The United Nations Sustainable Development Cooperation Framework (UNSDCF) 2023-2027 was launched on the 17th of August 2022 by the Government of Sri Lanka and the United Nations in Sri Lanka.
The UNSDCF is the framework that guides the work of all the UN Agencies in Sri Lanka and articulates the collective vision and contribution of the United Nations to support Sri Lanka to accelerate actions towards the achievement of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
The Cooperation Framework gives primacy to accelerating actions to ensure a rapid recovery from the economic crisis along with the impact of COVID-19, prioritising support to revitalise the economy and economic activities, social services, decent employment, social cohesion, and health and well-being for all people in Sri Lanka.
The UNSDCF was co-signed by the Secretary to the Treasury Mahinda Siriwardana on behalf of the Sri Lankan government and UN Resident Coordinator in Sri Lanka Hanaa Singer-Hamdy on behalf of the United Nations. Heads of UN Agencies, Funds and Programmes in Sri Lanka also signed the Cooperation Framework.
The signing ceremony hosted at the Ministry of Finance was also attended by Secretary to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Aruni Wijewardane and the Regional Director for Asia and the Pacific of the UN Development Coordination Office, David McLachlan-Karr.
Speaking at the event, Secretary to the Treasury Mahinda Siriwardana noted that “the current global challenges demonstrate the continued importance for multilateral solutions that bring together the international community around shared priorities. This Cooperation Framework with the United Nations in Sri Lanka will be key, as we pursue sustainable and inclusive development for the people of Sri Lanka.”
Elaborating further the UN Resident Coordinator in Sri Lanka Hanaa Singer-Hamdy said, “this Cooperation Framework is mutually owned and anchored in national development priorities, the 2030 Agenda and the principles of the UN Charter. The UNSDCF is structured around four interrelated and mutually reinforcing Strategic Priorities where the UN system will concentrate its expertise to support Sri Lanka to make transformational and accelerated progress. These Strategic Priorities cover Inclusive and Equitable Human Development and Well-being; Resilient and Green Recovery and Growth for Shared Prosperity and Environmental Sustainability; Social Cohesion and Inclusive Governance & Justice; and Gender Equality. Of course, our work will be underpinned by a crosscutting commitment to support rapid recovery from the economic crisis and the impact of COVID-19”. She further noted that programmes by the UN System will be anchored in the principles of human rights and non-discrimination and ensuring that “no one is left behind”.
“The 2023 – 2027 Development Cooperation Framework reflects Sri Lanka’s national development priorities while working in partnership with the UN Country Team towards the realization of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. It is being concluded at a very significant moment in Sri Lanka when transformational changes are being operationalized in the economic and social fronts. The Framework is also an important shift for the UN system in enhanced national level coordination in the delivery of its development activities,” Secretary to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Aruni Wijewardane said.
The UNSDCF will be funded through core budget allocations of an estimated USD 60 Million, in addition to approx. USD 325 Million through other resources – spread across the five-year period of implementation.
For many companies, a net zero transition will prove a complex and expensive pathway, despite the importance of this change.
Governments worldwide have made ambitious net zero commitments. They are using fiscal policies to encourage this business transformation in their jurisdictions and beyond.
Some of these policies are incentives – both discretionary (e.g. grants) or statutory (e.g. tax credits) – that are made available to support a business journey towards net zero.
However, these incentives are many and varied, and getting lost in the complicated and crowded landscape is easy. Additionally, many discretionary programmes are competitive, with limited funding. Therefore, only the ‘best’ projects receive funding.
How, then, can a business effectively approach access to discretionary incentives?
1) Understand Government priorities
Rather than tackling individual funding competitions in isolation, your business should look to understand how its long-term strategy aligns with Government priorities.
Alignment of your plans to Government policy benefits the development of grant applications. This is because grants and other incentives are designed to enforce policies that drive the economy in a particular direction.
For instance, the UK Ten Point Plan for a Green Industrial Revolution lays out actions in key areas such as hydrogen, carbon capture and storage, and offshore wind to transition the UK to a net zero future.
Government funding is therefore to prioritise and facilitate this transition. This can be by stimulating innovation to close knowledge gaps and by improving the return on investment on technologies that are not currently economically attractive.
Being able to effectively express alignment with Government sustainability plans is key to a successful application.
2) Think “outside in” to express your value
Most companies think “inside out” when they apply for funding – presenting their challenges and funding needs as the central driver for the grant request.
However, focusing on public priorities, rather than just the need for funding, enables an “outside-in” approach. This looks at the challenges the country needs to overcome to reach its objectives. It then allows the application to show how the proposed project contributes to the solution.
For instance, if the high cost of storage limits the amount of renewable energy that can be used on the grid, developing a new low-cost, efficient and rapidly deployable storage solution can positively impact renewable energy uptake, and would therefore be aligned with Government priorities.
3) Engage with funding consultations and policymakers
Governments often design incentive programmes in consultation with industrial players who are likely to bring priority-aligned solutions.
To take the earlier example around the amount of renewable energy that can used on the grid, energy companies may highlight that to be able to offer more of this resource, they need storage solutions more urgently than better solar panels. This could then lead to funding availability for these solutions in priority to other areas.
For a business engaging with policymakers, it is vital to connect with the right stakeholders and make pro-active contributions to funding consultations as this is likely to lead to better opportunities in the future.
There is an ever-evolving and competitive landscape for discretionary sustainability incentives and it is critical that businesses take a coordinated approach to incentives. Demonstrating how your strategy aligns with Government sustainability priorities can provide access to more funding opportunities, expedite application preparation, and improve your chance of application success.
As the world confronts the growing urgency of the climate crisis, hyperscale computing companies are stepping up their sustainability efforts. In recent years, cloud titans have emerged as the largest buyers of renewable energy, with the clean energy portfolios of Big Tech sometimes rivalling those of the world’s biggest utilities.
According to latest data from Bloomberg NEF, Amazon has been the largest corporate clean energy purchaser in the world for the second year straight. Globally, a total of 6.2 gigawatts (GW) of renewable energy was purchased in 2021 through 44 offsite power purchase agreements (PPAs) in nine countries by the tech giant. The company now has 310 renewable energy projects around the globe, with capacity to generate over 15.7 gigawatts of energy, making it one of the world’s clean energy leaders.
However, despite the growing ambition and appetite of these companies, their 100-per-cent-renewable energy goals remain out of reach in some parts of Asia, primarily due to a lack of affordable clean power options.
Ken Haig, who leads Amazon Web Services (AWS)’s energy and environment policy engagement efforts, says governments in the region can encourage corporate renewable investments by setting up regulatory frameworks that incentivise the adoption of affordable and renewable energy. “Leading renewable energy purchasers and cloud service providers can drive the demand for clean energy and help the sector to grow, bringing with it associated capital, green jobs and the proliferation of green technologies and approaches across Asia Pacific,” he said.
Haig, who also chairs the Asia Cloud Computing Association (ACCA)’s Sustainability Working Group, was speaking at AWS’s annual Asia Pacific Sustainability Summit held on 29 June. Experts on the same panel also said that overcoming the lack of financing, accurate information and confidence will give the region the breakthrough it needs.
Enabling renewable energy projects in Asia Pacific
Earlier this month, Singapore announced it would be importing up to 100 megawatts (MW) of hydropower from Laos via Thailand and Malaysia in the first multilateral cross-border electricity trade involving four ASEAN countries. With increasing regional collaboration, foreign imports of renewable energy for renewables-scarce Singapore, will become increasingly possible. This will not only boost investor confidence in such projects, but also make the sustainable construction and operation of digital infrastructure more achievable.
Heng Jian Wei, director (policy) at the National Climate Change Secretariat (NCCS) in the Prime Minister’s Office – Strategy Group (Singapore), said: “Such projects can help spur the growth of renewable energy resources, which can be used to power the grid in the host countries as well. They are powerful as they create a win-win outcome.”
He further explained that renewable energy projects can make better financial sense if sufficient offtakers are secured, and by reducing upfront costs and enabling downstream recovery.
Haig added that Amazon’s renewable energy strategy focuses on additionality. “We identify projects to invest in as offtakers enabling additional renewable energy to help green the grids where we operate. This is what we have done in APAC as well with three projects in Australia, two in China, and one each in Singapore and Japan,” he said.
AWS is currently on track to meet its pledge of using 100 per cent renewable energy by 2025, five years earlier than expected.
Asian Development Bank’s (ADB) senior energy specialist Stephen Peters cited the international help given to construct Cambodia’s 100MW National Solar Park Project, as a further example of how governments can make renewable energy projects more economically viable and less financially daunting.
In addition to ADB’s US$7.64 million loan, the project was also given a US$11 million concessional loan and a US$3 million grant from the Climate Investment Fund’s Scaling Up Renewable Energy Programme (SREP). With funding from 14 donor countries, SREP aims to help resource-strapped nations fight the impacts of climate change and accelerate their shift to a low-carbon economy.
The project, the first of its kind in Cambodia, adopts reverse auctioning as a strategy for the government to procure renewable energy generation capacity. The competition drives down the power purchase tariff for solar. “The model was very successful because it allows risks to be shared between the public and private sectors based on who can best handle the risk. This avoids premiums due to misallocated risk and produces low energy prices,” said Peters.
Pursuing ‘green growth’ for Asia’s data centres
Data centre operators are now facing pressure to meet stricter sustainability goals. In Singapore, a moratorium on data centres, once imposed due to sustainability concerns such as the heavy electricity and water usage of the facilities, was lifted in January this year, but with regulations to ensure that their power usage effectiveness (PUE) is kept at 1.3 or below. Moreover, applications to operate new centres must include innovation and sustainability solutions, and applicants should ideally have a proven track record in building and operating data centres.
At the summit, strategic economic consultancy AlphaBeta launched a paper detailing how Singapore could achieve a “green growth” scenario, where there is ample, sustainable digital infrastructure, by providing assistance to data centres sourcing for renewable energy.
AlphaBeta detailed four possible scenarios for Singapore’s data centre industry. Image: AlphaBeta
In their report, AlphaBeta developed a best case, “green growth” scenario, where if the Singapore government assists in the construction of new data centres and helps source renewable energy, digital infrastructure can not only cope with the increasing demands, but provide energy efficient services which allow the nation to reach its climate goals.
Quint Simon, who heads public policy at AWS, emphasised that countries in the region should not need to choose between digitalisation and decarbonisation, as tackling them both provides nations with viable ways of reaching their climate goals.
“Contrary to some beliefs, the twin transitions of digitalisation and decarbonisation are not mutually exclusive, but in fact, mutually beneficial. Governments across APAC can turn these parallel challenges into mutual opportunities by harnessing the demand for digitalisation to meet pressing climate commitments,” said Simon.
She urged companies to consider switching from on-site data centres to cloud computing, which can reduce energy consumption by up to 80 per cent and make net-zero ambitions more achievable.
The value of business investments and sustainability is becoming increasingly clear. Studies find that companies moving or building sustainability strategies into their digital transformation plans are two and a half times more likely to outperform their peers. And that’s not idealism. That’s good business sense. – Ken Haig, chair, ACCA Sustainability Working Group
Better data and disclosures
Experts at the AWS Sustainability Summit said that enhanced data disclosures are key to redirecting capital towards low-emissions investments.
Dr Amelia Sharman, New Zealand’s External Reporting Board’s director for climate standards, said that decision makers might still be using old frameworks. For example, some are preparing for scenarios where floods occur every once in 100 to 200 years, when in facts these extreme weather events are affecting nations every 10-20 years. She explained that these mechanisms are new and a lot of upskilling within the business, in the industry and with the investor community is necessary to support quality low-emission investments.
“We encourage entities to prioritise their investor and what is important to their investor’s decision making, when preparing climate-related disclosures,” said Sharman. “Quantitative data are an important element of the disclosures but entities are also encouraged to think qualitatively when exploring their climate-related risks and opportunities using strategic foresight tools such as scenario analysis.”
From 1 January 2023, climate-related disclosures aligned with the recommendations provided by the Taskforce on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) will be mandatory for all equity and debt issuers listed on the New Zealand Stock Exchange (NZX) and selected financial service organisations.
Despite the different developmental stages APAC countries are on in their decarbonisation journey, the panellists discussed the need for standardisation. Heng emphasised that it is important to try and put a price on an externality like carbon because we do pay a price for climate change impacts.
“A single carbon price for the Asia Pacific region or the world probably won’t happen anytime soon. However, an agreement on a single carbon price would be pragmatic, as it would enable greater near-term carbon emissions reductions by building confidence that all participating countries are undertaking comparable mitigation efforts.
Peters adds that “we should seek new and innovative ways to achieve a low carbon transition and regenerate our natural environment. One of the ways we can do this is by using natural capital to support blue and green bonds. Using digital solutions can accelerate this tremendously.”
Meeting Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) with technology
During the summit, the ACCA also released a concept note outlining how cloud computing and digital technologies can help countries reach their Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). According to the International Energy Agency, cloud-enabled technologies—such as artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning (ML), Internet of Things (IoT) and edge computing—will be critical to accelerating systemic sustainability transformation at scale.
For example, the Indonesian company Halodoc used behavioural insights from patient data stored on the cloud to connect millions of patients to 22,000 doctors and 1,000 partner pharmacies across the nation, thereby making healthcare simpler and more accessible. With wider adoption of such use cases, APAC countries can help promote their citizens’ good health and wellbeing, said the report.
Peter’s added, “Greater access to information and intelligence can support reaching the goals of the SDGs. The Asian Development Bank is exploring artificial intelligence tools to help governments analyse enormous amounts of data—for things like protected areas, wind speed, and solar radiance—to better determine, plan, and build their energy infrastructure.”
Another example is the use of cloud technology for agriculture in Asia. Farmers in Thailand and Pakistan reported a 50 per cent increase in yield and nearly 40 per cent corresponding increase in profitability after adopting cloud solutions for remote agricultural management.
Referencing this report, Haig said “The value of business investments and sustainability is becoming increasingly clear. Studies find that companies moving or building sustainability strategies into their digital transformation plans are two and a half times more likely to outperform their peers. And that’s not idealism. That’s good business sense.”
European lawmakers have voted to ban the sale of new diesel and gasoline cars and vans in the E.U. from 2035, representing a significant shot in the arm to the region’s ambitious green goals.
On Wednesday, 339 MEPs in the European Parliament voted in favor of the plans, which had been proposed by the European Commission, the E.U.’s executive branch. There were 249 votes against the proposal, while 24 MEPs abstained.
It takes the European Union a step closer to its goal of cutting emissions from new passenger cars and light commercial vehicles by 100 percent in 2035, compared to 2021. By 2030, the target is an emissions reduction of 50 percent for vans and 55 percent for cars.
The Commission has previously said passenger cars and vans account for roughly 12 percent and 2.5 percent of the E.U.’s total CO2 emissions. MEPs will now undertake negotiations about the plans with the bloc’s 27 member states.
The U.K., meanwhile, wants to stop the sale of new diesel and gasoline cars and vans by 2030. It will require, from 2035, all new cars and vans to have zero tailpipe emissions. The U.K. left the E.U. on Jan. 31, 2020.
Dutch MEP Jan Huitema, who is part of the Renew Europe Group, welcomed the result of Wednesday’s vote. “I am thrilled that the European Parliament has backed an ambitious revision of the targets for 2030 and supported a 100 percent target for 2035, which is crucial to reach climate neutrality by 2050,” he said.
Others commenting on the news included Alex Keynes, clean vehicles manager at Brussels-based campaign group Transport & Environment. “The deadline means the last fossil fuel cars will be sold by 2035, giving us a fighting chance of averting runaway climate change,” Keynes said.
We want to make the right decisions when we shop, but with so many different options on offer, how are we supposed to work out which one is best for the planet?
Guardian Money asked four experts. They are: Tim Lang, emeritus professor of food policy at City University, London’s Centre for Food Policy; Clare Oxborrow, senior sustainability analyst at Friends of the Earth; Isabella Woodward, researcher at the ethical comparison website The Good Shopping Guide; and Caroline Drummond, chief executive of Leaf (Linking Environment And Farming.
Is it greener to drive to a supermarket or book a delivery?
Tim Lang It depends on how much you buy. Practically, it’s hard to know what that delivery van’s impact is. If you own your own van and fill it on one trip, the carbon expended becomes proportionately smaller per food item than if you drive to the shop and buy little. The best strategy is to walk or cycle: you are taking exercise, putting the embedded energy in the food you eat to good use, and not polluting with your car. Electric cars simply push the pollution elsewhere – to the generating source..
Friends of the Earth There are so many factors. For deliveries, there are several questions. First, where is the food coming from – is it a warehouse? A shop? And how far away? Do they use refrigerated vans which use a lot of energy? Many supermarkets are switching to electric vans, so it’s important to check what’s available locally. The fact remains that travelling to the supermarket by foot or bike is the best choice, or opting for public transport.
Leaf For a van to deliver to some remote places, it may not be greener, but that driver could be the only person an individual living in a remote area has seen for the whole week … It is really important to understand the balance and trade-offs between impact on the environment, alongside economic viability and social acceptability and, indeed, health.
Food deliveries have an impact on the environment – but some say there are economic or social benefits. Photograph: Kathy deWitt/Alamy Stock Photo
Is organic always better?
Tim Lang Not always. Organic has the huge advantage of not being associated with pesticide use. In July I saw at a UK supermarket organic spring onions grown in Mexico. That is ludicrous. In truth, consumers get next to no information on the multiple forms of impact our food has. That’s why I, and many people, call for a new “omni-label” system that provides the range of information: not just environmental but health, social and economic data. We don’t know, for example, how much of what we spend actually gets to the primary producer.
Friends of the Earth Organic is the gold standard … so if you can afford it, it’s a great option. When it comes to meat and dairy, it will almost always be the best environmental choice in a supermarket. It does cost a bit more, but buying less and swapping some meat in dishes with other protein-rich foods like lentils will make it go further.
The Good Shopping Guide Overall, organic crops are better for nature and the biosphere. Organic farming minimises the use of pesticides, which have a potentially adverse impact on wildlife and the soil. Additionally, pesticides can be harmful to agricultural workers. However, it is important to balance this against food miles. Organic products shipped from thousands of miles away may be more harmful to the environment. Therefore, we recommend buying locally grown organic ingredients wherever possible.
Switching away from single-use plastic can make a real difference. Photograph: David Forster/Alamy Stock Photo
Can packaging cut food waste?
Tim Lang Plastic wrapping is often good news for retailers as they know it slows down the rotting process, but it is terrible for consumers and the environment. I always say: good food goes bad.
Friends of the Earth Wrapping fruit and veg in plastic can mask the fact that it’s no longer fresh. And fruit and veg left in airless plastic packaging will often go mouldy quicker than loose items without the needless wrapping. Considering that packaging is responsible for 70% of our plastic waste, there’s a huge difference to be made. It’s always better to buy loose fruit and veg, making sure they’re as fresh as possible. Stored correctly, they can last longer, too.
Leaf Packaging has certainly created an opportunity to stretch our seasons and storage for fresh fruit and veg; however, fossil fuel-based plastics and single-use plastics that are non-recyclable need to be phased out. The more we can stretch the time that fruit and veg are tasty, nutritious and assured of their growing quality, the better. Canning, freezing, packaging, storage, use of LED lights and growing capability all provide that opportunity.
Morrisons offers sturdy paper bags at checkouts, as it looks to ditch all its plastic ‘bags for life’. Photograph: Morrisons/PA
Which bags should I use?
Tim Lang If you walk to the shops, invest in a good trolley. Trolleys are trendy. Plastic bags are bad news full stop, but the avalanche continues, and it’s hard to avoid them unless you get into the habit of carrying your own bag.
Friends of the Earth Those designed to be reused tend to have a lower environmental impact than single-use plastic bags but, importantly, they must be used a sufficient number of times. For cotton bags, 50-150 times; paper bags, four-eight times; durable plastic bags like bags for life, 10-20 times. Cotton bags can be used for years, and can be washed and reused. So if you take the long view, cotton is best and more durable than plastic, particularly if it’s organic, unbleached fibre.
The Good Shopping Guide There are pros and cons to all types of shopping bags. The main problem is that many people use them once and discard them after. Regardless of what material they are, single-use bags are always unsustainable. Whichever bags you prefer to use, remember to bring them to the shop with you.
Leaf I am a big fan of the cotton tote bag. We have seen a lot of movement away from people always expecting a new plastic carrier bag when shopping, and our next step is to strive to ensure the bags we use are long-lasting, sustainably sourced and robust.
Cutting down on meat is one way to help the environment. Photograph: Ed Brown/Alamy
What’s the top thing a shopper should do to help the planet?
Tim Lang Cut down on meat. Eat it less often and buy high-quality meat such as pasture-fed. Less but better.
Friends of the Earth Livestock production has an enormous environmental impact, contributing 14.5% of the world’s planet-warming emissions. The industry is also a key driver of deforestation and the loss of important habitats, not to mention the huge amount of water and fertiliser needed, or the amount of waste produced in the process. That’s why buying and eating less meat and dairy is one of the best ways to reduce our own environmental impact.
The Good Shopping Guide Be aware of the ethical issues. This not only relates to which supermarket you use, but also which brands you are buying. We independently assess companies on their practices towards the environment, animals and people, providing a score out of 100 for each brand.
Leaf Naturally, seek out and purchase Leaf Marque produce. Quality fruit and veg grown with care for the environment, enhancing biodiversity, improving our soil health and water quality, and grown by farmers committed to more regenerative, climate-positive farming systems. Plus, go and visit a farm to see what farmers are doing to address climate change challenges.
The climate emergency is the biggest threat to civilisation we have ever faced. But there is good news: we already have every tool we need to beat it. The challenge is not identifying the solutions, but rolling them out with great speed.
Some key sectors are already racing ahead, such as electric cars. They are already cheaper to own and run in many places – and when the purchase prices equal those of fossil-fueled vehicles in the next few years, a runaway tipping point will be reached.
Electricity from renewables is now the cheapest form of power in most places, sometimes even cheaper than continuing to run existing coal plants. There’s a long way to go to meet the world’s huge energy demand, but the plummeting costs of batteries and other storage technologies bodes well.
And many big companies are realising that a failure to invest will be far more expensive as the impacts of global heating destroy economies. Even some of the biggest polluters, such as cement and steel, have seen the green writing on the wall.
Buildings are big emitters but the solution – improved energy efficiency – is simple to achieve and saves the occupants money, particularly with the cost of installing technology such as heat pumps expected to fall.
Stopping the razing of forests requires no technology at all, but it does require government action. While progress is poor – and Bolsonaro’s Brazil is going backwards – countries such as Indonesia have shown regulatory action can be effective. Protecting and restoring forests, particularly by empowering indigenous people, is a potent tool.
Recognition of the role food and farming play in driving global heating is high, and the solutions, from alternatives to meat to regenerative farming, are starting to grow. As with fossil fuels, ending vast and harmful subsidies is key, and there are glimmers of hope here, too.
In the climate crisis, every fraction of a degree matters and so every action reduces people’s suffering. Every action makes the world a cleaner and better place to live – by, for example, cutting the air pollution that ends millions of lives a year.
The real fuel for the green transition is a combination of those most valuable and intangible of commodities: political will and skill. The supply is being increased by demands for action from youth strikers to chief executives, and must be used to face down powerful vested interests, such as the fossil fuel, aviation and cattle industries. The race for a sustainable, low-carbon future is on, and the upcoming Cop26 climate talks in Glasgow will show how much faster we need to go.
Transport
Responsible for 14-28% of global greenhouse gas emissions, transport has been slow to decarbonise, and faces particular challenges in areas such as long-haul flight.
But technical solutions are available, if the will, public policy and spending are there, too. Electric cars are the most obvious: petrol and diesel vehicles will barely be produced in Europe within the decade. EV sales are accelerating everywhere, with the likes of Norway well past the tipping point, and cheaper electric vehicles coming from China have cut the fumes from buses. Meanwhile, combustion engines are ever more efficient and less polluting.
Employees on the assembly line for electric buses in Xi an, Shaanxi province, China. Photograph: Visual China Group/Getty Images
Bike and scooter schemes are growing rapidly as cities around the world embrace electric micromobility. Far cleaner ships for global freight are coming. The potential of hydrogen is growing, for cleaner trains where electrification is impractical, to be followed by ships and even, one day, planes. Manufacturers expect short-haul electric aircraft much sooner. Most of all, the pandemic has shown that a world without hypermobility is possible – and that many people will accept, or even embrace, a life where they commute and travel less. Gwyn Topham
Deforestation
Deforestation and land use change are the second-largest source of human-caused greenhouse gas emissions. The destruction of the world’s forests has continued at a relentless pace during the pandemic, with millions of hectares lost, driven by land-clearing in the Brazilian Amazon.
Volunteers plant mangrove tree seedlings in a conservation area on Dupa beach, Indonesia. Photograph: Basri Marzuki/NurPhoto/REX/Shutterstock
But there are reasons for hope. The UK has put nature at the heart of its Cop26 presidency and behind the scenes, the government is pushing hard for finance and new commitments from forested nations to protect the world’s remaining carbon banks. Indonesia and Malaysia, once global hotspots of deforestation, have experienced significant falls in recent years, the result of increased restrictions on palm oil plantations. However, the 2000s soy moratorium in Brazil shows these trends are reversible. Finally, there is a growing recognition of the importance of indigenous communities to protecting the world’s forests and biodiversity. In the face of racism and targeted violence, a growing number of studies and reports show they are the best guardians of the forest. Empowering those communities will be vital to ending deforestation. Patrick Greenfield
Technology
Emissions from technology companies, including direct emissions, emissions from electricity use and other operations such as manufacturing, account for 0.3% of global carbon emissions, while emissions from cryptocurrencies is a huge emerging issue.
Mining – the process in which a bitcoin is awarded to a computer that solves a complex series of algorithms – is a deeply energy-intensive process and only gets more energy-intensive as the algorithms grow more complex. But new mining methods are lighter, environmentally. A system called “proof of stake” has a 99% lower carbon footprint.
Researchers pose for a group photo at the International Research Center of Big Data for Sustainable Development Goals in Beijing, China. The centre was inaugurated to support the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Photograph: Xinhua/REX/Shutterstock
Scrutiny of the whole sector is increasing, spearheaded by tech workers who walked out in their hundreds to join climate change marches in 2019. The companies have pledged to do better: Amazon aims to be net zero carbon by 2040 and powered with 100% renewable energy by 2025. Facebook has a target of net zero emissions for its entire supply chain by 2030 and Microsoft has pledged to become carbon negative by 2030. Apple has committed to become carbon-neutral across its whole supply chain by 2030.
They’re still falling short when it comes to delivering, but employee groups continue to push. Kari Paul
Business
For decades Exxon Mobil has arguably been corporate America’s biggest climate change denier. But this year, the activist investor Engine No 1 won three seats on the company’s board with an agenda to force the company to finally acknowledge and confront the climate crisis.
Across corporate America and all around the world there are signs of change. The Federal Reserve, the world’s most powerful central bank, is beefing up its climate team. BlackRock, the world’s biggest investor, has made environmental sustainability a core goal for the company.
This isn’t about ideology: it’s about “common sense.” According to BlackRock, failure to tackle climate change is simply bad for business. The investor calculates that 58% of the US will suffer economic decline by 2060-2080 if nothing is done.
Much more needs to be done, and some question whether corporate America can really solve this crisis without government action. But the days of denial are over – what matters now is action. Dom Rushe
Electricity
The rocketing global market price for gas has ripped through world economies, forcing factories to close, triggering blackouts in China, and threatening to cool the global economic recovery from the Covid-19 pandemic.
But it has also spelled out a clear economic case for governments to redouble their efforts in developing homegrown, low-carbon electricity systems.
The good news is that renewable energy is ready to step up and play a greater role in electricity systems across the globe.
A woman completes paperwork by the light of solar-powered lamps in a village shop for solar products. Photograph: Kunal Gupta/Climate Visuals Countdown
The precipitous fall in the price of wind and solar energy has helped to incentivise fresh investments in electricity vehicles and energy storage technologies, such as batteries, where costs are plummeting too. Soon, wind and solar power will help to produce green hydrogen, which can be stored over long periods of time to generate electricity during days that are a little less bright or breezy.
All of these advances are made possible by cheap renewables, and will help countries to use more renewable energy too. There has never been a better time to step back from gas and go green. Jillian Ambrose
Buildings
The built environment is one of our biggest polluters, responsible for about 40% of global carbon emissions.
Over the past two decades, the carbon footprint of buildings “in use” has been greatly reduced by energy-saving technologies – better insulation, triple-glazing, and on-site renewables such as solar panels and ground-source heat pumps. Onheat pumps, the UK lags far behind: Norway, through a mixture of grants and high electricity prices, has installed more than 600 heat pumps for every 1,000 households.
As national energy grids are decarbonising, the focus is shifting to reducing the “embodied energy” of materials – which can account for up to three-quarters of a building’s emissions over its lifespan – for example by reducing the amount of concrete and steel in favour of timber.
The Vertical Forest in the Porta Nuova district in Milan. Photograph: Miguel Medina/AFP/Getty
There is also a growing movement to prioritise refurbishment and reuse over demolition, driven by the realisation that the most sustainable buildings are the ones that already exist. Oliver Wainwright
Food and farming
The hoofprint of the global livestock industry is a significant one, accounting for about 14% of total annual greenhouse gas emissions. But it is increasingly recognised and accepted by national governments.
New Zealand now has a legal commitment to reduce methane emissions from agriculture by 10% by 2030, while Denmark has passed a legally binding target to reduce climate emissions from the agricultural sector by 55% by 2030.
While global meat production is increasing, there is a growing shift towards fish and poultry, which have a comparatively lower emissions footprint than red meats. The food industry is also developing a range of lower-carbon products using plant-based proteins such as soy and pea, and insect and lab-grown meat alternatives. Tom Levitt
Manufacturing
Decarbonising the manufacturing of every product needed by a modern economy is a vast and varied task. Some sectors are well on their way. For instance, Apple, the world’s third-largest maker of mobile phones by volume, has pledged to produce net zero carbon throughout its supply chain by 2030.
For many others, advances in efficiency of factories and their products will be accelerated by machine learning and other artificial intelligence technologies that are still in their infancy. There are even hopeful signs in some of the hardest sectors to decarbonise, such as plans by Volvo to replace coal with hydrogen in the steel it uses in cars.
One of the greatest reasons for optimism is manufacturers’ increasing awareness of circular design principles. Making products easier to recycle from the start will help to cut emissions from fresh resource extraction– although a bigger question remains as to whether rich societies can reduce consumption, the most obvious way to cut emissions. Jasper Jolly
Launched in 2015, the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) represent a global agenda for “people and prosperity, now and in the future.”
There are 17 goals, addressing social and environmental priorities from “quality education” to “climate action.” Those goals are supported by 169 specific targets. The SDGs are intended for action by governments, organizations, and individuals, with full implementation by 2030.
NBS asked: What do the SDGs mean for business? How should companies best address them?
Our conversation brought together:
Dr. David Griggs, Professor at Warwick University (UK). Griggs helped develop the SDGs and has consulted with many organizations using them. He is the former head of the United Kingdom’s climate research centre and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s scientific assessment unit.
Martin Fryer, a sustainability professional based in New Zealand. At the time of this conversation, Fryer was Sustainability Manager at utility company Mercury Energy. He was previously sustainability manager at Auckland Airport and is now Head of Strategy and Impact at sustainability consultancy thinkstep-anz.
Below is a summary of their advice on how organizations can best use the SDGs.
The SDGs have a range of benefits
Dave Griggs: The motivation for using the SDGs is different for different organizations. Some see themselves as environmental or sustainable organizations and want to make that part of their DNA as a selling point, and the SDGs give them a framework to do that.
Others look at it quite differently. I was speaking to the CEO of a very large international conglomerate who had embraced the SDGs quite thoroughly. I asked him about his motivation and he said it was avoidance of risk, specifically around reputation.
I was talking to people at a very large bank who, again, had embraced the SDGs completely, both in terms of their internal practices and their lending practices. I asked them why they’d done that and they said, “In terms of our lending practices, we need to know that the organizations we’re lending to are going to be able to pay us back. We want them to be around for a while.” But in terms of their internal operations, the rationale was competitiveness, in terms of recruiting staff.
In implementation, start small – but be honest and thorough
Dave: I think people get quite anxious about choosing SDGs or choosing targets within them. And it’s absolutely fine to look at your business and see how it aligns with the SDGs and to say, “All right, there may be three or four which are the primary ones and a few that are slightly less relevant.” Just concentrate on the main ones first.
Certainly, if you’re starting out on your journey, you start with the ones that are the most important. But, equally, it’s not an exercise to just make you look good. So, you can’t just pick them on the basis of the things you’re doing well and ignore the things you’re not doing well. Usually it’s the things that are hard, that you haven’t done already, that bring you the real benefit.
Martin Fryer: In New Zealand, the SDGs started to gain traction three or four years ago. At first, a lot of it was driven by annual disclosures: How can we talk about our sustainability journey or performance in a way that’s more engaging? And the SDGs were jumped on by some organizations and you saw an absolute plethora of the logos in annual reports. It was very much a reporting exercise.
But now, there are a much smaller number of organizations using the SDGs, but the difference is they are actually using them. They’ve actually taken them and internalized them. They’ve gone into real depth into how the SDGs relate to their organization.
Connect the SDGs to company operations
Dave: How do you approach these 17 goals, 169 targets, which when you first look at them, blows your mind a bit? The answer is: You look where your business is aligned to them. And that goes for whether you’re a country, or a business, or a government.
I’ll give you an example. I was speaking to a health NGO who build hospitals in the developing world. They said, “We’ve completely aligned ourselves to the SDGs. We’re building this hospital in Africa and we’ve aligned it to SDG3, which is health. And we’ve made sure it’s properly aligned.” And I said, “Have you aligned to all the other goals?” They said, “Yeah, but we’re a health NGO. We just built hospitals, so we’re just SDG3.”
And I said, “Is this hospital going to use energy [SDG7]?” “Yeah.” “Where’s that energy going to come from?” “Okay.” “Now what about water [SDG6]? You use an awful lot of water in a hospital…” “Okay.” “What about the staff that you employ and providing a fair wage [SDG5]? Do you have equal pay for women in the hospital [SDG8]?” And so on. And we went through and virtually every goal, we found somewhere in building that hospital.
I must admit his reaction was, “You’ve just made my job 16 times more difficult!” But he also acknowledged that by doing that, they arrived at a far better outcome.
The SDGs’ special quality is integration
Martin: There has gradually been a realization of the interconnectedness of everything, that having a focus in one area has a knock-on effect in so many others.
From my experience in the corporate sector, [sustainability-related ideas] have come in waves. So, there was a focus on environmental protection and you had to have an EMS and it had to be compliant with ISO 14001 and international best practice and externally audited and verified. And then the focus now is more on the social side of things and how you’re treating your own people. Now, we’re all developing modern slavery statements.
At Mercury, we’ve just changed our corporate social responsibility policy into an integrated sustainability policy. It literally went to the Boards last month. So, the language of sustainable business practice is changing as well.
Now, we’ve done that without referring to the SDGs at all. But if you do embrace the SDGs, then it forces you to look at that interconnectedness. If you think about things in a far more integrated way, you can potentially get more value out of that process.
Collaboration (SDG 17) might be the most important goal
Martin: The New Zealand government has set a net zero 2050 target for the country. It is an amazing thing for organizations and society here to engage with. And we’re not going to achieve any of it in isolation. No one organization is going to find the solution. It has to be through collaboration and partnerships.
Dave: I think you have it perfectly, but the 17th SDG, “partnership for the goals,” is often seen as too hard. I’ve actually done some work with some colleagues about why collaboration is so difficult. It’s really because our entire structures are set up to be competitive.
Businesses compete against each other and government departments compete for their slice of the budget. So, when you now say, “This is a goal-based approach where we need to collaborate and bring the best minds together from social, economic, and environmental” — it’s actually very hard to do that. And also people speak very different languages, if the engineers have got to talk to the social scientists.
Actually, the COVID pandemic has given us very good examples of that collaboration. In the UK, we formed the SAGE committee, where all of the scientists and the politicians get together and discuss every day, and they’ve learned to speak the same language.
We had a collaboration example in Australia, where there were companies that wanted to do combined heat and power, using waste heat from operations to heat buildings. And it was impossible because the regulations were so complex. It took an NGO, ClimateWorks Australia, to say: “This just isn’t good enough.” They got together a number of companies, the government regulators, the generators, the network operators, and so on. And they basically sat them down for two years and sort of locked the door until they agreed on changes to the energy market rules. Then, because everybody had been in the room, the rules were relatively easy to implement.
Martin: Awesome. Yes, I think one of the most rewarding things that I participated in was when I was at Auckland Airport. The airport was about to do significant expansion, and we saw the opportunity to get better social outcomes from that huge capital spend that was coming to a part of Auckland which is lower socioeconomic class. We pulled together central government organizations, NGOs, local councils, philanthropic center, the airport company itself, and some of the big construction firms that were going to be involved in the project.
And it comes back to this idea of collaboration, and Dave talking about putting people into a room and just closing the door and not letting them leave until they sorted it out. The most important thing was starting the meeting by saying, “Has everybody left their baggage outside the door? Because when you come into this room, you’re representing a vision of the future.” In the end, we created an airport jobs and skills hub, which would enable the local community to get training, and employment.
The SDGs are imperfect but useful
Dave: The SDGs are a political compromise reached by 200 countries. And if you imagine trying to get 200 countries to agree what they’re going to have for breakfast, you’d be there forever. Trying to get them to agree a pathway towards a sustainable future for the world — It was miraculous we ended up with anything. So, they are not perfect.
There were things that I tried to get in that aren’t there, and there are things that are in there that I tried to get out and I couldn’t. For example, I think culture is hugely underplayed in the SDGs. And indigenous peoples are underplayed in the SDGs.
Some people say, “The SDGs, there are too many of them. They’re not perfect. They don’t cover this, they don’t cover that, and so we shouldn’t use them.” What they fail to realize is the enormity of the achievement in getting them at all. There is no question in my mind that if we all follow the 17 goals, we’d be in a better place than we are now.
Resources to Start With
Dave Griggs recommends: A Guide to SDG Interactions: from Science to Implementation (International Science Council). The report examines the interactions between the various goals and targets, determining to what extent they reinforce or conflict with each other. It includes a simple 7-point assessment scale.
Martin Fryer recommends: SDG Compass (GRI, UN Global Compact, and WBCSD). The guide supports companies in aligning their strategies with the SDGs and in measuring and managing their contribution.”
Special thanks to Fred Dahlmann (Warwick University) for suggesting this conversation.
Governments must step up their regulation of businesses to tackle the climate crisis, the former Bank of England governor Mark Carney has urged, because the financial free markets will not reduce greenhouse gas emissions alone.
Carney, who left the Bank of England last year before the first Covid-19 lockdown, is now one of the most influential figures working on Cop26, the vital UN climate talks to be held in Glasgow in November. He is a UN envoy on climate change and Boris Johnson’s finance adviser on the climate.
He said for the world to meet its climate goals, governments would have to force industries to follow clear rules, on everything from energy generation to construction and transport, and set carbon prices that would drive investment towards green ends and close down fossil fuels.
“We need clear, credible and predictable regulation from government,” he said. “Air quality rules, building codes, that type of strong regulation is needed. You can have strong regulation for the future, then the financial market will start investing today, for that future. Because that’s what markets do, they always look forward.”
Without such robust intervention from governments, markets would fail to address the crisis. “It wouldn’t happen spontaneously by the financial sector,” he said. “But we can’t get there without the financial sector.”
People must also press political leaders to act, Carney said. “When people have made it clear they have that objective [of tackling the climate crisis], and if there is public policy that translates those wishes into real action, a price on carbon, regulation of internal combustion engines for example, then financial markets – capitalism – will come up with the solutions to give people what they want.”
Carney argues that countries and companies could still carry on exploiting fossil fuels, despite this advice, if they use technology such as carbon capture and storage, or other ways of reducing emissions. “You have to take it on the specific projects. If [fossil fuel] producers are able, through considerable investment in carbon capture and storage, to get to net zero then that creates some room in the carbon budget.”
In Canada, for instance, where Carney is from and partly lives – and where, according to rumours, he is reported to be considering a political career – he said oil sands producers could continue to develop their high-carbon resources, if they reduce their emissions and Canada can make changes elsewhere. “Canada has an objective of 40-45% down on emissions by 2030,” he said. “I’m not going to dictate exactly how that is accomplished but the critical thing is the aggregate.”
Companies should also be able to use carbon offsets to meet climate targets, Carney insisted. The practice of offsetting – funding the planting of trees or protection of forests, or other projects that reduce carbon, to make up for a company’s or individual’s emissions – has become increasingly controversial. Some fraudulent schemes have been uncovered, in which carbon credits did not exist or did not represent an actual reduction in emissions. Other schemes have been found to fail to protect forests, allowing logging to continue while selling carbon credits based on keeping forests standing.
Carney has drawn criticism from green groups over his support for offsetting, but remains a staunch advocate. “I’m of the view that offsets can play a role because they extend the carbon budget,” he said. “It’s a bit like when we think about people living on a very tight budget. If you can find ways to save a bit of money here and there or earn a bit more money, you do it. That’s what this is.”
Part of the purpose of carbon credits is to protect areas of forest under threat, such as the Amazon or in south-east Asia, with the additional benefits of preserving natural ecosystems and helping indigenous peoples. The world has not yet found other ways of keeping rainforest protected, he said. “We may not like it that it makes sense to have private companies pay to stop [the burning] but it makes a lot more sense to do that and preserve the rainforest than to just let it happen. Unfortunately, we’ve been just letting it happen.”
Despite criticism of companies “greenwashing” before Cop26, and despite his acknowledgment that “we have left it very late” to begin seriously cutting emissions, Carney believes that harnessing capitalism and the power of money will bring about the changes needed in time to avoid climate breakdown.
“With the right regulation, with a rising carbon price, with a financial sector that is oriented this way, with public accountability of government, of financial institutions, of companies, yes, then we can, we certainly have the conditions in which to achieve [holding global heating to 1.5C],” he said. “That’s our objective.”
The UK government is to set in law the world’s most ambitious climate change target, cutting emissions by 78% by 2035 compared to 1990 levels.
And, as reported by Sky News earlier, the UK’s Sixth Carbon Budget will incorporate, for the first time, the country’s share of international aviation and shipping emissions.
It will mean an increase in ambition on the international pledge made by the UK government last December to reduce emissions by 68% by 2030.
In line with the recommendation from the independent Climate Change Committee, this Sixth Carbon Budget limits the volume of greenhouse gases emitted over a five-year period from 2033-2037, taking the UK more than three-quarters of the way to reaching net zero by 2050.
This will ensure Britain remains on track to end its contribution to climate change while remaining consistent with the Paris Agreement temperature goal to limit global warming to well below 2°C and pursue efforts towards 1.5°C.
The Paris Climate Agreement commits signatory countries to help limit global warming to well below 2°C, ideally to 1.5°C
The new target will become enshrined in law by the end of June, with legislation setting out the UK government’s commitments laid in Parliament on Wednesday.
Prime Minister Boris Johnson said the bold move was because he wanted to “continue to raise the bar on tackling climate change” hence “the most ambitious target to cut emissions in the world”.
The Strategic Programme to Empower the People and Economy (Pemerkasa) will support the country’s sustainability agendas, especially towards achieving the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG), said Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin.
The Prime Minister said the government, and the United Nations in Malaysia would set up the MySDG Trust Fund as a platform that allows funding from a variety of sources for SDG-compliant projects.
Muhyiddin, in unveiling Pemerkasa, also announced that the government would launch a Sustainable Sukuk, worth at least US$1 billion (RM4.121 billion).
“The proceeds from the sukuk will fund programmes and projects with sustainable elements, in addition to addressing the socio-economic impacts of the Covid-19 outbreak,” he said in his special address today.
The government’s RM20 billion additional economic stimulus package under the Program Strategik Memperkasa Rakyat dan Ekonomi (Pemerkasa) will provide some support to overall consumption spending affected by the pandemic, analysts said.STR/MOHD ADAM ARININ
The MySDG Trust Fund and the Sukuk Lestari are both listed in Focus Three – Strengthening the Country’s Competitiveness under Pemerkasa.
Muhyiddin said the government would increase the Market Development Grant ceiling from RM300,000 to RM500,000 for every company that participated in international exhibition platforms.
He also said to generate new sources of national wealth, a matching grant of RM50 million will be provided to develop the aerospace and medical devices industries.
Meanwhile, the International Trade and Industry Ministry, he added, would continue to explore new export potentials and encourage the use of automisation and mechanisation among industry players.
“As such, among the measures to be implemented include the eBizLink initiative, an online and hybrid digital marketing platform, and the Globepreneur initiative, which aims at enabling more high potential SME companies to access the international market,” he added.
