This panel will focus on the scope for a 'greener' economic and social recovery from Covid-19 in low and middle income countries. It will discuss evidence from a range of countries, and explore the extent to which climate action can be integrated into national plans and priorities.
Long Abstract:
Covid-19 has had severe economic and social impacts on most countries. It has also sparked wide ranging debates in many countries about how to recover, including the potential for 'building back better'. The prospect of a 'green' recovery from Covid-19 is just as important to low and middle income countries as it is to richer countries like the UK and the USA. This panel will focus on these debates in low and middle income countries, and discuss the extent to which calls for a greener recovery have translated into national plans and priorities.
Many national strategies published by low and middle income countries have already emphasised the need for resilient and sustainable economies. Some of these priorities have been reflected in updated plans to mitigate and adapt to climate change, which have been submitted to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change before COP26 in Glasgow. These plans include, for example, targets or policies to increase the role of renewable energy, cleaner forms of transport and more sustainable agricultural practices.
The panel will feature research contributions from several different countries that shed light on national debates about greening the recovery, and how they have influenced national strategies. This will include new evidence from Ghana and Zambia from a collaborative research project led by the convenors, and funded by UK Research and Innovation through the Global Challenges Research Fund. It will also include invited contributions from researchers in other countries and proposals submitted in response to the conference call for papers.
Methodology:
In line with the DSA guidance, each contributor will record a short presentation video with slides in advance of the session. Presenters will be asked to include a summary of research results, key recommendations for national policy makers and some more general lessons that could be applicable to other countries. Contributors will also be asked to highlight a question or issue that they would like the session to focus on. Following the two-minute summaries by each contributor, the chair will focus the discussion on the issues and questions that have been raised. Each contributor will be asked to invite one or more policy makers from their country to attend the session, and to comment on the research results and recommendations. The aim of the discussion will be to draw out national similarities and differences, and identify the conditions for more (or less) successful 'green recovery' strategies. Following the conference, the outcomes of the discussion will be summarised in a briefing for policy makers.
The presentation highlights the processes and outcome of building scenarios for socio-economic greening recovery in Ghana post-COVID19. It unpacks the constituents of two disparate alternative pathways [Leapfrog and Blended] that were arrived at through stakeholder consultative processes.
Paper long abstract:
Scenarios building processes provide the basis to prepare for unanticipated consequences and to identify strategic options that can enhance the outcomes of an existing situation. Being a process, scenarios building necessitates the consultation of varied stakeholders with broad-based knowledge and expertise apropos of the phenomenon at the core of the discussion. The process, therefore, provides a framework for the development of consensuses and sometimes divergence around core pathways. This paper employed a stakeholder participatory approach (two multi-stakeholder workshops) to deconstruct the alternative scenarios for COVID19 greening recovery of Ghana, following the conduction of a policy analysis and semi-structured interviews with experts. Through this participatory process, two alternative scenarios - 'Leapfrog' and 'Blended' - emerged. In the 'Leapfrog' scenario, a clear commitment to moving away from fossil fuels and decarbonising the economy rapidly is required. In order to avoid this leading to donor dependency, all international partnerships, whether involving financial or in-kind transfers, are carefully assessed to ensure they contribute in the long-term to internal wealth and job creation. Thus, the green economy paradigm becomes a key economic driver. On the other hand, the 'Blended' scenario advocates the concurrent investment in fossil fuel industries and renewable fuel sources in the short to medium term, while using resource taxes to generate funds for public investment in crucial social services. Thus, the pace of greening recovery under the 'Blended' scenario is slower compared with the 'Leapfrog' scenario.
Green recovery pathways offer opportunities to consider concerns about the environment and economic recovery to "build back better".
Paper long abstract:
The COVID-19 pandemic has affected economies of most countries and left them grappling with how best they can recover from it. For Zambia, the impacts of the pandemic have coincided with other non-pandemic related economic woes alongside the adverse effects of climate change. The green recovery pathways therefore, offer opportunities for Zambia to take into consideration concerns about the environment and economic recovery with a view to "build back better". This type of recovery entails meeting socio-economic aspirations and embody sustainable development particularly in the sectors hardest hit by both the pandemic and climate change. Despite putting up many plans to ensure that robust economic development is achieved, this was disrupted by climate change; these disruptions were intensified by the pandemic. A comprehensive literature review and analysis of Zambia's policy landscape concerning climate change was undertaken. This was complemented with responses from interviews with stakeholders on considerations of how best to balance socio-economic recovery from the pandemic and climate action. It suggested that the agriculture and energy sectors are vital to achieving a recovery that meets the needs of the majority, including those most vulnerable to the effects of climate change. Therefore, planning needs to take an approach that ensures that a clear policy and regulatory framework on climate actions is in place and implemented. This needs to be inclusive to improve the livelihoods of all, especially the most vulnerable in society.
Our findings highlight the need and ample research opportunity to consider technology choices in analyses of SDG indicators such as SDG 7 aiming to ensure access to affordable energy. A better understanding of SDG co-benefits and tradeoffs is essential for "green" recovery plans from Covid-19.
Paper long abstract:
Linkages between the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) have sparked research interest because a better understanding of SDG co-benefits and tradeoffs may enable faster progress on multiple sustainability fronts and among multiple actors, including governments, industries, and individual businesses. However, SDG linkages are often analyzed without explicitly considering the technologies used to implement individual SDGs. For example, investing in one clean energy technology over another to support progress towards SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy) might lead to stronger or weaker co-benefits and tradeoffs between SDG 7 and non-energy SDGs, e.g., due to differences in technology industries and their environmental and socio-economic impacts. Here we outline an approach to study this problem by connecting the industries required to manufacture and deploy the components of a technology to the SDG indicator framework as defined by the UN. We focus on SDG 7 and consider a set of example energy technologies (photovoltaic systems, nuclear fission power plants, wind turbines, and clean cookstoves) and non-energy SDGs (SDG 6, 8, and 9). We observe that all technologies show potential to create both beneficial and detrimental linkages between SDG 7 and non-energy SDGs (6, 8, and 9), with some notable differences between technology types and deployment scenarios. While linkages and their strength will need to be re-evaluated in the context of specific regional or local technology deployment strategies, our findings highlight the need and ample research opportunity to consider technology choices in analyses of SDG indicators and linkages.
Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality. Log in
Simon Bawakyillenuo (University of Ghana)
Mulima Nyambe-Mubanga (Zambia Institute for Policy Analysis and Research (ZIPAR))
Short Abstract:
This panel will focus on the scope for a 'greener' economic and social recovery from Covid-19 in low and middle income countries. It will discuss evidence from a range of countries, and explore the extent to which climate action can be integrated into national plans and priorities.
Long Abstract:
Covid-19 has had severe economic and social impacts on most countries. It has also sparked wide ranging debates in many countries about how to recover, including the potential for 'building back better'. The prospect of a 'green' recovery from Covid-19 is just as important to low and middle income countries as it is to richer countries like the UK and the USA. This panel will focus on these debates in low and middle income countries, and discuss the extent to which calls for a greener recovery have translated into national plans and priorities.
Many national strategies published by low and middle income countries have already emphasised the need for resilient and sustainable economies. Some of these priorities have been reflected in updated plans to mitigate and adapt to climate change, which have been submitted to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change before COP26 in Glasgow. These plans include, for example, targets or policies to increase the role of renewable energy, cleaner forms of transport and more sustainable agricultural practices.
The panel will feature research contributions from several different countries that shed light on national debates about greening the recovery, and how they have influenced national strategies. This will include new evidence from Ghana and Zambia from a collaborative research project led by the convenors, and funded by UK Research and Innovation through the Global Challenges Research Fund. It will also include invited contributions from researchers in other countries and proposals submitted in response to the conference call for papers.
Methodology:
In line with the DSA guidance, each contributor will record a short presentation video with slides in advance of the session. Presenters will be asked to include a summary of research results, key recommendations for national policy makers and some more general lessons that could be applicable to other countries. Contributors will also be asked to highlight a question or issue that they would like the session to focus on. Following the two-minute summaries by each contributor, the chair will focus the discussion on the issues and questions that have been raised. Each contributor will be asked to invite one or more policy makers from their country to attend the session, and to comment on the research results and recommendations. The aim of the discussion will be to draw out national similarities and differences, and identify the conditions for more (or less) successful 'green recovery' strategies. Following the conference, the outcomes of the discussion will be summarised in a briefing for policy makers.
Accepted papers:
Session 1 Thursday 7 July, 2022, -