Towards a political agenda for urban resilience. Katharina Schneider-Roos Deputy Executive Director, Global Infrastructure Basel

Transcription

1 Towards a political agenda for urban resilience Katharina Schneider-Roos Deputy Executive Director, Global Infrastructure Basel May 2017

2 AGENDA 1 How Financiers influence the Resilience Agenda 2 Measuring Resilience 3 SuRe - The Standard for Sustainable and Resilient Infrastructure 4 Translating Resilience for Investors

3 Lack of understanding Finance and Resilience Investors just came to terms with translating the concept of sustainability to ESG Now translation of resilience into financial terms: risk mitigation Danger of oversimplification, reduction to pure disaster risk reduction excluding social factors, like equity and poverty response Insurance companies influence the policy development to provide better investment environment in their countries of interest. Driver of Resilience!

4 How donors influence the resilience agenda Financiers play a vital role in bridging the gap between the needed infrastructure and available funds. Resilience initiatives are shaped by donor/investor-government relationships. Donor/investor support is geographically biased according to government priorities which limits resilience initiatives in some cities. Financial institutions should be required to show that climate based risks and vulnerabilities have been assessed and proper resilience measures integrated into projects, before grants, loans & investments are approved.

5 AGENDA 1 How Financiers influence the Resilience Agenda 2 Measuring Resilience 3 SuRe - The Standard for Sustainable and Resilient Infrastructure 4 Translating Resilience for Investors

6 Measuring Resilience Lack of measurement for a fuzzy concept Anyone can use it as they see fit There is a need to have a clear impact assessment to single out resilience measures and their impact Question of drawing boundaries, of long term data collection

7 Measuring Resilience Measuring Resilience helps cities for decision making and prioritization of projects. Resilience is context based and place specific hence cities need to develop indicators that fit into their situation. The drive for resilience in cities began because of natural disasters and climate change and as a result most organizations have concentrated on the environmental drivers of resilience. However, the complexity of cities call for a holistic approach that promotes environmental, social, economic and institutional resilience.

8 AGENDA 1 How Financiers influence the Resilience Agenda 2 Measuring Resilience 3 SuRe - The Standard for Sustainable and Resilient Infrastructure 4 Translating Resilience for Investors

9 GIB Tools: SuRe Standard The Standard for Sustainable and Resilient infrastructure What? - A global legally non-binding Standard which integrates sustainability and resilience aspects into infrastructure development and upgrade Implementing sustainability and resilience criteria into infrastructure projects Why? - Establish a common language and understanding between project developers, financiers and public sector institutions around sustainable and resilient infrastructure - Improve the attractiveness of sustainable and resilient infrastructure to multilateral and private investors, therefore channeling greater financing flows Characteristics? - Relies on independent verification and certification of infrastructure projects throughout their life cycles - Aims at being ISEAL compliant - Applicable to infrastructure projects across sectors in developed, emerging and developing countries - Allows comparison of projects - Applicable during design, construction, operation and decomissioning phases - Relevant to project developers, financiers and public sector institutions

10 SuRe Governance an initiative co-led by Global Infrastructure Basel Foundation and Natixis Investment Bank Standard Committee (15 experts) Principal decision-making body for the standard-setting process and revision Stakeholder balance Governance Bodies Stakeholder Council (up to 40 members) Provides a forum for information exchange Regional balance: members of developed and developing countries Nominates members of the Standard Committee Secretariat (GIB Foundation and Natixis Investment Bank) Coordinates the development of the standard on a daily basis Collaborates closely with other SuRe Governance bodies Multi- Stakeholder Approach Public Sector: Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN), International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) Cities: Boston, Fortaleza, New Orleans, Tshwane Financiers (incl. MDBs): European Investment Bank (EIB), World Bank GIF, Global Environment Facility (GEF), India Integrated Infrastructure Finance Bank (IDFC), Mirova, Santam Insurance, African Infrastructure Investment Managers (AIIM), Argaam Capital, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) Project Developers: Bouygues Construction, General Electric, Infrastructure Leasing & Financial Services Limited (IL&FS); Association of Chinese Plant Engineers (CAPEC), International Federation of Consulting Engineers (FIDIC) Civil Society: Institute for Development Environment and Energy (IDE-E), MCE Legal Advocats NGOs: Climate-KIC, CREAM-PPP, GIP Pacifico Colombia, The Nature Conservancy, World Resources Institute (WRI) Ross Centre, Green Economy Coalition, WWF International, WWF Switzerland International Organisations: OECD, UN- HABITAT, UNOPS Bilateral Organisations: Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ), Consultants & Certifiers: Environmental Resources Management (ERM), Mott MacDonald, true&fair.expert

11 Materiality Assessment Reporting & Impact Assessment SuRe Standard Three dimensions, 14 themes and 65=46 Management Criteria+17 Performance Criteria+2 Overarching Criteria 3 Dimensions 14 Themes 63 Criteria + 2 Climate Biodiversity and Ecosystems ENVIRONMENT Environmental Protection 19 Natural Resources Land Use and Landscape Human Rights Labour Rights and Working Conditions SOCIETY Customer Focus and Inclusiveness 25 Community Impacts Socioeconomic Development Management and Oversight - Financial Sustainability GOVERNANCE Sustainability and Resilience Management 19 Stakeholder Engagement Transparency and Accountability

12 SuRe working for SDGs Theory of Change to support SDGs

13 The SuRe Standard is in line with the Following International Frameworks SDG FATF National Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Risk Assessment ILO Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights FIDIC The Adis Ababa Action Agenda: Financing for Development UNFCCC Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants The MNE (multinationals) Declaration (ILO) IUCN Red list and Key Biodiversity Areas Standard Rotterdam Convention The OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises UN Universal Declaration on Human Rights Montreal Protocol on substances that deplete the ozone layer GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Sendai Framework for Disaster and Risk Reduction Transparenc y International Business Principles IFC Performance Standards The Equator Principles OECD BRIDGE Indicators (for gender equality) Convention on Biological Diversity SDG The SuRe Standard brings existing international frameworks and agreements on environmental, social and governance topics together. SDG 13

14 SuRe Impact Measurement Measuring Impact of SuRe on Projects: How much did SuRe improve projects compared with non-sure projects? Future: Compare control group (without certification) and a group with certification Definining Indicators: Compliance indicators Monitoring Indicators Monitoring and Evaluation System set up for data control and claim support (the data gathered from the audits can be used as a basis to measure baselines of projects and their improvement over time).

15 AGENDA 1 How Financiers influence the Resilience Agenda 2 Measuring Resilience 3 SuRe - The Standard for Sustainable and Resilient Infrastructure 4 Translating Resilience for Investors

16 Positioning SuRe - Theory of Change

17 The Relationship between Sustainability and Resilience in SuRe Definitions (taken from "the Guide to SuRe"): Interconnected The sustainability of an infrastructure system refers to its ability to meet service needs in a manner that does not make wasteful use of resources, minimises or reverses environmental damage and improves social equality. The resilience of an infrastructure system refers to its ability to maintain and recover functionality in the face of stresses and shocks, whether these can be predicted or not. The two concepts are interconnected (both aim at longevity and reliability) but also contradiction between the two concepts; e.g. resource efficiency can be contradictory to robustness but does not necessarily need to be. SuRe SuRe combines the two concepts and aims at giving guidance on how to manage sustainability and resilience aspects of an infrastructure project, both, from a risk management and a benefit creation perspectives (e.g. what is the solution that is resource efficient and robust at the same time?).

18 SuRe Standard relates to the City Resilience Framework (Arup) Definitions RF s/arup definition of resilience: The ability of a system or individual to withstand shocks and hazards, and adapt and grow after it. City resilience: Capacity of a city to function, survive and thrive no matter what stresses or shocks are encountered. Reflection in SuRe Reflective - a system shall reflect lessons learnt from the past and have mechanisms to continuously evolve. Decisions are based on evidence and past learning rather than on standing norms. Sure Issues (theme: Sustainability management): Whole of life approach (capacity to evolve for futures needs), consideration of innovative approaches Robust - a system should have well-designed, constructed and managed physical assets. SuRe Issues (theme: Management and Oversight; Climate Protection and Resilience): Results orientation (keep function and system service in case of hazards or failures); preparedness for hazards Redundant - a system shall have spare capacity in case of a disruption, extreme pressures or surges in demand. SuRe Issues (theme: Management and Oversight): Results orientation (keep function and system service in case of extreme circumstances or surges in demand) Flexible - implies that a system can change, which may favour decentralized and modular approaches, incorporation of indigenous/traditional knowledge etc. SuRe Issues (theme: Management and Oversight; Sustainability Management): Results orientation; Whole-of-life approach (extend useful life of infrastructure by introducing principles such as durability, resilience and flexibility Resourceful - implies that people and institutions are able to rapidly find different ways to achieve their goals or meet their needs during a shock or when under stress. SuRe Issues (theme: Management and Oversight; Financial Sustainability): Institutional know-how; capacity building; risk management; knowledge of real cost structure; access to capital Inclusive - emphasizes the need for broad consultation and engagement of communities. SuRe Issues (theme: Stakeholder engagement and participation; Transparency and Accountability; Inclusiveness; Vulnerable Communities): All under the SuRe themes Integrated - Integration between different city systems and across scales of operation to promote consistency. Sure Issues (Themes: Socioeconomic Development): Infrastructure integration and synergies

19 List of SuRe Criteria (examples) relating to Resilience Environmental and Social Management System(s) Results Orientation Risk Management Infrastructure Interconnectivity and Integration Infrastructure Adequacy Cumulative impacts Emergency Preparedness Climate Protection and Resilience Resilience Planning Life Cycle Approach Climate Resilience and Infrastructure Adaptability Organisational Structure and Management Team Qualifications, Know-How and Capacity Building Hiring and Training Local Staff Theme 1.3 on Stakeholder engagement and participation Theme 1.4 on Anti-corruption and Transparency Non-discrimination Affordability Minorities and Indigenous People Improving Access to Critical Infrastructure

20 Results of the Resilience Dividend Study 1. Investments in resilience pay off (GIB, SuRe SmartScan) 2. The better the risk mitigation, the better the resilience levels and associated benefits (International Disaster Data Base) 3. The more resilience measures are taken, the larger the associated benefits (SRBA, Sustainability and Resilience Benefits Assessment, University of Rotterdam, crowd intelligence ) 4. Intrinsic motivation should be stipulated to change behavior of decision makers and outcomes of decisions taken (RF). Indispensable for this end are: a. Awareness of Resilience Dividend > Tools b. Expert knowledge > Capacity Building / Technical Assistance c. Data > Database/ Registry