries, forest and watershed protection, and ecological waste management in CO2 reduction. How much carbon healthy soils or degraded lands can really hold?

ADAPTATION:a default mode & ‘must do’

• Cut through the chase. We may die before we could get justice. Adjust now before it’s too late, regardless of climate talks.

• How vulnerable are we (economic, social, political, geophysical, etc.)? POVERTY (our basic vulnerability) + CC = DISASTERS.

• What’s our adaptive capacity level---HIGH, MEDIUM, LOW? • HIGH adaptive capacity means: >a stable and prosperous economy; >a high degree of access to technology at all levels; >well-delineated roles and responsibilities for implementation of

adaptation strategies; >systems in place for the national, regional and local dissemination

of climate change and adaptation information; and >an equitable distribution of access to resources.

How vulnerable are we?

• POVERTY: If China’s dramatic poverty reduction is not counted, there are more poor people in the world now than when we started with MDG.

• INEQUALITY: Rich getting richer, wealth generated by growth enjoyed mostly by rich countries and the richest in every country.

• CONTINUING ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION: Poor performance by the 3 conventions---UNFCCC,

UNFCBD, UNCCD---and other multilateral environmental aggreements (MEAs).

How vulnerable are we?

• In just one month in 2009, two typhoons alone left the Philippines with: about 1000 dead, thousands more homeless, a damage totaling US$4.38 billion or 206 B pesos. Annual average of direct damage (1970-2006)---about US$305 million or 15 B pesos.

• How much heat can a vulnerable country like the Philippines endure---1, 2, 3 degrees---and for how long? How many super typhoons and floods can it survive, and at what cost? What would it take to adjust to CC impacts?

Green jobs & poverty

• If every problem translates to work, there’s more than enough problems around for anyone to be out of work.

• Every environmental problem a green job.• China and South Korea have it as national

policy to create green jobs.

Greening national development

• China: committed $140 billion of its $586 billion stimulus package to the promotion of renewable energy, which already employs 1 million people. Internal aid flows: about $10B annually from central to outlying (‘poorer’) regions.

• Internal aid flows: about $10B yearly transfer from rich regions to outlying (‘poor’) regions

Greening national development

• Korea: a stimulus package, about 3 per cent of GDP, dedicated to ‘greening’ the economy, of which 80 per cent focused on generating 1M green jobs in next 4 years.

• $5.8 billion investments in energy conservation in villages and schools to generate 170, 000 jobs; $1.7 billion in forest restoration to create about 130,000 jobs; $690 million for water resource management and over 160,000 jobs; and, $10 billion for river restoration to produce about 200,000+ jobs.

Integrating MDGs and CCA into national development

Addressing the dilemma of “Growth without development” What poverty-and-climate-sensitive plans and budgets should consider:• Ensuring basic capabilities: universal education & health care• Ensuring food security through sustainable agriculture, forestry, fisheries • Green jobs and full employment• Shifting to renewable/sustainable energy systems.• Clean production and clean consumption (full cycle greening) • Ecological waste management• Policy of stabilizing population levels• Community participation in addressing environmental problems and finding local

solutions• Good governance and people’s participation at all levels• Budgeting and financing for these priorities

Integration into development planning & budgeting

• Lessons from Philippine Agenda 21 (1990s-present)---policy incoherence (disconnect) between PA21 and medium- term development plan (MTPDP), policy-action gap, ‘money not where the mouth is’

• Philippine Strategy Framework and Action Plan on Climate Change: addressing vulnerabilities & risks, building high adaptive capacity toward achieving sustainable development

• Citizen/people/women participation in government planning & budgeting processes top-down, ground-up, and alternative processes (e.g. shadow reviews, Alternative Budget Initiative or ABI)

Global cooperation

• Increase EU aid for environment and climate change adaptation on top of existing ODA commitments.

• For bilateral aid, follow the examples of Spain funding of MDG-F, German aid for climate change adaptation, and others.

• More funding for community-based projects on reforestation/watershed protection, coastal resources management, sustainable agriculture.

Global cooperation

• No unfair strings attached on climate financing, eg Copenhagen Green Climate Fund.

• Grants not loans, more public resources for climate & environmental spending.

• Avoid privatization of environment and climate funds raised from public sources.

Global cooperation

• Trade openness must never compromise environmental safeguards.

• Financing resource extraction and promoting nature conservation, like oil and water, cannot mix.

• No proxy mitigation please: carbon offset & flexible mechanisms, like CDM, if at all necessary, must be over and above domestic mitigation responsibility.

• REDD –reducing emission from deforestation & forest degradation cannot substitute for CO2 emission reduction at home. Commercialization of REDD could lead to more deforestation.

And finally…

European NGOs must keep up pressure on EU and its members to keep their promises.