Climate Change and Sea Level Rise Preliminary Lessons

Climate Change and Sea Level Rise Preliminary Lessons for German Development Cooperation 13 May 2012 Prof. Burkhard von Rabenau, Ph. D. GIZ Environmentally and Climate-Friendly Urban Development in Da Nang (ECUD)

Motivation • GDC and ECUD interest in learning from experience • Answer ‘Key Questions’ posed in the Session Outline • Recommendations Da Nang Vulnerability Assessments • PEMSEA (2004) • Da. CRISS, JICA (2007 -2010) • ACCCRN, Rockefeller (2008 -2010) • City/CCCO, Da Nang PC (2011)

Session Guiding Questions

Key Questions What has been the UVA experience in Da Nang, which lessons have been commonly learnt, and to what extent are the methods used in Da Nang replicable elsewhere with more limited resources? Key Lessons Learned Ø See Next Section Replication with lesser resources is possible Ø Limit objectives awareness, exploration, work program Ø Use regional CC forecasts rather than own forecasts Ø Have courage to be incomplete, don’t try to be comprehensive Ø Don’t detail steps that are not later used

Key Questions How can methods be streamlined, and which results in Da Nang can be transferred to other areas? Streamlining of Methods Ø Too early, methods are streamlined but not validated Ø Review, test, and modify Ø ECUD is only at start Transfer of Methods Ø Are already being transferred, see ACCCRN workshops Ø Combine WB, ACCCRM, ADB, and City experience before transfer Ø ECUD should strengthen regional cooperation

Response to Key Questions What strategies were identified, and what policies and actions were adopted? How do these relate to the city’s existing urban development plan and priorities? Strategy identified Ø First Generation Plan mainly about mobilization Ø Focus on a 5 -10 year action plan (awareness raising, mainstreaming, identification of sector and area specific risks, policy planning, capacity building, international cooperation, and M&E) Ø Mainly take generic form (raise awareness, harden infrastructure) Relation to Existing Priorities Ø Need to confront CC objectives with other development goals Ø May come as part of mainstreaming

Response to Key Questions How is the planning stage geared towards shaping urban development and implementation? (Did planning result in concrete decisions shaping urban development, or was it too early to make such decisions? ) Concrete Decisions Ø Key issues are development trade-offs – but these remain for future Ø The Spatial Master Plan already may reflect CCA concerns. Ø Concrete actions require concrete knowledge. Completion of Drainage and River Flood Models during 2012 will assist. Ø Models have not yet been used for what-if analysis

Response to Session Questions In regard to fostering implementation in the face of limited public budgets, are new financing models emerging from the exercise? Emerging financing models Ø Mo. NRE provides funds on a competitive basis for CCA projects. City/CCCO has applied for funding of several projects. Ø The Local Investment Development Fund can be used, if PC so decides. ECUD is likely to propose that a public light pilot and a solid waste composting pilot be partially funded this way, with savings due to the projects earmarked for loan repayment. Ø ECUD proposes a Special Improvement District designed to attract partial private sector funding of CC adapted drainage works.

Da Nang’s Lessons for a German Approach

Importance of National Framework was essential to Assessment • Legal framework binding for all sectors and provinces • Mo. NRE Guidelines on sectors, districts and ward participation • Research by national institutions such as IMHEN, IWE, others) • Climate change forecasts for 7 regions • International support (Rockefeller , World Bank, ADB, donors) of framework. Lessons: Vietnam got a lot of things right. Follow-up needed in: Ø Assistance to national framework Ø GDC bottom-up pilot learning, replication at national level Ø UVA framework Ø Assessment tools Ø Implementation tools (e. g. mainstreaming, project studies)

First Generation Assessment Da Nang’s is a First Generation Assessment • Focus on mobilization for 40 Year Process to raise awareness and capacity building, research, pilots, mainstreaming. • Future assessments to be more sophisticated (e. g. flood modeling) Lessons: Follow up important Ø ‘Hard’ decisions remain to come Ø Hard decisions require confrontation with other dvlpt objectives Ø ECUD designed for follow-up and implementation Ø ECUD should contribute to 2 nd Generation Assessment

Time and Resource Requirements Several year effort, international resources • CC forecasting, new scoring methods qualitative B-C analysis, scoring methods, ward level participatory planning • All sectors, districts involved (supported by local consultants) Possible Lessons for GDC Ø Give it time, essential for learning, awareness Ø Work from inside institutions rather than as a consultancy Ø Do not set unrealistic productivity goals Ø Even a first assessments may require sophisticated CC forecasting (but savings possible using existing regional forecasts)

Climate vs. Climate Change ‘Climate Plus Approach’ – current risks + things will get worse • Rely mainly on current situation as starting point • Limited exposure forecasts, vulnerability horizon non-specific • Uses capacity experience with recent disasters Possible Lessons Ø Climate + approach not so limiting after all Ø Owes much to DRR , is a good entry point Ø Excellent way to start awareness raising Ø DRR, if extended to long-term is identical to CC UVA. Ø CC requires more sophisticated methodology than traditional DRR

Assessment Methodology Development Climate Change must compete with other objectives • Simple methods may not convince policy makers • Scoring methods suffer from additivity concerns, double counting, plausibility problems and non-comparability to other objectives Possible Lessons Ø Strong quantitative methods are often easily available Ø Add probabilistic and risk statements Ø Strengthen economic analysis and quantify Ø Consider exposure modeling Ø Validate methods (Review additivity, double counting) Ø Try selective rather than comprehensive UVA Ø Commence strategic work with instrument review

Planning vs. Doing, Strategy vs. Action Three presentations all focused on Implementation • Tiredness of strategic planning • Preference for tools and projects Possible Lessons Ø German (and international) approach favors strategic planning Ø Strategic planning often missing in Partner countries Ø ECUD must straddle both demands Ø Strategic roadmap to ECO friendly city that includes CC Ø Pilot projects that make CC part of feasibility analysis Ø Develop tools that change behavior

RECOMMENDATIONS

Recommendations Build on GDC existing strengths and priorities. • Long-term commitment • Location within government offices • Governance and capacity building focus rather than single product • Pilot Learning and replication at national level Focus on systemic solutions rather than special group advocacy. • Systemic solutions improve the policy framework and capacity of the system to address climate change • Special group advocacy ‘compensate for the failure of the existing system, rather than changing the system’ (WB, Economist). • Deal with advocacy as part of a systemic approach. In climate change policies that help the overall system are likely to help all.

Recommendations Employ synergies between climate change adaptation, mitigation, environment and resource conservation • The subjects share common characteristics and policy approaches • In Vietnam the same institution have responsibility for all Confront climate change with other development objectives • Climate change often treated in isolation • Hard decisions require confrontation with other development objectives • Use GDC integrated approach Develop ‘simple’ methods but make sure they work. • Use proven methods first, then validate and simplify • Validate simplifications, there usually is no free lunch • If ‘simple’ method works, do not limit use to medium sized cities

Recommendations Focus on changing behavior • Government agent’s reward system favors development, not CC • Private agents have 10 year project amortization horizon • Aim at policies that change incentives Contribute piecemeal to UV assessment methods • Focus on economic valuation to compete w/ other development objectives • Explore hedonic pricing, contingent valuation • Explore community contingent budgeting for community preferences • Improve scoring methods based on GDC experience • Avoid detail that is not used

THANK YOU