1 / 27

Financing Sustainable Development

Financing Sustainable Development. Emerging Environmental Commodity Markets. PART I. Emerging Environmental Commodity Markets. Demand for Environmental Finance. Many environmental strategies exist only on paper, and lack a budget to facilitate their implementation

gavril
Télécharger la présentation

Financing Sustainable Development

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Financing Sustainable Development Emerging Environmental Commodity Markets

  2. PART I • Emerging Environmental • Commodity Markets

  3. Demand for Environmental Finance • Many environmental strategies exist only on paper, and lack a budget to facilitate their implementation • $60 to 90 billion per year will be needed to address poverty-environment –sustainability goals over the next 10-15 years, and possibly $80 billion more per year to tackle global climate change over the next half century.

  4. Environment and ODA • Annual ODA flows could increase to about $100 billion by 2010. (This would still be about $50 billion short of the ODA levels needed just to meet the MDGs.) • Environment has traditionally accounted for less than 2% of ODA. Hence, this would amount to about $ 2 billion per year by 2010. • Other sources of finance need to be explored to address pressing environmental priorities. • CDM flows to date have been driven by market driven factors,not conducive to several of the UNDP client countries.

  5. The Emerging Environmental Commodities Markets • Economists have long argued that market-based regulations could achieve greater results at a lower cost than traditional “command-and- control” approaches • US Clean Air Act in 1990 piloted the first cap-and-trade environmental market for SO2 (a major culprit for acid rain) • Around the world, new markets are being set up to create economic incentives to protect global environmental goods. • Global environmental commodities markets received a boost in 1997 with the Kyoto Protocol, and an even bigger boost in 2005 with its entry-into-force following ratification by Russia.

  6. Market Goal Products Suppliers Customers Market Size by 2012 ($ Billion) Cap-and-trade carbon markets Abatement credits for reducing CO2 emissions (carbon offsets, AEU, ERUs, CERs) Permit traders Efficiency and GHG capture project developers Governments Energy intensive industries 14 Water trading Acres of forests and wetlands preserved, restored or created Landowners and private wetland mitigation banks Governments Water basin agencies Real estate developers 6 Habitat Conservation Acres of restored or conservation managed land. Landowners and private conservation banks. Governments Real estate developers Conservation organizations 4 Sustainable fisheries Permits to catch a set weight of fish species Certified marine fish. Governments issue quotas; Retiring fishers sell quotas; Certification organizations issue certificates (e.g., Certified Marine Fish Council) Fishing fleets Voluntary purchase of certified marine fish 60 Examples of Environmental Commodities Markets Source: Forest Trends (2005)

  7. CDM vs. MDG components by project type Aggregate Pool Attributes # 1 e.g. a renewable electricity project with employment effects, rural electrification and local air quality improvement GHG Emission Reduction CDM component # 2 e.g. a reforestation project with watershed and protection of endangered species # 3 e.g. a landfill gas project with small local air benefits Poverty Alleviation MDG component Biodiversity Protection # 4 e.g. a school building project with a small photovoltaic entity Other MDG Benefits

  8. Relative Importance of Various Financing Sources for Climate Change Carbon Finance By 2012: $1-$4 billion Up to $14 bn thereafter ODA By 2010: < $2bn Market transformation and development of renewable and clean power technology sectors By 2010: $234 to $625 billion By 2020: Up to $1,900 billion The Good News for Financing for Sustainable Development • After 2012: • Carbon Finance could raise resources 10 times greater than what is available through ODA • Market transformation could channel over 1000 times more funds to renewable and clean power technology sectors

  9. Part II • UNDP Services • in Environmental Finance • Carbon Finance as a first Step

  10. UNDP Environment Finance Services • Support in developing sustainable national strategy for environment and energy • Identification of potential funding sources to implement strategy (ODA, global environment trust funds, carbon finance, other commodity markets, and environmental fiscal reforms) • Develop capacity for well-functioning environmental commodity markets (This would include support for strengthening planning, legal, and financial institutions). • Provision of a one-stop shop for technical assistance in accessing each financial source, including GEF, MP, carbon finance and other environmental commodities markets.

  11. UNDP MDGCARBONFINANCE Overview of MDG Carbon Pooling Process MDG-Grade Carbon Projects Carboncredits $ CERs VERs UNDP purchases unique, project-specific carbon credits… … and aggregates credits into pool of standardized MDG-grade units. MDG-GradeKyoto Portfolio Voluntary MDG-GradeOffset Portfolio Pooled units retired on behalf of Participants to meet voluntary offset commitments Pooled units soldto meet compliance requirements $ Participants(governments, companies and carbon funds)

  12. UNDP Funding, Project Development and Carbon Credit Purchase Process • Sequential Processes • Program participants fund MDG Carbon Pool • UNDP & Project Developer sign ERPA* • Bank issues loan to Project Developer; For small-scale, high-MDG projects, UNDP may guarantee up to 50% of loan (not to exceed 5% of value of MDG Carbon Pool) • UNDP distributes pooled MDG carbon units (CERs and VERs) to Program Participants • Ongoing Processes • UNDP MDG Carbon Finance provides ongoing project development & validation services • CERs and VERs are transferred from Project Developer to UNDP MDG Carbon Pool • UNDP Carbon Pool pays Project Developer for credits • Project Developer makes interest payments to Bank • Project Developer pays guarantee fee to UNDP MDG Carbon Finance (as above, only in those cases where UNDP guarantees loan) ProgramParticipants Pooled CERUnits $ 1 4 2 • ERPA issued by UNDP , and $’s transferred (ongoing) • Project Development & Validation Services (ongoing) Project Developer UNDP MDGCARBONFINANCE • CERs and VERs (ongoing) • Carbon Rights and Limited Management Control Rights • Guarantee Fee (ongoing) LoanGuarantee(5% of portfolio) 2 3 Bank 3 Loan InterestPayments(ongoing) * Emissions Reduction Purchase Agreement

  13. Roles of financial partners Roles of financial partners • Establish Trust account for CDM/JI; • Establish Trust account for the voluntary trading arm of MDG Carbon; • Develop a global registry system/database for all VERs; • Provide VERs Business Development Services • Enter into ERPAs on behalf of the Trust with project proponents • When the ERs are delivered into the Trust, deposit the purchase price of ERs into the Trust and pay the project proponent for the appropriate amount of credits; • Make the necessary transfers within the CDM/JI registries • Transfer pre-agreed project development and technical advisory fees to MDG Carbon • If required, assist MDG Carbon in providing financing arrangements for project proponents.

  14. Environment Finance Manager • Supervise the operations of MDG Carbon, under the authority and guidance of MDG Carbon Supervisory Board, and be fully accountable to the Supervisory Board. In this context, the Environment Manager: • Manage trade-offs and develop synergies between UNDP Global Environment Funds (GEF TF, Adaptation Funds; CDM/JI/VER; MP; etc.); • Authorize issuance of ERPAs to Proponents; • Transmits PDDs to DOEs; • Issues Letters of Delegation of Authority to UNDP RRs to create Awards and start implementation; • Oversees the work of the MDG Carbon team; • Reports to MDG Carbon Supervisory on Facility performance on a semi-annual basis; • Implement Supervisory Board’s meeting decisions.

  15. UNDP Competitive Advantages • One-stop shop approach • Key market players typically only issue ERPAs or provide limited project development services. UNDP Carbon Finance will provide a simple, cost-effective approach to Carbon finance, from screening of eligible project ideas to project management and transaction of ERs. UNDP will also provide limited project financing to small scale, MDG-grade projects through a partial guarantee fund. • Universal presence and Trust • Is universal presence and trust will enable UNDP to provide project endorsement, pre-validation and verification services at a much lower cost than other market players and to transfer these savings to project developers. • Kyoto risk mitigation • Through the option of trading ERs either on the voluntary carbon offset market (VERs) or the Kyoto market (CERs), UNDP will mitigate the risk that a CDM project is not ultimately considered additional by the CDM Executive Board and other non-issuance risks. • Innovation capacity • Build capacity to trade ERs on the voluntary markets, UNDP will be able to develop innovative projects not eligible to CDM yet (biological carbon sequestration through integrated land management, etc.) • Sequencing different funding sources • By sequencing and/or combining different funding sources (GEF, MP, CERS/VERs, public transfers, etc.) UNDP will be able to address a broader range of climate change needs in developing countries.

  16. MDG CARBON FINANCE ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE

  17. Start-Up Costs • 1. 2006-2008: Pilot phase • First batch of projects to focus on renewable energy and biological carbon sequestration. • UNDP Carbon Initiative to be established as an EEG unit servicing Country Offices, under the supervision of an advisory board including all co-financiers (Regional Bureaux, BDP, bilateral donors). • $ 5 million start up funds required to establish UNDP Carbon Funds (signed companies, develop carbon offset methodologies, market carbon pools…) and finance upfront project management costs (development, certification, commissioning, monitoring of CERs revenues). • Financial break down: $ 2.5 million from bilateral donors (Nordic countries); $ 2.5 million from UNDP global and regional programmes ($750,000 from RBAP and RBA; $200,000 from RBEC, RBLAC and RBAS; $500,000 from BDP)+ WB PCF funds in the range of $20 – 25 mill. • 2. 2009-2012: Wrap-up or scale-up phase • Project development extended to energy efficiency. • Scale-up would require up $ 7 to 10 million of additional start-up cost, one option would potentially be to establish UNDP-MDG Carbon Facility as a Not for Profit Organization to scale-up operations.

  18. Carbon Finance Projects Risk Mitigation Approach Nature of Risk • Due Diligence • CDM/JI eligibility appraisal by UNDP Carbon Methodology Advisers (MA). • Host Country Carbon Appraisal (DNA, legal framework, etc.) • Policy/Cap. Dev. to DNA • Monitoring and pre-verification of CERS by UNDP COs and MAs • DNA refusal to approve the project/change in DNA policy • Failure to comply with rules and requirements for validation and registration under the CDM • Inaccurate validation/verification by DOEs • Failure to correctly monitor ERs PROCESS PROJECT MARKET COUNTRY • Established Methodologies • Reliance on fully developed methodologies during start-up phase; • Partnership with key DOEs

  19. Carbon Finance Projects Risk Mitigation Approach Nature of Risk • Due Diligence • Project design and Developer Appraisal leveraging UNDP climate change project risk management system • Enhanced development benefits • Carbon Certification of COs EFPs and RTAs • Independent assessment of project performance criteria • Buffer of ERs retained • Time/cost overrun • Miscalculated ER project performance • Project operation not up to technical specs • Changes to project assumptions making project unviable • Facility management • Damage to equipment • Project proponent default • Interest rate/currency fluctuation • Natural catastrophes PROCESS PROJECT MARKET COUNTRY Financial Instruments Standard Insurance

  20. Carbon Finance Projects Risk Mitigation Approach Nature of Risk • Demand/Price risk – evolution of ER markets • Failure to negotiate optimal terms for project participants in an ERPA • Failure to pay ERs/breach of contract owning to fall in market prices for ERs • Post Kyoto risks • Financial Risk Mgmnt • Framework partnerships with investment grade firms • Utilizing financial products and services to outsource key financial risks • Partial ER prepayments PROCESS PROJECT MARKET • Market and Product Diversification • Compliance and voluntary markets (market hedge) • Basic & premium carbon products uniquely differentiated and appeal to different buyers COUNTRY

  21. Carbon Finance Projects Risk Mitigation Approach Nature of Risk • Due diligence • Host Country Investment Appraisal • Drafting of contracts by UNDP counsel PROCESS • Contract enforcement • Currency inconvertibility • Nationalization of assets/host Country Gov. claiming title to ERs • Weak Governance • Host Country non compliance with KP. PROJECT • UN Country Presence • Mainstreaming of Carbon Finance into UNDP Country Programming • SBAA MARKET COUNTRY • Insurance Policies • As required by Financial Partners

  22. Carbon Finance Projects Key Players Risk Methodology/Carbon Process Advisers PROCESS Regional Technical Advisors For carbon project development PROJECT Business Development Advisors MARKET Country Offices COUNTRY

  23. Roles of Regional Service Centers/Regional Bureaux • Develop a regional CDM/JI strategy; • Incorporate Carbon Finance into Regional Policy Dialogue and Programming; • As required, participate in semi-annual meetings of MDG-Carbon Supervisory Board; • Identify and maintain consultants /experts/buyers’ profiles roster to assist in formulating PINs/PDDs; • As required, organize validation/verification missions of DOEs • Regional carbon training workshops for UNDP programme officers • Mobilize ODA for carbon finance capacity development at the regional level.

  24. Capacity Building to handle Carbon Financing Options • UNDP MDG Carbon will carry out regular EFP Carbon Workshops to help EFPs meet the new challenge: • need for CO EFPs to undergo a formal certification process to manage carbon projects. • MDG Carbon is developing a comprehensive Carbon Programming Site, mirroring the UNDP-GEF Intranet. • This space will be accessible through the EEG workspace and will aim to provide EFPs all relevant information on carbon programming (e-programming manual, KM products, contacts, project database, etc.). • It should be up and running by 1 July 2006.

  25. Roles of UNDP Country Offices • Upon carbon training certification of CO EFPs, COs will: • Identify/mainstream carbon project proposals into UNDP country programming; • Carry out project design’s pre-appraisal, including MDG impact; • Carry out developer appraisal (legal title to future CERs; track record, etc.); • Assist RTA in PIN/PDD formulation process at the country level; • Help project developer to understand and navigate the existing regulatory framework to secure DNA endorsement; • Resolve project non-performance issues due to a construction or contractual dispute; • Ensure that project operation data are collected and archived in accordance with monitoring plan, including MDG impact; • Mobilize/manage ODA to provide policy and technical advisory services to relevant nationalinstitutions (DNA, etc.) and project developers.

  26. Roles of Regional Technical Advisers • Upon carbon training certification, Regional Advisors will: • Conduct core Appraisal of project design (eligibility, technical feasibility, economic viability, etc.); • Evaluate applicability of existing baseline methodologies to proposed projects; • Manage the PIN/PDD formulation process; • Selection of optimum crediting period depending on non-renewal risk associated with policy change that could negate project’s Additionality (watch out for perverse incentives to delay positive policy change); • Advise project proponents on structuring and financing of CDM/JI projects • Advise on how to combine/sequence carbon finance with other environment sources (ODA, GEF, MP, TREC, etc.)

  27. ODA Vs CDM funding • Compromise language which emerged in the preamble of Decision 17/CP7 on modalities and procedures for a clean development mechanism: • “Emphasizing that public funding for clean development mechanism projects from Parties in Annex I is not to result in the diversion of official development assistance and is to be separate from and not counted towards the financial obligations of Parties included in Annex I,” • In practice, it is widely interpreted as meaning that using ODA to purchase CERs is a “no-no”, while using ODA to develop the capacity of DNA is OK. Co-financing CDM projects with ODA remains a gray area !b • BDP/UNDP currently preparing a paper on sequencing/combining different funds for global environment (ODA, GEF, MP, Carbon, TREC)

More Related