Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Climate Change International Negotiations
Date: 2008-09-17
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: ESC opinion, EU programme, action programme, climate change, energy resources, international negotiations, man-made disaster, reduction of gas emissions

31.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 77/73

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘Climate Change International
Negotiations’

(2009/C 77/19)

On 16-17 January 2008 the European Economic and Social Committee, acting under Article 29(2) of its
Rules of Procedure, decided to draw up an own-initiative opinion on

Climate Change International Negotiations.

The Section for Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment (The Sustainable Development Obser-
vatory), which was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on
2 September 2008. The rapporteur was Mr Osborn.

At its 447th plenary session, held on 17 and 18 September 2008 (meeting of 17 September), the European
Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 130 votes to three with three abstentions.

1. Summary and Recommendations

20 % target reduction should be firmly in place by the end
of 2008.

Climate change is one of the major challenges facing the
1.1
world in the 21st century. To avoid catastrophic change total
global emissions of greenhouse gases need to be substantially
reduced, and those of the developed countries will need to be
reduced by 60-80 % of 1990 levels by mid century.

The

international negotiations on climate

1.2
change
launched in Bali in December 2007 are crucial, since they will
have a decisive influence on the scale of action to be taken glob-
ally up to 2020. It is vital that these negotiations should be
carried to a successful conclusion in Copenhagen in 2009.

1.3
The EU has committed itself to a binding target of redu-
cing greenhouse gas emissions by 20 % from 1990 levels by
2020, and has put on the negotiating table an offer to increase
this to a 30 % reduction below 1990 levels if other countries
will make comparable commitments. Subsequently the Commis-
sion has launched proposals in the energy package of 23 January
2008 setting out proposals as to how the 20/30 % reduction
target can be achieved.

1.4
The Committee strongly supports the initiative that the
EU has taken in the negotiations and particularly its unilateral
commitment to 20 % target reductions for 2020 to get the
negotiations moving.

1.5 We believe however that the climate change challenge is
so serious that every effort should be made to go further. The
EU should be aiming at
the 30 % reduction conditionally
offered for 2020 and in the negotiations we should be seeking
to secure comparable commitments from other developed coun-
tries, with significant commitments also from the emerging
economies whose emissions are rising rapidly.

1.7 We consider that in order to achieve the 30 % reduction
target for 2020 which we believe should be the true goal, a
further set of measures at European and national level are likely
to be needed. We urge that steps be put in hand as soon as
possible to create a second tranche of measures that could
deliver the 30 % reduction.

1.8 We look forward to the forthcoming proposals from the
Commission on adaptation to climate change, and recommend
that this should be complemented by national adaptation strate-
gies for each of the member states.

1.9 We recommend the development of new initiatives to
support capacity building and technology transfer in the field of
climate change mitigation and adaptation.

Responding adequately to climate change will require
1.10
major changes in the world economy and in flows of invest-
ment. We recommend further analysis of the scale of resources
required and the appropriate machinery public and private
needed to handle these flows. We suggest that the scale of effort
and leadership required is comparable to that involved in the
creation of the Marshall plan for reconstruction in Europe after
World War II. On this occasion the EU should be a major
initiator of the plan needed.

1.11
Specifically funds will be needed to assist mitigation
and adaptation measures in developing countries. Expansion of
the CDM mechanism is one source of funds but the criteria and
implementation need to be tightened up. Europe could provide
some of
the extra resources needed from the proceeds of
auctioning of carbon trading permits.

1.6
In order to maximise its influence on the negotiations
the EU needs to be able to demonstrate its credibility by deli-
vering what it commits to. A package of measures to deliver the

1.12
levels, and by consumers and the public at large.

Action is needed by public bodies of all kinds at all

C 77/74

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

31.3.2009

1.13
The EU itself has a crucial part to play in guiding and
orchestrating this great transformation. We urge all the EU Insti-
tutions to play their full part in delivering the EU climate goal.
The Committee will do everything it can to help mobilise civil
society support in this great joint enterprise.

1.14
The parameters of the global deal to be constructed in
the international negotiations over the next eighteen months
need to be established as soon as possible so that political effort
can then be focused on communicating the challenge and
from all parts of
trust and commitment
building support,
society throughout the world for the major changes that need to
be made. This is not a deal that can be made behind closed
doors — all parts of society need to be involved. The abatement
measures must be proven realistic, economically and socially
sound and feasible in the suggested time frame.

2. Background

2.1
Climate change is one of the major challenges facing the
world in the 21st century. The 4th Assessment Report (4th AR)
the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
of
published in 2007 documented the changes that have already
taken place as a result of the huge increase in man-made green-
house gas emissions during the last two centuries, and projected
alarming further changes unless urgent action is taken to limit
global emissions in the next few years. The IPCC have advised
that the global goal should be to keep average global tempera-
tures to no more than 2oC above pre-industrial levels if cata-
strophic impacts are to be avoided. To achieve this goal, global
emissions of greenhouse gases will need to be substantially
reduced, and those of the developed countries will need to be
reduced to 60-80 % of 1990 levels by mid century.

2.2
The international community has been endeavouring to
agree collective action to limit emissions of greenhouse gases
for the past 20 years. The Framework Convention on Climate
Change was agreed at Rio in 1992, and was subsequently
strengthened by the Kyoto protocol of 1997 which committed
signatory countries to specific efforts to reduce emissions by
2012. It is generally recognised, however, that these agreements
and actions are only a beginning and that much more vigorous
and comprehensive action will be needed in the years ahead to
achieve the mid-century goal. The international negotiations on
climate change launched in Bali in December 2007 are therefore
crucial, since they will have a decisive influence on the scale of
action to be taken globally up to 2020. It is vital that these
negotiations should be carried to a successful conclusion in
Copenhagen in 2009.

Targets for 2020. The Bali Roadmap makes reference to
2.3
a section of the IPCC's 4th AR which demonstrates that by 2020
emissions reductions for developed countries in the range of
25-40 % below 1990 levels will be needed if the long-term goal

of limiting global warming to 2 degrees above pre-industrial
levels is to be achieved.

2.4
Clearly the developed countries will be the ones which
should be making large absolute reductions in their emissions,
since they have been and remain the largest per capita contribu-
tors to climate change. Europe needs to play its part. The USA
needs to be brought back into the international strategy and to
make real commitments to reductions. Russia will also need to
contribute by accepting a more realistic target than in the Kyoto
round.

2.5
The EU is playing a major part in those negotiations. The
Council has adopted a long term vision of cutting emissions by
developed countries by 60 to 80 % by 2050. As an interim
measure towards this long term goal the EU has committed
itself to a binding target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions
by 20 % from 1990 levels by 2020, and has put on the nego-
tiating table an offer to increase this to a 30 % reduction below
1990 levels if other countries will make comparable commit-
ments. Subsequently the Commission has launched proposals in
the energy package of 23 January 2008 setting out proposals as
to how the 20/30 % reduction target can be achieved.

2.6
It is also becoming important that developing countries
make serious commitments of their own to help limit climate
change. The major emerging economies of China, India, Brazil
and a few others are already or are fast becoming significant
emitters of greenhouse gases themselves, and it will be impor-
tant that they manage their economies in ways that restricts the
rate of growth of their emissions significantly below what it
would be in a business as usual model.

The essence of

2.7
that negotiators are
the global deal
aiming for is for developed countries to commit to challenging
targets and measures for reducing their own emissions, and to
offer financial and technological support to developing coun-
tries in return for commitments on their part to manage their
growth and development in ways that will limit the growth of
their greenhouse gas emissions as far as possible.

3. General Comments

3.1
For its part the EESC has been following from the outset
both the general progress of the negotiations and the package
of measures proposed by the Commission to enable the EU to
fulfil its own commitments. To follow the negotiations at first
hand the Committee sent
small delegations on behalf of
European civil society as part of the EU delegations to the Bali
Conference of the Parties to the Convention and to the subse-
quent intersessional Bonn meeting. The EESC is also using its
contacts with civil society organisations and groupings in other
leading countries to explore further
the positions they are
taking, and the part that civil society can play in promoting
agreement and implementation.

31.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 77/75

3.2
The Committee is reviewing the separate elements in the
Commission's climate and energy package in a number of sepa-
rate opinions which are summarised and cross-referenced in this
In this own initiative overview opinion the
general opinion.
Committee is now reviewing the progress and prospects of the
negotiations in general, and the part that Europe is playing.
Following adoption of the opinion the Committee intends to
organise side-events at the negotiation meetings planned to take
place in Poznan in December 2008 and in Copenhagen in
December 2009 to help civil society respond to and relate to
the ongoing negotiations.

tries, with significant commitments also from the emerging
economies whose emissions are rising rapidly.

4.3
If the negotiations only result in a 20 % commitment
from the EU, with comparably modest commitments from
other countries, that will in our view be a serious failure.

The Roadmap for the negotiations agreed at Bali identi-

3.3
fied four main building blocks for the negotiations:

— commitments to national

targets and measures to limit
greenhouse gas emissions up to 2020 and contribute to
mitigation of climate change;

4.4
Implementation. For the EU the measures proposed by
the Commission in its climate and energy package represent a
very positive and constructive implementation plan to enable
Europe to meet its 20 % reduction commitments for 2020. The
Committee has prepared separate opinions on each of
the
elements of this plan. In summary we support all elements of
the plan subject to the following comments:

— measures to manage adaptation to unavoidable climate

change;

— measures to support transfer of technology and capacity for
building for mitigating and adapting to climate change;

— establishing appropriate financial arrangements to support
mitigation and adaptation measures, technology transfer etc.

3.4 We are structuring the comments in our opinion around
these four building blocks.

4. Enhanced mitigation of climate change by limiting or

reducing emissions (Building Block 1)

4.1
Targets. The Committeefor agrees with the IPCC assess-
ment that reductions of emissions by developed countries in the
range 25-40 % from 1990 levels is an appropriate level of
ambition for the targets to be established for 2020. Achieving
bigger reductions than that by 2020 would probably now be
impracticable.

4.2
The Committee strongly supports the leading position
that the EU has taken in the negotiations. We applaud the initia-
tive shown by the EU in committing itself unilaterally to 20 %
target reductions for 2020 to get the negotiations moving. But
we think that the gravity of the climate change challenge is such
that every effort should be made to achieve the 30 % reduction
conditionally offered for 2020 and to aim in the negotiations to
secure comparable commitments from other developed coun-

— We support the proposed reforms and extension of

the
emission trading scheme. The tightening of the cap and
wider use of auctioning of allowances is welcome as it is in
line with the polluter-pays-principle, avoids windfall profits,
incentivises and funds low carbon installations and products
and fosters innovation. Given the scale of transformational
investment needed both in Europe and in developing coun-
tries we urge however that at least 50 % of revenues from
allowance auctioning should be mandated to support
climate change mitigation and adaptation measures rather
than the 20 % proposed by the Commission (1). We also
welcome the decision of
the Council and the European
Parliament to include aviation into ETS from 2012 on.

— We support the thrust of the burden sharing proposals for
the non traded sectors and urge the institutions not to erode
the overall target in their detailed discussions about the basis
for sharing the targets in this sector (2).

— We strongly support the move towards a rapid progress on
renewables. To achieve 20 % renewables by 2020 would be
a good first step towards increasing their use to much
higher levels by 2050 (3).

— We regret that the crucial issue of energy efficiency, where
the 20 % increase target by 2020 is not obligatory, seems to
be given less prominence than it deserves, as clearly shown
by the report of the Commission on the National Energy
Efficiency Plans. The majority of Member States have not set
up their national plans on time, the plans vary in their
quality, and some of them clearly lack ambition even though
major energy efficiency gains can often be achieved at
comparatively small
investment cost and with very
short payback periods (4).

initial

(1) See EESC Opinion CESE 1201/2008 adopted on 9 July 2008.
(2) See EESC Opinion CESE 1202/2008 adopted on 9 July 2008.
(3) See EESC Opinion 1511/08 adopted on 17 September 2008.
(4) See EESC Opinion 1513/08 adopted on 17 September 2008.

C 77/76

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

31.3.2009

— While we welcome the legislative framework for carbon
capture and storage (CCS) proposed by the Commission, we
are also anxious that funding for the envisaged demonstra-
tion projects is being made available only at an insufficient
rate and that progress towards application on an industrial
scale will be too slow, although it will be critically important
if some countries are obliged to rely substantially on coal
and other fossil fuel sources of power for many years to
come (5).

The European Union has pinned a lot of faith and poli-
4.5
tical capital on making its emissions cap and trading system a
main means of securing the emissions reductions that will be
needed. The EU ETS has already become the world's biggest
emissions trading system and is set to grow further after 2012.
Initially the system had only limited impact on European emis-
sions because generous initial caps and allocations led to a very
low carbon price. As the caps become tighter the carbon price
has risen and coupled with other factors driving up the price of
fossil fuels there is likely to be more impact on European power
production and other industries.

the strengthening of

In general we believe that

4.6
the
carbon trading system will have a positive effect on European
business and employment by encouraging the rapid develop-
low carbon processes and
ment of more energy-efficient
products that will be the market leaders of the future. This will
not only create employment, but also reduce our dependency
on imports and thus increase our energy security.

4.7 While the EU has been the first in this field it must now
be a key objective to encourage the development of trading
systems in the USA and other countries and to link all the
systems in a common global carbon market. The development
of a truly global carbon market could play a major part in
securing carbon emission reductions throughout the world in
the most efficient and cost-effective way. We strongly support
the ICAP (International Carbon Action Partnership)
initiative
that seeks to enable the various trading systems emerging in
different parts of the world to evolve harmoniously towards a
single global market. As an international carbon market
develops within a system of worldwide caps on emissions the
risk that a Europe-alone trading system might damage Europe's
competitive position should be reduced.

sectoral

agreements

International

4.8
setting out more
detailed plans and strategies for securing progressive reductions
in emissions from the main sectors concerned, and from their
products might also be useful. But this should be seen only as a
way of supporting the implementation of firm internationally
agreed national targets, not as an alternative to binding national
targets, since the history of the past 20 years shows that volun-

tary sectoral agreements in this field by themselves produce too
little, too late, and are impossible to enforce effectively.

4.9
On the transport side we reassert our view that a long
term sustainability strategy for transport needs to start from a
fundamental reassessment of the drivers of demand for trans-
port and of how the policies on physical planning, infrastructure
and public transport could over time suppress the remorseless
growth in demand for transport and eventually even reduce it.
Planning should not proceed on the basis that the growth of
traffic is inevitable and that the only possible limitation on
emissions from the transport sector lies in technical improve-
ments to fuel and engine design — important though those are.

4.10
tough
On the technical measures, we believe that
targets for reducing emissions from cars should not only be set
in a short term (120 g CO2 per km by 2012/2015), but also for
the medium term so as to reduce emissions substantially further
by 2020 (6). At the same time extra support should be given for
the development and early introduction of carbon-free vehicles
with electric or hydrogen propulsion.

4.11 We are less sanguine than the Commission about the
potential for achieving the 10 % target for biofuels for transport.
In view of the problems linked with the production of most
biofuels concerning their GHG emission reduction potential,
and the environmental and social impact of their production,
sustainability criteria than those proposed by the
stricter
Commission will have to be put in place so as to ensure that
biofuels are only introduced where they do have a genuine and
significant impact in reducing net carbon emissions, and do not
impose unacceptable pressures on agricultural
land and food
production. Moreover, economic considerations currently point
clearly into the direction that the use of biomass to produce
electricity or heat is (at least now and for the near future) much
more efficient than the use in form of biofuels.

4.12
Further measures to achieve the 30 % target. If the
package can be adopted by the end of 2008 with implementa-
tion beginning promptly in 2009 we believe that it will provide
good assurance that the EU should achieve its 20 % reduction
target by 2020.

4.13 We doubt however whether it would be possible to
achieve the 30 % reduction target for 2020 simply by tightening
up the ambitions of the separate elements of the package and
increasing the use of CDM credits as the Commission has at
present suggested. We believe that in order to achieve this more
ambitious target a more comprehensive and wider range of
measures is likely to be needed both at European and at
Member State level.

(5) See EESC Opinion CESE 1203/2008 adopted on 9 July 2008.

(6) See EESC EESC Opinion 1500/08 adopted on 17 September 2008.

31.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 77/77

4.14
At European level we suggest that the following further
elements should be among those to be considered for a second
package:

— more action through regulation and standard-setting to
promote energy efficiency in all main sectors and products;

— further measures to accelerate the development and intro-

duction of renewable energies;

— more support for the development of electric or hydrogen

propelled vehicles;

— an extension of the carbon trading system to include emis-
sions from shipping (we doubt whether ongoing discussions
in the International Maritime Organisation are capable of
delivering sufficient action sufficiently quickly);

— more collective efforts to adopt tighter national targets for

reductions under the effort-sharing agreement.

the

under

targets

At Member State level in order to achieve tighter indivi-
4.15
dual
the
Committee believes that Member States and their political
leaders need to do much more to bring the general public, busi-
ness, trade unions and other civil society organisations into part-
nership and participation in the common effort.

burden-sharing

agreement,

— Citizens need to be encouraged and incentivised to play
their part through such means as improving the efficiency of
their homes and using greener forms of energy for lighting
and heating, purchasing more energy efficient goods and
services, and reducing the carbon impact of their regular
travelling and their holidays. In our view there is already a
growing proportion of the public and of civil society organi-
sations who would be ready and willing to take action if
only they could be given a strong and effective political lead
as to what is expected of
them, along with appropriate
incentives for action.

— Many local and regional government bodies have already
shown vision and courageous political
leadership on this
issue. They need to be encouraged and incentivised to go
further.

— Businesses similarly need to be incentivised to make further
progress. They need to be urged and incentivised to continu-
ously improve the energy efficiency of their operations and
to obtain their energy from low carbon sources. Regulation
should be used more systematically and vigorously to drive
up the energy performance of all types of products and
services. The construction industry needs to be mandated to
achieve much higher energy efficiency both in the construc-
tion process and in the performance of buildings in use.

— Trade unions have an important part to play as well. Many
of their members are in the front line in delivering energy
practical
and
efficiency

improvements

disseminating

information and their potential contribution needs to be
recognised and encouraged. Trade unions also need to be
fully engaged with the process of transforming industry and
the economy onto a path of lower carbon intensity. Properly
managed the new forms of production should provide just
as many employment opportunities as the older carbon
intensive modes of production, while maintaining good
working conditions.

level,

latest Commission Progress Report

In order to enhance the EU's credibility at the interna-
4.16
tional
it is of the utmost importance that every single
Member State should make every effort in order to ensure that
not only the overall Kyoto target for the EU-15 ‘bubble’ will be
met, but also that the individual Kyoto targets for 2012 will be
reached. The
towards
achieving the Kyoto objectives (7) states that only three of the
EU-15 Member States were on track to meeting their targets
with current domestic policies, and that 8 are only projected to
reach their targets ‘when the effect of the Kyoto mechanisms,
carbon sinks and additional domestic policies and measures,
that are already being discussed, are accounted for’. For three
Member States, reaching their Kyoto target appears to be impos-
sible. Moreover, the large use of credits from the Kyoto flexible
mechanism, especially CDM, shows that the much needed trans-
formation towards a low carbon society has much further to go
in many Member States.

5. Adaptation to climate change (Building Block 2)

5.1
Even if successful action is taken to reduce global emis-
sions in the future, global warming is expected to increase
further over the next decades because of the emissions that have
already taken place.
In response to the Commission's Green
Paper on Adaptation to Climate Change, the Committee has
already adopted an opinion (8).
In summary the Committee
believes that the EU needs to establish an over-arching strategy
for managing adaptation to climate change within the EU,
within which more detailed national adaptation plans should be
drawn up by each Member State. Greatly increased priority
should also be given to adaptation in research and analysis, in
budgets and investment programmes and in other measures. We
hope that
foreseen for
in the White Paper on adaptation,
autumn 2008, the Commission will propose detailed measures
to make progress on this subject.

5.2
Outside the EU there are many parts of the developing
world which are already severely affected and will be even more
in the future but which have fewer resources to deal with the
impacts. It must therefore be a high priority for the EU and
other OECD countries to increase financial and other assistance
to the especially vulnerable parts of the world to help them
cope with climate change. Climate change considerations must
be mainstreamed into all development policies.

(7) COM(2007) 757 final.
(8) OJ C 120, 16.5.2008, p. 38.

C 77/78

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

31.3.2009

5.3
There will also need to be major efforts to support the
sustainable management of forests in the developing world and
to restrain the commercial pressures that are continuing to drive
large-scale deforestation in many parts of the world's climate
systems. The EESC is preparing a separate opinion on climate
change and forestry.

6. Action on technology development

and transfer

(Building Block 3)

6.1
To succeed in the transition to a lower carbon economy
the world will need to achieve a new industrial revolution.
There will need to be a major shift to cleaner forms of energy
production, new technology to capture emissions of carbon and
other greenhouse gases, and a continuous push to switch
products and consumption patterns to more efficient and less
energy intensive patterns. This will require big increases in rele-
vant research programmes by public and private sectors, and
major investment programmes to re-equip industry and trans-
form products and services. Many of the necessary technologies
are already in existence, but their application needs to be much
more widespread than it is now.

6.2 Within the UE this will require radical shifts in the
spending programmes of the EU and governments to support
the appropriate research, development and investment. It will
also require fiscal and other incentives to businesses and others
to make the necessary investments.

There will be a need to identify the kinds of technology
6.3
and services which will best assist the emerging economies and
developing countries to manage their continuing development
in the most sustainable and least carbon intensive way, and to
support its transfer to those economies on appropriate terms.
Where new technologies are identified that may be particularly
useful for developing countries in adapting to climate change or
in mitigating the carbon impact of their future development
ways should be established for assisting their rapid and wide-
spread introduction on affordable terms. It should be noted that
the emerging economies are themselves the originators or devel-
opers of some of the new technologies that will be needed.
Technology transfer should not be regarded solely as a one way
street running from North to South, but as a matter of facili-
tating the rapid dissemination of the key technologies around
the world wherever they may originate.

6.4
The Committee urges the EU to explore urgently with its
partners how the most up-to-date and carbon-efficient tech-
nology can be made readily available to the developing world
on affordable terms, including in particular technology in the
the transport
the energy-intensive industries,
power sector,
sector, and, as the technology becomes available, carbon seques-
tration. Countries that are likely to remain heavily dependent on
coal for power generation will need help to enable them to use

the latest clean coal technology and to introduce carbon capture
technology as soon as it is available.

6.5
Such technology transfer assistance should enable the
developing countries concerned to manage their development
on a lower carbon trajectory than would otherwise occur, and
might reasonably be made conditional to some extent on appro-
priate commitments by the developing countries concerned to
undertake other measures themselves to limit
the potential
growth in their emissions.

6.6
In parallel to the climate negotiations, EU and US should
undertake a new initiative to achieve trade liberalisation in
climate-friendly goods and services in the WTO framework.
This initiative should be designed in such a way that developed
countries, developing countries and emerging economies alike
could draw net advantages from such a liberalisation,
for
example by fostering the (further) development of environ-
mental technologies and services in the developing countries.

7. Scaling up of

finance and investment
mitigation and adaptation (Building Block 4)

to support

7.1
Developing countries will need help on a large scale
from the developed world to enable them to play their part in
meeting the climate change challenge without compromising
their development goals.
It will be particularly important to
ensure that the future path of development in the developing
world has as low carbon intensity as possible, and does not
reproduce the path of excessive reliance on carbon-intensive
production that marked (and marred) development
in the
North.

7.2
The developing countries that are worst affected by
climate change and which have least resources of their own to
handle adaptation will also need additional help. They will need
enhanced programmes for coastal defences, flood prevention,
drought alleviation, replanning of agriculture, new public health
needs and other matters.

7.3
The Committee welcomes the recognition at Bali by all
countries that new and additional resources and investment
channels and mechanisms will be needed to handle this transfer.
However, with some honourable exceptions
the developed
world does not have a good track record in delivering on past
promises to provide additional resources for sustainable devel-
opment objectives. On this occasion it is vital for the whole
world that genuinely additional resources should be mobilised
and committed.

The Committee has noted estimates from the UNFCCC
7.4
and others indicating that resources of some hundreds of
billions of dollars annually may be needed from the public and
private sectors combined when the programmes are fully geared

31.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 77/79

up. They recommend that in any case urgent steps should be
taken by the UNFCC, the Commission and/or OECD and the
International Financial Institutions to quantify the needs more
precisely and to secure the necessary pledges and commitments
so that adequate funding can be achieved and the programmes
undertaken can make a decisive impact on the global problem
of climate change. Proceeds from the auctioning of allocations
under future phases of the carbon trading scheme could be one
source of new funds but are unlikely to be sufficient by them-
selves for all that needs to be done.

7.5
CDM has had some success in channelling new resources
to support appropriate investments in non-Annex I countries.
But the distribution of projects has been skewed heavily towards
China and other emerging economies, and there have been
serious doubts about the additionality and quality of many of
the projects. It is vital that the criteria for acceptance of projects
should be implemented and monitored effectively if
the
mechanism is to play its proper part of securing that genuine
carbon reductions are achieved in the most efficient way
possible.

The Committee recommends that

the EU and others
7.6
concerned should explore urgently how the defects of
the
scheme can be eliminated in the next period, and the whole
programme geared up. In the future, CDM should give priority
to projects which make significant contributions not only to
reduce emissions, but also to foster
the transformation to
low-carbon economies. In particular in emerging economies, it
does not seem useful
to continue financing straightforward
energy-efficiency projects (‘low-hanging fruits’) which would be
done by the country anyway. For these countries,
‘sectoral
CDMs’ — possibly combined with no-lose targets (9) — could
be a viable option.

7.9
From this perspective the need to respond promptly to
the threat of climate change does not represent an additional
burden on the global economy but
simply an additional
powerful reason for proceeding rapidly with the economic and
industrial transformation which is in any case needed. When the
price of oil stood at USD 60 a barrel, the Stern review estimated
that the cost of measures needed over the next 50 years to deal
with climate change might amount to 1 % of global GDP. With
the price of oil now well over USD 100 a barrel investment in
renewables and efficiency measures of all kinds are already
looking much more attractive in business terms. By the same
token the net additional costs of measures to deal with climate
change are likely to be much less, and in some applications
could even become negative indicating that effective action on
climate change will actually represent a net benefit to the global
economy over the years ahead.

Responding appropriately to the climate challenge
7.10
should not
therefore be regarded as a vast, depressing and
burdensome obligation that will hold back economic growth,
but rather as an opportunity to be at the forefront of the next
economic and industrial revolution. The EU has been at the
forefront of the policy debate on climate change. But it still
needs to do more to convert that forward policy stance into an
that will
equally active and vigorous business environment
stimulate our businesses and our societies to make the necessary
investments to become global leaders and competitive winners
in the low carbon economy of the future.

7.11
Some commentators have spoken of the need for a new
Marshall plan, and we commend this parallel as giving a
measure of the scale of the challenge and the effort that will be
needed. We need a Marshall scale vision of how the countries of
the world can unite together in face of a common global
danger, with the strongest and wealthiest countries both
showing the way forward themselves and helping others as
generously as they can.

7.7
Private sector investment on a massive scale in less
carbon intensive production will be crucial in all parts of the
world. The measures undertaken by the EU and national govern-
ments should particularly aim to incentivise the private sector
to make such investments.

7.12
Action is needed by national and public bodies of all
kinds at all levels, by business of all kinds and by consumers
and the public at large.

7.8
The costs and investments needed will run into trillions
of dollars over the next 50 years. These are large sums. Such
investments are however already becoming necessary as global
supplies of fossil fuels become more constrained and prices rise.
Quite apart from climate change it is thus becoming increasingly
important from an economic perspective to diversify away from
fuels and to use remaining resources more efficiently.
fossil
Security considerations also point in the same direction, since
both scarcity of fossil fuels and climate changes already occur-
ring are potent sources of instability and conflict in many parts
of the world.

(9) No-lose targets: A pledge to reduce emissions by a certain amount; with
no penalty if the target is not met, but the possibility to sell credits if
reductions exceed the pledge.

8. Conclusions

8.1
Climate change is already happening and is already
having severe impacts around the world. These problems are
expected to get worse in the next few years as greenhouse gas
concentrations increase and temperatures rise more rapidly. The
world needs urgent action to set and implement demanding
leading to deeper
goals for reduction of emissions by 2020,

C 77/80

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

31.3.2009

reductions in the years that follow. The earlier the reductions
can be made the more good they will do in slowing the rate of
temperature increase.

8.2
Developed countries have much higher per capita emis-
sions than the rest of the world and need to stiffen up their
ambitions and actions for reducing them. Europe needs to
ensure that it delivers its existing commitments for 2012 and
then to commit to a 30 % reduction by 2020 — the higher end
of its range. To be credible in these ambitions it needs a further
package of sound and realistic measures to ensure that it can
deliver these targets, and to be planning now for the further
reductions that will be needed beyond 2020.

8.3
Developing countries need to be engaged as well, and
particular effort needs to be devoted to ensure that the most
energy-intensive
are
in the
equipped with the most energy efficient and least carbon-inten-
sive forms of production. They will need major, focused help
from the developed world.

emerging economies

sectors

8.4
The parameters of the global deal to be constructed in
the international negotiations over the next eighteen months
need to be established as soon as possible so that political effort

Brussels, 17 September 2008.

can then be focused on communicating the challenge and
building support,
from all parts of
trust and commitment
society throughout the world for the major changes that need to
be made. This is not a deal that can be made behind closed
doors — all parts of society need to be involved. The abatement
measures must be proven realistic, economically and socially
sound and feasible in the suggested time frame.

The global

8.5
transformation required is comparable in
scale to the industrial revolution of the last two centuries which
harnessed the energy locked up in fossil fuels to achieve massive
increases in the productive capacity and output of human
society. The world now needs a second industrial revolution to
substitute other forms of energy for fossil fuels, and to maximise
energy efficiency so as to enable us to achieve comparable levels
of output and growth without burdening the atmosphere with
unsustainable levels of greenhouse gas emissions. Major invest-
ment is needed; appropriate and focused changes in regulation,
taxes and other economic instruments will have to be made;
there will have to be significant changes in economic behaviour
and individual lifestyles. Everyone needs to understand the chal-
lenge and be engaged in the changes needed.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Dimitris DIMITRIADIS