The German Sustainable Development Strategy: New Edition 2016

Transcription

1 Prof. Dr. Rudi Kurz, Pforzheim University The German Sustainable Development Strategy: New Edition 2016 RME Research Conference Krems Nov 9,

2 Contents 1 Introduction and Global Context 2 German National Strategy New Strategy Critical Analysis 2

3 1 Introduction and Global Context Old development = growth paradigm: Catching-up promise for LDCs based on fast(er) growth (GDP/capita) in LDCs. Diagnosis: not possible for 9-10 billion people on a limited planet if we want to respect the equal rights of future generations (intergenerative justice) New paradigm: sustainable development (SD), socio-economic progress respecting environmental limits 1972 UN Conference on the Human Environment, Stockholm 1987 Brundtland Report Our Common Future (UN World Commission on Environment and Development WCED) 1992 Rio Conference Earth Summit (Agenda21, Convention on Climate Change UNFCCC, Convention on Biodiversity CBD) 2012 Rio+20: The Future We Want SDG process 2000 MDGs SDGs (adopted at UN Summit Sept 2015) 2015 Paris Agreement on Climate Change: < 2 C goal 3

4 1 Introduction and Global Context 4

5 1 Introduction and Global Context SDGs (2030 Agenda): 17 goals (with 169 targets and indicators) Integrating socio-economic (development) and environmental dimensions Universal (all nations addressed) Shared responsibility: governments + other stakeholders e.g. companies, universities 5

6 2 German National Strategy 2002 Constitution: Art. 20a GG: Der Staat schützt auch in Verantwortung für die zukünftigen Generationen die natürlichen Lebensgrundlagen und die Tiere. (1994/2002) 2002 Federal Government (not Parliament) decides on first German Sustainability Strategy: Perspectives for Germany (updates 2004, 2008, 2012) with 38 goals and indicators. Institutions: cabinet (state secretaries), parliamentary committee, RNE External (peer) review / evaluation 2012 Progress Report: Improvement in 19 indicators (GHGE minus 25%, renewable energy; economic performance; workforce participation of older workers), Not satisfactory: land use, biodiversity, air quality (nitrogen), material efficiency (no doubling); road transportation; gender pay gap In sum: Important first step and milestone towards a systematic strategic SD process. Questionable self-evaluation: overall direction ok 6

7 3 New Strategy Participative / consultative process draft May 30, 2016 Structure: follows the SDGs and reports for each of them a) Government priorities b) 60 national indicators, targets and programs/actions Commitment to report on all indicators that are currently developed at the UN level Germany as one of the first nations reporting on SDG implementation in the UN HLPF (July 19, 2016) Monitoring cycle : Every 2 years progress report from (independent) Statistical Bureau. Every 4 years adaptation of strategy. 7

8 3 New Strategy SDG 13 Climate (SDG 7 Affordable and Clean Energy) Keeping the old goal 80-95% vs. clearly fixing 95% (or even total decarbonization) contribution to Paris Agreement. Reduction of primary energy consumption by 50% ( ), share of renewables 60% results in a 80% reduction Additional goal on energy productivity not necessary. 1) The new currency of carbon budget: max Gigatonnes for all compatible with the 2 C goal. Today Gt p.a., i.e. enough capacity for years. Decarbonization by 2100 requires significant reductions in the very near future primarily by those who have a huge historical burden of emissions (like the UK, Germany as industrial forerunners). Germany today still has emission of about million tons p.a. (more precisely 902 million tons in 2014), i.e. 0,1% of global budget annually. If we would continue like that until 2050, we would consume 3% of the global budget (we are less than one percent of world population). 2) 60% reduction + 80% renewables: 0,4 x 0,2 = 0,08, i.e. 90 % reduction; or: 0,5 x 0,1 = 0,05 8

9 3 New Strategy SDG 14, 15 Biodiversity (water, land) No further decline (Biodiv-Indicator 100 = 1975; currently at 63) Wilderness ( 5% of all forests see Biodiv-Strategy) Indicator 21: 30 ha / day by No (ambitious) goal beyond, e.g. net zero by 2030 (SRU p 5). Clearly conflicting with additional infrastructure and housing needs. What policies to resolve this (market solution)? 9

10 3 New Strategy SDG 8 Work and Growth Indicator 15: GDP/capita not sufficient. Additional indicators as SD is a broader concept of wealth (e.g. HDI, including life expectancy and education) No target for GDP growth (income per capita) Resource productivity growth: old goal (doubling ) not achieved (less than two percent p.a.; necessary 3% p.a. 2030: MC/unit only 40% of 1994); no quantitative new goal specified. In addition goals would be necessary on: - absolute resource consumption (as the ultimate sustainability issue) - differentiate by resource (minerals, fossil energy, bio-materials, ) 10

11 3 New Strategy SDG 10 Inequality: reduce (income) inequality (Gini coefficient), stabilize social safety systems, SDG 12 Consumption and Production: Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns. What is responsible consumption? CO2-emissions, eco-/social labels? Consumption pattern if there would be true prices? (recommendation: Pigou taxes, no subsidies) SDG 4 Quality Education: Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all higher education management education PRME 11

12 4 Critical Analysis (1) Lack of Vision / Inspiration: Responsibility of Germany in a peaceful, co-operative world, guiding and inspiring action? Increase awareness in general (and in specific stakeholder groups like industry) and enthusiasm/engagement. Mainstreaming of SD. (2) Lack of analysis: Are the new goals/targets based on a systematic analysis of past performance (where did we fail, why)? This would have to include effects in (national), by (international, global supply-chain) and with (partnerships) Germany (see SRU p 2). Are potential conflicts between goals addressed and answers provided how to resolve them (priorities,. research)? 12

13 4 Critical Analysis (4) Lack of aspiration: Are goals ambitious and clearly specified? Is German contribution adequate in a global context? (like pledge in COP21). Ambition: pioneer role ( ehrgeizige Umsetzung Merkel). In many cases no quantified goals for 2030 and in most cases no goal at all for (5) Statistical overkill: Germany intents to be a reporting champion (reporting on all UN indicators). However, reporting is not l'art pour l'art but serves the strategy (strategic relevance vs. huge number). Too many indicators make international comparison more difficult. (6) Lack of resources: When gaps between goals and reality are identified, measures / programs are mentioned. Are additional (financial) resources necessary? 13

14 4 Critical Analysis (7) Lack of Consistency: SD goals implementation is an effort of all (shared responsibility). Are roles / responsibilities clearly specified - within the public sector (EU, states, communities), by sector of industry, by stakeholder group etc.? Is there at least a procedure to work in this direction (ongoing consultation with civil society is announced). No Masterplan ( Gesamtarchitektur SRU, p 2). Links to other relevant (federal) government strategies sometimes mentioned but not specified (e.g. Energiewende / energy transition, Biodiversitätsstrategie, Stickstoffstrategie, Klimaschutzplan 2050, Bundesverkehrswegeplan). 14

15 5 Critical Analysis (8) Lack of strategic orientation: The case of SDG 12: Responsible Consumption (and Production): 50% reduction of energy consumption (only then it is possible to produce the rest with renewables by 2050) Zero additional land use (reduction to 30 ha/day by 2020). Land use conflicts: housing, infrastructure, food, energy, materials, nature/biodiv. Bet on efficiency only: New source of energy (renewables, CO2- free) will guarantee affordable and clean energy and (e-)mobility. Problems of (non-renewable) resources / materials solved by circular economy and bioeconomy. Sufficieny (How much is enough?) not addressed, less consumption (without decline of wellbeing). 15

16 4 Critical Analysis (9) Resilience (Plan B): 1) With global problems and conflicts increasing (refugees as a symptom), we will face increasing cost for SD. However, problem solving capacity seems to erode (populism as a symptom). More investment in Social Capital necessary (education, communication, redistribution). (9) In sum: a) Not enough progress and learning compared to 2002 b) Legal quality and credibility: shouldn t parliament vote on such important aspects of our future? c) Not enough analytical quality to provide reliable orientation, changing expectations and decision making (e.g. of investors) 1) There is no Plan B because there is no Planet B. (Ban Ki-Moon?) 16

17 Thank you! 17