Avoiding academic and decorative planning in GHG emissions abatement studies with MCDA:

Abstract

Climate change issues have been considered some of the most complex and messy situations which the decision sciences face. In the last decade many countries have carried out studies related to climate change mitigation. The relevance of the outcomes of such studies depends on how well technical analysis, the priorities of the decision makers and technical/political feasibility are integrated.

This paper focuses on a framework suggested by the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) to study the costs and impacts of national policies for abating greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions. It illustrates how the quest for the inclusion of MCDA assessment in national greenhouse abatement costing studies can, without departing from the established analysis framework, be a pretext to provide a process which enhances stakeholder participation, validation, and ownership of the planning process. Such a process was used in a national study in Peru.

Introduction

In 1992, the Rio summit produced the first international agreement on greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions, in the form of a Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC), which established the obligation for partner countries to present inventories of greenhouse gas emissions and removals (United Nations, 1992). The goals and principles of the FCCC were further strengthened under the Kyoto Protocol (United Nations, 1997), which specifies targets for GHG reductions of 5.2% between 2008 and 2012 below the base year 1990 by industrialised countries. It also created additional flexibility mechanisms with the goals of: (i) reaching the GHG reduction targets at the lowest possible cost for those countries committed to reductions; and (ii) voluntary participation of developing countries in climate change mitigation efforts. One such mechanism is the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), which was designed for promoting the cooperation between developing and developed countries by allowing the latter to invest in GHG emissions abatement projects in the former.

The cost of GHG abatement is thus a central concept and is defined as the long-term cost to society of implementing a GHG abatement (abatement scenario) compared with a reference scenario (baseline) where no abatement is undertaken. Note that the existence of an abatement effort (cost) may not be enough to achieve a decrease in emissions (Fig. 1).¹

Numerous national abatement costing studies were carried out, frequently supported by external assistance. While all these studies reflect genuine analysis efforts and the desire to influence GHG abatement strategies, traces of academic or decorative planning are sometimes apparent. For the sake of illustration, we consider that decorative planning occurs when an official produces a document on mitigation strategies based on general policy information only, without regard for technical constraints or implications. The document serves no purpose in practice, other than being acknowledged as existent. In the other extreme, academic planning occurs when a technical team is assigned the task of conducting a mitigation study, and the abatement options included in such study reflect neither the priorities of its government nor the real implementation difficulties. Decision makers see the study as an academic exercise and do not share its assumptions. The planning process must combine the stakeholders’ views and motivations with the essential rigour in technical evaluation of constraints, costs and impacts.

Although this paper often mentions so-called “developing countries”, the discussion does not apply exclusively to these countries (nor does it apply equally to all of them). Section 2 presents special circumstances that affect the planning activities in developing countries. Section 3 revisits an established analysis framework for estimating the cost of GHG abatement and leads to the suggestion (in Section 4) on how to achieve a structured, participative process, within the established analysis framework. Section 5 reports on a national study in Peru, where such a process was used, and whose results were incorporated into the Peruvian national communication to the FCCC.