Climate Change Measure in Asia: A Review of Daily Life and ... · Climate Change Measure in Asia: A Review of Daily Life and Social / Economic Structure JENESYS East Asia Future Leaders

Climate Change Measure in Asia:A Review of Daily Life and Social /Economic Structure

September 12 - 18, 2010

The Japan FoundationJENESYS East Asia Future Leaders Programme

Climate Change Measure in Asia:A Review of Daily Life and Social / Economic Structure

September 12 - 18, 2010

The Japan FoundationJENESYS East Asia Future Leaders Programme

Climate Change Measure in Asia: A Review of Daily Life and Social / Economic Structure

JENESYS East Asia Future Leaders Programme 2010 Report

Published by

The Japan Foundation

Date of publication

March 2011

Ⓒ The Japan Foundation 2011

4-4-1 Yotsuya, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, Japan, 160-0004

Tel: +81-3-5369-6070

Fax: +81-3-5369-6041

URL: www.jpf.go.jp/e/

ISBN: 978-4-87540-131-5

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in or introduced into a retrieval system, or transmitted

in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise) without the prior permission of the

publisher of this book.

Contents

Foreword........................................................................................................................2

About.JENESYS...............................................................................................................3

Members....................................................................................................... 4

Final.Summary...............................................................................................................7

Programme.Advisor....................................................................................................20

Individual.Reports.from.Participants..........................................................................31

Cambodia / Chanthearith Ou ........................................................................................... 32

Cambodia / Sophal Leang ................................................................................................. 38

Vietnam / Dang Phuong Loan ........................................................................................... 43

Vietnam / Do Hoang Viet ................................................................................................... 46

Myanmar / Hlaing Min Maung ........................................................................................... 48

Myanmar / Shwe Cin Mya Htun ......................................................................................... 55

Laos / Vilayphone Sombathdouang ................................................................................. 60

Laos / Thounheuang Buithavong ....................................................................................... 65

Indonesia / Rendra Kurnia Hasan ....................................................................................... 70

Indonesia / Sabitah Irwani................................................................................................... 72

Thailand / Phirun Saiyasitpanich ......................................................................................... 76

Thailand / Jakkanit Kananurak ........................................................................................... 80

Philippines / Jonas Paolo Saludo ........................................................................................ 87

Singapore / Daryl Yeo .......................................................................................................... 91

Japan / Madoka Yoshino.................................................................................................... 96

Photos.........................................................................................................................101

Foreword

“Climate.Change.Measure.in.Asia:.A.Review.of.Daily.Life.and.Social/Economic.Structure”

The fifteenth Conference of the Parties (COP15) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, held in December 2009 in Copenhagen, Denmark, was attended by leaders from many different countries, for the purpose of participating in discussions aimed at reaching an agreement on a new framework on Climate Change, to be implemented from 2013. These discussions between leaders resulted in the compilation of the Copenhagen Accord, thus producing a degree of progress.

There are plans to hold COP16 in Cancun, Mexico in late November of this year. Japan believes it necessary to construct a fair and effective international framework facilitating the participation of all major nations, including the United States and China. It is incumbent on Japan to advance such international negotiations whilst working together and cooperating with other nations in respect of the Copenhagen Accord.

Through dialogue between Japan and other ASEAN nations—Japan’s neighbours in Asia—in the field of climate change, this project aims to enhance the understanding of ASEAN member states concerning Japan’s climate control measures, as well as their knowledge of all countries’ climate control measures, and to search for solutions to these global problems.

Negotiations on climate change involve consideration of such problems as the emission of greenhouse gasses including CO2, and are closely linked to the everyday lives of people, as well as to culture in the broader sense. By extrapolation, consideration of individual lifestyles, social structures, and the industrial topography of each nation is required.

For this reason, the aim of the programme was to invite other nations to inspect Japan’s advanced environmental technologies, to experience the Japanese lifestyle (culture), to familiarise themselves with Japan’s position regarding climate control measures, and to contribute to the quest for Japan-ASEAN cooperation.

Young leaders in East Asian countries such as administrators, researchers etc., especially those engaged in climate change issues were invited to participate in the programme. They discussed and shared the situation in their own countries, and learned about how the problem of climate change has been tackled in Japan. Participants visited governmental offices and field sites such as various kinds of power plants in order to gain an overview of how climate change has come about, and what is being done.

The Japan Foundation hopes that the network that has built up between the participants in this year's programme will contribute to a deeper level of mutual understanding throughout the East Asia region. Finally, the Japan Foundation would like to express our deepest appreciation to all those individuals who have contributed to the realization of this programme.

2

About.JENESYSThe Japan-East Asia Network of Exchange for Students and Youths.(JENESYS) is designed to strengthen solidarity in East Asia through the promotion of mutual understanding among the younger generations in the region. In January 2007, the then Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe announced a large-scale youth exchange initiative, budgeted at US$315 million, entitled the JENESYS Programme. Approximately 6,000 youths, mainly from East Asia Summit (EAS) member countries, has been invited to Japan over the five years (2007-2012) under the Programme.

The Japan Foundation organizes a series of East Asia Future Leader Programme, funded by the Japan-ASEAN Integration fund, as an international exchange among young intellectuals in Asia and Oceania under JENESYS Programme.

*JENESYS Programme in Asia and Oceania Section in the Japan Foundation

<1st Year: 2007-2008>- International Forum “Towards and East Asia Community: Beyond Cross-Cultural Diversity; Inter-cultural, Inter-

societal, Inter-faith Dialogue” - Group A “Migration in Asia and Oceania: Towards a Win-Win and WIN Scheme for the Origin-Destination Countries

and for the Migrant themselves”- Group B “Urban Community Development Inspired by Culture: The Potential of Creative Cities”

<2nd Year: 2008-2009>- Group C “Overcoming Poverty through a Social Inclusion Approach: The Status quo of Asia and Oceania in a

Globalized Economy”- Group D “Environmental Conservation through Biodiversity: In Search of Sustainable Development”- Group E “Migration and the Role of Community amid the Global Financial Crisis”

<3rd Year: 2009-2010>- Group F “The Potential of Peace Education in Asia and Oceania”- Group G “Re-Acknowledging Cultural Diversity: The Roles and Possibilities of the Asia and Oceania Region”- Group H “Disaster Prevention and People: Working Toward the Creation of a Strong Society”

<4rd Year: 2010-2011>- Group I “Climate Change Measure in Asia: A Review of Daily Life and Social / Economic Structure”

3

Members

Programme.Advisor

JapanYukari.TAKAMURA　Professor, School of Law, Ryukoku University, Japan

Participants

CambodiaChanthearith.OuDeputy Director, Climate Change Department, Ministry of Environment, Cambodia

Sophal.LeangTechnical Officer, Climate Change Department, Ministry of Environment, Cambodia

VietnamDang.Phuong.LoanOfficial, Department of International Cooperation, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, Vietnam

Do.Hoang.VietSpecialist, Department of Meteorology, Hydrology and Climate Change, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, Vietnam

MyanmarHlaing.Min.MaungHead of Branch, National Commission for Environmental Affairs, Ministry of Forestry, Myanmar

Shwe.Cin.Mya.HtunThird Secretary, International Organizations and Economic Department, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Myanmar

LaosVilayphone.SombathdouangTechnical Officer, Water Resources and Environment Administration, Laos

Thounheuang.BuithavongTechnical Officer, Water Resources and Environment Administration, Laos

4

IndonesiaRendra.Kurnia.HasanLegal Officer, Climate Change Impact Control, Ministry of Environment, Indonesia

Sabitah.IrwaniOfficer, Adaptation for Climate Change Unit, State Ministry, Indonesia

ThailandPhirun.SaiyasitpanichEnvironmental Official Professional Level, Office of Natural Resources and Environmental Policy and Planning, Thailand

Jakkanit.KananurakActing Director, Capacity Building and Outreach Office, Thailand Greenhouse Gas Management Organization, Thailand

PhilippinesJonas.Paolo.SaludoScience Research Specialist II, Office of the President – Climate Change Commission, Philippines

SingaporeDaryl.YeoAssistant Director, Energy Division, Ministry of Trade and Industry, Singapore

JapanMadoka.YoshinoResearch Assistant, Climate Change Group, Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES), Japan

Members5

Programme.of.Activities

Day.1.■　September.12,.2010.(Sunday)

Arrival in JapanStay in Tokyo

Day.2.■　September.13,.2010.(Monday)

<Introduction Session at Ministry of Foreign Affairs>09:30-12:00 Discussion I14:15-14:30 Courtesy Call on Ms. Nishimura, the Parliamentary Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs14:30-15:15 Discussion II15:30-16:15 Discussion III16:30-18:00 Discussion IV19:00-20:30 Welcome Reception

Stay in Tokyo

Day.3.■　.September.14,.2010.(Tuesday)

09:30-11:30 Discussion V15:00-17:00 Inspection: Panasonic CenterEvening Leave for Hiroshima (flight from Haneda Airport to Hiroshima Airport)

Stay in Hiroshima

Day.4.■　September.15,.2010.(Wednesday)

09:00-09:30 Visit Atomic Bomb Dome09:30-12:00 Visit Peace Memorial MuseumAfternoon Cultural Sightseeing: Miyajima IslandEvening Leave for Kyoto (bullet train)

Stay in Kyoto

Day.5.■　September.16,.2010.(Thursday)

11:40-13:30 Inspection: Oi Nuclear Power Plant15:00-17:30 Inspection: Maizuru Thermal Power Station

Stay in Otsu

Day.6.■　September.17,.2010.(Friday)

Morning Field Trip in Kyoto: Japanese ‘Eco’ life style and culture12:00-13:30 Farewell Lunch13:30-15:00 Overall Evaluation Session16:00-20:00 Cultural Sight seeing in Kyoto

Stay in Otsu

Day.7■　September.18,.2010.(Saturday)　 Departure of the Participants from Itami / Kansai International Airport (Osaka)

6

Final.Summary

DAY.1.(13.September):.Opinion.Exchange.Sessions.at.the.Ministry.of.Foreign.Affairs.of.Japan

Opinion.Exchange.Session.1

On the first day, the participants were driven through the central Tokyo area by bus from their hotel to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) in Kasumigaseki, Tokyo. At MOFA, Mr. Noboru Sekiguchi, Senior Negotiator for Climate Change at the International Cooperation Bureau greeted the participants. Mr. Sekiguchi introduced Mr. Akira Yamada, Deputy Director-General of the International Cooperation Bureau, who stated that in 10-20 years, the influence of climate change would be significant, and therefore would become a problem of the participants’ generation.

Next, Mr. Sekiguchi introduced Prof. Yukari Takamura, School of Law, Ryukoku University, who gave a keynote lecture providing an overview of current climate change initiatives. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) stated that its ultimate goal was the “stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate.” Developing countries argued that the long-term target must be ambitious and underpinned by developed countries’ mid-term targets. The long-term target required a more drastic and rapid reduction and a swift shift towards a low carbon society. In order to make the post-2012 regime effective, mitigation efforts by both developed countries and developing countries were essential. Looking at energy-related CO2 emissions region by region it was apparent that by 2020, developing countries could have overtaken developed countries. Therefore, international cooperation was essential in assisting developing countries.

The Copenhagen meeting had been supposed to reach a conclusion along two tracks, negotiations for developed countries’ commitments beyond 2012 under the Kyoto Protocol Ad Hoc Working Group (AWG-KP), and negotiations under the UNFCCC. The Copenhagen Accord, which COP15 “took note of,” seemed to be the only springboard for promoting negotiation post-Copenhagen, and there were concerns that it might take longer to agree on a post-2012 regime. If there was no legally-binding target, what happened to the carbon market would become an issue. In the light

JENESYSEast.Asia.Future.Leaders.Programme.2010

Climate.Change.Measure.in.Asia:A.Review.of.Daily.Life.and.Social/Economic.Structure

(Summary)

7

Final Summary

of the current state of the negotiations, a multilateral approach was absolutely more desirable. It was necessary to address the issue in a more comprehensive manner and ensure transparency and equitable allocation of efforts by countries. Efforts to reach an agreement must be maximized, and at the same time a mixed top-down and bottom-up bilateral approach must be adopted.

Mr. Rendra Kunria Hasan from Indonesia stated that he was interested in Prof. Takamura’s statement that developed and developing countries should adopt mitigation activities. He said that it was not safe to rely on multilateral negotiations because there would never be a win-win situation. Mr. Daryl Yeo from Singapore asked how negotiations would take place without a multilateral platform. Mr. Hasan responded that the multilateral platform should be kept as is, but bilateral negotiations should proceed at the same time. In response to a question by Dr. Jakkanit Kananurak from Thailand, Prof. Takamura stated that there was a difference in measurable, reportable, and verifiable (MRV) systems in developed and developing countries, and how international measurements and analysis would work with domestic MRV systems was still under discussion. Having a different formula for developed countries and developing countries could be the basis for agreement. She agreed that the United States had an obligation to reduce CO2 emissions despite not having ratified the Kyoto Protocol. However, under the Kyoto Protocol, other countries had a strong commitment hence required a more equitable commitment from the United States. Secondly, according to the inventory data, not all developed countries were on track towards the Kyoto target; rather, some had even exceeded the 1990 level, including Japan. Therefore, developed countries should take more action. However, cooperation from both sides was needed.

Mr. Do Hoang Viet from Viet Nam asked Mr. Sekiguchi whether he saw any major legal obstacles in pursuing the Kyoto Protocol. Mr. Sekiguchi stated that he saw none, but he also pointed out that Kyoto only obligates developed countries to lower emission levels, and developing countries such as China and India produced high levels of CO2. Mr. Ou Chanthearith from Cambodia asked how many Japanese Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) projects were being implemented. Prof. Takamura answered it was difficult to say how many because they were civilian projects to help developing countries. In response to a question from Dr. Phirun Saiyasitpanich from Thailand, Prof. Takamura stated that Japan had a mid-term and long-term target, but it was not expressed in terms of per capita emissions. Dr. Saiyasitpanich said it was very important for developing countries to take a stand in the negotiation on the issue of per capita emissions. Mr. Do asked how the information in the reporting system in Japan was updated. Prof. Takamura stated that major emitting companies must submit annual reports to the authorities and were also obligated to promote energy conserving initiatives under the Global Warming Act.

Ms. Madoka Yoshino from Japan asked what information other participants thought should be submitted in the annual reports. Mr. Hassan replied that it seemed difficult to develop a reporting system domestically and that a biannual or triannual report would be good. But there needed to be a differentiation between developed and developing countries. In Indonesia, a national inventory system was being prepared with the cooperation of JICA. Information such as a coping study on what activities had been recorded by various ministries, what information had been gathered, and information on how to use the IPCC guidelines would be useful. Mr. Ou stated that Cambodia had finished its first communication to the UNFCCC, but they still faced many challenges, such as different areas being under the protection of different ministries, making it difficult to compile information. Mr. Do stated that Viet Nam was on the point of its second national communication and more capacity building and funding support would help. Ms. Yoshino asked what kind of support, capacity building and funding were needed most. Mr. Do answered that there were workshops on how to carry out an inventory and technical MRV mitigation actions would be helpful as well. Mr. Ou and Mr. Hlaing Ming Maung from Myanmar stated that they had the same situation in their respective countries. Technology transfer was necessary. Prof. Takamura asked what kind of support would be helpful for CDM projects to come to the participants’ countries. Mr. Ou responded that promotion of energy efficiency and renewable energy was necessary. Mr. Hasan responded that Indonesia

8

Final Summary

needed the capital to develop a local DOE.

Dr. Saiyasitpanich enquired whether Japanese law required major emitting companies to reduce CO2 emissions by a certain amount and what kind of strategic measures was Japan taking to convince the companies to reduce emissions, particularly in the energy sector. Prof. Takamura said that under the Energy Conservation Law, major emitting companies had to improve energy efficiency by one percent annually, and they must submit and comply with a voluntary target. However, penalties for not complying were rarely enforced. Secondly, in regard to Japan’s strategic approach to implementing targets, a bill would be submitted to the Diet soon, which included provisions to achieve the target by 2020. A national trading scheme would be introduced within a year of the passing of the bill and a carbon tax would be implemented.


After enjoying lunch and the view of Tokyo from the 35th floor of the Kasumigaseki Building, the participants returned to the Ministry. At the Ministry, they paid a courtesy call on Ms. Chinami Nishimura, Parliamentary Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs. Mr. Sekiguchi then introduced Mr. Junya Nakano, another senior negotiator, and gave a presentation on mitigation. He stated that one of the most important things in terms of mitigation was the Bali Action Plan and explained its five building blocks, a shared vision, mitigation, adaptation, technology and finance, each of which was being addressed by the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action (AWG-LCA).

Japan’s basic policy on mitigation was to reduce emissions by 25 percent by 2020 compared to 1990 levels, to introduce a domestic emissions trading mechanism and feed-in tariff for renewable energy, and to consider a global warming tax. Japan’s commitment was premised on there being agreement on ambitious targets by all major emitters. The Copenhagen Accord had achieved the establishment of economy-wide emissions reduction targets for developed countries and mitigation actions by developing countries, the introduction of MRV, and a mechanism for reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation.

Japan was providing fast-start financing for developing countries up to 2012, for the purpose of assisting developing countries. Of the US$ 15 billion pledged for this purpose, US$ 5.32 million dollars had already been implemented. Areas of assistance included mitigation, REDD Plus, and adaptation. Currently Japan co-chaired the REDD Plus Partnership. In terms of domestic measures, Japan would be submitting to the Diet the Basic Act on Global Warming Countermeasures, which covered items such as an emissions trading system, a green tax system, renewable energy, etc.

Ms. Sabitah Irwani from Indonesia asked for more details about the global warming tax and Japan’s fast-start financing for developing countries. Mr. Sekiguchi stated that Japan had only committed to study what it could do under the global warming tax and there was no concrete system, but that could yet come in such forms as a levy on airline tickets. However, consideration must be given to the possibility of negative impact on the airline industry. In regard to fast-start financing, Mr. Nakano stated the JICA office in various countries researched the situation in those countries. Normally, Japan needed to identify what needs there were and what support it could give, and needed to collaborate with the government of that country.


Mr. Masanori Nakagawa, Assistant Director for International Cooperation, Office of International Cooperation on Climate Control, Ministry of the Environment, gave a presentation entitled “Adaptation to Climate Change.” The Copenhagen Accord stated that adaptation must be undertaken by both developed and developing countries. The

9

Final Summary

integration of adaptation, developing policies, scientific research, and networking were key components for enhancing adaptation actions. It was essential to mainstream adaptation into development policies. The implementation of adaptation measures must be based on scientific assessment and the accumulation and sharing of information and research findings. Additionally, past experiences and adaptation considerations should be incorporated into the various relevant policies.

Mr. Hasan asked what steps Japan had taken in terms of adaptation and what the role of the private sector was in implementing these actions. Mr. Nakagawa responded that adaptation had yet to be defined and that Japan was conducting research in this area. In terms of green adaptation and meeting the emissions target, the government wanted the private sector to participate in policy-making for adaptation, but in reality, it was only the government that was thinking about new policies. Mr. Sekiguchi stated that in terms of mitigation, the Nippon Keidanren had a voluntary group with voluntary targets and their own action plan.

Mr. Hasan asked what kind of incentive the government would provide to companies to reduce their emissions. Mr. Nakagawa said it was mostly a social commitment. Then Mr. Hasan raised the issue of how Japan would meet the 2020 target if the private sector was not involved. Mr. Sekiguchi said it would be done not only by government institutions and a domestic cap and trade system was currently under consideration. Dr. Saiyasitpanich asked about the role of the consumer sector. Prof. Takamura responded that a strict housing regulation system existed in the residential sector. However, for the moment, there was no taxation system such as would incentivize people to lower their carbon footprint. Dr. Saiyasitpanich said that some countries were considering not allowing products to be sold without labeling their carbon footprint.

Next, Mr. Ryo Nasu from METI gave a presentation entitled “Climate Change and Technology.” He stated that technology was the key to tackling climate change. One thing to keep in mind was that technology transfer was led by the private sector, and some emerging economies with manufacturing industries and sizeable markets were experiencing rapid technology transfer. For effective technology transfer, it was essential to identify BAT and best practice through public-private partnership, thereby enabling a policy environment for technology transfer and matching, that is, identifying country-specific technology needs and matching financial institutions. The Asia-Pacific Partnership (APP) promoted sector-specific cooperation. It identified and removed barriers for deployment and transfer of technologies in each sector. Technology mechanisms under UN negotiation, the Technology Executive Committee (TEC) and the Climate Technology Center and Network (CTC) also supported developing countries, both in the public and private sectors. Issues that needed to be addressed to move forward included the overall package of the post-2012 framework, the relationship between the TEC and CTC, and intellectual property rights (IPR).

Mr. Hasan asked Mr. Nasu about his ideas on IPR issues. Mr. Nasu stated that in the area of climate change technology, IPR was not much of an issue compared to issues of finance. However, the private sector remained apprehensive and it was a controversial issue under the UN negotiations. Mr. Do pointed out that the cost-benefit relationship was often not visible and asked how the involvement of the private sector would be promoted. Mr. Nasu responded that the opportunity to sell their products in a new market provided an incentive for the Japanese industrial sector. Mr. Do asked whether it was part of Japan’s vision for the future to further support this type of activity, and Mr. Nasu responded that Japan wanted to provide further support for technology transfer. Ms. Irwani asked whether Japan had any experience or documentation on technology assessment. Mr. Nasu responded that Japan was involved in technology assessment and that it also undertook cooperation on a bilateral basis with China, Indonesia and other countries.

10

Final Summary


Mr. Ou presented the Cambodian government’s policies on climate change. Cambodia had ratified the UN convention and this made Cambodia eligible for UNFCCC funding, etc., allowing Cambodia to prepare its first national communication. The Ministry of Environment had established the Climate Change Office in 2003. Because climate change had become a more serious issue, in 2009 the office had been upgraded to a Department. Cambodia had also set up a National Adaptation Programme for Action (NAPA). Through the UNFCCC Cambodia had also established the Cambodia Climate Change Alliance which was involved in a three year project funded by multiple donors for the purpose of capacity-building. Mr. Leang Sophal added that Cambodia had ratified the Kyoto Protocol in 2002.

Mr. Hasan presented climate change policies in Indonesia. Indonesia was focusing on climate change policies and an inventory. Since 2007 some activities related to mitigation had been undertaken and Indonesia was now trying to upgrade these initiatives. Indonesia was preparing a national inventory system. Local governments were also included in this initiative and were expected to manage their carbon levels. In terms of mitigation activities, the target was to reduce emissions by 26 percent by 2020. Every province was expected to have its own verification and assessment system and the Ministry of Environment was developing guidelines for local governments.

Ms. Thounheuang Buithavong of Laos outlined her country’s climate change policies. The Climate Change Office had been established in 2008. Laos had ratified the Kyoto Protocol in 2007 and climate change was a national focal point. So far, Laos had completed its first national communication in October 2000 and had established a national strategy on climate change in March 2010. Ongoing projects included the second national communication due in 2011.

Ms. Shwe Cin Mya Htun of Myanmar explained that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs was responsible for initiatives on climate change in Myanmar. Myanmar had been trying to raise public awareness on climate change since experiencing devastating natural disasters. Currently, Myanmar was analyzing statistics from the national disaster and reviewing responses. Myanmar was participating in international conventions such as the Montreal Protocol, etc. Although there were many environmental laws, they had yet to be enacted. Myanmar needed a national climate change policy and to coordinate and form a national climate change institution and a framework for environmental law.

Mr. Jonas Paolo Saludo from the Philippines explained that his country was a pioneer in climate change. The Philippines had ratified the UN convention in 1994 and the Kyoto Protocol in 2003. President Arroyo had created a climate change task force, which assessed the situation in the country. This presidential task force was well organized and united all government programs under one umbrella. In 2009 a national strategy on climate change had been drafted by executive order and a new law established. The framework would serve as a basis for a national climate change action plan which would address the need to develop a realistic program to respond to the immediate needs and adverse effects of climate change. Currently a national climate change action plan was being formulated.

Mr. Yeo described the situation in Singapore. Being a low-lying small island state, climate change was a serious issue. Singapore had implemented many policies based on environmental sustainability. Singapore was unique in that it had no resources of alternative energy, except solar power, which did not have a big impact on the environment. The Ministry of Trade and Industry was currently considering other options, including nuclear power, and viewed technology as having a big role in energy efficiency.

Dr. Saiyasitpanich described the situation in Thailand. Thailand had ratified the UNFCCC in 1994 and the Kyoto Protocol in 2002 with the aim of becoming a clean society and green economy. Thailand was trying to privatize major

11

Final Summary

energy companies and concentrate on alternative fuels. With emissions charging now underway, Thailand was moving to facilitate the implementation of nuclear energy. Another approach was incentive-based, utilizing tax breaks, clean development, etc. Thailand also promoted a carbon market. Carbon reduction levels could be applied for by companies by reducing emissions levels by 10 percent.

Ms. Dang Phuong Loan and Mr. Do outlined the situation in Viet Nam. Viet Nam was one of the countries most affected by climate change. The government had implemented policies under the UNFCCC. Viet Nam had also completed a national communication to the UNFCCC. Recently it had approved a national target for responding to climate change. Under this program, action plans had been developed. Viet Nam laid emphasis on mitigation because it was one of the most affected and most vulnerable countries, although it emitted only 0.4 percent of global emissions. In terms of national policies, key points were the identification of impacts and measures, including mainstream measures for national and sectoral planning, a science program to develop technologies, and drawing up legal documents and guidelines. Other sideline issues included the promotion of a green culture and possibly a nuclear energy program.

Ms. Yoshino briefly introduced the Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES) which conducts policy research to support sustainable development in the Asia-Pacific region. Her division, the Climate Change Group (CC) and Market Mechanism Group were working closely with Asian developing countries. Currently IGES-CC was working on the post-2012 climate regime, reviewing emission reduction pledges, identifying existing and possible institutional frameworks, and monitoring progress in different countries regarding climate change mitigation and adaptation. International negotiation, MRV systems, co-benefits approach, and sustainable low carbon development were a few of the topics covered variously through policy research, holding workshops and conducting interviews and policy dialogues.

Prof. Takamura closed the session by recognizing three common points. First, over time the international community had succeeded in developing institutions for dealing with the climate change issue. Secondly, all countries had made continuous efforts to tackle the problem of climate change, especially in the areas of national communication, drawing up an inventory and NAPA. Lastly, various mitigation measures had been taken in each country, including the enactment of climate laws and preparation of infrastructure for CDM and adaptation.

Welcome.Reception.at.Dai-ichi.Hotel.Tokyo

In the evening, participants attended a reception held in their honor at the Dai-ichi Hotel Tokyo. Mr. Shinsuke Sugiyama, Director-General for Global Issues, MOFA, gave a welcoming speech, saying that dealing with climate change had become one of the top agendas in the international community and it was essential for Japan to cooperate with other Asian countries. Each of the participants then introduced themselves. Representing the participants, Mr. Yeo thanked MOFA and the Japan Foundation for having invited them and stated that he hoped to share ideas, learn best practices and build lasting friendships through the program. Prof. Takamura gave a toast saying that while the situations in each country differed, the participants were all there for the purpose of continuing efforts to combat climate change and that she hoped for a successful and fruitful week.

12

Final Summary

DAY.2.(14.September):.Opinion.Exchange.Session.at. the.Ministry.of.Foreign.Affairs.of.Japan.and.Visit. to. the.Panasonic.Center


Mr. Sekiguchi introduced Mr. Daisuke Hirota from the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) who gave a presentation entitled “Promotion of Practical GHG Emissions Reduction through the Bilateral Offset Mechanism with Low Carbon Technologies and Products.” The coverage of emissions by countries committed under the Kyoto Protocol to reduce CO2 emissions accounted for only 30 percent of global CO2 emissions and even if those countries achieved their commitments, global emissions would actually increase. Therefore it was not enough for developed countries alone to reduce CO2 emissions.

In regard to the CDM, a major problem was that the review process by the UN took a long time. Additionally there were limitations, such as types of eligible projects. Japan had many low carbon technologies and products, for example in the power, steel, and cement sectors. If these were to be applied to power plants in other countries, they would greatly reduce CO2 emissions. Japan supported the Copenhagen Accord, and was implementing a new offset mechanism, which was effective and speedy in making bilateral arrangements, and was in a public-private initiative covering a wider range of technologies than the CDM. Ensuring mobility and flexibility for each business and contribution to the economic revitalization of various sectors and areas were essential. METI had started to fund feasibility studies and intended to increase the budget for this initiative.

Dr. Kananurak asked Mr. Hirota whether the feasibility study for road transportation was for something similar to a GPS system. Mr. Hirota explained that the digital tachograph was to optimize driving. Dr. Saiyasitpanich asked whether this was ready to be implemented. Mr. Hirota responded that it was currently at the feasibility study stage and that the continuation of the project depended on the budget. Mr. Do asked whether these studies would continue even after the end of the Kyoto Protocol agreement period. Mr. Hirota responded that the studies were not necessarily related to the Kyoto Protocol. The important thing in the studies was to make the technologies and projects credible. Mr. Chanthearith asked what would incentivize the private sector to join CDM projects. Mr. Hirota stated that under the current CDM, the judgment of additionality was too strict, which was the main cause of the private sector’s reluctance to act. In addition, the pricing for the new crediting mechanism was still being decided.

Next, Mr. Nakano talked about the current negotiation process of the finance issue at the UNFCCC. Two types of financing issues were being discussed, short-term financing during the period of 2010-2012 and long-term financing from 2020 onward. The Japanese government had committed US$15 billion from 2010-2012, of which US$ 5.3 billion had already been provided for assistance to developing countries. Developing countries did not know enough about Japan’s efforts and that Japan should make more efforts in this area. In long-term financing, developed countries had committed to a goal of mobilizing US$ 100 billion per year up till 2020. This funding would come from various sources, although most of it should come from public financing. One issue was that it was difficult to use the funds. Developing countries argued it might be easier for them to access one big fund directly. Japan was skeptical on this matter. Japan’s intention was to have its own fund to enable economic cooperation projects to developing countries to continue smoothly and it aimed for slim organization and swift implementation.

Mr. Yeo asked how the accountability and success of a project would be measured. Mr. Nakano replied that this was still under negotiation. Mr. Do pointed out that the amount out of the US$ 5 billion dedicated to adaptation was much

13

Final Summary

smaller than that for mitigation and asked whether this would change. Mr. Nakano agreed there was very little money allocated to adaptation, but the imbalance was not intentional and would be adjusted in the future. Mr. Hasan commented that huge funds gathered in one body that could be accessed easily would be fine so long as a managing mechanism was established. Ms. Yoshino said that developing different mechanisms would generate several processes of applying to the various funds, and might result in reduced accessibility. Mr. Nakano agreed that having different funds could cause complexity and delay. Mr. Leang stated that Cambodia had already developed a NAPA and they had identified challenges especially in financial support. In the provinces, many did not understand climate change.

Visit.to.the.Panasonic.Center,.Tokyo

After lunch at No no Budo, where they enjoyed a Japanese buffet lunch, the participants moved to Odaiba, using the Ginza subway line and Yurikamome, a fully automated transit system. After enjoying the view of the harbor and Tokyo, they visited the Panasonic Center Tokyo, a PR center for Panasonic Corporation. The Panasonic Center was opened in September 2002 as a global information center. Mr. Takashi Oshima, General Manager, Panasonic Center Tokyo, greeted the participants and showed them a video presentation about Panasonic’s products and environmental technologies.

The participants then split into two groups and toured the facility. They experienced first-hand a futuristic television in the AVC network showcase. The guide also introduced Panasonic’s latest products such as a 3D video recorder and the world’s first touch panel camera. On the second floor, the participants learned about Panasonic’s eco ideas. The participants were shown technologies such as water-conserving toilets and the heat pump used in driers and other appliances. Later, the guide explained Panasonic’s environmental activities, such as the Yellow Sea eco region support in China. The participants also viewed a short 3D movie promoting environmental conservation. Finally, the participants went outside of the center where they were shown an electronic billboard welcoming the JENESYS Programme participants. The participants then went to Haneda Airport, where they boarded a plane to Hiroshima.

DAY.3.(15.September):.Visit.to.the.Hiroshima.Peace.Memorial.Museum.and.Miyajima

In the morning, the participants first went to the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park by bus. On the way, they saw Hiroshima Castle. At Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park, the participants viewed the A-Bomb Dome and other memorials. Many participants asked about the significance of the many paper cranes hanging in rows by the Children's Peace Monument. The cranes signified a wish for world peace.

At the Hiroshima Memorial Museum, the participants listened to Ms. Yoshiko Kajimoto, an A-bomb survivor sharing her experience of the bombing of Hiroshima. Ms. Kajimoto was 14 years old at the time of the bombing and was working as a mobilized student in a factory that manufactured airplane propellers, 2.3 km away from the epicenter. She described scenes such as the leveled city, a sea of bodies, and people with flesh hanging from their fingertips. She concluded her experience by saying she felt it her mission to convey the feelings of her father, who died later from residual radiation poisoning, and her friends who had passed away without being able to speak out. She also described the black rain—rain containing residual radiation—which caused a secondary disaster, and the plight of A-bomb orphans, children who had been evacuated and returned to Hiroshima to find they had lost their families and homes. Ms. Kajimoto then showed the participants pictures drawn by various students based on her story.

Mr. Do asked whether any members of the US command at the time had ever visited Hiroshima and Ms. Kajimoto

14

Final Summary

responded that to the best of her recollection, no one had. She also mentioned that the City of Hiroshima had been requesting a visit from US President Obama, but that such a visit had yet to be realized. At the end of the presentation, Mr. Hasan, representing the group, thanked Ms. Kajimoto for sharing her experience with them and stated that he hoped that this opportunity would serve to enhance solidarity and cooperation in ASEAN countries to end war.

The participants then viewed the exhibits in the museum and learned about the history of Hiroshima, the bombing, and its aftermath. Outside the museum, they were approached by local elementary students who were on a field study, and were asked to write a message about how they felt about Hiroshima and to pinpoint their respective countries on a map.

The participants then boarded a ferry to Miyajima, a small island located northwest of Hiroshima Bay. There, they enjoyed a lunch of oysters, a specialty of the region, and then visited Itsukushima Shrine, a UNESCO World Heritage Site. After they had explored the island, the group boarded the Nozomi shinkansen (bullet train) for Kyoto.

DAY.4.(16.September):.Inspection.Tours.of.Ohi.Nuclear.Power.Station.and.Maizuru.Power.Station

Ohi.Nuclear.Power.Station

In the morning, the group visited Ohi Nuclear Power Station of Kansai Electric Power Co., Inc. (KEPCO). At El Park Ohi, the power station’s PR facility, the participants were greeted by Mr. Kanamori, who was in charge of the PR facility, and then watched a short video introducing the power station and the surrounding areas. Mr. Kanamori explained that Ohi Nuclear Power Station, established in 1971, comprised 4 units and produced 471 MW of electricity. Nuclear power accounted for 30 percent of Japan’s power. Nuclear power generated CO2 emissions at the same level as solar and wind power and was superior to those types of power generation in terms of emissions per kilowatt. Therefore, nuclear power generation was an important source of energy from both the viewpoints of security and global warming countermeasures. Japan relied heavily on imported fuels. Oil was mostly imported from the Middle East and Asia, and uranium from Australia and Canada. In terms of energy efficiency, uranium was the most efficient, compared to solar and wind energy, which had low energy efficiency levels. The merits of nuclear power generation were the low level of CO2 emissions, high energy efficiency, and that spent fuel could be recycled. KEPCO had three nuclear power plants, all situated in the Wakasa bay area. The reasons for this were the area’s solid foundations, the availability of large amounts of water needed for nuclear power generation, the large land area, and the understanding of local residents towards nuclear power generation.

Next, a guide showed the group to another room where they viewed a 1/3 scale model of a containment vessel of a nuclear power plant. The guide gave a brief explanation as to how power was generated and the safety measures implemented at the power station. After the explanation, the group boarded a bus and toured the facilities.

Back at the PR center, a Q&A session started. Mr. Yeo asked where the closest towns and cities were. Mr. Kanamori responded that the closest town was Ohi and the closest large city was Kyoto. Mr. Yeo also asked about the land area of the power station and Mr. Kanamori replied that the power station had a land area of 1.88 million m2 and about one third of the area was in use. When asked about what happened to the radioactive waste, Mr. Kanamori responded that they were not using MOX yet, but there were plans to do so and that no fixed plan had been set in regard to the final waste. Technology-wise, the units would be able to operate for sixty years; however, there were no specific plans yet on how long the units would actually operate. Mr. Yeo also asked about the relationship with the local residents. Mr. Kanamori stated that while there were no demonstrations against the construction of the power station, there had been some

15

Final Summary

opposition in the beginning.

Dr. Saiyasitpanich asked how many nuclear power stations there were in Japan and Mr. Kanamori responded that there were 54 at 21 sites. When asked about whether the composition of power generation affected the price of electricity, Mr. Kanamori stated that while the difference was not large, it did exist and that the difference reflected the difference in the composition of power generation. In terms of development, Mr. Kanamori explained that the government was responsible for leading the initial development of new type reactors, but the actual construction of reactors for commercial use was done by private companies. Mr. Do asked about the provision of electricity overseas. Mr. Kanamori responded that KEPCO was cooperating with Southeast Asian countries in the construction of hydro power generators and assistance for nuclear power generators was being considered for the future. KEPCO was also selling electricity to the Philippines. In regard to storage, low level waste was temporarily being sent to the Shimokita peninsula and would later be moved to larger facilities. Spent fuel would be sent to Rokkasho village where a recycling plant was scheduled to be built.

Maizuru.Power.Station

In the afternoon, the group visited KEPCO’s Maizuru Power Station, a coal-fueled power station. They were greeted by Mr. Satoshi Takase, deputy general manager of the power station. He stated that he would like to highlight KEPCO’s environmental measures for coal power generation and that at Maizuru, the power generation was at the very high level of 43 percent and CO2 emissions were low. He then played a short video on Maizuru Power Station and the surrounding areas. Mr. Takase also talked briefly on Japan’s energy situation, saying that because 50 percent of Japan’s oil was imported from the Middle East, Japan needed to be prepared for any changes in the situation in the Middle East and was therefore reconsidering coal as a source of power. Japan also needed to develop technology to minimize the effect of coal power generation on the environment. He then talked about the power generation process and how the power station used coal mixed with 3 percent biomass.

The group then donned helmets and boarded a bus to take a tour of the facilities. As they stopped at various points so that Mr. Takase could give them explanations, many questions came up. Dr. Saiyasitpanich asked whether 3 percent was the optimum ratio of biomass to coal. Mr. Takase answered that it was not the optimum ratio for CO2 reduction, but as the plant had been designed for coal use only, it was the best ratio they could use under the circumstances. Mr. Yeo asked what the CO2 emission per kilowatt was. Mr. Takase explained that it was 0.78 kg of CO2 per kilowatt (calculation base). Dr. Saiyasitpanich asked whether that was a high figure compared to the average, to which Mr. Takase responded that they did not calculate an average, but that it was definitely a low number. He also explained that 100,000 tons of coal per week was used. Mr. Takase showed the group the concrete coal silos—the largest concrete silos in the world. Coal was usually exposed to air, but at Maizuru, it was transported from ships directly into the silos, preventing the dispersal of coal particles into the air. Coal was imported mainly from Australia, China, and Indonesia. Biomass, which was stored in silos with a capacity of 500,000 tons each, was mostly imported from Canada, and was mostly made up of wood shavings and sawdust. The calorific count of biomass was about 70 percent that of coal.

The participants also saw an 80,000 ton coal carrier, the Maizuru Bishamon, which had just arrived the previous day at the pier from Australia. Mr. Saludo asked how long the journey took from Australia and Mr. Takase said it was about two weeks. He also explained that the pier was a dedicated pier for Maizuru Power Station and could harbor ships up to 90,000 tons.

During the Q&A session that followed the bus tour, Dr. Saiyasitpanich enquired about the SOX and NOX emissions. Mr. Takase explained about the facilities’ desulphurization and denitration processes and stated that Maizuru had the

16

Final Summary

highest recycling efficiency level in the world. Dr. Saiyasitpanich asked about the desulphurization facility and Mr. Takase explained that while that the different types of system had mostly the same efficiency, the submersible system employed at Maizuru was particularly simple and easy to maintain. Mr. Takase asked a question of the participants in turn, inquiring what their specialties were. Mr. Hasan told him that he was a specialist in mitigation activities, focusing on the legal aspects. Mr. Do then asked about the future of Japan’s coal power generation, bringing up the topic of powder coal versus gasification. Mr. Takase replied that gasification was still in the testing process and that it might be a viable method in 20-30 years. He concluded the session by saying that he hoped that the visit would contribute to climate change measures in the participants’ respective countries.

After the tour of Maizuru Power Station, the participants visited El Mar Maizuru, Maizuru Power Station’s PR center. The director of the center explained that while all of Japan’s power plants had PR centers, El Mar Maizuru was the only one floating on the sea. The center comprised three floors and a basement and featured a planetarium as well as the Energy Experience Hall, where information ranging from the concept of energy to the changes in energy utilization through the years was exhibited. The participants enjoyed the spectacular view of the bay from the PR center.

DAY.5.(17.September):.Field.Trip.to.Mumeisha,.Evaluation.Session,.and.Visit.to.Gion.Corner

Field.Trip.to.Mumeisha

In the morning, the participants visited Mumeisha, a traditional Kyoto-style house in Kyoto. Mumeisha was built in 1909 and is currently a private residence. The proprietor opened up the house initially in response to request from students of architecture. She explained the functions of each room and the participants listened intently while she explained about traditional housing in Kyoto and the aesthetics of traditional Japanese culture, which incorporates nature in many ways. They also enjoyed some Japanese tea and traditional sweets.

The participants enjoyed a farewell lunch along with Prof. Takamura and two students from Kyoto University. Before the start of the lunch, Mr. Yuji Hirota, Deputy Director of the Asia and Oceania Section, Japanese Studies and Intellectual Exchange Dept., Japan Foundation, gave an address. He stated that he hoped that the network the participants created during the program would contribute to the further deepening of mutual understanding in Southeast Asia in the future.

Evaluation.Session

Prof. Takamura introduced the two doctoral students from Kyoto University, Mr. Izumi Inasawa, an emission trading expert who worked for the Japan Bank for International Cooperation (JBIC), and Mr. Hiroaki Sakamoto, whose research field was the economics of climate change. The participants then split up into three groups and discussed what they had learned through the program, and their assessments and suggestions for the program.

Group 1: Izumi Inasawa (moderator), Ou Chanthearith, Dang Phuong Loan, Vilayphone Sombathduang, Jonas Paolo Saludo, Phirun Saiyasitpanich

Mr. Inasawa summarized the discussions of Group 1 listing four items. Participants learned about Japan’s climate change policy, funding, domestic policy and public awareness. Japan’s climate change policy addressed the demand side

17

Final Summary

which introduced technology improvement. However, how policy reached the people was an area less focused on. In regard to technology, Japan’s technology was advanced, but technology transfer was not easy. So funding was an issue. Additionally, how to raise the awareness of people was important.

Many ideas were raised on the assessment and suggestions for the JENESYS program. Participants wanted to know more about how to deal with the issue cross-sectorally, what were Japan’s preparations for COP16, how Japan was dealing with specific issues such as adaptation, education, etc. They also expected more information on funding, especially on financial conditions for Japan’s ODA. The participants also stressed that the length of the program was short. They wanted more time for in-depth learning and suggested the need for an advanced course with the same participants. They also wanted to learn more about Japan’s cooperation on climate change in the international arena, especially for developing countries. Lastly, they wanted to learn more about Japanese domestic policies.

Group 2: Hiroaki Sakamoto (moderator), Leang Sophal, Do Hoang Viet, Shwe Cin Mya Htun, Sabitah Irwani, Madoka Hoshino

Mr. Sakamoto highlighted some of the issues raised in Group 2’s discussion. The program presented an excellent opportunity to learn more about mitigation, adaptation, technology transfer and so on. In this regard it was a good experience on which participants could build in their own countries. One suggestion raised was that it would be better to focus on adaptation, as that was what was important in participants’ countries. Another point raised was that this was a good opportunity to learn about Japanese domestic policies on climate change. The chance to talk to senior negotiators was especially informative and participants were surprised at the frankness of senior negotiators. One idea might be to invite senior negotiators from other countries to discuss such issues. The program provided a good opportunity to learn how to cooperate and share ideas with those from other countries. The participants likened the program to a training camp for negotiators and they hoped for a more systematic training course for such activities. Mr. Sakamoto concluded his group’s presentation by saying various kinds of cooperation should be integrated so as to benefit the region from all aspects, such as economic development and public governance.

Group 3: Yukari Takamura (moderator), Rendra Kurnia Hasan, Hlaing Min Maung, Thounheuang Buithavong, Daryl Yeo, Jakkanit Kananurak

Prof. Takamura stated that what was needed was to further implement activities such as capacity development and the raising of public awareness. Also suggested was the possibility of having more programs focusing on specific sectors, such as residential, transportation, and so on, in order to create a low carbon infrastructure involving cities. Secondly, the issue of how to incorporate national mitigation activities with CDM projects was raised. Specific requests for the JENESYS program included a request for another seminar right after COP16. Another was a scholarship for foreign experts to do a Masters or Doctoral program in Japan. The experience of visiting the power plants had been useful, but perhaps it could be combined with an explanation about the policies behind the establishment of such power plants.

Mr. Hirota gave his impressions of the evaluation session. He expressed his hope that the program would become a stepping-stone for participants to search for answers from different channels, be they embassies, the Japan Foundation, or international organizations. The Japanese government would articulate its position at COP16 in Cancun the coming

18

Final Summary

November. If there were points they could agree on in regard to Japan’s position, they should convey their opinions to their superiors. However, the JENESYS program was not only for the purpose of promoting Japan’s position, so the participants should not feel compelled to agree with everything.

On behalf of the participants, Mr. Viet thanked the organizers and Prof. Takamura for their hospitality and stated that both formal discussions and informal chats had been highly informative and stimulating. It had been especially enriching to be able to meet and talk to those involved in the negotiation process, as this opportunity had added faces to the name Japan and that of other ASEAN countries. This aspect of the humanization of the process would be crucially helpful to future international climate change negotiations. The participants would take away a positive input from the program and the shared experience would help bring more to the negotiating table in their respective countries.

The session ended with a group photograph, following which the participants filled out a questionnaire on general information about themselves and a review of the JENESYS program.

Visit.to.Gion.Corner

In the evening, the participants went back to Kyoto for some cultural sightseeing. Walking along the streets of Kyoto, they caught glimpses of maiko girls on their way to work. The participants then went to Gion Corner, a theatre showing traditional Japanese performance arts, such as the tea ceremony, Japanese court music, Kyomai (Kyoto style dance), and Bunraku (puppet play). This concluded the activities of the program.

19

Where do we stand?Climate Negotiation after Copenhagen

JENESYS Programme2010.9.13

Yukari TAKAMURA(Ryukoku University, Japan)

• What science tells us: Our challenge and its implication

• State of affairs of climate negotiation• What Copenhagen decided• Climate negotiation after Copenhagen

Scientific findings from IPCC (1)• Some scientific findings from IPCC AR4

– Climate change is occurring.– Most of the observed increase in globally averaged

temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations.

– The global averaged surface temperature is projected to increase over the period 1990-2100:– by 1.1 to 2.9 degree in case where we could achieve sustainable

society globally– by 2.4 to 6.4 degree in case of fossil fuel depending society with

high economic growth.

Scientific findings from IPCC (2)• Some scientific findings from IPCC AR4（cont’d）

– Rise of sea level is projected:– by 18 to 38cm in case where we could achieve sustainable society

globally– by 26 to 59cm in case of fossil fuel depending society with high

economic growth.

＊What type of future society and economy we make a choice on will determine the degree of impacts of climate change.

Programme.Advisor

Yukari TAKAMURAProfessor, School of Law, Ryukoku University, Japan

Programme.Advisor

20

Programme Advisor

Impacts of climate change (1)

• likely that anthropogenic warming has had a discernible influence on many physical and biological systems.

• very likely that all regions will experience either declines in net benefits or increases in net costs for increases in temperature greater than about 2-3°C and that developing countries are expected to experience larger percentage losses.

Impacts in Asia

• Decrease in freshwater availability could adversely affect more than one billion people by the 2050s.

• “Climate change is projected to impinge on the sustainable development of most developing countries of Asia, as it compounds the pressures on natural resources and the environment associated with rapid urbanization, industrialization, and economic development.”

Article 2 of UNFCCC

The ultimate objective of this Convention and any related legal instruments that the Conference of the Parties may adopt is to achieve, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Convention, stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system. Such a level should be achieved within a time-frame sufficient to allow ecosystems to adapt naturally to climate change, to ensure that food production is not threatened and to enable economic development to proceed in a sustainable manner.

Our Challenges

• Global emissions of GHGs need to peak in the next 10-15 years and need to be reduced to very low levels, well below half the levels in 2000 by the middle of the twenty-first century in order to stabilize their concentrations in the atmosphere to attain the most stringent mitigation levels to avoid dangerous climate change.

Stabilization requires emission reduction by more than 50% compared to current emission level.

21

Programme Advisor

Shared long term goal?• Basically, countries agree on drastic cut of global

emissions by the middle of this century.• In Toyako Summit (2008), G8 countries endorsed

“the goal of achieving at least 50% reduction of global emissions by 2050” as the goal that G8 countries want to “share with all Parties to the UNFCCC and together with them to consider and adopt in the UNFCCC negotiations”.

• Developing countries argue that long term target must be ambitious and underpinned by strong mid-term target by developed countries.

Implication of the goal (1)• The emerging long-term target requires us to reduce

emission more drastically and rapidly and to move as quickly as possible towards a low carbon society.

• Post-2012 climate regime should deliver significant reduction to make global emission peak out by 2020.

• Failure in establishing a really effective regime would lead to a failure, or if not, making it difficult, to achieve the long-term target.

Implications of long term targetsCategory

CO2 concentration (ppm)

CO2-eq concentration (ppm)

Global mean temperature increase above pre-industrial (℃)

Peaking year for CO2 emissions

Change in global CO2 emissions in 2050 (% of 2000 emissions)

I 350-400 445-490 2.0-2.4 2000-2015 -85 to -50

II 400-440 490-535 2.4-2.8 2000-2020 -60 to -30

III 440-485 535-590 2.8-3.2 2010-2030 -30 to +5

IV 485-570 590-710 3.2-4.0 2020-2060 +10 to +60

V 570-660 710-855 4.0-4.9 2050-2080 +25 to +85

VI 660-790 855-1130 4.9-6.1 2060-2090 +90 to +140

Source: IPCC AR4, 2007

Implication of the goal (2)• In order that a post-2012 regime should be effective,

both developed countries and developing countries’mitigation efforts are essential.

• Emission reduction should also occur in DCs, but its cost should be assumed/ shared by international community.

• International cooperation are more than important to support reduction actions by DCs and to establish a mechanism to make such actions more effective.

将来の排出予測

Source: IEA, World Energy Outlook 2009 出典) EDMC/エネルギー・経済統計要覧2010年版全国地球温暖化防止活動推進センターHPより

22

Programme Advisor

Energy-Related CO2 Emissions by Regions

Source: IEA, 2004 Source: IPCC,2007

Where reductions should occur for 450ppm stabilization

Source: IEA, World Energy Outlook 2009

Per Capita Energy-Related CO2 Emissions(2005)

Source:Takamura based on IEEJ, Handbook on Energy & Economic Statistics in Japan 2008

Per Capita Energy-Related CO2 Emissions by Region

Source: IEA, 2004

Number of people without Electricity

(2002, million)Source:IEA, World Energy Outlook 2004

23

Programme Advisor

Brief History of Climate Negotiation• 1988 Establishment of IPCC• 1992 UNFCCC adopted (entry into force in 1994)

• 1995 COP1: Berlin Mandate adopted• 1997 Kyoto Protocol (KP) adopted• 2001 Marrakesh Accords (implementation rules) adopted• 2005 Entry into force of the KP; Negotiation under the

KP (AWG-KP) started• 2007 Bali Action Plan adopted; Negotiation under the

UNFCCC (AWG-LCA) launched• 2009 COP15 (expected to have an agreed outcome)• 2010 COP16（Cancun, Mexico）• 2011 COP17（South Africa）

2 track negotiations

• Negotiations toward Copenhagen in 2 tracks– Negotiation for developed countries’ commitments

beyond 2012 under the KP (AWG-KP) since 2005– Negotiation under the UNFCCC (AWG-Long-

term Cooperative Action (LCA)) since 2007 (Bali Action Plan)

KP3.9 track (Commitments by developed countries)

Negotiation start

AgreedOutcome in

Copenhagen?

Post-2012 Negotiation since 2005

2005 2006 2007

KP9 track(Review of the KP)

UNFCCC trackon Long-termCooperative Action

2008 2009

First Review

SecondReview

Bali ActionPlan

completed

AWG-KP（Ad-hoc working group under the KP）

AWG-LCA（Ad-hoc working group on long-term cooperative action）

“Dialogue”start

AWG-KP (1)

• Negotiation aiming to agree on developed countries’ commitments beyond 2012 under the KP– “Commitments for subsequent periods for Parties included

in Annex I shall be established in amendments to Annex B to this Protocol... [The COP/MOP] shall initiate the consideration of such commitments at least seven years before the end of the first commitment period...” (Article 3.9)

AWG-KP (2)

• Negotiation focusing on:– Proposal for amendments to the KP

• Annex B (including quantified emission reduction targets); Article 3.1; 3.7; 3.9; ...

– Other related issues• Kyoto mechanisms; LULUCF; coverage of gases and

sectors (including international aviation and maritime transport); others

AWG-KP (3)

• Based on pledges by developed countries, focus is on scale of aggregate emission reduction by developed countries.– Baseyear

• 1990 or other• Single year or multiple years

– Commitment period• 5 or 8 years

• Kyoto mechanisms and LULUCF continue to use under the KP.

• Increasing necessity for more consistency with AWG-LCA.

24

Programme Advisor

AWG-KP (4)

• Proposals on Improved/new market mechanisms– Improving CDM– Co-benefit requirement– Crediting Nationally Appropriate Mitigation

Actions• International aviation and maritime transport

AWG-LCA

• Negotiation track in which all parties participate.

• Discuss both mitigation by developed and developing countries.

• Shared vision/ Adaptation/ Technology/ Finance/ Capacity-building

What Copenhagen decided

• COP takes note of the Copenhagen Accord (CA).

• COP decides to extend the mandate of the AWG-LCA to present the outcome of its work to COP16.

• COP/MOP of the Kyoto Protocol also requests the AWG-KP to continue its work and to deliver the results of its work for the adoption by COP/MOP6.

Copenhagen Accord: its status

• COP does not adopt but only takes note of Copenhagen Accord (CA).– “a way of recognizing that something is there, but

not going so far as to associate yourself with it.”(Former Executive-Secretary)

– Not legally binding, but politically binding only for countries supporting it.

– However, 138 countries associate themselves with the CA. About 90 countries of which emissions in aggregate represent more than 80% of global emissions have already put forward their pledges.

What was agreed in CA (1)

• We agree that deep cuts are required with view to reducing global emissions so as to hold the increase in global temperature below 2 degrees Celsius... (para. 2)

• We should cooperate in achieving the peaking of global and national emissions as soon as possible, recognizing that ... a low emission development strategy is indispensable for sustainable development. (para. 2)


• Annex I Parties commit to implement ... the quantified economy-wide emissions targets for 2020... (para. 4)– to be submitted ... by 31 January 2010– further strengthen the emission reductions initiated

by the Kyoto Protocol.– Delivery of reduction and financing...will be

measured, reported and verified in accordance with ... the guideline adopted by the COP...

25

Programme Advisor

What was agreed in CA (3)• Non-Annex I Parties will implement mitigation

actions, including those to be submitted ... by 31 January 2010... (para. 5)– Mitigation actions ... should be communicated through

national communication ... every 2 years...– Subject to their domestic measurement, reporting and

verification the results of which will be reported through their national communications every 2 years.

– Communicate information on the implementation of their actions through national communications, with provisions for international consultations and analysis...


• Nationally appropriate mitigation actions seeking international support will be recorded in a registry along with relevant ... support (para. 5).– These supported ... actions will be subject to

international measurement, reporting and verification in accordance with the guidelines adopted by the COP.


• Scaled up, new and additional, predictable and adequate funding as well as improved access ... to developing countries (para. 8).– The collective commitment by developed countries

is to provide new and additional resources, approaching USD 30 billion for the period 2010 �2012.

– In the context of meaningful mitigation actions and transparency on implementation, developed countries commit to a goal of mobilizing jointly USD 100 billion dollars a year by 2020.


• A High Level Panel will be established to study the contribution of the potential sources of revenue... (para. 9).

• We decide that the Copenhagen Green Climate Fund shall be established as an operating entity of the financial mechanism of the Convention... (para. 10)

• We decide to establish a Technology Mechanism to accelerate technology development and transfer... (para. 11)

How to evaluate the CA (1)

• Many issues left undecided or in no details.– Reducing emissions from deforestation in

developing countries– Market mechanisms– Emissions from international air and maritime

transport– Adaptation– Legal nature of mitigation commitments and

actions.– Legal form of the agreed outcome


• Emerging posture of post-2012 regime– Both developed countries and developing countries

do mitigation efforts based on equity and in accordance with CBDR and respective capabilities.

– Seek to ensure that implementation will be transparent and accountable.

– Collective but concrete pledges on financing.– Appears to be less ambitious than expected, but

seems difficult to agree on more than the CA.

26

Programme Advisor


• Mitigation commitments by developed countries: return to “pledge and review”?– Might be the only way the US could agree on.– Two concerns

• How to ensure comparability of efforts among developed countries: “equity” concern

• Sufficiently ambitious enough to achieve the long-term target?: “effectiveness” concern

Current level of ambition

Source: Höhne et al. 2009

Negotiation after Copenhagen (1)

• COP only takes note of the CA, but it seems to be a springboard (perhaps the only one?) to promote the negotiation.

• Still remain divergence of views on the CA and post 2012 climate regime.

• Accelerating negotiation is essential to deliver an agreement on post-2012 regime.

Negotiation after Copenhagen (2)• Concern is emerging: it might take longer time to

agree on a post-2012 regime.• Possible “gap” between the 1st and 2nd

commitment periods under the Kyoto Protocol.– Possibility of lacking in legally binding target for

developed countries– Possible impacts on carbon market– In order to avoid the “gap”

• Needs to adopt the amendment in Cancun (this year) or South Africa (2011); and

• Three fourth (3/4) of Parties should ratified before 3 October 2012.

Evolution of Carbon Market• 2,221 CDM projects registered and about 3,000 more

projects in the pipeline.• More than 2.8 GtCO2 is expected to be reduced by 2012

through CDM.– Corresponds to 2 year’s aggregated emissions of Japan and to 3

year’s emissions of Germany.(UNEP Risoe Center, CDM pipeline, as of 1st June 2010)

• In 2007, 7.4 billion US dollar was transacted for CERs.– Equivalent 3 times of 4 year (2002-2006) GEF funding (GEF3).

• The CDM Executive Board reported that the amount of investment to developing countries under the CDM by the end of 2006 is 26 billion US dollar.

• Windows for emission reduction in developing countries and for funding necessary for such reduction.

Canada?

WCIRGGIEUETS

Norway

Australia

New South Wales

NZ

Japan?US

CDM

CDM

CDM

27

Programme Advisor

Investment and financial flows are key• Returning global emissions to current levels in

2030 requires additional investment and financial flows about 200 billion US dollar in 2030 (UNFCCC Secretariat 2007). Updates in 2008 show that they will be 170% higher.

• Over half would be needed in DCs (UNFCCC Secretariat 2008).

• Private funds will play a crucial role.– will constitute the largest share of investment and

financial flows (86 %) (UNFCCC Secretariat 2007).

Source: World Bank, 2010

Market trends of CDM and JI


• Multilateral approach is absolutely more desirable for the regime to be effective.– Addressing the issue in a more comprehensive way– Ensuring transparency and equitable allocation of

efforts by countries.– Legitimacy– Result in more effective regime


• Problems with multilateral approach in light of current negotiation– Wait without doing anything until an agreement

reached?– Level of ambition might be lower: “the Lowest

common denominator” problem

Qualitative assessment of fragmented type of regimes

Synergistic Cooperative Conflictive

Speed Faster to negotiate and to agree, at least no concern

Faster to negotiate and to agree, at least no concernMight delay broader participation

Possible to delay broader participation

Ambition/ performance

Possible to reach “narrow-but-deep” agreementsThe more fragmented, the higher the costWith free trade and economic competition, might result in a “Race to bottom” (the general decline of environmental standards).

Equity More tailored for specific circumstances of each countryAllow powerful states to opt for a mechanismLack in legitimacy, which might decrease effectiveness

Source: Takamura based on Biermann et al., 2010

Conclusion (1)

• Better international regime is necessary as a tool for enhancing our efforts and cooperation to tackle climate change.– Manage to control overall efforts so as to achieve

the long- term target.– Provide support for mitigation actions and

adaptation by DCs.• Negotiation stands at juncture.

– Maximize our efforts to reach an agreement.

28

Programme Advisor

Conclusion (2)

• Some ambiguity about future negotiation.– Intention of our leaders gathering in Copenhagen

is clear towards realizing a low carbon society and economy with sense of urgency.

– Prepare all possible scenarios. Enhance bilateral cooperation to tackle climate change.

– Opportunities for a new model of development

Thank you for your attention!

Yukari TAKAMURA

29

Individual Reports from Participants

My name is Ou Chanthearith received a Bachelor degree in business of management from National Institute of Management, Cambodia in 2003 and a Master of Business Administration Emphasis in Business Management in 2009 from International Adventist Institute of Advanced Studied, Philippines. My present profession is a Deputy Director of Climate Change Department, Ministry of Environment Cambodia. My work is responsible to implementing all tasks that assigned by the director of department such as, attending workshop, seminar, meeting and training course in-outside the country. Joining group researching and collecting data for impact assessment in the areas that has faced by the phenomenon drought and flood is prepared for second national communicate to respond UNFCCC and especially, report to director on the matters related to climate change issues. Currently, nominated as a member of Cambodia Climate Change Alliance (CCCA) and responsible for acknowledge and learning platform. I live in a small country which calls Kingdom of Cambodia.

The Kingdom of Cambodia is located in mainland Southeast Asia between latitudes 10° and 15° N and longitudes 102° and 108° E. Cambodia covers an area of 181,035 km2 with a total population projected at about 13.4 million people in 2008 (NIS, 2008). Approximately 80 % of this population lives in rural areas. Cambodia shares its border with Thailand in the west and north, with Laos in the north, and with Vietnam in the east and south/southeast and has a coastline in the south/southwest, in the Gulf of Thailand Cambodia has a coastal line of approximately 435 km in the south and southwest of the country. Economic Exclusive Zone in the Gulf of Thailand is estimated to be 42,000 km2.

Cambodia is a least developed country, with a GDP per capita of US$297 in 2002 and increased to US$594 by 2007. The agriculture sector has accounted for approximately 60.4% of employment, industry sector for 14% and services sector for 25.6% in 2007(NIS, 2003, 2008). Agricultural production is dependent on the annual flooding and recession of the Tonle Sap Lake and the Mekong River, which brings fertile alluviums to the central plains. In 2004, 19.7% of population lived below the national food poverty line (RGC, 2007).

As a least developed agrarian country, Cambodia is highly vulnerable to climate change, the more so as it has low adaptive capacity to changing climate conditions. In recent years, there were more frequent and severe floods and droughts, which have resulted in a significant number of fatalities and large economic losses. Aside from that, Cambodia has experienced many natural disasters throughout the country in the last decade such as widespread drought in 1986/87 and 1997/98 and the worst consecutive floods in1999, 2000, 2001 and 2002 have caused considerable economic losses and social and environmental impacts.

In order to response to climate change Cambodia signed the UNFCCC in December 1995 and acceded Kyoto Protocol in 2002. Through Cambodian Ministry of Environment (MoE) has done considerable activities and plans including

Individual ReportCambodia

Chanthearith OuDeputy Director, Climate Change Department, Ministry of Environment, Cambodia

32


In June 2003, the Cambodian Climate Change Office (CCCO) was established within the Ministry of Environment and promoted as Department of Climate Change (CCD) in late 2009. The broad mandate is to carry out all technical activities related to the implementation of the UNFCCC and other climate change-related tasks as assigned including acts as the secretariat of the UNFCCC, National Focal Point and a Designated National Authority under the Kyoto Protocol for Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) activities. Appointed the National Climate Change Committee (NCCC) serving as a policy-making body and will coordinate the development and implementation of policies, plans and measures to address climate change issues within the country; conducting the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM); implementing National Adaptation Plan of Action (NAPA), developed Initiative National Communication and Second National Communication is under progress. Furthermore, to deepen the NCCC, Cambodia’s prime minister accepted the appointment for the honorable chair man of the committee. However, Cambodia haven’t created yet a concrete strategy plan to strengthen adaptation activities more affective in agriculture sector to adapt climate change because of limited human resources and lack of financial support.

Cambodia, as a Non-Annex 1 Party to the UNFCCC, is ready to cooperate with the international community and regional partners in addressing climate change issues in accordance with the principle of “common but differentiated responsibility”. Capacity building, adaptation, technology transfer, and finance support must be the main consideration that Cambodia has to pay much attention to respond to the commitment as a member of UNFCCC.

Cambodia

33


Cambodia

Final Individual report

Introduction

The Kingdom of Cambodia is located in mainland Southeast Asia between latitudes 10° and 15° N and longitudes 102° and 108° E. Cambodia covers an area of 181,035 km2 with a total population projected at about 13.4 million people in 2008 (NIS, 2008). Approximately 80 % of this population lives in rural areas. Cambodia shares its border with Thailand in the west and north, with Laos in the north, and with Vietnam in the east and south/southeast and has a coastline in the south/southwest, in the Gulf of Thailand Cambodia has a coastal line of approximately 435 km in the south and southwest of the country. Economic Exclusive Zone in the Gulf of Thailand is estimated to be 42,000 km2.

Cambodia is a least developed country, with a GDP per capita of US$297 in 2002 and increased to US$594 by 2007. The agriculture sector has accounted for approximately 60.4% of employment, industry sector for 14% and services sector for 25.6% in 2007(NIS, 2003, 2008). Agricultural production is dependent on the annual flooding and recession of the Tonle Sap Lake and the Mekong River, which brings fertile alluviums to the central plains. In 2004, 19.7% of population lived below the national food poverty line (RGC, 2007).

In my view, fundamentally there three questions on the issues of climate change. First, how to view it, that is the question of scientific uncertainty; second, how to say it, that is the question concerning the legitimacy of addressing climate change in the peculiar political atmosphere of various countries; and third, how to do with it, that is the question of institutional arrangement and option of policy tools. The question can be resolved by IPCC, the second by politicians, and third by legal and economic experts. Having raised these three questions, I will use this framework to introduce the situation of Cambodia in addressing climate change.

Impacts of Cambodia

As a poor agrarian country, Cambodia is highly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. The country’s agriculture, a major sector of the national economy, is dependent on the natural rainfall and the annual flooding and recession of the Mekong River and the Tonle Sap Lake. The Cambodian agriculture is therefore particularly sensitive to potential changes in local climate and monsoon regimes. Data from the past five years indicate that more than 70% of rice production loss in Cambodia was primarily due to flooding while drought was responsible for about 20% of the losses.

Over the last decade Cambodian has experienced social, economic and environmental impacts caused by irregular, sever and more frequent floods, droughts and windstorms, which are believed to be related to changes in local and global climate. As study conducted by the Cambodian Ministry of Environment (MoE) in 2001 suggests that by 2100 rainfall in Cambodia would increase by 3% to 35% from the current condition, while temperature increase would be in the range of 1.30°C-2.50°C. These conditions may result in the increased occurrence of extreme climate events.

In addition, sea level rise will severely affect the 4354 km-long coastline, large parts of the Mekong River flood plain and the Tonle Sap ecosystem, which is the heart of Cambodia’s economy culture and environment. The above-mentioned study indicates that a sea level increase of one meter would inundate many costal areas of Cambodia, specifically the province of Koh Kong. In Koh Kong City, a total area of approximately 44 km2 would be permanently underwater. The

34


Cambodia

mangrove ecosystem is the widest area to be submerged and about 56% of the settlement area would also be flooded. The country is also vulnerable to the health impacts of climate change due to its geographical location, the poor healthcare system, poverty predomination among the majority of people, and low awareness of people about healthcare measures.

Climate change Activities in Cambodia Cambodia and the UNFCCC

Cambodia, as a least developed country, clearly recognizes that climate change is a serious environmental threat to the country and to the rest of the world. The Royal Government of Cambodia, with its limited capability and available resources, has actively worked with the global community to address this threat.

Cambodia signed the UNFCCC in December 1995 and acceded Kyoto Protocol in 2002. Through Cambodian Ministry of Environment (MoE) has done considerable activities and plans including In June 2003, the Cambodian Climate Change Office (CCCO) was established within the Ministry of Environment and promoted as Department of Climate Change (CCD) in late 2009. The broad mandate is to carry out all technical activities related to the implementation of the UNFCCC and other climate change-related tasks as assigned including acts as the secretariat of the UNFCCC, National Focal Point and a Designated National Authority under the Kyoto Protocol for Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) activities.

Appointed the National Climate Change Committee (NCCC) serving as a policy-making body and will coordinate the development and implementation of policies, plans and measures to address climate change issues within the country; conducting the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM); implementing National Adaptation Plan of Action (NAPA), developed Initiative National Communication and Second National Communication is under progress. Furthermore, to deepen the NCCC, Cambodia’s prime minister accepted the appointment for the honorable chair man of the committee. However, Cambodia haven’t created yet a concrete strategy plan to strengthen adaptation activities more affective in agriculture sector to adapt climate change because of limited human resources and lack of financial support.

Cambodia and the CDM

As a developing country or Non-Annex I party to the convention, Cambodia does not have any commitments to reduce its GHG emissions. However, the country is committed to support the promulgation of the Kyoto Protocol, the first inter national agreement that lays the foundation to achieve the ultimate goal of the UNFCCC: stabilizing of GHG concentration in the atmosphere, at a level that would prevent dangerous changes to the climate system.

In the context, the Royal Government of Cambodia signed the Instrument of Accession to the Kyoto Protocol on 4 July 2002, indicating its commitments to the global efforts in addressing climate change issues. This makes Cambodia eligible for hosting emission reduction projects under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM).

The CDM has two key goals: (i) to assist developing countries who host CDM projects to achieve their sustainable development objectives, and (ii) to help development countries partially meet their GHG reduction commitments by allowing them to take credits from emission reducing projects undertaken in developing countries.

35


Cambodia

In order to participate in the CDM, developing countries must meet 3 basic requirements: (i) voluntary participation, (ii) establishment of a Designated National Authority (DNA), and (iii) ratification of the Kyoto Protocol. The CDM cannot divert Official Development Assistance (ODA). The Designated National Authority (DNA) is responsible for certifying that proposed CDM projects comply with national sustainable development objectives.

Some typical CDM project types that reduce, avoid or sequester the GHG emissions are:▪ Renewable energy (hydro, wind, solar, biomass);▪ Energy efficiency (production and end use);▪ Fuel switching (bio-diesel, gas);▪ Cogeneration (combined heat and power generation);▪ Industrial processes (For example, CO2 from cement production);▪ Forestry (afforestation and reforestation for carbon sinks);▪ Transport activities;▪ Waste management.

Benefits of the CDM to Cambodia

For Cambodia, the CDM may be a source of new investment, environmentally friendly technology and capacity building in the fields of energy, forestry, agriculture and waste management. These are some of the key economic sectors Cambodia desperately needs to foster to support its sustainable development goals. In the energy sector, if designated and implemented wisely, CDM projects will offer the country opportunities to improve energy, to transfer environmentally friendly technology and to help create new jobs.

In the forestry sector, CDM projects will help increase the amount of forests through reforestation and afforestation activities. These forests will subsequently help regulate local climate, mitigate climate change impacts such as floods and storms and absorb carbon from the atmosphere. Furthermore, they will provide many associated environmental benefits and services such as watershed protection, control of soil erosion and degradation, biodiversity conservation, provision of non-timber products. These are very important aspects of local communities and for the whole of Cambodia.

Cambodia, as a Non-Annex 1 Party to the UNFCCC, is ready to cooperate with the international community and regional partners in addressing climate change issues in accordance with the principle of “common but differentiated responsibility”. Capacity building, adaptation, technology transfer, and finance support must be the main consideration that Cambodia has to pay much attention to respond to the commitment as a member of UNFCCC.

Experiences gained from JENESYS program:▪ First, to attend this program was a broad journey for me. This is the most memorable experience abroad. This

experience made me understand Japan that I wasn’t aware of before coming. I deeply realized that the country is beautiful, neat and orderly. Not only did I gain new knowledge, I also experienced different cultures, Japan food and such beautiful scenery.

▪ Secondly, I have made very good friends from different countries; some of friends from different countries and several friends for Japanese Foundation. We communicated with each other from different backgrounds and culture. We helped each other when we faced difficult times; we shared experience with each other. Friends are precious wealth; they give me much help.

36


Cambodia

▪ Thirdly, I have gained a new knowledge and understanding of the climate change policies from other countries, and got an in-dept understanding of the Japanese government had played much attention on climate change issues that Japan has faced a phenomenon climate such drought and flood also the rest of the world. Furthermore, Japanese government has played very important role to the UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol by providing a huge financial support to all developing countries to implementing any clean development mechanism (CDM) and mitigation GHG programs as a response its commitment to UNFCCC for reducing CO2 in Copenhagen accord. The most important through dialogue between Japan and other ASEAN nations-Japan’s neighbors in Asia-in the field of climate change, also the program has shown the aims to enhance the understanding of ASEAN member states about Japan’s climate control measures as well as to boost understanding about the climate control measures of all countries and to search for solution to these global problems and also Japanese government is preparing its stances to boost the international negotiation COP 17 in Cancun city, Mexico will be has a concrete outcome.

Overall the programme exceeded my expectation. Not only did I bring back a wealth of information but also memories that I’ll look fondly upon. I’d like to thank the Japan Foundation for this opportunity and hope to meet the participants as well as members of the foundation again.

37

(1). My name is Leang Sophal (Cambodian). It is the first time for me to visit Japan with my colleague and to meet all of you from other countries such as Viet Nam, Lao, Philippines, and some countries that have presence here. It is good program for us to understand each other and to share knowledge, experiences and other interest things. My institution is Climate Change Department, Ministry of Environment of Kingdom of Cambodia which have address #48, Preah Shihanuk Blvd, Chomkarmon, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.

(2). My work : Now I will say about the previous work. In 2007, I was an officer of Ministry of Education, youth and sports to be teacher in Banteay Meanchey province. In 02 April, 2010, I changed framework from MoEYS to MoE to work in the climate change department until present time but I have tried to know about the climate change issue so much to facilitate myself to present job.

(3). Climate Change is one of the most serious global problems which has brought countries throughout the world to work together to mitigate the problem under an international convention call the United Nation Framework Convention on Climate Change(UNFCCC). The Kingdom of Cambodia ratified the convention on 18th December 1995and the convention entered into force on 17th March 1996. Through an agreement between the Government of Cambodia and UNDP/Global environment facility (GEF), Cambodia have received funding from UNDP-GEF to carry out three years project called Enabling Cambodia to prepare first national communication in response to the UNFCCC(climate change enabling activity project: CCEAP). At previous time, climate change is office of Ministry of Environment of Cambodia but in 14 October, 2009 Ministry upgraded the office to department of climate change having 5 offices. The Royal Government of Cambodia has strongly taken care about the climate change and regard it to be first priority because it has related to water resource, agriculture, human health…….Climate Change Department(MoE) has mainstreamed climate change issue at universities in Svay Rieng and Prey Veng provinces because it is good measure for all students to know this issue.

(4). I hope when I joint this program, I will get more knowledge and new experiences from your country and other countries about the climate change to mainstream this new context for Cambodia and it is a good chance for me to understand about JAPAN country and living life.

Individual ReportCambodia

Sophal LeangTechnical Officer, Climate Change Department, Ministry of Environment, Cambodia

38


The final report to JENESY Program/ Japan Foundation12-18 September 2010, Japan

Firstly, I would like to fully thank the organizers to warmly welcome to all participants especially the participants from Cambodia and it is the first time for me to join this program and visit the modern country like JAPAN duration one week. There are 14 participants from 8 countries such as Cambodia, Viet Nam, Thailand, Indonesia, Burma, Singapore, Philippines, and Lao.

Day 1 September 12, 2010 (Sunday)We got warmly welcome from the representative of the JENESY’S Program, Japan foundation at the Narita air port in Tokyo, Japan

Day 2 September 13, 2010 (Monday)In the morning, all participants met each other in the Sinjuku Washington hotel in Tokyo (the Capital of Japan) to go to the Ministry of Foreign Affair of Japan to make discussion with the representative from the Ministry. There are the presentations of all participants, Mr.Noboru SEKIGUCHI, Senior Negotiator for Climate Change, International Cooperation Bureau, Ministry of Foreign Affair of Japan (MoFA), Professor Yukari TAKAMURA from Ryukoku University in Japan, Mr. Akama, program assistant.At the next step, we had the presentation of Mr. Noboru about the Mitigation. He suggested the 3 main points to debate:

(1). What are we negotiating?In the first point, there are 5 small points such as:1st International Framework on Climate Change; 2nd Negotiation Process; 3rd Projected Global CO2 Emissions from fuel Combustion; 4th What lacks in mitigation under the Kyoto Protocol and; 5th Japan’s Basic Policy: Mitigation.

(2). What have we achieved in Copenhagen?There are 5 small main points included such as: 1st The Conclusion of COP 15(2009); 2nd Major Progress achieved in Copenhagen Accord; 3rd Copenhagen Accord;4th Copenhagen Accord: contents and its significance; 5th Mid-term targets following the Copenhagen Accord.

(3). What are we doing for Cancun?There are 5 small points such as: 1st 2010 Negotiation Schedule;2nd Issues to be;3rd Japan’s Fast-Start Financing for Developing Countries up to 2012;4th REDD+;5th Domestic Measures. For this presentation

Cambodia

39


There are a lot of questions because they want to know the step that the they practised for this time or in the future. The discussion had smoothly process with asking, answering and sharing the knowledge and it was wonderful time for all participants and the coordinator and presenter could gain the new outcome.

At the same day after lunch, there was the presentation of Ms. Yukari TAKAMURA to raise Where do we stand? Climate Negotiation after Copenhagen.She suggested a lot of points for this meeting like: Scientific findings from IPCC, Impact of climate change, Impact in Asia, Article 2 of UNFCCC, Our challenges, Shared long term goal, Implication of the goal, Implication of long term targets, Energy-Related CO2 Emissions by Regions, Equity implications (all GHG emissions without LULUCF), Where reductions should occur for 450ppn stabilization, Per Capita Energy-Related CO2 Emissions by Region, Number of people without Electricity, Brief History of Climate Negotiation, 2 track negotiations, AWG-KP, AWG-LCA, What Copenhagen decided, Copenhagen Accord: its status, What was agreed in CA?, How to evaluate the CA, Current level of ambition, Evaluation of Carbon Market, Investment and financial flows are key, Market trends of CDM and JI, Negotiation after Copenhagen and Qualitative assessment of fragmented type of regimes. For the presentation of Ms. Takamura, it is really main points for the currently context facing to the climate change that is the concern for all countries around the world even though these countries are the developed countries or developing countries but the developing countries are easier to be risk than developed countries because they have still had the measures to adapt and mitigate to climate change especially the raising the awareness and capacity building. For this point too, the developing countries like Cambodia have no obligation to reduce the Green House Gas Emission because it is the activities of all more than thirty-developed countries that have commitment to reduce it or give the budgets to all developing countries set up the activities such as the mainstreaming the knowledge to adapt or mitigate themselves when facing.

At the next session, we had the presentation of Mr. Ryo Nasu, METI/GOJ on Climate Change and Technolog He said about the Role of Technology in Tackling Climate Change, Technology Transfer led by Private Sector, Conditions for Effective Technology Transfer, Successful sectoral cooperation by APP, Technology Mechanism under UN Negotiation, Climate Technology Center and Network, and the Crunch Issues. These all main points are very importance for all participants because we can gain more knowledge relating to the Technology in modern country like Japan. Why I say like this because of Technology can make climate change. For example, the industrialized countries have emitted every day into the air and cut down the ozone layer to prevent the sun light flexing to the earth so it is the reason that cause the increasing the temperature. We have a chance to meet vice minister of Ministry of Foreign Affair to share the experience and some main points for this study trip of all participants from 8 countries. She warmly welcome us to visit Japan and she requested us to express the ideas. For the next session, we also had the presentation of the representative from Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry on Promotion of practical GHG emissions reduction through the Bilateral Offset Mechanism with low carbon Technologies and Products. He spoke about World Emissions Trend, Materialization of the Copenhagen Accord (COP15), Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), Japanese Low Carbon Technologies and Products, New Approach to Tackle Climate Change, Promotion through Application of Business Incentives, Promotion beyond National Boundaries, Concentrated Investment in Important Sectors, Key Elements of Japan’s New Offset Mechanism, Requirement of New Mechanisms and F/S for Bilateral Offset Mechanism in FY 2010.After discussion full day, we had the welcome reception at the restaurant that come from the representative of each embassy to join together.

Cambodia

40


Day 3 September 14, 2010 (Tuesday)We had half-day meeting for all participants. We also had the presentation of Mr. Masanori Nakagawa, Assistant Director for International Cooperation Office of International Strategy on Climate Change, Ministry of the Environment of Japan on Adaptation to Climate Change. He quoted some main points such as: Climate Change and its Impacts, Adaptation to Climate Change, Asia Pacific Climate Change Adaptation Network, Wise Adaptation to Climate Change and Wise Adaptation.

At the afternoon session, the organizers led us to visit and ride the underground train and sky train in Tokyo the capital of Japan. After that, we visited the Panasonic Center in Tokyo. The General Manager of the Panasonic Center warmly welcome us for visiting this modern and famous company. The staffs of it is guide to tell us of all new equipments that they just found recently and they visited that place per hour. The GM of company gave us a gift. After visiting, we continued traveling to Hiroshima by plane that approximately had distant 800km from Tokyo.

Day 4 September 15, 2010 (Wednesday)From 09:00-09:30, we visited the Atomic Bomb Dome to be the latest thing in the second world war and there is one family of Check Republic is owner of this Dome. After visiting the Dome, we visited the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum. All participants were very happy to visit this famous place and In the Hiroshima Peace Memory Center, we saw the movie, pictures, and other things like dress, spoons, bottles, bullets, and other things else. We met old lady to be guide to tell us the story relating to the dropping Nuclear bomb. When having the World War II, she was a young lady (11years old). She told us every thing what happened in the past. After visiting the center, we went to Miyajima Island and we traveled more than 30 minutes to arrive the island. The Island fully had oysters and the residents have fed it for living life because the island has been famous place for all visitors and they want to eat delicious oysters, especially we saw the beautiful landscapes around us and better living life of those people and we come back with the train. At the evening, we continued traveling to Kyoto by bullet train and around 9 O’clock we arrived at the same day.

Day 5 September 16, 2010 (Thursday)In the morning, we visited to Oi Nuclear Power Plant. We met the manager of the plant to make a little discussion especially to know each other first. We traveled around the plant campus. They nearly constructed the plant to the sea because they have thought that the sea has been main elements of power.After visiting this plant, they continued visiting the Maizuru Thermal Power Station in Kyoto. We also met the manager of the plant and we made discussion more than 20 minutes including the asking and answering the questions from participants from each countries. We went on to visit the plant with a lot of questions and we also were on the big and famous ship nearly to the plant.

Day 6 September 17, 2010 (Friday)In the morning, we had field trip in Kyoto. We visited the home of old lady living alone after her husband passed away but she still carried life style and culture until now. When I visited her home, I observed the things like table was changed and I asked why? She said that when her husband had alive, the table had foot but while her husband passed away, we need to cut off the foot of table but the ancient dress she still wear until now.

Next time, we had farewell lunch in the hotel that come from the representatives of the Japan program. After lunch, we had the meeting to share 3-group discussion to get input and some recommendations to the program especially we chose the reporter after making discussion. Professor Takamura gave us the gift at the end of discussion meeting.

Cambodia

41


Day 7 September 18, 2010 (Saturday)All participants left for kansai International Airport (Osaka).

Finally, I would like to thank all of you that set up this program. This program make me know exactly about the modern country like Japan. Why I say like this? Because when I stayed in Japan, I saw everything to be very good. I referred to the living life, using the equipments, salary, good infrastructures, fully with the light and water to use, sanitation, and especially the morality of Japanese people. Japan is the country that I wish to visit and to study.

Thank you !

Cambodia

42

Individual ReportVietnam

Dang Phuong LoanOfficial, Department of International Cooperation, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, Vietnam

FINAL REPORT

Climate change, illustrated mainly by global warming and sea level rise, is one of the most serious challenges facing human being in the 21st century. Responding to climate change requires timely action, effective cooperation and efforts of the international community in both adaptation and mitigation.

The annual average temperature of Vietnam has increased about 0,5-0.7°C in the last 50 years; sea level has increased about 20cm in the same time. According to recent forecasts, the average temperature would increase by 2,3°C and the average sea level of Vietnam would increase by 75cm at the year 2010. Vietnam is one of the countries seriously affected by impacts of climate change, especially impacts of sea level rise because of long coastline, population concentrated in coastal deltas and economic activities depend on agriculture, natural resources and forestry. Vietnam's population accounts for 1% of the world population and CO2 emission of Vietnam is only 0.4% of total CO2 emissions worldwide. Climate change impacts on Vietnam more and more seriously.

Having recognized the importance in the fight against climate change, Vietnam signed United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) on 11/6/1992 and ratified it on 16/11/1994 and also signed Kyoto Protocol (KP) on 03/12/1998 and ratified it on 25/9/2002. Vietnam has been trying in cooperation with the international community to achieve multilateral agreements coping with impacts of climate change in accordance with the principle of "common but differentiated responsibilities" as defined in the UNFCCC. The Government of Vietnam has issued directions, decisions on implementation policy of the UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol. Viet Nam has already completed the Viet Nam Initial National Communication to the UNFCCC and is building the Viet Nam second National Communication to the UNFCCC. Besides, the Government of Vietnam has announced climate change and sea level rise scenarios for Viet Nam by 2100, approved National Strategy for Natural Disaster Prevention, Response and Mitigation to 2020.

To proactively respond to climate change, recently the Government of Vietnam has approved the National Target Program to respond to climate change (NTP) dated December 2nd 2008. Strategic objectives of the NTP are to assess climate change’s impacts on sectors and regions in specific periods and to develop feasible action plan to effective respond to climate change in each short-term and long-term periods to ensure sustainable development of Viet Nam, to take over opportunities to develop towards a low-carbon economy, effective and economic use of energy, proper exploitation and rational use of new and renewable energy sources to replace fossil fuels, development of green industry; and to join the international community’s efforts in responding to climate change, and protecting global climatic system. Vietnam has also actively promoted cooperation with international organizations in dealing with climate change. Currently, response

43


Vietnam

to climate change is one of the key policies of Vietnam in the field of natural resources, environment and sustainable development.

As a Party to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and Kyoto Protocol, so joining the annual activities of the UNFCCC and KP is not only Vietnam obligations, but also its rights and benefits. Vietnam has actively involved in the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and The Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (CMP), especially since the COP 11 in Montreal, Canada in 2005 to COP 15 in Copenhagen, Denmark in 2009. At COP 15, the Delegation of Vietnam, including 100 members led by Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung attended the COP 15 and CMP 5 in Copenhagen, Denmark from 07 to 18 December 2009. On this occasion, Vietnam held a side event to introduce to the world about Vietnam's efforts to respond to climate change.

The fight against climate change is a long war and need the asssociation of all countries in the world. Vietnam is considered as one of the countries most severely affected by climate change so many countries and organizations around the world have paid much attention and support for Vietnam, of which Japan is a of the countries actively supporting Vietnam, particularly through the Support Program to Respond to Climate Change (SP-RCC), worth more than US 100 million.

Through the Program “Climate Change Measure in Asia: A Review of Daily Life and Social/Economic Structure”, Japanese experts have given us much useful information on the current situation of climate change in the world, the climate change negotiation process, the achievements which the world has achieved in recent years, efforts and challenges, as well as climate change negotiation trends in the future. In addition, the program also introduced pariticpants the efforts and achievements of Japan in cutting emissions through the application of appropriate policies and technologies on lower carbon emission. We had many opportunities to visit field sites, including Panasonic Center, Oil Nuclear Power Plant and Mazuru Thermal Power Plant. These works show that Japan is developing ways to build a green and sustainable economy.

Southeast Asia is one of the areas subject to damage, the most vulnerable to climate change due to floods, storms, sea level rise, so the programs like this helped participants from ASEAN countries has the opportunity to exchange information on the status of climate change, adaptation measures that increase the connection between nations. Nghe Ðo

4

c ngũ âm

We had the wonderful experience of the country of Japan. We enjoyed the performances of traditional arts of Japan such as Ikebana, tea ceremony, Japanese traditional dramas and Japnanese traditional food and many beautiful landscapes in Japan. During the program, members of the Japan Foundation was interested and enthusiastic in supporting us from the first day we arrived in the Japan until we returned home.

For me, the program had been very fruitful because not

44


Vietnam

only did I have a chance to learn about Japan’s experiences but also to learn, by exchanging information of experiences in other ASEAN countries. This knowledge has been a significant contribution to may career….In the future, I believe that this kind of program will support any effort to create and construct firm solidarity among ASEAN countries to overcome common problems on climate change. I’d like to thank the Japan Foundation for this opportunity and hope to meet the participants as well as members of the Japan Foundation again.

45

Overview of climate change policies in Viet Nam

As one of the nations to be most adversely impacted by climate change, Viet Nam has created a strong legal platform and continually taken a proactive stance in responding to climate change.

Subsequent to the ratification of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in November 1994, and the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol in September 2002, Viet Nam has introduced, amended and updated various legal documents for the implementation of these treaties. Climate change response planning directives were promptly issued in 2005 as the Kyoto Protocol came into effect. Guidance for the implementation of the Clean Development Mechanism, as well as CDM project set-up procedures were provided in multiple Decisions, Circulars and Joint-Circulars.

A new milestone was reached in climate change response in 2008 when the Government of Viet Nam ratified the National Target Program to Respond to Climate Change (NTP-RCC) with Decision 158/2008/QĐ-TTg . NTP-RCC is a nation-wide program, encompassing all provinces and cities, sectors, cross-sector linkages following the principles of sustainable development and UNFCCC’s “common but differentiated responsibilities,” with the objectives of assessing the extent of climate change, its impact on Viet Nam, and developing a comprehensive response through policy streamlining, capacity building, long-term planning and implementation.

NTP-RCC is currently at the end of the first stage and making preparations for the next stage 2011-2015. It is currently putting special emphasis on financing with various donors, including amongst others JICA and AFD for the implementation of policies and projects compiled between 2008 and 2010.

Overall, Viet Nam is thoroughly engaged in the global climate change response and the active involvement of high-level leadership at international conferences and negotiations underscore the importance attributed to the issue and the international process.

Session 1

We look forward with hope to an agreement that comprises robust binding emission reduction commitments from all the major industrialized nations and major emerging global emitters for the second stage of the Kyoto Protocol.

Vietnam

Do Hoang VietSpecialist, Department of Meteorology, Hydrology and Climate Change, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, Vietnam

Individual Report

46


Session 2　

Scientific models point very clearly to the need for global emissions to peak between 2015 and 2020 to ensure that global temperature increases remain within a 2 degrees Celsius bound in the 21st century. Internationally, it is clear that more robust efforts are needed to accomplish this target which implies a minimal 40% reduction of emissions by 2020 and 80% by 2050 with respect to 1990 levels.

Domestically, Viet Nam has also asserted the need to take mitigation actions focusing on 3 areas (agriculture, forestry and land use), with 28 specific solutions. These are consistent with REDD+ and MRV requirements.

Session 3　

Because of our special vulnerability to climate change through geographic specificities, Viet Nam puts greater emphasis on Adaptation activities. Capacity-building plays an important part in the country’s developmental plans and is consistently pursued.

We have focused our efforts in technology in energy and energy efficiency. Currently Viet Nam is also implementing a National Target Program for Energy Efficiency. We are actively looking at wind, solar, and nuclear energy in our economic planning.

Session 4　

Session 5　

Financing climate change responses in both adaptation and mitigation require sizeable and sustained funding in order to ensure success both national and global scales. We believe financial, technical and technological support and assistance for developing countries are all crucial towards achieving the common goal and must be enhanced in considerable ways. We appreciate the “Cool Earth 50” initiative by Japan in its spirit of burden-sharing at the financing level.

Vietnam

47

Myanmar

Hlaing Min MaungHead of Branch, National Commission for Environmental Affairs, Ministry of Forestry, Myanmar

Individual Report

1. Work experience

I served as a range officer and staff officer at the Forest Department, Ministry of Forestry from November 1996 to mid March 2009. And then I was transferred to National Commission for Environmental Affairs, Ministry of Forestry on 17th March 2009, and currently working as a Head of Branch at this organization. I am responsible for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD) and forestry issue; for supporting the Director/joint secretary of NCEA, in preparing/ editing/ organizing on Climate change and Energy issue. In this connection, I am working as a desk officer for Initial National Communication project. In addition, I am also working as a member of Environmental Performance Assessment Team. Moreover, I am responsible for supporting the Director/Joint secretary of the NCEA, in preparing/ organizing National and international workshop.

2. Overview of Climate change Policies of Myanmar

The Union of Myanmar formed the National Commission for Environmental Affairs (NCEA) in February 1990 in order to systematically and effectively perform the environmental conservation activities. The Commission acts as a national focal point for environmental matters and promote environmentally sound and sustainable development activities in the Union of Myanmar.

The Union of Myanmar has adopted the National Environment Policy in 1994 and the policy clearly states that, “Environmental protection should always be the primary objective in seeking development”. With a view to implementing the National Environment Policy, the Commission has formulated and published Myanmar Agenda 21 in 1997. To implement the policy, a Myanmar environmental law was drafted in the year 2000. In addition to the drafted law, over sixty sectoral laws are in existence and those sectoral laws ensure environmental sustainability in the country. In accordance with the environmental policy, the Nature Environment Conservation Committee (NECC) was formed in 2004 with the representatives from nine ministries as members who are responsible for monitoring the environmental conservation activities at different administrative levels. Both NCEA and NECC are chaired by the Minister for Forestry. Although the Union of Myanmar has not issued particular climate policy statement, there are some provisions and ministerial policy statements which contain climate policy. The Constitution of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar, adopted in May 2008 by referendum, has some provisions for protection of natural environment. The Ministry of Forestry issued its policy statement and it has many provisions which relates to climate policy. Likewise, the policy statement of the Ministry of Health contains some statements on climate policy. In addition, the policy statement of the Ministry of Energy highlights in energy independence; wider use of new and renewable sources of energy; promoting energy efficiency and conservation; and promoting utilization of alternative fuel in household.

48


Myanmar

The Union of Myanmar has, in regards with climate change agreements, acceded to International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, London, 1973 and its Protocol of 1978; ratified the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, New York, 1992 in 1994; acceded to its Kyoto Protocol in 2003; ratified the International Tropical Timber Agreement, Geneva, 1994 in 1996; acceded Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer, Vienna, 1985 in 1993; acceded Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, London, 1987 in 1993; and ICAO ANNEX 16 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation Environmental Protection Vol. II Aircraft Engine Emission.

The Union of Myanmar adopted Singapore Declaration on Climate Change, Energy and the Environment on 21 November 2007 and ASEAN Statement on Joint Response to Climate Change on 9 April 2010.

3. Ideas concerned with discussion sessions

3.1 Session 1International Framework on Climate change beyond 2012Before expiration of Kyoto Protocol in 2012, there is a basic need to get legal climate agreement to weather the climate change related issue. At that time, the world’s leaders should make clear decision to save our planet. Therefore, the expected outcome of COP 16 and COP 17 will be an international climate agreement. We will see who will be a successful climate negotiator and which will be a newly developed International Framework on Climate Change beyond 2012.

3.2 Section 2(a) Mitigation Regarding with carbon emission and sink of the Union of Myanmar, she has finalized Initial National Communication recently and data shows that the Union of Myanmar is still not a net carbon emitter. This is mainly because of forestry sector which sequesters more than it emits. But we have to try to reach the emission target of annex I countries. This is all the global citizens’ commitments.

(b) REDD Forests play a central role in climate change. Forests act as a sink as well as a source of CO2. Avoided deforestation was not included in Kyoto mechanism because of permanence and leakage issues. REDD has the potential to generate substantial benefits in addition to the reduction of greenhouse gas. It is an important element of a future climate change scenario that integrates the role of forests and forestry. Myanmar has many enabling conditions for REDD including policy, management system, poverty reduction etc. Design and implementation of REDD mechanism still have the questions regarding the MRV, financing, reference level, payment system, permanence and leakage.

3.3 Session 3 According to ADB Report (September, 2009) on Economics of climate change in South East Asia, one of the World’s most vulnerable regions to climate change is South East Asia. Therefore, we need to do vulnerable assessment for adaptation. But most of them are still developing and we need to have adequate budget and technology transfer to adapt the climate change impact. In this respect, capacity building program for adaptation measures from developed countries is essential.

49


3.4 Session 5There are still needs to have clear understanding about carbon financing system and credit mechanism. In this regards, clear definition about the said system and mechanism should be developed.

Myanmar

50


Myanmar

Individual ReportBackground

Adopted in 1992 and entered into force on 21 March 1994, the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) sets out a framework for actions aimed at stabilizing the atmospheric concentrations of GHGs to avoid dangerous interference with the climate system. In December 1997, 189 parties of the UNFCCC agreed to a Protocol known as Kyoto Protocol that adopted mechanisms and tools for emissions reduction of GHGs.

According to Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), our atmosphere already contains enough long-lived greenhouse gases (GHGs in Short) to raise the global temperature by 2 degree Celsius. If that is the case, both human and ecological systems will be at risk from more natural disasters. As you already known, climate change is defining challenge of the 21st century. Consequently, immediate actions are needed to reduce CO2 emission in order to avoid the negative impacts of the climate change. The South-East-Asia is one of the most vulnerable regions to climatic variability in the world and it is predicted that the worst is yet to come to the region due to the climate change in coming decades, according to 2009 ADB report.

The JENESYS, Japan-East Asia Network of Exchange for students and Youths Programme 2010 on “Climate Change Measures in Asia: A Review of Daily Life and Social/Economic Structures” was organized by the Japan Foundation from 12th September-18th September in Japan. The aim of this program is to enhance the understanding of Japan’s climate control policy as well as boosting understanding about the climate control measures and searching for solutions to these global problems among ASEAN member states. From Myanmar, Ms. Shwe Cin Mya Htun, Head of Branch from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and I were invited to participate in the programme. Totally 15 young men and women officers working for climate change issue from 9 countries in ASEAN Member States were invited to participate in this program. This programme is composed of lectures, group discussion, Courtesy call to Parliamentary Vice-Minister from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, inspection of low carbon development, visiting Atomic Bomb Dome and Peace Memorial Museum, field trip to Japanese Eco life style and culture, and cultural sightseeing. During the programme we also had the best chance to exchange information and knowledge, and share our opinions on climate change related issue. Based on the climate change policy presentation made by respective countries’ participants and its general discussion, we also had the opportunity to understand the current situation of each country’s climate change policy and best practices from different perspectives. Before sharing my experiences from participating in this programme, I would like to offer a picture of climate change related issue in Myanmar.

Climate Change related issue in Myanmar

With the underlying physical geography, the risks associated with the climatic condition are generally known to be natural disasters like storm, flood and drought in Myanmar. While long coastal line is susceptible to Cyclone Storm, droughts are common in rain-shadowed area of the central part of Myanmar. Ayeyarwady delta area at the lower part of Myanmar and the areas alongside the major rivers of Ayeyarwady, Chindwin and Sittoung are also prone to flood in rainy season. Climate change due to global warming has been encountered since five decades ago in Myanmar. Climate changes in Monsoon Climatology of Myanmar created shorter durations of rainy season (late onset and early withdrawal of monsoon), increased heat indices and decreased annual rainfall since after 1977. Monsoon strength sharply decreased after the warm episode of 1978-1983. Normal monsoon breaks disappear in 1990s, and abnormal synoptic situations occurred in 1980s and 1990s. As an agricultural country, the effect of climatic natural disaster has caused great damages

51


Myanmar

and losses in local farming and economy. To reduce such losses, it is indeed essential in developing a contingency plan at national level for raising public awareness and reducing the possible impact by climate change.

Myanmar formed the National Commission for Environmental Affairs (NCEA) in February 1990 in order to systematically and effectively perform the environmental conservation activities. The Commission acts as a national focal point for environmental matters and promote environmentally sound and sustainable development activities in the Union of Myanmar.

Myanmar has adopted the National Environment Policy in 1994 and the policy clearly states that, “Environmental protection should always be the primary objective in seeking development”. With a view to implementing the National Environment Policy, the Commission has formulated and published Myanmar Agenda 21 in 1997. To implement the policy, a Myanmar environmental law was drafted in the year 2000. In addition to the drafted law, over sixty sectoral laws are in existence and those sectoral laws ensure environmental sustainability in the country. In accordance with the environmental policy, the Nature Environment Conservation Committee (NECC) was formed in 2004 with the representatives from nine ministries as members who are responsible for monitoring the environmental conservation activities at different administrative levels. Both NCEA and NECC are chaired by the Minister for Forestry.

Although Myanmar has not issued particular climate policy statement, there are some provisions and ministerial policy statements which contain climate policy. The Constitution of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar, adopted in May 2008 by referendum, has some provisions for protection of natural environment. The Ministry of Forestry issued its policy statement and it has many provisions which relates to climate policy. Likewise, the policy statement of the Ministry of Health contains some statements on climate policy. In addition, the policy statement of the Ministry of Energy highlights in energy independence; wider use of new and renewable sources of energy; promoting energy efficiency and conservation; and promoting utilization of alternative fuel in household.

Myanmar has, in regards with climate change agreements, acceded to International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, London, 1973 and its Protocol of 1978; ratified the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, New York, 1992 in 1994; acceded to its Kyoto Protocol in 2003; ratified the International Tropical Timber Agreement, Geneva, 1994 in 1996; acceded Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer, Vienna, 1985 in 1993; acceded Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, London, 1987 in 1993; and ICAO ANNEX 16 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation Environmental Protection Vol. II Aircraft Engine Emission.

Myanmar adopted Singapore Declaration on Climate Change, Energy and the Environment in November 2007 and ASEAN Statement on Joint Response to Climate Change in April 2010.

As required by all parties to the UNFCCC, the Union of Myanmar conducted its first GHG inventory with the assistance of ADB in 1997 under the Asian Least Cost Greenhouse Gas Abatement Strategy (ALGAS) Project. Myanmar conducted its first GHG inventory for base year of 1990, with the assistance of ADB in 1997. The inventory was conducted under the ADB study of Asia Least Cost Greenhouse Gas Abatement Strategy (ALGAS). General trend of net GHGs emissions in CO2 equivalent is low and consistent. Total net GHGs emission in CO2 equivalent for base year 1990 is approximately 41.5 million metric tons and it reaches to 62 million tons in year 2005. Agriculture and Energy Sectors are the major sources for total GHGs emission while the Forestry Sector is the major net sink of CO2. Emission from industrial process and waste are considered to be minimal. The 1990 base year emission level (less than 1 ton per person per year)

52


Myanmar

is relatively low comparing with other GMS countries, land use change and the Forest Sector is the net sink of GHGs emissions as about half of total surface land area is still covered by forest. Moreover, Myanmar has been implementing the Initial National Communication (INC) project by the assistance of Global Environment Facility (GEF) in 2008. In line with Myanmar Agenda 21, the Project for the Preparation of National Communication for the adaptation to Climate Change funded by GEF through UNEP has been started. Project Executing Agency is Department of Metrological and Hydrology, Ministry of Transport, in cooperation with National Commission for Environmental Affairs (NCEA).

Regarding with carbon emission and sink of Myanmar, she has finalized Initial National Communication recently and data shows that Myanmar is still not a net carbon emitter. This is mainly because of forestry sector which sequesters more than it emits.

Electricity generation through HYDRO power stands at the top with the highest percentage of 64.7%, followed by natural gas at 20.3%. Electricity generation by using coal and diesel is at 4.7 and 2.2% respectively. Electricity generation through hydro and gas is thus cleaner than that of power generation through coal. This reveals that power generation in the Union of Myanmar is clean and thus the country is not a net emitter.

To reduce emission from transportation, energy policy in transportation sector is to use Natural Gas in the place of petrol and diesel for some vehicles in short term and bio-fuel in the long term. Conversions of fossil-fuel use vehicles into CNG cars are encouraged.

By absorbing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and serving as carbon sinks, forests play a key role in addressing global climate change. Forest sector, therefore, has been considered as a prominent component in the UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol. Currently the following activities of the forest sector, among others, are contributing to the mitigation of adverse changes in climatic conditions:

- Restoration and rehabilitation of degraded forests;- Rehabilitation and re-afforestation in the Central Dry Region;- Improving traditional cultivation system and control of shifting cultivation;- Watershed management activities;- Rehabilitation and conservation of fragile forest ecosystems like mangroves;- Establishment and expansion of Protected Areas System; and- Introducing reduced impact logging practices

Myanmar has a forest cover of around 50% of the total land area and they are mostly natural forests. Until now a total of more than 500, 000 hectares of forest plantations were established throughout the country and they are actually carbon sinks. Dry Zone Greening Department was established in 1997 to make the dry region green. Until now, the Department has formed a total of 117,000 ha of plantations in the region.

Nowadays, clean development mechanism (CDM) and reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD) are becoming important financial mechanisms in addition to being strategies to mitigate climate change. The concept is to provide financial incentives to any forestry project that has “real, measurable and long-term benefits” related to the mitigation of climate change while reducing the national deforestation rate.

However, political acceptance and implementation of climate policies aimed at reducing carbon emission from

53


Myanmar

deforestation will require the resolution of scientific challenges. Foremost among these challenges is the quantification of site specific carbon sequestration capacities of each forest ecosystem and the identification of feasible approaches to address national-level carbon emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries like Myanmar. Designated National Authority (DNA) was established in 2006 in order to approve the proposed CDM projects at the national level, to coordinate and facilitate CDM projects in various sectors of Myanmar and to connect with international organizations for CDM project activities. DNA of Myanmar is led by Minister for Forestry and the secretary and joint-secretary are the senior officials from the Forest Department, and is established by 22 members representing 15 ministries. DNA has been preparing the procedures and organizing the technical teams which are necessary.

In present economic development activities, environmental conservation plans are integrated at every 5-year economic plans and one of the objectives in the economic plan (2006-2010) is to conserve natural environment.

Myanmar places great emphasis on IPCC’s report which concludes that developed countries need to reduce GHGs emissions from 25 to 40 % below 1990 levels by 2020 and from 80 to 95% below 1990 levels by 2050.

Myanmar had a painful experience of tropical Cyclone Nargis in 2008 and therefore Myanmar supports any actions and measures that reduce significant reduction of CO2 emissions to avert global warming.

Lesson learnt from the Programme

This programme provided a unique opportunity to explore climate change issues in Japan and engage at a region and global level cooperation to get the emission target and agreement. Not only Japanese Government but also all Japanese societies had deeply held attitudes concerning climate control activities. Needless to say, the Japanese Government had made her commitment to reduce her emissions and the Japanese people had changed their individual behaviour to get their emission targets according to Kyoto protocol. Moreover, creating low carbon society is a best practise for realising how they are actively participated, accounted on climate related issues. Therefore, I had learned that even the formulation and development of climate policy is important but the more we need to do is the individual attitude on the implementation of each policy.

Conclusion

We need to find multilateral agreements through international negotiations before and after COP 16. By doing so, we need better policies to find a way to control climate change issue for the benefit of all countries. At the regional level, inter-state cooperation plays an important role to improve climate change policies in order to ensure that for the effective mitigation and adaptation measures. After participation this JENESYS programme, I had a better understanding of climate change issue from having a chance to learn about Japan and also from exchanging views with participants from ASEAN member states. During this programme, I also had the chance to make wonderful friends who are working for combating climate change in the region with different backgrounds and to explore Japan and its culture. I, therefore, will never forget this wonderful experience and will always be thankful to the Japan Foundation and the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs for providing this great opportunity. I strongly believe that the friendships and networks we built during this programme, the experiences we shared and what we have learnt will be a valuable contribution and will enhance my current and future work in the climate change field through a deeper understanding of climate change related issues facing Japan and the East Asia Region.

54

MyanmarIndividual Report

Shwe Cin Mya HtunThird Secretary, International Organizations and Economic Department, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Myanmar

1. Work Experience

I am currently working at the International Organizations and Economic Department. My daily responsibilities are to coordinate with other ministries to strength the trade relation with other countries, to analyze the region and the world’s economic trends, their effects in the international arena and to continuously examine the relations between Myanmar and its trading partner. Besides these normal duties, I am preparing to get necessary documents for various subjects and giving support the speech to my superiors for attending the International Conference . So I need to achieve an in-depth knowledge of the diverse subjects to empower my carrier like the course of trade and environment.

2. Overview of Climate change Policies of Myanmar

Today many difficult issues such as financial crisis, food security, terrorism, pandemic diseases and climate change take the top lines of the global agenda. These global challenges adversely affect our people especially from developing countries. Global warming and climate change impacts are growing issues for sustainable development of nations all over the world. As Myanmar is an agro-based country and agriculture is obviously climate dependent, the implication of climate change on agriculture cannot be ignored.

The Union of Myanmar formed the National Commission for Environmental Affairs (NCEA) in 1990 in order to systematically and effectively perform the environmental conservation activities. In 1997 this Commission had formulated and published Myanmar Agenda 21 to implement the National Environmental Policy. To implement this policy, Myanmar Environmental Law was drafted in the year 2000. In accordance with this policy, the Nature Environmental Conservation Committee (NECC) was formed in 2004. Both NCEA and NECC are chaired by the Ministry of Forest.

Myanmar Government has been giving attention to make the central dry area green since 1954. In 1997, a new department under the title of Dry Zone Greening Department was formed. The scope of the greening project has been extended from (9) arid districts in the dry zone area of Central Myanmar to (13) districts presently. Extensive greening activities are being carried out with community participation. Similarly, The Forestry Department has been carrying out conservation of the natural forest, replanting in deforested areas and forming protected areas and wildlife sanctuaries for biodiversity conservation. Moreover, construction of new reservoirs and dams, proper management of water shortage, diversion of water from streams and creeks, lifting of water from rivers through pumps and efficient utilization of ground water are carrying out in accordance with the adaptation and mitigation activities in future.

55


Myanmar is a low carbon emission country. Due to the painful experience of Cyclone Nargis in May 2008, the Myanmar government is fully aware of the need to act decisively. We are implementing the National Adaptation Programmes of Action (NAPA) to reduce environmental risks associated with climate change.

Myanmar has been carried out National Air Quality Monitoring Project funded by UNEP in the year 2007, 2008, 2009 and with the assistance of the Thai government, air quality measuring was carried out in Tachileik in 2010. The Government adopted the National Environmental Health Action Plan in August 2009.

The Government has been promoting public interest and awareness on the environment is the annual celebration of the World Environment Day. Since 1993, World Environment Day has been celebrated on a nation-wide scale in Myanmar. This shows Myanmar puts ecosystem services in priority and environmental conservation.

These all above mention are how Myanmar contributes the environmental conservation and implements the appropriate measures.

Session (1)

Developing countries which produce much lower emission than the developed countries deserve to be treated with fairness. Developing countries which contribute less than 2 percent of greenhouse gases are the most vulnerable and are the least protected in the face of climate change. Unless timely action is taken to rectify the situation, the developing countries risk jeopardizing years of hard work they have devoted to meet their millennium development goals, particularly with regard to eradication of poverty and promotion of better health and living conditions for present and future generations. The endeavors of developing countries in pursuance of sustainable development should be supported by developed countries through financing, technology transfer, capacity building and irrevocable commitment. I would like to highlight the need to achieving a just, equitable and binding agreement to ensure the rise in temperature to below 2 degree Celsius after 2012.

We hope that COP16 at Mexico will be held in good faith and that the process will more advance than COP15 at Copenhagen in an open, transparent and inclusive manner. The developed countries are worried about the reduction of Carbon which could be hindered their economy. According to Kyoto Protocol, the carbon credit is the best way of adaptation to the developing countries and it will happen to reach agreement. But it can take for a long period between this replanting process, the developed countries should support the technology transfer.

Session (2)

In Myanmar, most of the rural peoples depend on firewood for cooking. They use charcoals for cooking. Using firewood or charcoal for cooking is a major cause of emission of carbon dioxide and deforestation. So let us know what kind of arrangement Japan did for such kind of problem before using the electricity.

Myanmar

56


Session (3)

For industrial sector, some Myanmar mills and factories are technically outdated and emit a large volume of smoke. In addition, old vehicles also emit emissions to cause air pollution, especially in big cities. New technologies or devices should be introduced to those old and outdated mills and factories to stop or mitigate emissions. So it should be replaced the environmental unfriendly vehicles with environmental friendly vehicles. The developed countries like Japan should cooperate with Myanmar authorities concerned to provide sort of vehicles to Myanmar.

Myanmar

57


Myanmar

Individual Report

I would like to express my sincere appreciation to the Japan Foundation and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan for the opportunity to participate in the JENESYS East Asia Future Leaders Programme. We were able to share our knowledge and exchange our experiences and opinions on climate change related issues from 9 ASEAN countries by presenting the country reports on the first day and second day. During this programme, we had chanced to visit Panasonic Center, Atomic Bomb Dome and Peace Memorial Museum and study trip to Japan’s Electronic Power Plants and observe how Japan tried to mitigate and adopt their climate change measure on daily life and social structure by using advanced technologies and systematic strategies. I am fully confident that we can rely on JENESYS programme not only for improving our knowledge, ability and career development but also promoting the capacity building of developing countries.

Today, it is true that climate change becomes a global challenge. Global warming is causing climate change. The governments around the world seek various measures to stabilize climate change at national level and regional level. The United Nations is also playing its role to mitigate climate change as global level. Thus, it is necessary that all nations – especially in the developed world, the need to reduce the emission of carbon dioxide gas is necessary. Therefore, concerted efforts are needed to combat against climate change. Myanmar noted the alarming climate change and also takes part in fight against climate change. Myanmar signed the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in 1992 and ratified it in 1994. The Agreement of Kyoto Protocol was signed and ratified since 2003. Myanmar also signed the Singapore Declaration on Climate Change, Energy and the Environment at East Asia Summit held in Singapore 2007. Myanmar is a party to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC) and the related Kyoto Protocol.

Myanmar is now undertaking a project on preparation of the Initial National Communication under the UNFCCC. The main objective of this project is to enable Myanmar to fulfil its commitments and obligations as required by the UNFCCC and its Kyoto Protocol.

Although Myanmar has not issued particular climate policy statement, there are some provisions and ministerial policy statements which contain climate policy. The Constitution of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar, adopted in May 2008 by referendum, has some provisions for protection of natural environment. The Ministry of Forestry issued its policy statement and it has many provisions which relates to climate policy. Likewise, the policy statement of the Ministry of Health contains some statements on climate policy. In addition, the policy statement of the Ministry of Energy highlights in energy independence; wider use of new and renewable sources of energy; promoting energy efficiency and conservation; and promoting utilization of alternative fuel in household.

As ASEAN member, at the regional level, Myanmar is participating in ASEAN Climate Change Network which will strengthen cooperation among the member countries for sharing information on climate change activities. Myanmar is also cooperating in ASEAN Climate Change Initiative (ACCI) being undertaken by ASEAN Senior Officials on Environment (ASOEN).

Myanmar formed the National Commission for Environmental Affairs (NCEA) in February 1990 in order to systematically and effectively performed the environmental conservation activities. The Commission acts as a national focal point for environment activities in Myanmar.

58


Myanmar

Myanmar has adopted the National Environment Policy in 1994. With a view to implementing the National Environment Policy, the Commission has formulated and published Myanmar Agenda 21 in 1997. To implement the policy, a Myanmar environmental law was drafted in the year 2000. In addition to the drafted law, over sixty sectoral laws are in existence and those sectoral laws ensure environmental sustainability in the country.

In accordance with the environmental policy, the Nature Environment Conservation Committee (NECC) was formed in 2004 with the representatives from nine ministries as members who are responsible for monitoring the environmental conservation activities at different administrative levels. Both NCEA and NECC are chaired by the Minister for Forestry. Myanmar is an agro-based country and therefore the emission of carbon is very minimal. Its per capital emission of carbon of the country is less than 1 ton per annum. The Initial National Communication Project is being conducted in Myanmar in order to know the sector-wise emission and the country is also implementing National Adaptation Programmes of Action (NAPAs) to reduce the associated environmental risks.

With regard to Myanmar’s carbon emission and sink, the country has finalized initial National Communication recently and data shows that Myanmar is still not a net carbon emitter. This is mainly because of forestry sector which sequesters more than it emits.

In Myanmar, electricity generation through Hydro Power stands top with the highest percentage of 64.7 per cent followed by natural gas at 20.3 per cent. Electricity generation by using coal and diesel is at 4.7 and 2.2 per cent respectively. Electricity generation through hydro and gas is thus cleaner than that of power generation through coal. This reveals that power generation in Myanmar is clean and thus the country is not a net emitter.

To reduce emission from transportation, energy policy in transportation sector is to use Natural Gas in the place of petrol and diesel for some vehicles in short term and bio-fuel in the long term. Conversions of fossil fuel use vehicles into CNG cars are encouraged.

Briefly say, As we are aware, climate change is a global issue and too large and complex to be faced by any individual country alone. As climate change is not an environmental issue, it is also an international economic issue.

59

CLIMATE CHANGE STATUS IN LAO PDR

Presented by Ms. Vilayphone SOMBATHDOUANGPlanning and Cooperation, Department of Environment, Water Resources and Environment Administration.P. O Box 7864 Vientiane, Lao PDR.

Self-Introduction.

Background Information.

Department of Environment’s Organization Chart. Planning and Cooperation Division chart.

Completed Projects in Laos.

Strategy on Climate change of Laos.

Outline

Name: Ms. Vilayphone SOMBATHDOUANG

Job title: Technical Officer of Planning and Cooperation Division .

Started to work with Department of Environment under Water Resources and Environment Administration (WREA)2008 to present.

Country: Lao PDR.

SELF-INTRODUCTION Background Information1. To manage, recruit and replace the department staff.

Allocate tasks in accordance with their skills and qualifications.

2. To strengthen organizational framework and develop human resources at central and local level in the organization.

3. To build capacity in environment for environmental officers in other parts of the Government both at central and local level.

Vilayphone SombathdouangTechnical Officer, Water Resources and Environment Administration, Laos

Individual ReportLaos

60


Department of EnvironmentDepartment of Environment’’s s Organization Chart Organization Chart

Planning and Cooperation DivisionPlanning and Cooperation Division under the Department of Environment was established Water Resources and Environment Administration (WREA).

Director General of Division

Deputy Director General of Division

Cooperation Unit

Human resourcesUnit

Plan and finance Unit

Protocal and managementUnit

Strategy on Climate Change of the Lao PDR

• The target of the strategy on climate change in the Lao PDR are:

• To building awareness and capacity building for officer in central government and local government.

• To Adaptation climate change.

• To Mitigation from climate change.

ACTION PLAN: 8 THEMATIC PRIORITIES

Building Awareness and CapacityBuilding Awareness and Capacity►► 1: Building Climate Change Awareness1: Building Climate Change Awareness►► 2: Strengthening Policies and Institutions2: Strengthening Policies and Institutions►► 3: Expanding the Knowledge Base3: Expanding the Knowledge Base

AdaptationAdaptation►► 4: Mainstreaming Climate Change4: Mainstreaming Climate Change►► 5: Building Adaptive Capacity of the Poor5: Building Adaptive Capacity of the Poor►► 6: Enhancing Ecosystem Resilience6: Enhancing Ecosystem Resilience►► 7: Comprehensive Disaster Management7: Comprehensive Disaster Management

MitigationMitigation►► 8: Climate Change Mitigation8: Climate Change Mitigation

AgricultureForestryWater

IndustryHealth

Energy,Agriculture,LUCE,Industry Waste

• Lao PDR’s First National Communication. Completed October 2000.

• Lao PDR’s National Adaptation Programme of Action.

Completed May 2009.

• Strategy on climate change of the Lao PDR. Completed March 2010.

• Second National Communication on Climate Change.

Ongoing 2009-2011.

• Capacity Development Technical Assistant for Capacity Enhancement for coping with climate change.

Start 2010-1012.

Climate Change Implementation NATIONAL ADAPTAION PROGRAMMES OF ACTION (NAPA), (2004-2009)

Conducted rapid assessment on main climate change impact in 4 sectors such as: agriculture, forestry, water & Health.

45 Project Concepts: 45 Project Concepts: 13 for Agriculture 13 for Agriculture 14 for Forestry 14 for Forestry 10 for Water 10 for Water 8 for Health8 for Health

Total amounts: 85 Total amounts: 85 mUSmUS$$

Follow up phase funding by LDCF through GEF – Title: “Improving the Resilience of the Agriculture Sector in Lao PDR to Climate Change Impacts”- 5 mUS$ ( 5 years project – 2009-2014)

Laos

61


SECOND NATIONAL COMMUNICATION ON CLIMATE CHANGE PROJECT (SNC) 2008-2011

1. GHG emission inventory and Key Source analyses for five 1. GHG emission inventory and Key Source analyses for five of the six sectors mentioned in the IPCC guidelines of the six sectors mentioned in the IPCC guidelines namely:namely: energy, energy, land use and forestry, land use and forestry, agricultureagriculture Industries andIndustries and waste. waste. (but not for solvent)(but not for solvent)

2. Vulnerability and Adaptation (V&A) Assessment), 2. Vulnerability and Adaptation (V&A) Assessment), 3. Mitigation Analyses and option ), 3. Mitigation Analyses and option ), 4. Climate change scenarios4. Climate change scenarios

Laos

62


Back groundI have graduated with a Diploma of Finance and Banking from Satha business college of Lao in 2008 and received my Bachelor degree of the same major in 2010. I started to work at Department of Environment, Water Resources and Environment Administration (WREA) Since 2008. Now I am working at the Planning and Cooperation Division, Department of Environment WREA, My responsibility is Human Resources and Cooperation, but I did not have any Experiences in this work but it was interested in this work that can make me to improve my knowledge to work in the future.

TopographyThe Lao People’s Democratic Republic or Lao PDR is a landlocked country covering an area of 236800 square kilometers. The country stretches more than 1700 km from north and between 100 km and 400 km from as to west The country share is borders with the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, Kingdom of Thailand, Kingdom of Cambodia, People’s Democratic of China and Myanmar. The topography of the nation is the mostly mountainous ranging from 200 to 28820 meters with mountains covering about two thirds of the land area. The country is crisscrossed by a number of river, including a 1856 km stretch of Mekong river (Nam Khong), Which defines its border with Myanmar and major part of its border with Thailand.

The Lao PDR has tropical climate dominated by the south-west monsoon which bring high, humidity, and high temperatures between mid- April and mid October. The climate is characterized by high internal variability of rainfall with relatively frequent occurrence of flooding and drought. The average temperatures rang from 20c in the mountainous areas and highland plateaus to 25-27c in the plain, internal temperatures variations are large.

The Lao PDR is abundant in natural resources like water, forests and minerals, the country has abundant surface and groundwater resources. It has a per capital availability of 66000 cubic meters and, despite expected increase in the future demand, there are no expected water problems in the foreseeable future. The mountainous terrain, combined with a large river network, provides a large hydroelectric power generation potential, with has barely been tapped.

Forest resources are and important source of income, construction material, fuel wood, and other non-timber products in the Lao PDR. They also contribute significantly to the foreign exchange earning of country. The total forest area of the Lao PDR is 11.17 Mha (million hectares), covering 47% of total land area. Over the two decades have decreased due to shifting cultivation practices, poorly planned logging activities, and forest fires.

The Lao PDR has abundance of mineral resources such as gold, copper, limestone, gypsum, lead, and tin, with have so far been little expiated due to act of resources for development and limited infrastructure to access the resources.

The Lao PDR is home to a small but ethnically diverse population. The population of country, according to the 1995 census, is 4574848 mostly living in rural areas. The population can be categorized into three groups: the Lao Lou, Lao theung, and Lao Soung. The average population growth rate is average of 2.8% The country is categorized as Aleuts developed country. In 1995, per capita income in the Lao PDR was estimated at $350. This reflects minimal standards of living the majority of people in the country. Poverty eradication and providing people with decent living conditions are the two important challenges for the Lao PDR. The economy has growth at an annual growth rate of 6.5% over the period 1990-1995. The government became a full member of ASEAN (Association of South East Asian Nations) in July 1997. The Lao PDR is one of the four riparian countries comprising the Mekong River commission.

Laos

63


Agriculture remains the principle economic sector in the Lao PDR, accounting for 55% of the total value added in 1995, Since new economic mechanism was adopted in 1986 income from industry and tourism has increased rapidly. The economy is highly import- dependent and its major source of export earnings is hydroelectricity mad timber.

Economic ConditionsSince the Government of the Lao PDR endorsed reform at the end of the 1980s, the country has opened investment, converted to a market-oriented economy and launched a decentralization policy. This policy defines the province as a strategic unit, the district as a Financial and Planning unit, and the village as an implementing unit. This policy is a basis for the construction of the national economy and for establishing a concrete foundation for gradual industrialization and modernization. The policy has also Stabilized macro-economic conditions and ensured a steady, sustained growth and macro-equilibrium. The average gross domestic product (GDP) growth per head was about 7.9% in 2007(World Bank 2008), which is higher than the 5 year average growth from 1996-2000. Average income was about $511 per person per year in 2005-2006 (National Statistics Centre, 2006). In this regards, due to in the economic structure that have been taken place over the last 5 years, the ratio of agriculture in the GDP has decreased from 51.9% in 2000 to 45.5% in 2005 and an estimated 40.3% in 2007, Whereas the ratio of industry has increased from 24.4% in 2000 to 28.2% in 2005 and an estimated 34.1% in 2007, and the service sector also increased from 25.7% in 2000 to 26.4% in 2005 and 25.6% in 2007. These figures illustrate positive changes in the economic structure of the Lao PDR.

What I have gained from the JENESYS Program.The JENESYS Program is the great program for ASEAN number countries to negotiations on climate change are a problem related to such issues as the emission of green house gasses including CO2 as well as culture and religion such as individual lifestyles, social and the industrial structures in Japan. For that reason I am interested in many industrial can management and inspect for good quality and good standard to control the environment impact. I also had the good opportunities to sites visit to know about the high technology transfer in Production industrial which can be used for energy saving and environment protection especially for the Panasonic centre and the Oi nuclear power station that I knew about how to use the energy for environment friendly.

The great experience of JENESYS Program.First of all, I would like to thank Japan Foundation, The Ministry of Foreign Affairs, all participants and those who welcomed us during the program. This program was really great and I learned so many things through our visits many places. In addition, it was great to spend two weeks with people from 9 different countries. We not only spent a lot of time for studying, but also had a lot fun and share many experiences together and I hope to meet the participants as well as members of the Japan foundation again.

Laos

64

Climate Change Status in Lao PDR

Presented by Ms. Thounheuang BUITHAVONGClimate Change Office, Department of Environment, Water Resources and Environment Administration.

P. O Box 7864 Vientiane, Lao PDR.

• Self-Introduction.

• Background Information.

Outline

• Climate change office chart.

• Completed Projects in Laos.

• Strategy on Climate change of Laos.

Self-Introduction

• Name: Ms. Thounheuang BUITHAVONG.

• Job title: Technical Officer of climate change office.

• Started to work with Department of Environment under Water Resources and Environment Administration (WREA) since 2007 to present.

• Country: Lao PDR.

Background Information

• Climate change Office was established in 2008 under the Water Resources and Environment Administration (WREA).

• Lao PDR has ratified to UNFCCC in 1995.

• Lao PDR has ratified to Kyoto Protocol in 2007.y

• Climate Change Office is the UNFCCC focal point.

• Water Resources and Environment Administration worked as CDM-DNA.

• Climate Change Office has assigned to be DNA Secretariat by WREA.

Thounheuang BuithavongTechnical Officer, Water Resources and Environment Administration, Laos

Individual ReportLaos

65


Policy and Coordination Unit

Vulnerability and Adaptation Unit

Mitigation and CDM Unit

Communication and Promotion Unit

Administration

Climate Change Office Chart

Policy and Coordination Unit

Vulnerability and Adaptation Unit

Mitigation and CDM Unit

Communication and Promotion Unit

National Climate Change

Strategy and Action Plan

Negotiation

National Communications

NAPA

Adaptation Action plan

Adaptation Funds access

CDM-DNA Secretariat

Mitigation Action Plan

GHG Inventories

Carbon Finance

Capacity Building

Education and Information

ICT

Admin

Finance

National Climate Change

Strategy and Action Plan

Negotiation

National Communications

NAPA

Adaptation Action plan

Adaptation Funds access

CDM-DNA Secretariat

Mitigation Action Plan

GHG Inventories

Carbon Finance

Capacity Building

Education and Information

ICT

Climate Change Implementation

• Lao PDR’s First National Communication. Completed October 2000.

• Lao PDR’s National Adaptation Programme of Action.

Completed May 2009.

• Strategy on climate change of the Lao PDR. Completed March 2010.

• Second National Communication on Climate Change.

Ongoing 2009-2011.

• Capacity Development Technical Assistant for Capacity Enhancement for coping with climate change.

Start 2010-1012.

Strategy on Climate change of the Lao PDR.

The target of the strategy on climate change in the Lao PDR are:

To building awareness and capacity building for officer in central government and local government.g g

To Adaptation climate change.

To Mitigation from climate change.

Action Plan: 8 Thematic Priorities

Building Awareness and Capacity►1: Building Climate Change Awareness►2: Strengthening Policies and Institutions►3: Expanding the Knowledge BaseAdaptationAdaptationAdaptationAdaptation►4: Mainstreaming Climate Change►5: Building Adaptive Capacity of the Poor►6: Enhancing Ecosystem Resilience►7: Comprehensive Disaster ManagementMitigation►8: Climate Change Mitigation

AgricultureForestryWater IndustryHealth

Energy, AgricultureLUCF, Industry

Waste

National Adaptaion Programmes of Action (NAPA), (2004-2009)

Conducted rapid assessment on main climate change impact in 4 sectors such as: agriculture, forestry, water & Health.forestry, water & Health.

45 Project Concepts: 13 for Agriculture 13 for Aggg14 for Forestry 10 for Water 8 for Health

Total amounts: 85 mUS$Follow up phase funding by LDCF through GEF – Title: “Improving the Resilience of the Agriculture Sector in Lao PDR to Climate Change Impacts” - 5 mUS$ ( 5 years project – 2009-2014)

1. GHG emission inventory and Key Source analyses for five of the six sectors mentioned in the IPCC guidelines namely:• energy, • land use and forestry,

Second National Communication on Climate Change Project (SNC) 2008-2011

land use and forestry,y,f y,• agriculture• Industries and• waste. (but not for solvent)

2. Vulnerability and Adaptation (V&A) Assessment),3. Mitigation Analyses and option ),4. Climate change scenarios

Laos

66


I. BackgroundI received my Bachelor degree in English of Arts (English Special Program) from National University of Laos in 2005 and received my diploma in Accounting in 2006. I started to work at Department of Environment since 2007. I am currently working at the climate change office (CCO), Department of Environment, Water Resources and Environment Administration, Lao PDR. I have been working at climate change office for 3 years and I was assigned to be in charge of clean Development Mechanism (CDM) Unit, even though my education skill is not related to my work and I did not have any work experiences on this field but it was really interested in motivated myself to look for an opportunity to enhance my knowledge in this field and the other field which is related to climate change. In 2003, Institute for Global Environment Strategy (IGES) has been conducting CDM Capacity activities in selected Asian countries, under the auspices of the Ministry of the Environment of Japan. In 2008, it was given an opportunity to learned from IGES in closed cooperation with the WREA and has launched the CDM program which aims at enhancing human and institutional capacity for government of Lao PDR, to promoted CDM project identification and development in Lao PDR and to assisted realization of CDM projects, to contributed the discussion of reforming the current CDM as well as the CDM beyond 2012 under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) from the viewpoint of Lao PDR.

1. TopographyLao People’s Democratic Republic is a small country located in the Indochina peninsula (Mekong Region) and shared border with 5 countries such as: Republic of China to the North, Vietnam to the East, Cambodia to the south, and Thailand and Myanmar (Burma) to the West and Northwest respectively. Lao PDR has a total land area of approximately 236,800km2, 80 percent of which is mountainous. Mountains are found in the Northern region, thee annamite Chain (forming most of the eastern border of the country), and in the South, posing a significant natural buffer to storms that occur in the region. However, the remaining 20 percent of the country comprises mostly flat floodplains along the Mekong River. The lowest altitude of Lao PDR is 200 meters and highest is 2,880 meters.

2. Social ConditionThe 2005 census (2006 Statistics) indicates that Lao PDR has a population of 5.8 million people and an average population density of about 24/km2, which is the lowest density in Southeast Asia. The population growth rate was about 2.4 percent per annum, crude birth rate 33.7 per 1,000 people, and total fertility rate between 4.3 per woman to 6 per woman in rural areas. Infant mortality rates ranged from 5-12.5 depending on the province and adult life expectancy (males and females) ranged from >50-60 depending on province (Hook et al, 2003). Over 73 percent of Lao populations live in the rural areas. The remaining 20 percent of the urban population has an average growth rate of 5.5 percent per year.

The results of official surveys in Lao PDR indicated that in 1992-1993, approximately 38.6 percent of poor households were living below the poverty line, and in 2002/3 it was estimated that 28.7 percent of household in the country are poor (NGPES, 2004; Resolution of the VIII Party Congress, 2006; and MPI Background Document for the Round Table Implementation Meeting, 2008). This success reflects the Government and Party’s utmost efforts to reduce poverty. Poverty reduction is a key policy directive of the Resolution of the VIII Party Congress. It is reflected in the National Growth and Poverty Eradication Strategy (NGPES) where it forms the basis for the formulation and implementation Government policies that will lift the country from LDC status by 2020. To date, poverty in mountainous and remote areas has been addressed gradually, in particular in the northern provinces and in the province along the Lao PDR and Vietnam borders, in which a large number of ethnic minorities rely mainly on shifting cultivation activities for their livelihoods.

Laos

67


In general, education development plans at different levels have been a relative success. This is a significant trend for future development, as both quantitatively and qualitatively reflected in the following aggregate figures: primary enrolment rates increased from 79 percent in 2001 to 84.2 percent in 2005 and an estimated 89 percent in 2007-2008, lower school enrolment from 46.6 percent to 54.8 percent, and upper secondary school from 22.6 percent to 34.4 percent. Vocational education and university, both public and private, are also increasing. Adult literacy rates have also increased to 73 percent in 2007 (MPI Background Document for the Round Table Implementation Meeting, 2008). Because of success such as these, Lao PDR now rank 133rd out of 179 countries worldwide in the Human Development Index of the United Nations, compared to the 1993 when it ranked 141st out of 173 countries.

Over the last five years, the Government has paid close attention to expanding health care networks at both central and local levels. The health care network has increased significantly at the grassroots level, with villages and village clusters providing the centre point for health care services and curative centre for the people. At the same time, private health care networks have also been promoted and strongly enhanced, greatly contributing to health care services. The supply of medication domestically produced could meet 48 percent of domestic demand and about 96 percent of the villages in the country have been now equipped with village drug kits. In 2006, average life expectancy of the people increased to 61 years (National Statistics Centre, 2006). However, estimated suggest that despite considerable efforts, 37 percent of children younger than age 5 are under weight. Chronic malnutrition, or stunting also remains a major issue, affecting 40 percent of children under age 5, and requires urgent attention (MPI Background Document for the Round Table Implementation Meeting, 2008).

3. Economic ConditionsSince the Government of the Lao PDR endorsed reform at the end of the 1980s, the country has opened investment, converted to a market-oriented economy and launched a decentralization policy. This policy defines the province as a strategic unit, the district as a financial and planning unit, and the village as an implementing unit. This policy is a basis for the construction of the national economy and for establishing a concrete foundation for gradual industrialization and modernization. The policy has also stabilized macro-economic conditions and ensured a steady, sustained growth and macro-equilibrium. The average gross domestic product (GDP) growth per head was about 7.9 percent in 2007 (World Bank, 2008), which is higher than the 5 year average growth from 1996-2000. Average income was about USD 511 per person per year in 2005-2006 (National Statistics Centre, 2006). In this regards, due to in the economic structure that have been taken place over the last 5 years, the ratio of agriculture in the GDP has decreased from 51.9 percent in 2000 to 45.5 percent in 2005 and an estimated 40.3 percent in 2007, whereas the ratio of industry has increased from 24.4 percent in 2000 to 28.2 percent in 2005 and an estimated 34.1 percent in 2007, and the service sector also increased from 25.7 percent in 2000 to 26.4 percent in 2005 and 25.6 percent in 2007. These figures illustrate positive changes in the economic structure of the Lao PDR.

II. What I have gained from the ProgramIn September 2010, I was informed about the JENESYS program with the theme topic of “Climate Change Measure in Asia: A Review of Daily Life and Social/Economic Structure” during the program, there was a concept which was very important for ASEAN member countries to negotiations on climate change are a problem related to such issues as the emission of greenhouse gasses including CO2, and are closely linked to the overall lives of people, as well as culture in a broader sense. This link spreads to include such issues as individual lifestyles, social structure, and the industrial structures of each nation. For that reason, the aim of this project is to have other nations inspect Japan’s advanced

Laos

68


environmental technologies, experience the Japanese lifestyle (culture), increase their understanding of Japan’s position regarding climate control measures, and to contribute to the quest for Japan-ASEAN cooperation. I also had the good opportunities to visit field sites to know about the high technology transfer in production industrial which can be used for energy saving and environment protection, especially for the Panasonic Center and the Oi Nuclear Power Plant and to knew about the Japanese life style and culture of Japan.

III. ConclusionI would like to express my sincere thanks to the Japan Foundation and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan for the good opportunity to participate in the JENESYS East Asia Future Leaders Program. I have learned so many things through our visit and it was great to spend one weeks with people from Asian countries, we not only spent a lot of time for studying to know the daily life, the food, the culture, the places, the social and the economic in Japan but also had a lot of fun and these experiences really brought us together.

Laos

69

Indonesia

Rendra Kurnia HasanLegal Officer, Climate Change Impact Control, Ministry of Environment, Indonesia

Individual Report

Nowadays climate change comes as a hot topic to discuss. It could be seen from countries that are more than 190 who have ratified the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The convention says that the country Parties should protect the climate system for the benefit of present and future generations of humankind, on the basis of equity and in accordance with their common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities. Accordingly, the developed country Parties should take the lead in combating climate change and the adverse effects thereof.

As a developed country party to the Convention, Japan has taken some steps to deal with climate change issues as mandated by the Convention. One of those is conducting capacity building for developing country parties in the area of climate change. Through Jenesys Programme, Japan invited eight ASEAN member countries to learn about Japan’s activities in term of dealing with climate change in its national level.

According to the multilateral negotiation under the UNFCCC, all country parties have now been discussing how to set up a long cooperative action as well as a second commitment, not only for the developed countries that are parties to the Kyoto Protocol, but also for all developed country parties to the convention, including the United States of America. Japan has stated its position on this matter that setting up emission reduction target could no longer for developed country parties only, but also to the whole country parties to the convention. Referring to its position, Japan said that such situation could be achieved through the Copenhagen Accord. Of course the accord could not be treated as a parties’ decision since the Conference of the Parties only took note of it, but it could be used as a win-win solution to breakthrough the process under the negotiation.

Responding to Japan’s position on the multilateral negotiation, Indonesia said that the negotiation should be held under the two tracks, the convention and the protocol. Parties could not insist to use the Copenhagen accord as the basis of negotiation since the Conference of the Parties only took note of it. Therefore, for each element governed by the Copenhagen Accord that could be used as a win-win solution for both developed and developing countries should be discussed under the two legal tracks and be put on the decision under the convention and/or the protocol. Meanwhile, since the multilateral negotiation under the Convention is much more of the politics, Indonesia agreed on enhancing bilateral cooperation in term of dealing with climate change issues, as been said by Japan as well.

70


Indonesia

Furthermore, Japan has announced its national emission reduction target by 25% compared to 1990 level by 2020. Having announced that, Japan plays an important role in term of preventing the global temperature increase below 2°C. Thus, to achieve its national emission reduction target, Japan has established some nuclear power plants in some chosen areas. The most important thing is that the private sectors also play an important thing to help Japan achieves its target. It could be seen from the nuclear power plants which are owned by the private sectors. The government only plays the role to monitor and to endorse the price of the electricity before it goes to the public.

Not only the power plant, the electronic enterprise – Panasonic also comes with its great innovation. At the Panasonic centre, we have been shown how Panasonic deals with climate change issues. It plans to create technology that could provide people to work from home so that the use of fossil fuel for transportation will be no longer needed.

Japan also has a very great and comfortable public transportations. It could be seen from public busses, MRT, and sinkansen which are very comfortable to use. Having said that, people in Japan have choice

whether to use public transportation or their own vehicle. Of course people will mostly choose public transportation since there are so many advantages, especially on time, money, energy and efficiency.

From all low carbon technology that have been innovated in Japan, there’s still a question how the government could achieve its target of 25% emission reduction. The role of private sectors in term of achieving Japan’s national emission reduction target remains unclear since there is no obligation for private sectors to reduce their emission. They only take mitigation activities voluntarily since shaming-and-blaming situation does exist in Japan.

Having learnt from Japan’s situation, it is undeniable that private sectors play an important role in term of dealing with climate change issues at national level. A join research and development between government and private sectors should be considered as a way to enhance the development of low carbon technology. Public awareness also needs to be enhanced because the key point of dealing with climate change is dealing with people’s understanding as well. As conclusion, in term of dealing with climate change, all related elements should work together. Governments, private sectors, communities and people should work hand-to-hand. It is totally impossible if we only relay on the governments initiative to deal with climate change issues them selves.

71

Indonesia

Sabitah IrwaniOfficer, Adaptation for Climate Change Unit, State Ministry, Indonesia

Individual Report

Japan invited eight ASEAN member countries to learn about Japan’s activities in term of dealing with climate change in its national level and to discuss and share best understanding regarding the climate policies in each country.

Having learnt from Japan climate change policy, its government claimed that Japan will reduce its emissions by 25% by 2020 if compared to the 1990 level. To achieve such result Japan also announced it would provide assistance to developing countries in public financing.

While Cambodia gives more attention to climate change adaptation policy by linking efforts to reduce vulnerability to present climate-related disasters with those aimed at building longer-term resilience to climate change. Cambodia climate change adaptation is largely about water and health concerns and the strengthening of institutional capacity.

Dealing with climate change Thailand has National Strategic Plan on Climate Change 2008-2012 and it also has developed the National Committee on Climate Change. Its national strategic plan has several key strategic such as building capacity to response to climate change adaptation, reduction of GHG emission and increase absorbing sources of GHG, support research and development to understand more on impact of climate change, Increase awareness and participation to deal with climate change and Capacity building for institutions/personnel Support international collaboration Indonesia already sets national emissions reduction by 26% under BAU by 2020. Some preparations at national have been made with regards to achieve its national goal. Coordinated by Ministry of Environment, Indonesia is

72


Indonesia

now preparing its regulation concerning national GHG inventories. On the same time, National Development Planning Agency is also coordinating the development of mitigation action plans relating to 26% emission reductions that would be governed in a form of presidential decree. Such regulations will be used as legal basis for all relating sectors to do specific GHG inventories as well as mitigation actions. As a vulnerable country, Indonesia also gives its concern on adaptation issues. Steps have been taken to deal with adaptation issues. For example, Indonesia has developed a pilot project on Risk and Adaptation Assessment to Climate Change in Lombok Island, West Nusa Tenggara Province. The assessment on vulnerability, risk and climate change adaptation need to be conduct to achieve the goal:

• To analyze the baseline condition and the projection of climate change in the local level • To analyze magnitude and pattern of hazard, vulnerability and risk of climate change on various sector such as

coastal, water, agriculture, etc • To formulate the adaptation strategies to reduce risk and vulnerability caused by climate change • To integrate identified adaptation strategies to climate change into the development planning

In order to familiarize all the participant with the Japan social culture the program also give the participant opportunity to visit public and private organization such as OHI nuclear power plant in Kansai and Panasonic Centre in Tokyo. It also gives the participant a chance to watch several traditional arts such as tea ceremony and traditional dance.

By visiting OHI nuclear power plant we learned that Japan has developed the research of nuclear power generation since the middle of the 1950s. Currently, 54 commercial nuclear reactors are in operation with a total generation capacity of 48,847 MW and about 30% of electricity comes from nuclear power. Japan will continue to develop nuclear power as a mainstay of non-fossil energy.

While at Panasonic Centre the company showed its latest products and innovative concepts for the future digital home with some of those are environment friendly technologies.

Over all the participant learned many valuable things for five days in Japan. It country has a diligent and hard worker population, no wonder now Japan come as respected developed country.

73


CLIMATE CHANGE POLICIES IN INDONESIA

In 1994, Indonesia has ratified International legal instrument - United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). By ratifying such instrument, Indonesia should take part of achieving the objective of the convention, to stabilize the GHG emissions in atmosphere which is not harm the climate system. Indonesia has also ratified the kyoto protocol in 2005, that it provide opportunity to take part to global GHG stabilitation effort through clean development (CDM) activities. Moreover, according to decision 1/CP.13 (Bali Action Plan) under the convention, it says that all developed countries should do their nationally appropriate mitigation commitments or actions (NAMAC) in an MRV manner and Developing countries also develop their nationally appropriate mitigation actions (NAMAs) enabled and supported by finance, technology and capacity building in an MRV manner.

Having such condition, Indonesia already sets national emissions reduction by 26% under BAU by 2020. Some preparations at national have been made with regards to achieve its national goal. Coordinated by Ministry of Environment, Indonesia is now preparing its regulation concerning national GHG inventories. On the same time, National Development Planning Agency is also coordinating the development of mitigation action plans relating to 26% emission reductions that would be governed in a form of presidential decree. Such regulations will be used as legal basis for all relating sectors to do specific GHG inventories as well as mitigation actions.

As a vulnerable country, Indonesia also gives its concern on adaptation issues. Steps have been taken to deal with adaptation issues. For example, Indonesia has developed a pilot project on Risk and Adaptation Assessment to Climate Change in Lombok Island, West Nusa Tenggara Province. The assessment on vulnerability, risk and climate change adaptation need to be conduct to achieve the goal: • To analyze the baseline condition and the projection of climate change in the local level • To analyze magnitude and pattern of hazard, vulnerability and risk of climate change on various sector such as coastal,

water, agriculture, etc • To formulate the adaptation strategies to reduce risk and vulnerability caused by climate change • To integrate identified adaptation strategies to climate change into the development planning

Following the success study in Lombok Island, Indonesia has initiated the replication study in South Sumatera Province and Tarakan City, East Kalimantan Province. The project has doing in cooperation with Germany (GTZ) and Australia (AusAID) Government and will be finish in year 2011. Except the replicate vulnerability and risk assessment methodology for developing adaptation strategies in local level the objective of this replication study is to securing the appropriate financial support, including innovations of financial and regulatory instruments.

Thus, Ministry of Environment is now preparing its Draft of Environmental Ministerial Decree concerning the Regional Implementation on Climate Change Impact Management Policies. Such decree is to be made to obligate local government (Governor and Major) to develop climate change adaptation policies in their regions that cover: ▪ Information system development (including data base) ▪ Capacity enhancement and development ▪ Regulation development ▪ Action plan ▪ Evaluation and monitoring.

Indonesia

74


Therefore, local government should develop technical regulation that in line and in accordance with Climate Change Risk and Adaptation Assessment (KRAPI). Potential sector included in KRAPI are: water resources, agriculture, forestry, fishery, marine and coastal, industry, economy, residential, and health. KRAPI also covers: climate change analysis and projection, sea level rise analysis and projection, climate change impact analysis and projection on potential sectors, recommendation of adaptation strategies.

Above all, in 2009, Indonesia has developed Act number 32/2009 concerning Environmental Protection and Management. According to such regulation, it is clearly stated that climate change issues, including mitigation and adaptation should be mainstreamed into national planning programmes, in a context of sustainable development. Question that should be answered by the government is how to implement suitable low carbon development policies at national and local level that could enhance the economic development.

Idea to each topic of the sessions on Sept 13th and 14th.

1. Japan’s views on the expected outcome in Cancun, COP 16. 2. Lesson learnt from the government of Japan of its “Cool Earth 50 programmes”. 3. The role of the government in term of “low carbon development”. How to set up supporting elements (such as

technology, finance, incentive and disincentive mechanism, etc) for private sectors? 4. The role of private sectors in term of “low carbon development”. What the benefit for private sectors if they implement

mitigation actions? (consider national circumstances of developing countries). 5. Lesson learnt on MRV system related to national mitigation actions in JAPAN. 6. Lesson learnt from ASEAN countries, as well as the government of japan of their national adaptation policies and

programmes.

Indonesia

75

Thailand

Phirun SaiyasitpanichEnvironmental Official Professional Level, Office of Natural Resources and Environmental Policy and Planning, Thailand

Individual Report

Topic Suggestion Japanese strategy on how to tackle the climate change problem including the following aspects:- Japan position among other developed countries on the effort to lower carbon emission,- Japanese strategic approach in terms of technological development, particularly in the

industrial sector, to make sure of efficient natural resources utilization with lower emission,- Japanese experience in implementing low carbon society policy in terms of methodology,

problems and obstacles, solution and the level of success,

STRATEGY : Promote greenhouse gas mitigation activities based on sustainable development

Goal: Reduce greenhouse gas emission and promote clean technologies

Guidelines: 1) Promote greenhouse gas mitigation in the energy sector through improving energy efficiency and promoting renewable energy production

2) Promote greenhouse gas mitigation in the industrial sector 3) Promote greenhouse gas mitigation in the agricultural sector

Examples of measures: For 1) - Promote exploration, assessment, and prioritization of major alternative energy sources for

commercialization and draw Bio-Energy roadmap - Develop technologies on alternative energy production such as biomass and biogas to make its

price more competitive with that of the fossil fuel - Promote production and utilization of alternative energy that does not emit greenhouse gases

such as nuclear power, hydro power, wind energy, solar energy, and fuel cell - Revise related law and regulation and designate the economic measures to help facilitate the

production and utilization of alternative energy including one that does not emit greenhouse gases, especially in the industrial sector

- Promote incentives for use of alternative energy through clean development mechanism (CDM), energy conservation funds, etc

For 2) - Designate proprietors of particular projects such cement and steel production that emits

significant amount of greenhouse gases to integrate greenhouse gas emission reduction plans and measures in the company policy and evaluate the greenhouse gas emission annually

76


Thailand

- Promote the use of clean and environmental-friendly technologies for new and modified production process to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by giving incentives to the project proprietor through clean development mechanism (CDM), energy conservation funds, etc

- Formulate incentive measures for the banking sector to take into account the environmental aspects when approving loans to project proprietors

STRATEGY : Promote greenhouse gas mitigation activities based on sustainable development

For 3) - Promote farmers to improve agricultural processes to attain efficient resource utilization and

reduction of chemical usage - Develop agricultural management system comprising of planning, operation, and production

and waste handling to minimize greenhouse gas emission from activities such as rice field, hog farm, etc

- Improve control of open burning through the use of incentive measures and law enforcement - Promote the improvement of animal food quality to reduce methane emission from an animal

digestive system

77


Climate Change Measure in Asia: Lessons from Japan

Dr.Phirun Saiyasitpanich holds a Bachelor of Engineering in environmental engineering from Chulalongkorn University (2001) and a Master of Science and Doctor of Philosophy in environmental engineering from University of Cincinnati (2003 and 2006). He is currently working as a professional environmentalist at the Office of Natural Resources and Environmental Policy and Planning under the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment. His key area of responsibility is to review the environmental impact assessment reports of the energy and industrial development projects to make sure that the project investors make use of energy-efficient and cleaner technologies to minimize the pollution and green house gas emissions.

Currently, climate change issue has been a major concern of the world communities. A great deal of efforts has been made towards the global agreement of GHG reduction. Nevertheless, it seems that no concrete solution has been satisfactorily achieved thus far. During my visit to Japan for the JENESYS Program on Climate Change Measure in Asia: A Review of Daily Life and Social/Economic Structure on September 12th-18th, 2010, the Japanese government along with several private organizations has decisively demonstrated its strong will to tackle this problem not only domestically by tightening up its national plan and policy but also internationally by providing aid to developing and underdeveloped countries. The program is composed of lectures, group discussions, meetings with government officers and visits to several facilities. 15 delegates from 9 countries including Japan participated in this program. In this paper, I will discuss my experience of learning about the Japanese climate control policies and control measures as well as the unique Japanese cultures, and the shared visions on climate change strategies among ASEAN countries.

Several sessions on the first two days of the visit were dedicated for a broad discussion of the climate change policies. The key issues on the Copenhagen Accord were raised and discussed. The bottom-up approach seems to be a more practical mechanism in speeding up a reduction of a total discharge of GHG emissions since it is more likely that China and U.S. will participate. However, the bilaterally-agreed measurement, reporting and verification (MRV) method needs to be rapidly established and clarified. One of the key elements to drive this mechanism forward is the utilization of low carbon technology. The Japanese developed technologies and products offer a promising solution for the practical GHG emissions reduction. However, most technologies and know-how belong to private sectors. The important question is therefore how to fast-track a transfer of these technologies to the developing and under-developing countries where their budget is very limited.

Japan’s basic policy on mitigation was also discussed. The introduction of a domestic emission trading mechanism and a feed-in tariff for renewable energy, as well as the consideration of a global warming tax are a set of challenging domestic policies that could set an example for other developed nations to follow. Examples of Options for adaptation in terms of technological, policy and socioeconomic standpoints were discussed. This information was very useful for all participants, especially for those from the ASEAN countries that are prone to climate change disaster. Thailand national power development policy also aims to install a nuclear power station in the near future. Consequently, the visit to Ohi nuclear power station was very interesting. It cannot be denied that the nuclear power is the cleanest technology thus far in producing the electricity in views of a cost-benefit and environmental pollution and GHG emissions. However, to really have one built in Thailand is no quite easy due to the public concern on its safety. Having a chance to visit this station greatly enhances my knowledge and understanding about its utmost safety. Since Ohi nuclear

Thailand

78


power station is located in the Wakasa Bay National Park, it is well proven that good plant design and management system could help maintain the pristine condition of the surrounding natural marine and forest environment without any significant impact to the surrounding communities.

Thailand has several coal-fired power plants located around the country. The biggest one can produce electricity up to 2,625 MW. The visit to MAIZURU power station was greatly useful. The perfect design on coal storage and transfer in a completely closed system, the installation of the cutting-edge emission control technology such as SCR and FGD to reduce NOX and SO2 emissions definitely makes the facility to be environmental-friendly. The FGD, in particular, is designed as a submerged flue gas in an alkaline solution which could offer better energy efficiency while performing the same SO2 removal. The utilization of these technologies would definitely help change the negative image of coal-fired power development in Thailand and make the public understand that the coal-fired power station can co-exist with the community and the surrounding ecosystem.

I have learned throughout the JENESYS program not only the Japanese advance knowledge an technology to tackle the climate change problem and its strong will to help other countries in several ways but also the Japan’s culture that clearly explains why Japan has become the most developed country of the world. Visits to the atomic bomb dome, peace memorial museum and Japanese old house help me realize that to be as humble, organized, industrious and diligent act the Japanese are is the key to bring any nation to its supreme success.

This program allowed me to meet many new friends from many neighboring countries. I believe that the time we shared and the experience we all gained throughout the program will be of great benefit to our future work and our nation as a whole. Though no one knows when we will meet again but I am certain that our friendships and networks will last forever.

Last but not the least; I would like to express my sincere thanks to the Japan Foundation and MOFA for arranging such a memorable program for all of us. I really hope that this useful program will continue for many years to enhance the collaboration among the countries in our region.

Thailand

79

Thailand

Jakkanit KananurakActing Director, Capacity Building and Outreach Office, Thailand Greenhouse Gas Management Organization, Thailand

Individual Report

My responsibility:- Need assessment and providing capacity development in issues related to Clean Development Mechanism (CDM)

to specific target groups (financial sector, industrial sector, consultants, etc.) and public,- Managing and providing internal training to improve staff knowledge and skill to support organization goals,- Promoting organization roles and activities through media (i.e. TV, radio, conference, exhibitions),- Managing international projects that related to energy efficiency improvement i.e. UNDP’s Project: Barrier

Removal to the Cost-Effective Development and Implementation of Energy Efficiency Standards and Labeling: BRESL

- Planning and Managing CB Office budget and plan

On International Forum: Thailand Policy and Reduction of GHG Emissions

Thailand, a party to the Kyoto Protocol, has a firm intention to reduce the emission of greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming. Our current emission of greenhouse gases is 3.5 tons/ year, which is below the average emission of 3.9 tons/ year. In Thailand, studies show that most of the greenhouse gases are released from the following sectors: energy, transportation, and industry.

In the energy sector, the reduction of greenhouse gases emission, in terms of supply, will emphasize the need for efficient energy production, use of clean energy and clean technology for electrical power generation, and deployment of diverse forms of energies, including using bio-diesel and gasohol. In terms of demand, emphasis will be placed on encouraging for energy efficiency practice. This will be beneficial to end users as well as to the economy as a whole.

Thailand, like the rest of the world, recognized the need to use clean alternative forms of energy that are not harmful to nature, instead of using fossil energy. There is also worldwide realization of the need to reduce greenhouse gases. If all signatories to the Kyoto Protocol follow its provisions, the world’s average temperature will be reduced by 0.02-0.028 degrees Celsius within 2050 or 45 years from now. This will help to prevent damage to the climate and the environment as climate change poses the most severe threat to the environment.

80


Thailand

Initial Ideas on topic for meeting at MOFA during 13-14 September 2010

*Session 1International framework on climate change beyond 2012a) Legal form of an agreementb) Expected outcome in COP16 and COP17c) Multilateral negotiations in addressing climate changeIn this section, I would like to gain latest climate change policy from each participated countries. And perhaps, what are Japan’s expectations from the coming COP 16 AND COP 17.

*Session 2a) Mitigationi) Emission Reduction target / actionsii) Transparency of mitigation actions (Measurement, Reporting, Verification; MRV)b) REDD+ (Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries)In this section, I am very interest in the MRV, perhaps J-MRV could be elaborated as a good example in the meeting. For REDD+, I think this could benefit for many country including Thailand.

*Session 3a) Adaptation and Capacity-buildingb) TechnologyAfter discussion on climate change policy, then it is vital to address on adaptation including capacity development. I would like to hear more on systematic capacity building and how to develop the effective capacity building plan.

*Session 4Overview of climate change policies of ASEAN member countries (Each representative in ASEAN member countries has three minutes to speak.)This is a good opportunity to share ideas with others.

*Session 5a) Financeb) Credit mechanismsWithout adequate project financing support, then the CDM would not have been invested. I have been aware of many international financing supports. However, I would like to hear about the Japanese’s, particularly on JBIC activities.

81


JENESYS Programme“Climate Change Measure in Asia: A Review of Daily Life and Social / Economic

Structure” Conducted by the Japan Foundation12th – 18th September 2010

The 7-day program achieved its objective in enhancing and exchanging the perspective of participants in both of “Climate Change Measure in Asia” and “Life and Social/ Economic Structure.

Broadly speaking, the whole program’s schedule had been carefully planned and organized to fulfill the objective of the program within the limited visiting timeframe through the professional speakers and program organizers.

To be more specific on climate change measure issue, the meeting at MOFA was very organized. Particularly, the invited speakers from related governments unit are really experienced staff on the issue that they presented. The Panasonic center also gave a fantastic idea on latest energy efficiency technology that can be a part of everyday lifestyle. In addition, visiting nuclear and thermal power plants also provided a better understanding of how proper of the allocation of energy source in Japan. My impression also extended to the speakers at both nuclear and thermal power plants.

Visiting the Hiroshima museum is a good linkage to me on how the humanity should exploit the technology in a way that promoting better life of citizen rather than conducting a war.

For the Life and Social/ Economic Structure of Japan, visiting the typical Japanese-style house is just the right thing that illustrated me on how the Japanese life style used to be. Personally, this house visiting impressed me not only the living style but also far beyond to the hospitality of the house owner.

Lastly, I would like to thank you Japan foundation and the organizers particularly Inami-san and Akama-san for your cordially invitation and preparation. I think this program is another good initiative that the Japan foundation has organized in order to bridge and harmonize the good understanding of both “Climate Change Measure in Asia” and “Life and Social/ Economic Structure. Eventually, I wish there is a continuous phase of this program.

Together with this report, I also attach the summary of Thailand’s Climate Change Challenge as followed:

Thailand’s Climate Change Challenges

1) Impacts on natural resourcesThailand’s economic base depends heavily on its natural resources. Its main sources of income are derived from tourism, exports of agricultural products and processed agricultural products and food industry, for instance. Consequently, there is an urgent need to sustain growth, taking into account the expected climate change impacts on natural resources. In addition, a majority of population in Thailand works in the agricultural sector and still faces poverty and poor quality of living. Climate change poses threats that can result in significant changes in natural resources, impacting population who depend heavily on these resources. Often, this population sector has very limited capacity to adapt to changes, rendering them the most vulnerable to climate change impacts.

Thailand

82


2) Energy demand challengesThailand is in a developing stage and one of its main development goal is poverty eradication and improvement of the quality of life among its population. Government policy has therefore remained focused on ensuring and sustaining economic growth in various sectors. This has inevitably brought about a continuous increase in energy demand during the past decades, and it is projected that energy demand will continue to grow for many years from now. Data in 2003 shows that the energy sector plays a major role in accounting for 56.1% of Thailand’s total greenhouse gas emission. The obvious challenge for Thailand is therefore to mitigate its greenhouse gas emission without sacrificing its economic growth.

Thailand’s Strategic Plan on Climate Change B.E. 2551-2555 (2008-2012)

In recent years, an international wake to climate threats supported by strong scientific evidence has suggested that climate risks have posed more serious threats to natural resources and humankind than what was previously thought. Thailand has reviewed its past efforts to address the climate challenges and believe that a more comprehensive framework needs to be set up in order to set a clear direction towards responding directly to climate change challenges, and to promote an integrated approach of problem-solving among different sectors. In doing so, several barriers can be identified, which include:

1) Lack of scientific knowledge base on climate change to support policy formulation and evaluation, and decision making

2) Lack of public awareness 3) Lack of capacity among relevant agencies 4) Lack of clear direction and continuity towards international cooperation

The Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (MNRE), as the national focal point of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and a focal point for climate change implementation in Thailand, has therefore formulated and launched Thailand’s Strategic Plan on Climate Change B.E. 2551-2555 (2008-2012), aiming for it to be the country’s first comprehensive response to climate change, to remove existing barriers to climate change implementation in Thailand, and to promote an integrated approach of problem-solving by relevant agencies in various sectors.

The main objective of Thailand’s Strategic Plan on Climate Change B.E. 2551-2555 (2008-2012) is to provide a comprehensive guideline of national responses to climate change challenges. It is essential that national-level and local-level agencies with relevant mandates develop their own action plan that corresponds to the guidelines set forth in the Strategic Plan. Thailand’s Strategic Plan on Climate Change B.E. 2551-2555 (2008-2012) was approved by the Cabinet on 22 January 2008, and the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment is now initiating the Action Plan Development Process among relevant agencies, expected to be completed this year.

There are six strategies in Thailand’s Strategic Plan on Climate Change B.E. 2551-2555 (2008-2012).

Thailand

83


STRATEGY 1: Build capacity to adapt and reduce vulnerabilities to climate change impacts

Goal: Protect, conserve and add values to natural resource base, and protect, conserve and improve environmental quality and the quality of living from climate change impacts.

Guidelines: 1.1) Build capacity to assess climate change impacts 1.2) Prevent and mitigate damage caused by climate change impacts on the following sectors: - natural resources, ecological systems, biological diversity - natural disaster and human settlements - agriculture, industry, cultural and historic sites - public health 1.3) Build capacity to adapt to climate change in the above sectors.

Examples of measures: - Identify hot spots vulnerable to climate change impacts - Promote activities such as water and forest conservation and restoration, infrastructure

improvement and land use change to reduce vulnerabilities in hot spot areas - Assess adaptation options for hot spot areas including changing crop types, farming

processes, etc. - Establish effective early warning systems and evacuation plans to minimize damage from

extreme climate events

STRATEGY 2: Promote greenhouse gas mitigation activities based on sustainable development

Goal: Reduce greenhouse gas emission and promote clean technologiesGuidelines: 2.1) Promote greenhouse gas mitigation in the energy sector through improving energy efficiency,

promoting renewable energy 2.2) Promote greenhouse gas mitigation in the waste sector 2.3) Promote greenhouse gas mitigation in the industrial sector 2.4) Promote greenhouse gas mitigation in the agricultural sector 2.5) Increase carbon sinks 2.6) Develop and promote mechanisms that support clean technology development

Examples of measures: - Promote use of renewable energy in power generation, transportation and industrial processes - Improve energy efficiency in transportation, industrial processes, commercial and residential

buildings - Promote forest conservation, afforestation and reforestation to increase carbon sinks - Increase urban green space

Thailand

84


STRATEGY 3: Support research and development to better understand climate change, its impacts and adaptation and mitigation options

Goal: Support R&D and climate change knowledge management and develop climate change knowledge base to support decision-making

Guidelines: 3.1) Build climate change knowledge for better climate assessment 3.2) Build knowledge base on climate change impacts and adaptation options in relevant sectors 3.3) Build knowledge base on greenhouse gas mitigation options 3.4) Develop appropriate mechanisms for continuous knowledge transfer and management to

support policy-making and implementation in relevant agencies

Examples of measures: - Provide support for R&D activities, focusing on but not limited to, the following fields:

▪ Climate science – improvement of climate modeling ▪ Climate change impacts on natural resources, ecosystems, agriculture, public health and

industries▪ Weather-resistant crops and improved agricultural practices▪ Application of renewable energies and energy efficiency techniques in power

generation, transportation, industrial processes, commercial and residential buildings ▪ Climate risk management

- Support development of centers of excellence in climate change-related fields

STRATEGY 4: Raise awareness and promote public participation

Goal: Better public awareness and understanding of their roles in response to climate change challenges

Guidelines: 4.1) Organize public awareness campaigns and outreach activities on a regular basis 4.2) Promote awareness in the educational sector 4.3) Develop mechanisms to evaluate the effectiveness of campaigns and outreach activities on a

regular basisExamples of measures: - Launch continuous public campaigns of climate change education - Encourage community participation in local planning processes to reduce vulnerabilities and

adopt adaptation and mitigation options for identified climate change impacts - Provide public hearings of local and national plans - Encourage inclusion of climate change education in school curricular activities

Thailand

85


STRATEGY 5: Build capacity of relevant personnel and institutions and establish a framework of coordination and integration

Goal: Better coordination and integration among personnel and agencies involved in climate change implementation

Guidelines: 5.1) Support continuous training and skill development relevant to climate change implementation 5.2) Create mechanisms to transfer knowledge and share experience among different agencies

Examples of measures: - Establish national climate change information center with linked database to the climate

change centers of excellence - Provide continuous staff training - Develop standardized archiving and documentation among relevant institutions - Establish effective negotiation teams

STRATEGY 6: Support international cooperation to achieve the common goal of climate change mitigation and sustainable development

Goal: Build capacity of relevant personnel and agencies to create better coordination and integration to support and promote international cooperation relevant to climate change at the global and regional level

Guidelines: 6.1) Integrate climate change implementation under different international frameworks, such as UNFCCC, ASEAN and relevant bilateral and multilateral agreements

6.2) Promote skill development and experience sharing among relevant agencies dealing with climate change-related international cooperation

Examples of measures: - Ensure active participation in climate change conventions and conferences - Promote climate change cooperation among ASEAN members - Support the Clean Development Mechanism

Thailand

86

Philippines

Jonas Paolo SaludoScience Research Specialist II, Office of the President – Climate Change Commission, Philippines

Individual Report

1. I work as Science Research Specialist of the Climate Change Office. I do research, as technical staff to the Executive Director and of the CCO. Also, I’m attending meetings, conferences, and forums which concern the office. I was being trained to be a resource/focal person of the office regarding climate change.

2. Climate Change Policies in the Philippines

The Philippines was one of the pioneers in establishing responses to the challenges of climate change. In 1991, the Philippine Inter-Agency Committee on Climate Change (IACCC) was created by virtue of Presidential Administrative Order No. 220, making the Philippines among the first countries to have such a national committee. In 1994, the Philippines, along with over 150 other countries, ratified the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), which goal was to limit GHG emissions into the atmosphere at levels that will avert global warming.

In 1995, the country initiated the first Asia Pacific Leaders’ Conference on Climate Change, where ranking representatives of 38 countries subsequently forged the Manila Declaration, a landmark document that affirmed the vulnerability of archipelagic and island nations to global warming and climate change. In 2003, the Philippine Senate ratified the Kyoto Protocol, an international agreement that commits both industrialized and developing nations to cut back on their GHG emissions.

The Philippine government has taken huge strides in boosting the country’s capacity to cope with the unsympathetic effects of climate change. It developed institutional and organizational framework, consisting of policies and legal instruments, to address environmental issues, and mainstream the issue of climate change in national and local development plans and programs. Its initiatives involved, among others, the inclusion of mitigation, to help reduce GHG emissions; and adaptation, to help the country and citizens deal with the dangers of climate change.

In 2007, the Presidential Task Force on Climate Change (PTFCC) was created. The PTFCC was asked to quickly assess the impact of climate change in the country, initiate strategies to prevent or trim down GHG release, conduct public information and awareness campaign, design risk reduction and mitigation measures as well as adaptation schemes, collaborate with international partners, and integrate climate risk management to government’s development policies, plans, and programs.

Also, on the following year, the PTFCC was re-organized by virtue of Executive Order No. 774, uniting all government programs into one dedicated climate change battle. The President chaired the new PTFCC, while

87


Cabinet Secretaries headed the 17 Task Groups under the task force. Meanwhile, the Office of the Presidential Adviser on Climate Change (OPACC) was mandated to serve as Secretariat and implementing arm of the PTFCC.

In 2009, Executive Order 785 made possible the gathering of various government agencies to draft a National Adaptation Strategy on Climate Change. The Executive Order 774 focused on mitigation measures while Executive Order 785 aimed to produce an adaptation plan for the country.

In October of the same year, the Republic Act No. 9729, or the Climate Change Act of 2009, was signed. It is a breakthrough legislation that is said to have raised the issue of climate change to the level of national security. Consequently, as authorized by the law, the Climate Change Commission (CCC) was established under the Office of the President (OP) as a policy-making, coordinating, and evaluating body for the implementation of climate change-related efforts. Through the new law, the IACCC and PTFCC were effectively abolished.

Under R.A. 9729, the CCC drafted the National Framework Strategy on Climate Change (NFSCC) and currently formulating the National Climate Change Action Plan (NCCAP). The framework strategy is committed towards ensuring and strengthening the adaptation of our natural ecosystems and human communities to climate change. It aspires to chart a cleaner development path for the country, highlighting the mutually beneficial relationship between climate change mitigation and adaptation.

The NCCAP will address the need to develop a realistically achievable country-driven program of action for integrated CC adaptation and mitigation. it will specifically develop a program of priority activities addressing the urgent and immediate needs and concerns of the Phil relating to the adverse effects of climate change.

3. At these sessions, there will be a sharing of the climate change policies of each country. With the presentations of each country, we can get the best practice, approaches and strategy that each country is using and possibly be applied on our respective country. Also, the Japanese government can share their approaches regarding climate change.

Philippines

88


Experience Report

We all know that climate change is already happening and we are experiencing the unsympathetic effects on our daily lives. The phenomena become a global issue which needs to be address by all nations. It also crosses all sectors of the society and each sector plays a vital role for sustaining life on earth. As we all be relying to the planet we are all living, everyone has a responsibility in this battle against climate change. Seeing the vital role of the society especially the youth, the Japanese Government together with the Japan Foundation organized the Climate Change Measure in Asia: A review of Daily Life and Social/Economic Structure” which will help enhance participant countries’ understanding of the Japan climate change policies, measures/initiatives and possible solutions to these global phenomena. Developing countries like the Philippines is one of the vulnerable nations to the impacts of climate change.

First time entering Japan, especially in Tokyo, the first thing popped in my mind is that “I’m definitely in the first world country”. This is the country I want to live in.

I’m excited to meet the participants from different country and as well as the Japanese people who organized the event. On the first day of the program, I was so excited in meeting new friends from different countries. We were introduced to some Japanese government officials.

We have a healthy discussion with the host country’s initiatives on addressing climate change. With the presentation of the host country’s initiatives on climate change, I think most of us learned some of the strategies we should adopt in order to cope up with the effects of climate change. The sessions was one of the best way of information exchange and it also served as a venue for knowledge and experience sharing of different countries in the fight against this battle.

Basically, the program runs into tackling different aspect of climate change, its science, policies, what was going in international negotiations and how each country can help in this combat against climate change. Recognizing the vulnerability of developing countries to cope up with the impacts of climate change, Japan showcased its initiatives in addressing this issue.

As a developing country, we want to succeed like Japan does. In the sessions, we have learned things which are useful for each country in helping in the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions like the use of nuclear power plant and coal power plant with an effective, sustainable and advanced technology to implement. We shared our comments/suggestions to Japanese Government regarding some of their initiatives. One of my colleague suggested that there’s a need for private companies in Japan to monitor if they are complying with the emissions reduction of their country. I personally agreed on the suggestion of my colleague which was recognized by the Japanese officials.

After the two-day discussions, we were tour around in Tokyo, Hiroshima, and Kyoto. We learned things about Japanese culture. This unique experience opens our understanding of Japan’s way of life. The most memorable experience for me is when we went to Hiroshima, the nuclear bomb site. When I learned how these nuclear bombs destroyed Hiroshima, we are hoping that it would not happen again. We went to the Hiroshima Memorial Museum and have a glimpse of what had happened on the day of the bombings and how this city revived from the devastation brought by the nuclear weapons. I really enjoyed talking to Japanese kids which after I filled out something to the paper they handed me, gave me a paper bird origami. I felt happy when I saw those kids smiling after learning what was happened before.

Philippines

89


Most of us were amazed when we were tour around in Tokyo, especially in the Panasonic Center. I, myself was surprised on the advanced technology of Japan has, specifically the future Wall television. With the advanced technology the Japan has right now; I think they can cope easily to climate change rather than some developing countries. Those technologies especially the green technology are much needed by any country. Also, we experience riding the bullet train. Though we have trains in our country, but the bullet train was so fast that I felt I’m riding sport car. These technologies of using trains could address the reduction of gas emissions through these massive transport systems and can avoid congestion of vehicles in the city.

The program that the Japanese government together with Japan Foundation serves as a great venue for the strong ties between each nation and understand the Japanese culture. It was a great experience that money can’t buy. I’m thankful to the Japanese government of giving us the chance to visit their country and understand their ways of living. This kind of a program is important among countries in establishing a concrete solution to the impacts of climate change.

Philippines

90

Singapore

Daryl YeoAssistant Director, Energy Division, Ministry of Trade and Industry, Singapore

Individual Report

(1) My Work

I work on Energy Policy and International Cooperation at Energy Division, Ministry of Trade and Industry, Singapore. My portfolio covers Energy Security/Fuel Mix where the ministry is exploring new options for electricity generation such as clean coal, electricity imports and nuclear energy to diversify our fuel source. Another area that I am looking at is Energy Research, Development and Demonstration (RD&D) where my division develops/coordinates the national Energy RD&D strategy to meet national energy policy objectives of economic competitiveness, environmental sustainability and energy security. Key R&D areas include energy efficiency (for industry and buildings), renewable energy (solar, bioenergy, wind) and smart grids etc.

(2) Overview of climate change policies of your country

Singapore supports and participates actively in the international effort to arrive at a global climate change agreement. We have announced on 2 Dec 2009 that we will commit to reduce emissions growth by 16% below Business as Usual levels by 2020, in the context of a legally binding international climate change agreement, in which other countries also commit to targets and implement them in good faith.

Alternative Energy Disadvantaged: However, our willingness to mitigate our emissions growth is constrained by our inability to move substantially away from fossil fuels. We have no access to geothermal and hydro power while our wind speed is too low for commercial usage. Solar is perhaps the most viable renewable option. Even then, Singapore faces limitations in harnessing solar power due to our urban density. Preliminary studies indicate that even if solar panels are installed on all available roof top and reservoir land, only 10% of our current energy needs will be met by solar power.

Domestic Mitigation: Domestically, we have developed a Sustainable Development Blueprint which lays out policies to further protect our environment and to improve energy efficiency. Under the blueprint, we have undertaken to improve our energy efficiency (EE) by 20% by 2030 and 35% by 2030, both based on 2005 levels. The improvements in energy efficiency will be achieved across four key end-use sectors: industry, transport, households and buildings.

The government is applying an economic lens to carbon mitigation. For Singapore, barriers to the adoption of energy efficiency include limited capital (EE investments, even if positive Net Present Value, compete with other investment opportunities), high upfront cost, lack of information (High search costs of time/resources to research and implement EE solutions), Split incentives (Decision-maker does not reap the benefits of EE investment) and bounded

91


rationality (Limited capability to process available information). We are actively studying to use an array of fiscal tools (levies, subsidies, rebates), capability building tools (training programmes, campaigns) and regulatory tools (standards) to overcome these barriers.

(3) Questions for Sessions

Session 1: International framework on climate change beyond 2012

What is the likelihood that a global binding agreement will be achieved at COP16 and COP17?

Session 2: Mitigation

From Japan’s experience, what were the most effective domestic mitigation measures?What were some of Japan’s emission reduction targets and how best can governments suitably ensure that these targets are met?

Session 3: Technology

What were some Energy Efficiency Research and Development (R&D) areas that hold the most promise?What was the most appropriate way to develop technology roadmaps to meet carbon targets?How can we ensure that R&D is translated into adoption?

Session 5: Financing and credit mechanisms

How can we change the incentive systems in financing to ensure that domestic firms adopt more Energy Efficiency Initiatives?

Singapore

92


(4) Key Learning Points from Trip

The programme titled “Climate Change Measures in Asia: A Review of Daily Life and Social/Economic Structure” aimed to enhance understanding of Japan’s climate control policies through dialogue between Japan and ASEAN countries. Participants were engaged by Japanese civil servants on discussions on the state of climate change negotiations and Japan’s climate change policies in the context of COP15 and the upcoming COP16 in Cancun. We were also introduced to Japan’s advanced environmental technologies and social structures through site visits. There were many fruitful discussions and the site visits in particular were extremely informative in providing perspectives on Japan’s climate change policies.

Climate Change Negotiations after COP15

Measurement, Reporting and Verification

The forum discussed the challenges of measurement, reporting and verification. Most ASEAN countries expressed difficulty in measurement and asked for the possibility of Japan’s funding support in this. The Indonesian delegate also commented that it would be equitable that to use ‘per capita’ indicators based on the principle that “all humans are equal”. It was agreed that a global deal was contingent on there being a consensus on the ideal climate change indicators.

Clean Development Mechanisms (CDMs) Projects- Adaptation vs Mitigation

ASEAN countries were concerned that Annex 1 countries were not committing enough funds to adaptation. The main source of funding for the UNFCCC Adaptation Fund was CDM and the majority of CDM projects were focused on mitigation. The Adaptation Fund had been slow to operationalize and had not yet disbursed any funding. Myanmar, who had suffered the effects of adverse climate conditions (Cyclone Nargis in 2008) was especially concerned by the lack of funding for adaptation projects. A Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) representative said that the Japanese government was aware of this deficit, and were currently studying the different options and there was the possibility in the future for bilateral arrangements in adaptation projects.

Japan’s Domestic Climate Change Policies

I learnt that Japan was mobilizing all available policy tools domestically, including the introduction of an integrated domestic emission trading mechanism and a feed-in tariff for renewable energy, as well as the consideration of a global warming tax to meet its target of emissions reduction by 25% by 2020, compared to 1990 level. These policies were articulated in the “Basic Act on Global Warming Countermeasures” and had been submitted to the Diet. We learnt that there were many barriers to establishing climate change policies. The current industrial climate (e.g. Japan Airlines had recently been declared bankrupt) posed great challenges to the government to impose stringent measures on industry. The Japanese government were also only committed to studying global warming tax at this juncture. I also learnt that Japan had undertaken some quite innovative policies to reduce energy consumption. For example, the implementation of a policy encouraging men to wear short sleeve shirts in the civil service during the summer would reduce the need for energy in air-conditioning/cooling.

Singapore

93


Site Visits

The site visits to the nuclear and thermal coal nuclear power plants were very interesting from my perspective, given my work on fuel mix and energy security.

Ohi Nuclear Power Plant

KEPCO (Kansai Electric Power Co.) runs four Pressurised Water Reactors (PWR) generation units, producing a total of 4,710 MW for the Kansai area (including major cities of Kyoto, Osaka, Kobe) and occupying a total land area of 1,880,000 square metres. It is the second largest nuclear power plant in Japan after the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa Nuclear Power Plant owned and operated by Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO).

The guide focused on the advanced safety features of the plant a. Defense-in-Depth featuring controls rods, Emergency Core Cooling System (ECCS) and five-layers of shielding

to enclose radioactive materials b. Maximum safety precautions in event of major earthquakes where the reactor will shut down automaticallyc. Radiation monitoring devices installed within the power station and its vicinity to constantly monitor radiation

Public Communications

There was a strong emphasis on good public communications and seeking public acceptance. Most telling were the headline on the brochure “Your Trust is Our No. 1 Priority” and the welcome video which sought to convey that the Ohi nuclear power plant seamlessly blended in with Ohi’s people, its natural beauty and history. The guide said that a natural beige colour was chosen for the reactors to achieve harmony with the natural scenery. I was particularly interested in public opinion and their perspective on safety. I quizzed one of the plant’s managers how far the power plant from high population densities and about the degree of public opposition from the local community when the first unit was built in 1979. The nearest town centre of Ohi was within 10km of the plant while the nearest big city, Kyoto, was about 40km away. Opinion was largely polarised: there had been local activist groups that objected to siting a nuclear plant in the Ohi region and strong supporters that were attracted to the various government incentives and economic benefits that came along with a nuclear power plant. Increasing awareness/acceptance of the need for nuclear (and coal) for energy security among local communities was thus a key strategy of KEPCO.

Maizuru Coal Thermal Power Station

Maizuru was a state-of-the-art 1.8GW thermal power station built in 2004 by KEPCO and covers land area of 1,030,000 square metres. The plant achieves 43% efficiency with pulverised bituminous coal from Australia, China and Indonesia. This new coal power plant is significant for Japan as they were revisiting the value of coal after a long hiatus. It is also KEPCO’s only new coal power plant.

Maizuru had several features targeted at emission reduction. a. Mixing biomass pellets (3%) with pulverised coal to reduce carbon emissionsb. World’s largest silos (50m deep, vessel can accommodate 90,000 tons) featuring non-exposure to the environment.

This eliminates the possibility of dust particles.

Singapore

94


c. Dust/Ash recycled for cementd. Sulphur Oxides Flue gas past through limestone to make gypsum e. Nitrogen oxides are treated by catalytic convertors f. Water is treated before discharge

However, these features do not focus on the reduction of carbon dioxide and the plant produces 0.78kg CO2/kwh which is higher compared to some coal gasification technologies used in Denmark and a typical CCGT Natural Gas plant in Singapore. KEPCO said that the highly stable supply of coal made it viable for energy security considerations and that they were concerned with the reduction of CO2 per kwh over the entire fuel mix. Thus, the high carbon emissions of the coal thermal power plant would be balanced with cleaner energy sources such as nuclear and LNG.

I learnt that at present KEPCO was concerned with using conventional coal technologies most efficiently and reducing carbon emissions over the total generation package. There were no extensive plans for IGCC and Carbon Capture and in his opinion, would only be commercially viable in 10-20 years.

Conclusion

The trip was very interesting and enjoyable. It was a good platform for the exchange of ideas between ASEAN countries and Japan. Our hosts were extremely helpful and hospitable, and I managed to make many new friends in the region. Thus, it was certainly a trip to remember.

Singapore

95

Japan

Madoka YoshinoResearch Assistant, Climate Change Group, Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES), Japan

Individual Report

My workWith a background in studying environmental pollutions in Southeast Asian waters and working on sustainable procurement, after graduating from Indiana University School of Public and Environmental Affairs with Master of Public Affairs and Master of Science in Environmental Science, I joined the Climate Change Division of Ministry of Foreign Affairs as a short-term assistant. I then started working for the Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES) Climate Change Group in May 2010. In order to address global climate change, IGES Climate Change Group is conducting strategic policy research in the Asia-Pacifi c, which is home to the world’s fastest growing emitters of greenhouse gases. Our main research components for the 5th research phase (2010-2012) include: sustainable low carbon development in emerging Asian countries, post-2012 climate regime, measurable, reportable and verifiable (MRV) framework for Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs), and co-benefits approach in Asia. We closely work with the Ministry of Environment and other national and international institutions, researchers and policy makers. I am currently working with the future climate regime team, conducting research on MRV/NAMA, reviewing existing international treaties and protocols, comparing national submissions, studying negotiation texts (particularly on capacity building, forestry, NAMA), and looking into co-benefi ts approaches.

Overview of Japan’s climate change policyJapan has committed to 25% emission reduction by 2020, if compared to 1990 and 80% reduction by 2050.

My idea on topics for the sessions at MOFA(1) Session 1: International framework on climate change beyond 2012

a) Legal form of an agreement: it is important to come to an agreement on the post-2012 framework. If all nations can cooperate with each other, starting from a voluntary agreement may be acceptable. At the same time, legally binding agreement may be necessary as it may accelerate the changes that need to happen in the very near future. I am interested in learning other participants’ opinions.

b) Expected outcome in COP16 and COP17: We are receiving messages from the AWG meetings that at COP16, we may see only small steps toward some agreement. The negotiation texts require further discussions. Even if the outlook for a major agreement at COP16 may be smaller than we may wish, I hope to observe constructive discussion towards an agreement at COP17-as the time is running out.

c) Multilateral negotiations in addressing climate change

96


Japan

(2) Session 2: a) Mitigation

i) Emission Reduction target / actions: from a researcher’s point of view, this is quite an interesting topic-as various kinds of mitigation actions and targets submitted or proposed. Categorizing, comparing and evaluating these different target and actions will be essential in considering how to approach them from a policy perspective. I look forward to sharing opinions on different kind of mitigation actions among countries.

ii) Transparency of mitigation actions: MRV is one of the topics I am working on at the moment. As I review existing procedures and international treaties that we can learn from and may apply to the future climate regime, I would be especially interested in seeking what are the existing institutional, political, or legal frameworks in the countries that may be applicable to the climate change regime.

b) REDD+: As forestry is the biggest sector in some countries and is closely connected to topics such as energy, biodiversity, employment, trade, agriculture, industry, and indigenous people- and as 3/4 of Japan is forest, among other reasons, REDD+ will be an important topic for all participants.

(3) Session 3: a)Adaptation and Capacity-building; b)TechnologyContinuity is a key feature for some training programs (capacity building). How can continuity be ensured? What kind of capacity building and technology are ASEAN countries seeking? Through capacity building, we may be able to increase comparability of information that each countries hold. Drawing baselines are often challenging for any scientific or economic measures. Some technology may be more applicable to one than another. Knowledge sharing, collecting best practices, adjusting technologies for different situations and different areas can address the above issues. I would like to learn from the other participants, where their interests lie for these key issues.

(4) Session 4: Overview of climate change policies of ASEAN member countries

(5) Session 5:a) Finance: I would like to ask the following questions to the participants: In what form should financial support to

developing nations be provided? What will be the ideal way of distributing financial support? In which sector/area are financial support most needed and may be most efficiently used?

b) Credit mechanisms: What are the trends and thoughts of the participants on NAMA credit, market mechanisms, etc.?

97


Japan

JENESYS East Asia Future Leaders Programme titled “Climate Change Measures in Asia: A Review of Daily Life and Social/Economic Structure” provided a great opportunity to understand ASEAN countries, various aspects of climate change and the common challenge we face. Through a week-long program, we had presentations, discussions, receptions, visits to sights in Japan and further formal and informal discussions. We were introduced to new and old cultures and customs, technologies and dreams, challenges and possible solutions. Multiple sessions were held facilitated by the Climate Change negotiators, Mr. Sekiguchi and Mr. Nakano, from Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Professor Takamura of Ryukoku University. We were also fortunate to meet Ms. Nishimura, Parliamentary Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs. Among the many topics and interesting views I came across during the program, I would like to briefly mention some, together with some of the efforts Japan has been making to address climate change.

Japan’s current situation and its mid- and long-term targetsJapan’s CO2 emission amounted for 3.9 % of the world total emission in 20081. As an Annex I party to the Kyoto Protocol, Japan has been calling for major economies to agree to a comprehensive legally-binding framework. Japan submitted their intent to be associated to the Copenhagen Accord in the end of January 2010. Its “quantified economy-wide emissions targets for 2020” was “25% reduction,” if compared to 1990 level. This target is “premised on the establishment of a fair and effective international framework in which all major economies participate and on agreement by those economies on ambitious targets.”2 As for the long-term target, Japan aims to reduce its GHG emission by 80% in 2050.

Efforts to address climate changeJapan’s Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Accounting and Reporting SystemIn Japan, revised Act on Promotion of Global Warming Countermeasures of 2005 introduced the Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Accounting and Reporting System3. This program mandates entities that emit considerably large amounts of greenhouse gases to calculate and report their emissions to the government. Government compiles the data and makes the reported data public. This system was created to promote activities based on the plan-do-check-action (PDCA) cycle, and by visualizing the information, encourage and motivate the general public and business operators in general to take voluntary actions. In the fiscal year (FY) 2008, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the specified emitter or the enterprises under the mandatory GHG Accounting and Reporting System amounted to 612.40 million tons-CO2 equivalent. This figure was approximately half the nationwide emission of 1282 million tons in FY2008. Japan’s 2008 GHG emission was 6.4% lower compared to that of 2007, which is 1.6% above the level of the base year 1990.

Team minus six percent (-6%)Under the Kyoto Protocol, Japan has committed to 6% reduction of its GHG emission from 2008 to 2012 compared to its 1990 level. “Team minus six percent”4 was one of the efforts to achieving this target. Entities and individuals can declare their intent to join the “team minus six percent” and announce their emission reduction goals and report on their voluntary efforts. This was a national campaign against global warming established in 2005, headed by the Prime Minister and the Minister of the Environment as the sub-leader. Approximately 34900 institutions and over 3.43 million

1 International Energy Agency, 2010. CO2 Emissions from Fuel Combustions 2010 Edition Highlights. http://www.iea.org/co2highlights/co2highlights.pdf 2 http://unfccc.int/files/meetings/application/pdf/japancphaccord_app1.pdf 3 Ministry of the Environment and Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, 2010. Greenhouse Gas Emission Data of FY 2008 Compiled Under the

Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Accounting and Reporting System based on the Act on Promotion of Global Warming Countermeasures. http://www.env.go.jp/en/headline/file_view.php?serial=380&hou_id=14494 http://www.team-6.jp/english/index.html

98


Japan

individuals have joined the Team. It has now changed its name to “Challenge 25”, in order to promote the national campaign and effort towards achieving the 25% GHG reduction5. In the recent years, “eco-points” became well known to the Japanese public. Eco-points were introduced to promote “eco-friendly” or low carbon appliances6. Eco-points are allocated to designated appliances and products, which meets energy efficiency criteria. As “green” products can be more expensive compared to conventional products, eco-points, which can be redeemed for cash, helped promoting these “green” or “eco-friendly” products7. Air conditioner and refrigerator with higher efficiency are few of the examples. As for the automobiles, tax break was given for “eco-cars” such as hybrid cars to boost the demand. Japanese government allocated 600 billion yen for eco-points fund in 2010.

Cap and trade/emission trading schemeAmong the local efforts, the Metropolitan Government of Tokyo introduced the first cap and trade type emission trading scheme in Japan in April 20108. Entities with annual oil equivalent energy use of 1500 kiloliters are required to reduce their emissions by 8% (or 6% for factories) by 2014 compared to the average emission of the selected three consecutive years between 2002 and 2007. Approximately 1100 office buildings and 300 factories are under this ETS. There are plans to expand the ETS to include other prefectures in the area.

Selected topics and lessons learned from the sessionsCopenhagen AccordFollowing the Fifteenth Conference of the Parties (COP) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in Copenhagen, Japan hosted the Eighth Informal Meeting on “Further Actions against Climate Change” in Tokyo in March 2010, which was welcomed for its “timely opportunity to kick off and facilitate climate change discussions” after Copenhagen9. Japan, in various occasions, continued to encouraged nations to be associated with the Copenhagen Accord, which the Parties “took note” of at COP15. The Copenhagen Accord was an interesting and challenging topic to discuss as various conditions exist among the countries represented by the participants: some have showed their intent to be associated with the Accord, some have submitted their Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMA), and some are yet to respond. As various types of NAMA have been submitted, comparability of the efforts and achievement will not be easy to measure. Further discussions will be needed to move towards an agreement on a fair and comprehensive international framework.

REDD+ PartnershipReducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation; and the role of conservation, sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks (REDD+) is one of the issues in which major development is expected to take place in the international negotiation in 2010. Deforestation and forest degradation was approximately 17% of the global anthropogenic GHG emissions in 2007. Reducing emissions in the forest sector, according to the presentation during the program, is: 1) cost effective; and 2) has an immediate impact as emission reduction techniques and approaches are well known and available. It is also expected to provide co-benefits such as biodiversity conservation, improved livelihood, and adaptation to climate change. In October 2010, progress was made in the forestry sector at the

5 Challenge 25 Committee and Ministry of the Environment. http://www.challenge25.go.jp/about/about_c25/index.html6 http://eco-points.jp/whats/index.html7 News articles on Eco-points: List of goods qualified for eco-points now out. http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nb20090620a1.html (Japan Times.

20 June 2009) Eco-Point Applications Hit All-Time High In Nov http://e.nikkei.com/e/fr/tnks/Nni20101214D14JFN03.htm (Nikkei. 15 December 2010)8 Tokyo Metropolitan Government, 2010. Tokyo Cap and Trade Program: Japan’s first mandatory emissions trading scheme. http://www.kankyo.metro.

tokyo.jp/en/attachement/Tokyo-cap_and_trade_program-march_2010_TMG.pdf 9 http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/environment/warm/cop/imfa/summary1003.html

99


Japan

Aichi-Nagoya Ministerial Meeting of the REDD+ Partnership. Japan and Papua New Guinea co-chaired the meeting held in Nagoya, Japan and promoted the partnership on REDD+.10 With approximately two third of its land covered by forest and mountains, Japan has further potential to work on this area. IGES, as a strategic research institute working on various issues of global environment, has been placing efforts in REDD+ research. It has developed and is enhancing its REDD+ Database11. During the sessions, participants expressed their concerns on the forestry sector and how it has large implication to their countries’ policy and efforts against climate change.

AdaptationOne of the topics covered during the climate change sessions at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) was adaptation. Important to note was that “ under the tough administrative situation, Japanese government is trying to provide funding”. Further scientific research is required in the field of adaptation and the resource is limited, so networking becomes more important. Asia Pacific Climate Change Adaptation Network was officially launched in 2009 as part of the Global Adaptation Network. Networking allows better information sharing and enhances capacity building through knowledge mobilization. It is also important to mainstream adaptation into development policies especially when “enhanced action and international cooperation on adaptation is urgently required to support the implementation of adaptation action in developing countries”12.

Finance and assistanceAnother important topic was finance. Japan, as a top donor to the USD 30 billion of fast-track finance pledged in Copenhagen by the developed nations, implemented approximately USD 5.3 billion out of the 15 billion pledged under the “Hatoyama Initiative”13. By the end of 2012, Japan plans to implement USD 11 billion as public finance. Funding sources are both public and private. Through the discussion, some participants mentioned the importance of and need for education and capacity building as public awareness is still low for some countries and areas. Long term and continuous assistance can enable frequent monitoring and improved reporting. We also realized the importance of seeking mutual benefits among countries and promoting private interests to address climate change while ensuring developments.

JENESYS ExperienceThe week-long program was valuable in terms of networking and building friendship among participants representing ASEAN countries. The program was helpful in putting faces to our neighboring countries. It gave us wonderful opportunities to informally discuss challenges we share. We were able to exchange information and views on climate change and energy, among other interesting topics, both formally and informally.

I would like to express my sincere appreciation to staffs of the Japan Foundation and to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Japan for providing us participants the wonderful opportunity to learn and deepen understanding on the ASEAN countries, Japan, and various issues of climate change. I would also like to say thanks to my fellow participants, who I believe are working tirelessly on our common challenges of climate change in other parts of Asia, and hope to work together again in the near future.

10 Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 2010. Co-chairs' Summary Aichi-Nagoya Ministerial Meeting of the REDD+ Partnership. http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/environment/warm/cop/sum_reed_p_1010en.html 11 Institute for Global Environmental Strategies. REDD+ Database. http://redd-database.iges.or.jp/redd/ 12 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Fact Sheet: The need for adaptation. http://unfccc.int/press/fact_sheets/items/4985.php 13 Delegation of Japan, 2009. Support for developing countries under the “Hatoyama Initiative. http://www.kantei.go.jp/foreign/topics/2009/1216initiative_

e.pdf http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/environment/warm/cop/pdfs/financing_en.pdf

100

Photos

102Photos

103 Photos

105 Photos

104Photos

106Photos

Documents

Climate Change Measure in Asia: A Review of Daily Life and ... · Climate Change Measure in Asia: A Review of Daily Life and Social / Economic Structure JENESYS East Asia Future Leaders