The aim of this online guidance is to assist all states and regions completing the CDP States and Regions 2019 Information Request. The online guidance provides a high-level overview of each questionnaire section as well as further information and guidance on each question. This online guidance also provides examples of good responses for selected questions.
Should you need any further support with answering the questions or using CDP’s platform, please contact CDP by e-mail on [email protected] or by phone on +44 (0) 203 818 3908. Office hours are 09:00 – 17:30 GMT/BST, Monday to Friday.
CDP believes that subnational governments play a vital role in driving climate action and delivering sustainable economies. To limit global warming to 2 degrees, it is imperative that states and regions set ambitious climate targets and drive global standards of climate leadership. CDP provides a global platform for subnational governments to measure, manage and disclose their environmental impacts. CDP's States and Regions program’s main aim is to use annual reporting to promote transparency and increase climate action, ambition and accountability of these governments. The program works with over 100 states and regions across the globe, representing 36 countries, over 630 million people and US$13 trillion in GDP.
The 2019 Information Request is composed of a series of sections. Each section asks questions about an aspect of your region including: greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, risks and opportunities from climate change, and strategies for mitigating emissions, and strategies for adapting to changes in the climate. The Information Request allows your region to report two separate but parallel greenhouse gas inventories: one for your entire region (jurisdiction), and government’s operations. The differentiation between region-wide (sometimes called “territorial”) and government operations emissions recognizes that while governments can influence emissions and develop resilience in their operations through demonstrated leadership, policies and regulations, as well as strategies and programs, sometimes they can only make changes to the facilities and operations under their direct control. As such, separate but parallel inventories are needed. As a responding region, you have the opportunity to report one, both or neither of these emissions inventories depending on the data you have available.
The information generated from this request will assist in improving the understanding of subnational level GHG emissions. It provides a framework for the development/enhancement of GHG inventories ensuring that emissions are reported in a meaningful way. It can highlight potential risks and opportunities arising from climate change, promote consideration of adaptation and resilience building activities and facilitate target setting. Overall, it will enhance the understanding of how subnational governments are dealing with the challenge of climate change.
CDP requests states and regions to disclose their environmental impacts and create a sustainable economy that avoids dangerous climate change. Encouraging states and regions to disclose their environmental information through CDP’s states and regions information request provides the foundation to achieve this mission.
CDP would like to thank its partners on the States and Regions program for their assistance in the development of this online guidance:
The Climate Group
For their support on providing definitions, additional information and best practices on the following topics:
NRG4SD
For reviewing the guidance information and providing feedback on the following topics:
The data collected from this information request is used for analysis and research by CDP and its partners, and supports the following initiatives:
Under2 Coalition
The Under2 Coalition is driven by a group of ambitious state and regional governments committed to keeping global temperature rises to under 2°C. The coalition brings together more than 220 governments who represent over 1.3 billion people and 43% of the global economy. The Climate Group is the Secretariat to the Under2 Coalition and works with governments to accelerate climate action. CDP works in partnership with The Climate Group to provide the world’s first global platform for states and regions to measure, manage and disclose their greenhouse gas emissions. We are united in our firm belief of the vital role that state and regional governments play in driving climate action and delivering sustainable economies that avoid dangerous climate change and leads to a net-zero emissions world. State and regional government climate action is fundamental to delivering the Paris Agreement and the disclosed data drives CDP’s analytical benchmarking, commitment tracking and data management; and The Climate Group’s governments networks, peer learning, policy work and promotion of climate leadership.
RegionsAdapt
The RegionsAdapt initiative aims to inspire and support state, provincial and regional governments to take action, cooperate and report efforts on climate change adaptation. The initiative requires governments to report on the progress of their adaptation actions and goals on an annual basis. NRG4SD is the network that supports this initiative as its Secretariat and by involving members from the five continents.
New York Declaration on Forests
Please complete the following table:
Profile | Details |
---|---|
Government name |
Text field |
Country |
Text field |
Currency |
Select from Appendix A |
Leader title (e.g. Governor, Premier…) |
Text field |
Leader name |
Text field |
This is a table question, which asks for details for your region’s general profile. The table has the following fields:
Please complete the following table:
Annual operating budget | Budget year |
---|---|
Numerical field | Numerical field |
This is a table question, which asks for details of your region’s operating budget. The table has the following fields:
Please complete the following table:
Region's current population | Region's current population year | Region's population in year 2010 | Region's population in year 2030 | Region's population in year 2050 | Comments |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Numerical field |
Numerical field |
Numerical field |
Numerical field |
Numerical field |
Text field |
This is a table question, which asks about your region’s current population size, its historical population (in year 2010) and how it is forecast to change in the future (for years 2030 and 2050). Please ensure that the population figure is entered in a full format i.e. if your regions population is 1.87 million then you will enter 1870000. This question assists CDP in understanding the demographic changes that have occurred in a region in the past and what the projections are for the region towards 2050. Should you not have this information available, please provide a comment on this in the comments text field. The table has the following fields:
Please complete the following table:
Region's current GDP | Region's current GDP year | Region's GDP in year 2010 | Region's GDP in year 2030 | Region's GDP in year 2050 | Comments |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Numerical field |
Numerical field |
Numerical field |
Numerical field |
Numerical field |
Text field |
This is a table question, which asks about your region’s current GDP, its historical GDP (in year 2010) and how it is forecast to change in the future (for years 2030 and 2050). This question assists CDP in understanding the economic changes that have occurred in a region in the past and what the projections are for the region towards 2050. Should you not have this information available, please provide a comment on this in the comments text field. The table has the following fields:
Gross Domestic Product (GDP): Gross Domestic Product (GDP) at market prices is the expenditure on final goods and services minus imports: final consumption expenditures, gross capital formation, and exports less imports. "Gross" signifies that no deduction has been made for the depreciation of machinery, buildings, and other capital products used in production. "Domestic" means it is production by the resident institutional units of the country. The products refer to final goods and services, that is, those that are purchased, imputed, or otherwise, as: final consumption of households, non-profit institutions serving households and government; fixed assets; and exports (minus imports). For more information see the definitions developed by the OECD.
Please complete the following table:
Average annual temperature (in Celsius) | Land area (in square km) | Average altitude (m) | Latitude (e.g. 41.259) | Longitude (e.g. -120.989) |
---|---|---|---|---|
Numerical field |
Numerical field |
Numerical field |
Numerical field |
Numerical field |
This question asks about your region’s geographical details. The table has the following fields:
This is an open text question.
Please note that when copying from another document into the disclosure platform, formatting is not retained.
This question aims to understand how climate change action steps and progress are measured, monitored and managed. If relevant, details offered could include the following: department, committee, or person responsible for climate change-related activities; information on frequency of actions or disclosing; next steps for governance and planned future changes; governance challenges encountered; and stakeholder engagement processes.
Select one of the following options:
Please answer by selecting “Yes” or “No” from the drop-down menu provided. If you select “Yes” you will be directed to question 2.2a.
A good definition of a master plan comes from the Scottish government:
“A master plan describes and maps an overall development concept, including present and future land use, urban design and landscaping, built form, infrastructure, circulation and service provision. It is based upon an understanding of place and it is intended to provide a structured approach to creating a clear and consistent framework for development.”
If “Yes” is selected in response to 2.2:
Please complete the following table. You are able to add rows by using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table.
Master plan design | Description |
---|---|
Select from:
|
Text field |
[Add Row]
This is a table question. This question only applies if you have selected “Yes” in answer to question 2.2. The question aims to understand how the region uses a master plan to reduce GHG emissions. You can select how the master plan is designed in the first field and you will be able to provide a brief description as to how this is relevant for your region. You can use the description column to report existing capacities and resources, or lack of, at the subnational level to effictively plan, design and implement climate actions as outlines in the master planning document. If multiple options from the drop-down menu apply for your region, you can add a row to select additional options and to provide descriptions regarding your master plan. An option called “Other” is added to allow regions to describe additional ways their master plans are designed that cannot be categorized using the options provided in the drop-down menu.
Please complete the following table. You are able to add rows by using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table.
Working with local governments | Target type | Explanation |
---|---|---|
Select from:
|
Select from:
|
Text field |
[Add Row]
This question aims to identify examples of multilevel governance when it comes to climate change mitigation and target setting. Multilevel governance also provides a flexible conceptual framework to understand the relationships between regional and city-level governments across mitigation and adaptation policy issues. It has become increasingly evident that regional and local decisions are essential in the design and implementation of mitigation and adaptation strategies to respond. This is because greenhouse gas emissions are the result of actions or processes that occur in a given place and, while national and international policy frameworks can mandate and coordinate action, a multitude of local level actions will ultimately be needed to alter future emission pathways over the long-term (Reference: OECD 2009).
This is a table question with the following fields:
This question allows you to report on multiple targets by adding an additional row.
Case Study: Basque Country’s multilevel governance for climate actionThe Basque Country is a great example of how a subnational government can lead sustainable development and support low carbon and resilient climate actions locally, while also engaging and profiling its action at European and international level. The Basque Country has been able to support, through long-term cooperation, its own local governments to commit and reach ambitious targets, and to implement sustainable plans, while showcasing internationally how regional commitments can impact global climate action. The Basque Government works closely and supports the Basque network of Municipalities for Sustainability (Udalsarea21), which supports directly municipalities in the territory, setting up a very successful example of multi-level partnership and effective institutional coordination. Udalsarea21 coordinates the Basque Country Local Sustainability Observatory, and to monitor effectively the implementation of the over 25,000 actions at local level, has developed the MUGI21 application. In addition, this application provides municipalities with the opportunity to extract data and gain a better overview of their local process and the effectiveness of their Local Action Plan. Reference: European Union and the Committee of the Regions (2017), An overview of regions and cities with-in the global climate change process - a perspective for the future. Available at: https://cor.europa.eu/en/documentation/studies/Documents/overview-LRA-global-climate-change-process.pdf |
Please complete the following table. You are able to add rows by using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table.
Working with national governments | Target type | Explanation |
---|---|---|
Select from:
|
Select from:
|
Text field |
[Add Row]
The aim of this question is to identify examples of multilevel governance of climate mitigation focusing on national and subnational government levels. National governments often depend on subnational governments to deliver climate mitigation action through directly implementing policies. Subnational governments can strengthen and reinforce national policies to help reach higher ambitions, for example, through addressing market failures not dealt with by national policy or increasing policy stringency in subnational delivery; subnational governments are often best placed to identify local needs and benefits and to exploit synergies across investment priorities through mobilizing local resources and coordinating between individuals, institutions and sectors that are crucial to mitigation action (Reference: Low Emissions Development Strategies (LEDS) Global Partnership Working Group on Sub-national Integration). The role of regional governments in meeting national climate targets is further emphasized by the Paris Agreement, which illustrated the importance of ‘non-Party stakeholders’ (which includes states and regions) in securing the Agreement’s objectives to keep the global temperature increase well below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 degrees Celsius (Reference: United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Paris Agreement, December 2015).
This is a table question with the following fields:
This question allows you to report on multiple targets by adding an additional row.
Additional Information: The Paris Climate Package and the reference to subnational governmentsThe Paris Climate Package includes both the Paris Agreement and the COP21 decisions on implementation, and it explicitly recognizes and engages local and Subnational governments in climate action. Paragraph 15 of the preamble of the Paris Agreement recognizes the importance of the engagements of all levels of government and various actors. Paragraph 15 of the preamble of the COP21 Decision that supports the Paris Agreement also agrees to uphold and promote regional and international cooperation in order to mobilize stronger and more ambitious climate action by all Parties and non-Party stakeholders, including civil society, the private sector, financial institutions, cities and other Sub-national authorities, local communities and indigenous peoples. The COP21 Decision further envisages active engagement of Non-Party Stakeholders as appropriate, including through the technical examination processes on mitigation and adaptation and high-level events of the COP Presidencies. National governments have also recognized cities and regions in their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), approximately half of which encourage and foresee action at the local and Sub-national levels. This figure is promising for the role of cities and regions as nations work toward achieving their climate commitments. Reference: European Union and the Committee of the Regions (2017), An overview of regions and cities with-in the global climate change process - a perspective for the future. Available at: https://cor.europa.eu/en/documentation/studies/Documents/overview-LRA-global-climate-change-process.pdf |
Select one of the following options:
The aim of this question is to identify positive economic opportunities that may arise as a result of climate change and how states and regions are maximizing these opportunities. For some states and regions with a strong foundation in scientific and technology research and development, advanced / precision manufacturing, export facilities, or those well endowed with renewable energy resources (wind, solar, geothermal, marine, and biomass), financial opportunities to develop new goods and services may be realized.
Select your response from the following options:
Case Study: Canadian perspective on economic opportunitiesFew countries have seen their economic aspirations frustrated by the imperatives of mitigating climate change as much as Canada, which once dreamt of parlaying its vast oil sands resource into becoming an energy superpower. However, global climate change, in conjunction with the national and international policies designed to mitigate it, will present some unique opportunities for the Canadian economy over the next several decades. Warming temperatures and longer growing seasons open the door to producing more value-added crops as the corn and soybean belts migrate north. The market for renewable wind and solar power in Canada is expected to see a quantum leap over the next decade and a half, as coal- red power is phased out across the country. Stringent emission reduction targets in northeastern US states point to a growing market for Canadian hydro power, while there is a compelling economic case for Ontario to import comparatively cheap surplus hydro power from Quebec as an alternative to the costly refurbishing of its ageing nuclear power plants. Reference: Rubin, J (2017) Economic Opportunities from a Changing Climate. Centre for International Governance Innovation. Available at: https://www.cigionline.org/publications/economic-opportunities-changing-climate |
If “Yes” or "Do not know" is selected in response to 2.5:
Please complete the following table. You are able to add rows by using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table.
Economic opportunity | Describe how the region is maximizing this opportunity |
---|---|
Select from:
|
Text field |
[Add Row]
This is a table question, which invites you to detail the economic opportunities from mitigating and adapting to climate change, and asks you to describe how your state/region is seizing them. Please select as many options that apply to your region from the drop-down list. The table has the following fields:
This question allows you to report on multiple economic opportunities by adding an additional row.
Economic Opportunity | Describe how the region is maximizing this opportunity |
---|---|
Additional funding opportunities |
The region is positioning itself to take advantage of new opportunities by inviting funding organizations to witness the impacts of our work on climate adaptation to access funding and organize projects designed to reduce risks associated with climate change for our citizens. |
Improved efficiency of operations |
Performing an emissions inventory had the added benefit of identifying inefficiencies in operations by tracking data related to energy consumption, waste processes and water consumption at the government operations and regional levels. |
If “No” is selected in response to 2.5:
Please complete the following table:
Reason | Explanation |
---|---|
Select from:
| Text field |
It is possible that your region does not see any potential economic opportunities from climate change. You might consider, for instance, that any potential opportunities are small and insignificant in comparison to the risks. Please complete the table presented in this question to explain the reasoning behind the lack of economic opportunities for your region.
Reason | Explanation |
---|---|
Opportunities have not been assessed. |
Our region's government currently does not have the resources to assess the economic opportunities from addressing climate change. |
By selecting “Yes” below, you are indicating that you have region-wide GHG emissions data from the entire region over which the regional government can exercise a degree of influence through the policies and regulations they implement to report at this time.
Select one of the following options:
This question asks states and regions whether they have a region-wide emissions inventory to report. This question allows states and regions to select “No” as a response to this question. This directs them to question 3.14, which invites them to explain the reasoning behind their response. States and regions that responded with “No” will only see this question, while those that have selected “Yes” will see additional questions designed to ask states and regions specific details regarding their region-wide emissions inventory.
Capturing region-wide emissions – often referred to as the “territorial” emissions inventory – creates a snapshot of all the region-wide activities and their contribution to global climate change. Collating region-wide emissions can provide a basis from which regions can develop policy and enact regulation with the aim of reducing these emissions. This distinction and imperative to capture data for both government operations emissions and the wider region represent the greatest difference between appropriate region-specific protocols and corporate emissions disclosing protocols.
If “Yes” is selected in response to 3.1:
Please complete the following table:
From | To |
---|---|
Drop-down calendar |
Drop-down calendar |
The reporting platform provides a drop-down calendar for you to enter the dates requested. Entries must be for a 12-month period. Please provide the start and end dates of the period covered by your emissions inventory. Please ensure that this is the year covered by the emissions inventory and not the year of publication or the year when the assessment was made. If you do not have data for the entire 12-month period, please extrapolate to 12 months.
Best practice:
It is good practice to use a calendar year for reporting emissions and removals. The IPCC provides Approaches to Data Collection, on how to proceed when data for the calendar year reporting are not available or not considered suitable.
From | To |
---|---|
01/01/2015 |
31/12/2015 |
If “Yes” is selected in response to 3.1:
Select one of the following options:
In your answer, please choose from the list of options provided. Examples of approaches that might be used by your region other than its geopolitical boundary in the US for instance include county or regional GHG accounting. Circumstances where this might be undertaken include where your region’s geopolitical boundary is small relative to the total population, economic activity and land area that are symbiotic with a particular urban center of the region. If you select "Other", you will be given the opportunity to enter the relevant boundary in the text field. You can use the comment box to outline if the boundary of the emissions inventory does or does not match with the administrative boundary of the reporting entity. If it does not, then please specify the exclusions and/or additions to the administrative boundary.
If “Yes” is selected in response to 3.1
Please complete the following table:
Primary protocol | Explanation | Inventory quality control measures |
---|---|---|
Select from:
|
Text field |
Text field |
In CDP’s reporting platform, you will see a list of methodologies developed by third parties. Please select the primary methodology that you followed in measuring greenhouse gas emissions for your region. If you do not see your chosen methodology reflected in the list please select “Other” and describe your methodology. We recognize that many regions follow multiple protocols in creating their inventories; if this is the case for your region, please choose the protocol that is best described as your “primary” protocol. The explanation field is incorporated in this question to allow states and regions to briefly explain how the selected protocol is used and any additional protocols and processes use for the collection of data and development of region-wide inventories. If your response to this question is “Other”, please provide enough information to make clear issues such as boundaries, data capture and accounting/calculation techniques, and decision-making criteria for which emissions to include.
Region-wide GHG emissions inventory protocols and methodologies
The options to choose from include:
These values are not meant to be exhaustive. If you have used a proprietary methodology or a third party methodology that you do not see listed here, please select “Other” and enter the name of the methodology in the text field provided.
Some of these measurement methodologies share general principles. Many of these principles are included in the WRI/WBCSD GHG Protocol (and other similar methods) and the following is quoted directly from the ICLEI International Emissions Analysis Protocol:
Many methodologies also suggest similar best practices in measuring greenhouse gas emissions. Some of these suggestions are detailed here:
Inventory quality control measures
- Provide routine and consistent checks to ensure data integrity, correctness, and completeness;
- Identify and address errors and omissions;
- Document and archive inventory material and record all QC activities.
If “Yes” is selected in response to 3.1:
Select all that apply:
The list consists of the main greenhouse gases defined by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC): carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulphur hexafluoride (SF6), as well as nitrogen trifluoride (NF3).
If any gas is selected in 3.5:
This is a new question, which asks states and regions if they can break down their emissions by greenhouse gas type, as greenhouse gases other than carbon dioxide are significant and relevant. This question allows states and regions to select "No" as a response to this question. Those that have selected "Yes" will see an additional question where states and regions will break down their emissions in CO2-equivalents (CO2e) by greenhouse gas type.
If "Yes" is selected in 3.5a:
Greenhouse gas | Total gross emissions (metric tonnes CO2e) | Global Warming Potential reference (select relevant IPCC Assessment Report) |
---|---|---|
Select from:
|
Numerical field | Select from:
|
[Add row]
Because greenhouse gases are often only reported in CO2-equivalents, their contribution to overall emissions are sometimes masked. UNFCCC Global Warming Potentials (GWPs) are used to estimate, compare, and aggregate the relative climate effects of various greenhouse gases (GHGs). They are a measure of the relative radiative effect of a given substance compared to another, integrated over a chosen time horizon.
- Carbon dioxide (CO2)
- Methane (CH4)
- Nitrous oxide (N2O)
- Hydrofluorocarbon family of gases (HFCs)
- Perfluorocarbon family of gases (PFCs)
- Sulfur hexafluoride (SF6)
- Nitrogen trifluoride (NF3) has been included in the basket of mandated GHGs as it is considered a potent contributor to climate change and is therefore mandated to be included in national inventories under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
- While only the above-named seven gases are requested, you may enter others if you wish by selecting the "Other, please specify" option from the drop-down menu in column 1 and entering the name of the gas.
Global Warming Potential (GWP): The intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)'s Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) defines the Global Warming Potential (GWP) as “an index, based on radiative properties of greenhouse gases, measuring the radiative forcing following a pulse emission of a unit mass of a given greenhouse gas in the present-day atmosphere integrated over a chosen time horizon, relative to that of carbon dioxide. The GWP represents the combined effect of the differing times these gases remain in the atmosphere and their relative effectiveness in causing radiative forcing. The Kyoto Protocol is based on GWPs from pulse emissions over a 100-year time frame.” By using GWPs, GHG emissions from multiple gases can be standardized to a carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e).
If “Yes” is selected in response to 3.1:
Please complete the following table:
Emission types | Emissions of latest inventory (metric tonnes CO2e) | Level of confidence | Comments |
---|---|---|---|
Total gross emissions (excludes sinks) |
Numerical field
|
Select from:
|
Text field |
Total net emissions (includes sinks) |
Numerical field |
Select from:
|
Text field |
This question allows you to enter the total gross and net region-wide GHG emissions for the reported year. If your region does not calculate one of these types of total, please leave that row blank. The table has the following fields:
Total gross emissions (excludes sinks): Gross emissions are your total GHG emissions from before accounting for any emission reductions from sinks – forest carbon removals, vegetation, and soils. Gross emissions include emissions from the five main IPCC sectors – Energy, Industrial Processes and Product Use (IPPU), Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use (AFOLU), Waste and Other.
Total net emissions (includes sinks) – Net emissions include both emissions and removals from land-use change and forestry (LUCF) is the difference between the amount of carbon sequestered in sinks and the amount emitted by sources. The value for total net emissions should be lower than total gross emissions.
High – Select high if your reported emissions have a high level of accuracy.
Medium – Select medium if your reported emissions have a medium level of accuracy.
Low – Select low if your reported emissions have a low level of accuracy.
Emission types | Emissions of latest inventory (metric tonnes CO2e) | Level of confidence | Comments |
---|---|---|---|
Total gross emissions (excludes sinks) |
404700000 |
High |
Excluding sinks and fugitive emissions from natural gas distribution |
Total net emissions (includes sinks) |
404000000 |
High |
This includes sinks from land use, land use change and forestry (LULUCF) |
If “Yes” is selected in response to 3.1:
Select one of the following options:
The rationale for this question is to get insights on whether states and regions are tracking changes over time from their base year region-wide emissions. Base year emissions, under the Kyoto Protocol, are defined as the aggregate anthropogenic carbon dioxide equivalent emissions of the GHGs sources in a historical base year (Reference: UNFCCC). It is essential that governments seek to continuously track progress against their targets and adjust their climate policies, incentives and actions accordingly. In order to maintain the momentum that was catalysed by the adoption and ratification of the Paris Agreement, governments must show that their targets are more than just aspirational by reducing their emissions to levels that are lower than their base year (historic reference). If you selected “Yes” as a response to this question, you will be directed to completing the table for question 3.7a.
Best practice:
Part of a robust accounting framework is to track emissions over time comprehensively, and consistently from a given base year. Guidelines for defining and adjusting a base year can be found here (US Environment Protection Agency – Climate Leaders GHG Inventory Protocol).
If “Yes” is selected in response to 3.7:
Please complete the following table:
Base year | Total emissions of base year inventory (metric tonnes CO2e) | Does your base year emissions inventory account for sinks? | Percentage change in the emissions reported in latest inventory from base year |
---|---|---|---|
Numerical field |
Numerical field
|
Select from:
|
Percentage field |
This is a supplementary question to 3.7 in which states and regions are asked to provide the details of their base year emissions inventory. The table has the following fields:
If the percentage is a negative value (i.e. reduction), then please add a minus sign (-) before the numerical value without the percentage symbol (%).
Base year | Total emissions of base year inventory (metric tonnes CO2e) | Does your base year emissions inventory account for sinks? | Percentage change in the emissions reported in latest inventory from base year |
---|---|---|---|
1990 |
500000000 |
Yes |
-19 |
If “Yes” is selected in response to 3.1:
Please complete the following table:
Change in emissions | Reason for change | Explanation |
---|---|---|
Select from:
|
See drop-down options below
|
Text field |
Reason for change drop-down options:
If “Increased” is selected:
If “Decreased” is selected:
If “This is our first year of calculation” is selected:
If “Stayed the same” is selected:
If “Do not know” is selected:
This question has been modified to provide specific drop-down options depending on the changes in reported emissions. This is a table question with the following fields:
Change in emissions | Reason for change | Explanation |
---|---|---|
Decreased |
Policy change |
Last year we reported emissions from our last inventory calculated in 2012. This year we have updated our inventory and notice a decrease in our total emissions. We believe this change can be explained by our stringent policies, which we have implemented to reduce emissions. |
If “Yes” is selected in response to 3.1:
Select one of the following options:
Please provide a “Yes” or “No” answer using the drop-down menu provided. If you answered “Yes” you will be directed to question 3.9a.
If “Yes” is selected in response to 3.9:
Please complete the following table:
Scope | Metric tonnes CO2e | Level of confidence | Comments |
---|---|---|---|
Scope 1 emissions excluding emissions from grid-supplied energy generation |
Numerical field |
Select from:
|
Text field |
Scope 1 emissions from grid-supplied energy generation within the region’s boundary |
Numerical field |
Select from:
|
Text field |
Total Scope 1 emissions (Row 1 + Row 2) |
Numerical field |
Select from:
|
Text field |
Total Scope 2 emissions |
Numerical field |
Select from:
|
Text field |
Total (Scope 1 + Scope 2) emissions |
Numerical field |
Select from:
|
Text field |
Total Scope 3 emissions |
Numerical field |
Select from:
|
Text field |
If you categorize your emissions by scope, please enter the appropriate figures for your Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions. Where values are not available, please use the comment field to indicate the reason why. This table question breaks down emissions into scope 1, 2 and scope 3. Scope 1 emissions are further split into emissions excluding grid-supplied energy generation and emissions exclusively from grid-supplied energy generation within your regional boundaries. The table has the following fields:
High – Select high if your scope breakdown has a high level of accuracy.
Medium – Select medium if your scope breakdown has a medium level of accuracy.
Low – Select low if your scope breakdown has a low level of accuracy.
If “Yes” is selected in response to 3.1:
Please complete the following table:
Document title | Attachment | Level of confidence | Comment on level of confidence |
---|---|---|---|
Text field |
Attach your document here. |
Select from:
|
Text field |
This question allows states and regions to directly upload their emissions inventory. If you have an inventory you wish to upload, please complete the table used for this question.
High – Select high if your inventory has a high level of accuracy.
Medium – Select medium if your inventory has a medium level of accuracy.
Low – Select low if your inventory has a low level of accuracy.
If 1996 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories is selected in 3.4:
Please complete the following table.You are able to add rows by using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table.
1996 IPCC sector | Scope | Emissions (metric tonnes CO2e) |
---|---|---|
Select from:
|
Select from:
|
Numerical field |
The purpose of this question is to understand the breakdown of your state/region’s emissions by sector, as defined by the 1996 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. You are provided with a table in the reporting platform to structure your response. Using the “Add row” function in this table allows you to report your state/region’s emissions breakdown using multiple sectors and scopes.
1996 IPCC sector | Scope | Emissions (metric tonnes CO2e) |
---|---|---|
Energy |
Scope 1 |
475000 |
Industrial Processes |
Scope 1 |
100000 |
Solvents |
Scope 1 |
50000 |
Land use, Land use change and Forestry |
Scope 1 |
80000 |
Agriculture |
Scope 1 |
90000 |
Waste |
Scope 1 |
70000 |
If 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories is selected in 3.4:
Please complete the following table.You are able to add rows by using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table.
2006 IPCC sector | Scope | Emissions (metric tonnes CO2e) |
---|---|---|
Select from:
|
Select from:
|
Numerical field |
The purpose of this question is to understand the breakdown of your state/region’s emissions by sector, as defined by the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. You are provided with a table in the reporting platform to structure your response. Using the “Add row” function in this table allows you to report your state/region’s emissions breakdown using multiple sectors and scopes.
2006 IPCC sector | Scope | Emissions (metric tonnes CO2e) |
---|---|---|
Energy |
Scope 1 |
475000 |
Industrial Processes and Product Use |
Scope 1 |
100000 |
Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use |
Scope 1 |
80000 |
Waste |
Scope 1 |
90000 |
Other |
Scope 1 |
70000 |
If International Emissions Analysis Protocol (ICLEI) is selected in 3.4:
Please complete the following table.You are able to add rows by using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table.
UNFCCC sector | Scope | Emissions (metric tonnes CO2e) |
---|---|---|
Select from:
|
Select from:
|
Numerical field |
[Add Row]
The purpose of this question is to understand the breakdown of your state/region’s emissions by sector, as defined by the UNFCCC and used by International Emissions Analysis Protocol (ICLEI). You are provided with a table in the reporting platform to structure your response. Using the “Add row” function in this table allows you to report your state/region’s emissions breakdown using multiple sectors and scopes.
UNFCCC sector | Scope | Emissions (metric tonnes CO2e) |
---|---|---|
Stationary Energy |
Scope 1 |
475000 |
Transport |
Scope 2 |
35000 |
Fugitive Emissions |
Scope 1 |
20000 |
Industrial Processes |
Scope 1 |
100000 |
Agriculture |
Scope 1 |
80000 |
Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry |
Scope 1 |
90000 |
Solid Waste Disposal |
Scope 1 |
90000 |
Wastewater Treatment and Discharge |
Scope 1 |
30000 |
If any other methodology is selected in 3.4:
Please complete the following table.You are able to add rows by using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table.
Source | Scope | Emissions (metric tonnes of CO2e) |
---|---|---|
Text field |
Select from:
|
Numerical field |
[Add Row]
The purpose of this question is to learn more about how your regional government breaks down emissions, which can be valuable information for comparative understanding between states and regions. Please note that this question is flexible to accommodate many of the different kinds of categories used by states and regions. You are provided with a table in the ORS to structure your response. Examples of how your state/region might characterize and differentiate emissions are listed below and shown below.
End user - Buildings, transport, water utilities, wastewater utilities, etc.
Economic sector - Commercial, residential, industrial, agricultural, freight and logistics, etc.
Other - Please describe if your state/region uses another classification approach (e.g. by geography or zone, by zoning or land use classification, etc.).
Source | Scope | Emissions (metric tonnes CO2e) |
---|---|---|
Buildings |
Scope 1 |
475000 |
Water |
Scope 1 |
10000 |
Transport |
Scope 1 |
10000 |
Stationary |
Scope 2 |
379000 |
Mobile |
Scope 2 |
18000 |
Railways |
Scope 2 |
350000 |
If “Yes” is selected in response to 3.9:
Select one of the following options:
Please provide an answer using the drop-down menu provided. If you answer “Yes” you will be directed to question 3.12a, if you answer “No”, “intending to undertake in the future”, "Intending to undertake in the next 2 years", or “Not intending to undertake” you will be directed to question 3.12b. Examples of Scope 3 emissions that a region may include in its community emissions inventory include:
For more information on Scope 3 emissions, please see, for example, the ICLEI International Emissions Analysis Protocol.
If “Yes” is selected in response to 3.12:
Please complete the following table.You are able to add rows by using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table.
Source of Scope 3 emissions | Emissions (metric tonnes CO2e) | Comments |
---|---|---|
Select from:
|
Numerical field |
Text field |
[Add Row]
We anticipate that there will be variations between regions in how Scope 3 emissions are calculated. The information you provide in the question will assist in making comparison between states, regions and drawing lessons learned that can assist in selecting and implementing appropriate methods for accurately measuring and managing this type of emissions. This is a table question designed to allow disclosers to identify the Scope 3 emissions sources, which are included in your region-wide emissions inventory. The table has the following headers:
Source of Scope 3 emissions | Emissions (metric tonnes CO2e) | Comment |
---|---|---|
Roads |
400000 |
Tailpipe emissions from vehicles used by residents |
Upstream emissions from energy use |
500000 |
Upstream/downstream emissions (e.g., mining/transport of coal) |
If “No”, “Intending to undertake in the next 2 years” or “Not intending to undertake” is selected in response to 3.12:
Please complete the following table:
Reason | Explanation |
---|---|
Select from:
|
Text field |
Please select the most appropriate reason as to why your region does not have a breakdown of Scope 3 emissions and explain your choice. Please outline any information you have on future plans to measure and assess Scope 3 emissions breakdown for your region.
If “Yes” is selected in response to 3.1:
Please complete the following table:
Region’s total emissions in year 2010 | Region’s total emissions in year 2030 | Region’s total emissions in year 2050 | Comment |
---|---|---|---|
Numerical field |
Numerical field |
Numerical field |
Text field |
This question asks states and regions to report their historical emissions in the year 2010 and projected region-wide emissions by 2030 and 2050. The information reported for this question will help better understand how a state/region’s region-wide emissions will change over time. If you do not have historical and projected emissions values for 2010, 2030, 2050, but it is available for other years then please report this information in the comments field.
Projected region-wide total emissions are estimated projections of how emissions may evolve in the future. Baselines can inform strategic planning on climate change, emissions mitigation goal setting, and climate policy design. The OECD elaborates more on baseline emissions projections here.
Region's total emissions in year 2010 | Region's total emissions in year 2030 | Region's total emissions in year 2050 |
---|---|---|
156188300 |
186000000 |
205000000 |
If “No” is selected in response to 3.1:
Please complete the following table:
Reason | Explanation |
---|---|
Select from:
|
Text field
|
This question only appears if you selected “No” to question 3.1. The aim of this question is to allow states and regions to give more details on why they do not have information to report regarding their region-wide emissions inventory by selecting an option from the drop-down options in the “Reasoning” field. States and regions can also provide more details and additional information to explain their choice in the “Explanation” field.
If “Yes” is selected in response to 3.1:
Select one of the following options:
Regional governments may see value in having external verification or auditing of their emissions and emission reduction efforts. This can ensure higher levels of quality control/quality assurance. Externally verified information may also be required if performance metrics related to carbon emissions have been devised for government departments or department managers. The ability to call on verified data may provide government organizations a powerful tool in their efforts to influence policy or regulation at other levels of government or with other regional stakeholders. Please only state that you have had or are having verification/assurance carried out if it is by an independent third party accredited to perform verification of GHG data.
Select your response from the following options:
If “Yes” is selected in response to 3.15:
Please complete the following table:
Name of verifier | Year of verification | Comments |
---|---|---|
Text field |
Drop-down list: 2010 – 2019 |
Text field |
This question only applies if you have answered “Yes” to question 3.15. This question provides an opportunity to describe relevant information about the verification process. Please provide the following information if you have it:
Activities using external data helps establish the reliability for the intended applications of the inventory. As a valuable element of the Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) system of the inventory management, there are different tools for verification published by the IPCC.
If “No” is selected in response to 3.15:
Please complete the following table:
Reason | Comments |
---|---|
Select from:
|
Text field |
This question only applies if you have answered “No” to question 3.15. The question includes drop-down options for states and regions to select the reason for their response. This question offers you the opportunity to explain why you do not have an external verification process and provide further information about your future plans for external verification, if you have any.
Please complete the following table:
Region-wide electricity | Amount of electricity | Units | Associated GHG emissions (metric tonnes of CO2e) | Reporting year of data used | Comments |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Electricity consumed |
Numerical field |
Select from:
|
Numerical field |
Numerical field |
Text field |
Electricity produced |
Numerical field |
Select from:
|
Numerical field |
Numerical field |
Text field |
Electricity imported |
Numerical field |
Select from:
|
Numerical field |
Numerical field |
Text field |
This question is your opportunity to detail the amount of electricity generated in your region, consumed by your region and imported by your region. Electricity generated refers to “in-state” generation. The associated GHG emissions are also asked for. The table has the following fields:
Region-wide electricity | Amount of electricity | Units | Associated GHG emissions (metric tonnes of CO2e) | Reporting year of data used | Comments |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Electricity consumed |
47974.80 |
GWh |
19093954 |
2015 |
Emissions are calculated by applying the National electricity emission factor for 2015 |
Electricity produced |
45355.20 |
GWh |
18051385 |
2015 |
Gross electricity production |
Electricity imported |
4689.60 |
GWh |
1866441 |
2015 |
Net electricity imports |
Please complete the following table:
Energy source | Percentage |
---|---|
Coal |
Percentage field |
Gas |
Percentage field |
Oil |
Percentage field |
Nuclear |
Percentage field |
Biomass |
Percentage field |
Geothermal |
Percentage field |
Hydro |
Percentage field |
Solar |
Percentage field |
Wind |
Percentage field |
Other sources |
Percentage field |
The goal of this question is to get a better understanding of the current energy mix of your electricity grid and the contribution made by renewable technologies at the region-wide scale. In the energy source field we have listed the most common sources of energy. If other sources of energy are relevant for your region, please specify them in the comments field. Please indicate the percentage of each energy source constituting your energy mix, where it is applicable. If the energy source is not applicable to your electric grid please enter 0.
Please ensure that the total percentage entered adds up to 100.
Energy source | Percent |
---|---|
Coal |
20 |
Gas |
30 |
Oil |
0 |
Nuclear |
0 |
Biomass |
0 |
Geothermal |
0 |
Hydro |
40 |
Solar |
0 |
Wind |
10 |
Other sources |
0 |
By selecting “Yes” below, you are indicating that you have GHG emissions data from your government operations (sometimes referred to as 'corporate' or 'municipal' emissions) to report at this time.
Select one of the following options:
This question asks states and regions whether they have an emissions inventory for their government operations to report. This question allows states and regions to select “No” as a response to this question if they do not have the relevant information. In this case, the discloser would be directed to question 4.9, which invites them to explain the reasoning behind their response. States and regions that responded with “No” will only see this question, while those that have selected “Yes” will see additional questions designed to ask states and regions specific details regarding their government’s emissions inventory.
If “Yes” is selected in response to 4.1:
Please complete the following table:
From | To |
---|---|
Drop-down calendar |
Drop-down calendar |
The reporting platform provides a drop-down calendar for you to enter the dates requested. Entries must be for a 12-month period. Please provide the start and end dates of the period for which your emissions inventory. If you do not have data for the entire 12-month period, please extrapolate to 12 months.
If “Yes” is selected in response to 4.1:
Select one of the following options:
In your answer, please choose from the list of options provided. The options allow for emissions to be captured from a ranging set of institutions, from government departments to quasi-governmental authorities, public corporations and special purpose vehicles. Further guidance on the suitability of these different methods is available in the Local Government Operations Protocol and the WRI/WBCSD GHG Protocol. If none of the listed options describes your boundary, please select “other” from the options provided. You will then be provided with a text field in which to describe your boundary.
If “Yes” is selected in response to 4.1:
Please complete the following table:
Primary protocol | Comments |
---|---|
Select from:
|
Text field |
This question aims to understand which processes you have used to calculate emissions generated by your government operations. In the first field you will see a list of methodologies. Please select the methodology on which you base the majority of your calculations. The system will only let you select one methodology. These values are not meant to be exhaustive. If you do not see your chosen methodology reflected in the list please select “Other” and describe your methodology.
If you have an emissions inventory you wish to upload you can attach it to this question.
The methods and approaches for the measurement of emissions from government operations are broadly similar to that of companies. Many well-accepted methodologies for quantifying organizational GHG emissions exist, which have applicability to governments seeking to compile this information.
Please select the methodology on which you base the majority of your calculations. The system will only let you select one methodology. These values are not meant to be exhaustive. If you do not see your chosen methodology reflected in the list please select “Other” and describe your methodology.
You might have calculated your emissions using multiple methodologies or by slightly modifying an existing methodology. In the second field, please detail how you have used multiple methodologies or how your region collects and manages data for your government operations.
Some of these measurement methodologies share general principles. Many of these principles are included in the WRI/WBCSD GHG Protocol (and other similar methods) and the following is quoted directly from the ICLEI International Emissions Analysis Protocol:
Many methodologies also suggest similar best practices in measuring greenhouse gas emissions. Some of these suggestions are detailed here:
If “Yes” is selected in response to 4.1:
Select all that apply:
The list consists of the main greenhouse gases defined by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC): carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulphur hexafluoride (SF6), as well as nitrogen trifluoride (NF3).
If “Yes” is selected in response to 4.1:
Please complete the following table:
Scope | Emissions (metric tonnes CO2e) | Comment on total emissions | Change in total emissions from last reported year | Reason for change | Explanation |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total emissions (Scopes 1 & 2) |
Numerical field |
Text field
|
Select from:
|
See drop-down options below |
Text field
|
Total emissions (Scope 1 only) |
Numerical field |
Text field
|
Select from:
|
See drop-down options below |
Text field
|
Total emissions (Scope 2 only) |
Numerical field |
Text field |
Select from:
|
See drop-down options below |
Text field |
Reason for change drop-down options:
If “Increased” is selected:
If “Decreased” is selected:
If “This is our first year of calculation” is selected:
If “Stayed the same” is selected:
If “Do not know” selected is selected:
This question is your opportunity to enter a numeric value for the total figure for your government operations’ GHG emissions in the selected year / 12 months of disclosing. Please indicate figures related to total emissions (combining scopes 1 & 2) in the first row. If your region disaggregates emissions into Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions, please enter the total emissions for scope 1 only in the second row and the total emissions for scope 2 only in the third row. If you do not break down your emissions in this way then please skip this question. Please provide the following information:
Scopes are a common categorization and more details are available in the following methodologies:
For example, the following description of scopes is taken directly from the Local Government Operations Protocol:
Scope | Emissions (metric tonnes CO2e) | Comment on total emissions | Change in total emissions from last reported year | Reason for change | Explanation |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total emissions (Scopes 1 & 2) |
200000 |
See Scopes 1 and 2 comments |
This is our first year of calculation |
Previous data was not reliable |
Our data collection was completed recently |
Total emissions (Scope 1 only) |
100000 |
Includes emissions from building heating and vehicle fleet |
This is our first year of calculation |
Previous data was not reliable |
Our data collection was completed recently |
Total emissions (Scope 2 only) |
100000 |
Includes emissions from electricity consumption and heat from district heating |
This is our first year of calculation |
Previous data was not reliable |
Our data collection was completed recently |
If “Yes” is selected in response to 4.1:
Please complete the following table. You are able to add rows by using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table.
Source | Scope | Emissions (metric tonnes of CO2e) | Comments |
---|---|---|---|
Select from:
|
Select from:
|
Numerical field |
Text field
|
[Add Row]
This modified question asks states and regions a breakdown of the Scope 1 and 2 emissions by source. In CDP’s platform, you will have the option to select as many as apply. The full list of emissions sources is below. Multiple entries can be made, using the ‘Add row’ button at the base of the question. These values are broadly consistent with guidance provided by other organizations for disaggregating and disclosing total emissions.
Source | Scope | Emissions (metric tonnes CO2e) | Comments |
---|---|---|---|
Municipal vehicle fleet |
Scope 1 |
50000 |
Includes emissions from all vehicles |
Electricity generation |
Scope 1 |
50000 |
Includes emissions from all sources of electricity |
Electricity transmission and distribution |
Scope 2 |
100000 |
Emissions from generation of purchased electricity |
If “Yes” is selected in response to 4.1:
Select one of the following options:
Please provide a “Yes” or “No” answer using the drop-down menu provided. If you answer “Yes” you will be directed to question 4.9a, if you answer “No” you will be directed to question 4.9b. Further detail on measuring Scope 3 emissions can be found in the ICLEI Local Government Operations Protocol.
The following description of Scope 3 emissions is taken directly from the ICLEI Local Government Operations Protocol:
If "Yes" is selected in response to 4.8:
Please complete the following table. You are able to add rows by using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table.
Source of Scope 3 emissions | Emissions (metric tonnes of CO2e) | Comments |
---|---|---|
Select from:
|
Numerical field |
Text field |
[Add Row]
We anticipate that there will be variations between regions in how Scope 3 emissions are calculated. The information you provide in the question will assist in making comparison between regions and drawing lessons learned that can assist regions in selecting and implementing appropriate methods for accurately measuring and managing this type of emissions.
This is a table question with three fields to allow explanation of the Scope 3 emissions sources which are included in the government operations inventory. The fields provided are as follows:
Source of Scope 3 emissions | Emissions (metric tonnes CO2e) | Comment |
---|---|---|
Employee commuting |
40000 |
Estimate based on a survey conducted amongst government employees regarding their ways of traveling to work |
If “No” is selected in response to 4.8:
Please complete the following table:
Reason | Explanation |
---|---|
Select from:
| Text field |
Please select the most appropriate reason as to why your government operations do not have a breakdown of Scope 3 emissions and explain your choice. Please outline any information you have on future plans to measure and assess Scope 3 emissions breakdown for your government operations.
If “No” is selected in response to 4.1:
Please complete the following table:
Reason | Explanation |
---|---|
Select from:
|
Text field |
This question only appears if you selected “No” to question 4.1. The aim of this question is to allow states and regions to give more details on the on why they do not have information to report regarding their government’s emissions inventory by selecting an option from the drop-down options in the “Reasoning” field. States and regions can also provide more details and additional information in the “Explanation” field.
If “Yes” is selected in response to 4.1:
Select one of the following options:
Regional governments may see value in having external verification or auditing of their emissions and emission reduction efforts. This can ensure higher levels of quality control / quality assurance. Externally verified information may also be required if performance metrics related to carbon emissions have been devised for government departments or department managers. The ability to call on verified data may provide government organizations a powerful tool in their efforts to influence policy or regulation at other levels of government or with other regional stakeholders.
Select your response from the following options:
If “Yes” is selected in response to 4.10:
Please complete the following table:
Name of verifier | Year of verification | Comments |
---|---|---|
Text field |
Drop-down list: 2010 – 2019 |
Text field |
This question only applies if you have answered “Yes” to question 4.10. This question provides an opportunity to describe relevant information about the verification process. Please provide the following information if you have it:
Activities using external data helps establish the reliability for the intended applications of the inventory. As a valuable element of the Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) system of the inventory management, there are different tools for verification published by the IPCC.
If “No” is selected in response to 4.10:
Please complete the following table:
Reason | Explanation |
---|---|
Select from:
|
Text field |
This question only applies if you have answered “No” to question 4.10. This question offers you the opportunity to explain why you do not have an external verification process and provide further information about your future plans for external verification, if you have any.
Please complete the following table:
Government electricity | Amount of electricity | Units | Associated GHG emissions (metric tonnes of CO2e) | Reporting year of data used | Comments |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total electricity consumed |
Numerical field |
Select from:
|
Numerical field
|
Numerical field
|
Text field |
This question is your opportunity to detail the total amount of electricity consumed by your government. The associated GHG emissions are also asked for. The table has the following fields:
Please complete the following table:
Energy source | Percent |
---|---|
Coal |
Percentage field |
Gas |
Percentage field |
Oil |
Percentage field |
Nuclear |
Percentage field |
Biomass |
Percentage field |
Geothermal |
Percentage field |
Hydro |
Percentage field |
Solar |
Percentage field |
Wind |
Percentage field |
Other sources |
Percentage field |
The goal of this question is to get a better understanding of the current energy mix of your electricity grid and the contribution made by renewable technologies at the region-wide scale. In the Energy source field, we have listed the most common sources of energy. If other sources of energy are relevant for your government electricity consumption, please specify them in comments field. Please indicate the percentage of each energy source constituting your energy mix, where it is applicable. If the energy source is not applicable to your electric grid please enter 0.
Please ensure that the total percentage entered adds up to 100.
Energy source | Percent |
---|---|
Coal |
20 |
Gas |
30 |
Oil |
0 |
Nuclear |
0 |
Biomass |
0 |
Geothermal |
0 |
Hydro |
40 |
Solar |
0 |
Wind |
10 |
Other sources |
0 |
Select one of the following options:
Please indicate whether your region has a climate change action plan by selecting “Yes”; “No”; “In progress”; “Intending to undertake in the next 2 years”; “Not intending to undertake”; or “Do not know” from the drop-down menu provided. If you select “Yes” you will be directed to question 5.1a. If you select “No”, “Not intending to undertake” or “intending to undertake in the next 2 years” you will be directed to question 5.1b.
If “Yes” is selected in response to 5.1:
Please complete the following table.You are able to add rows by using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table.
Publication title | Year of publication | Attachment | Web link | Stage of implementation |
---|---|---|---|---|
Text field |
Numerical field |
Attach your document here. |
Text field |
Select from:
|
If you selected “Yes” in question 5.1, you will be asked to complete this table question to provide additional details about your climate action plan. Please note that if you have multiple climate change action plans, you can provide their information by adding a row when responding to this question. The table has the following fields:
If "No", "Not intending to undertake", or "Intending to undertake in the next 2 years" is selected in response to 5.1:
Please complete the following table:
Reason | Explanation |
---|---|
Select from:
|
Text field |
If you selected “No”, “Not intending to undertake”, or “Intending to undertake in the next 2 years” in question 5.1, you will be asked to complete this table question to explain the reasoning behind your response. The table has the following fields:
Select all that apply:
“Region-wide” includes the entire geographic area of the region while “Government operations” focuses on targets applied solely to your government operations. If you want to report your emissions reduction targets in place for your government operations, please see question 5.3. Please note that:
Disclosing states and regions that have joined the Under2 Coalition must provide a "region-wide" scale emissions reduction target.
Please select all the relevant types of emissions reductions target that are in place within your region. Depending on the type of target you select, individual tables will appear allowing you to provide additional information about each of those target types. If you currently do not have emissions reduction targets, please select “No target” and you will be directed to question 5.2e where you will be given the opportunity to explain the reason behind your response.
Best practice:
It is considered good practice to set ambitious climate targets that encompass all of Kyoto greenhouse gases – carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulphur hexafluoride (SF6) and nitrogen trifluoride (NF3) – emitted by all IPCC sectors – Energy, Industry, Transport, Agriculture, Waste, and LULUCF.
Please make sure to reflect this in your response by specifying the sectors and gases covered by your total region-wide emissions in the comments field of the table for each type of target type selected. If you would like to report on your individual sector-specific emissions reduction targets, please select the sector in the sector field and specify the gases covered in the comments field.
If “Base year emissions target” is selected in response to 5.2:
Please complete the following table.The table is displayed over several rows for readability. You are able to add rows by using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table.
Sector | Year of target implementation | Base year | Base year emissions (metric tonnes CO2e) | Percentage reduction target |
---|---|---|---|---|
Select from:
|
Numerical field |
Numerical field |
Numerical field |
Percentage field |
Target year | Percentage of target achieved | Does this target align with a 1.5-2°C trajectory? | Has a decarbonisation pathway (s) been modelled for your target? | Pathway summary | Please describe the target |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Numerical field | Percentage field | Select from:
| Select from:
| Text field | Text field |
[Add Row]
This question allows you to provide the details of your region-wide base year emissions reduction target. You can provide information on multiple targets by adding additional rows. Please try to complete all the relevant fields of this table. This is a table question with the following fields:
Short target summary: Please include your short target summary in this field. Examples of short target summaries are presented below for total region-wide emissions and sectoral targets respectively.
Sectors covered: If you selected “Total region-wide emissions” in the sector field, please outline the relevant ones covered by your target in this field.
Gases covered: Please specify all the relevant Kyoto GHGs (CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs and SF6) covered by your emissions target.
Web link of target: If there is additional information regarding your target on your regions website, then please provide the web link in this field.
Examples of target summaries
For additional information on base year emissions reduction targets, below are examples of targets that cover both total region-wide and individual sectors.
Sector | States and regions | Example | Minimum inventory needs |
---|---|---|---|
Total region-wide emissions |
Scotland |
Reduce region-wide CO2e emissions by 42% by 2020 based on a 1990 baseline |
Inventory for 1990 and 2020 |
Total region-wide emissions |
Thuringia |
Reduce region-wide CO2e emissions by 60 - 70% by 2030 based on 1990 levels |
Inventory for 1990 and for 2030 |
Total region-wide emissions |
North Rhine-Westphalia |
Reduce the emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG) by at least 80 % by 2050 below 1990 levels |
Inventory for 1990 and 2050 |
Transport | Kronoberg | Reduce region-wide GHG emissions from the transport sector by 35% by 2020 based on 1990 levels | Inventory for 1990 and 2020 |
Sectors where powers are devolved to the Welsh Government | Wales | Annual reduction of 3% in CO2e emissions, in areas of devolved competence by 3% each year from 2011, against a baseline of average emissions from 2006-2010 | Inventory for 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 and all subsequent years |
Agriculture | South Holland | Reduce CO2 emissions of the greenhouses for 50% by 2020 based on 2013 levels | Inventory for 2013 and 2020 |
Sector | Year of target implementation | Base year | Base year emissions (metric tonnes CO2e) | Percentage reduction target | Target year |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total region-wide emissions |
2010 |
1990 |
250000000 |
100 |
2050 |
Industry |
2010 |
1990 |
80000000 |
100 |
2050 |
Percentage of target achieved | Does this target align with a 1.5-2°C trajectory? | Has a decarbonisation pathway(s) been modelled for your target? | Pathway summary | Please describe the target |
---|---|---|---|---|
20 |
Yes |
Yes |
Pathway developed using Energy PATHWAYS model. Three pathways developed for the regions energy system which focused on electrification, renewable energy and innovation. This work shows that the state can achieve deep emission reductions using a variety of technologies and approaches. |
Reduce region-wide emissions for all 2006 IPCC sectors by 100% based on 1990 levels. This target covers CO2, methane and HFCs. |
30 |
No |
No |
N/A |
Reduce region-wide emissions for the industry sector by 100% based on 1990 levels. This target covers CO2 and methane. |
If “Base year intensity target” is selected in response to 5.2:
Please complete the following table.The table is displayed over several rows for readability. You are able to add rows by using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table.
Sector | Year of target implementation |
Intensity unit (Emissions per) | Base year | Base year emissions per intensity unit (metric tonnes CO2e per denominator) |
---|---|---|---|---|
Select from:
|
Numerical field |
Select from:
|
Numerical field |
Numerical field |
Percentage reduction target in emissions intensity | Target year | Percentage of target achieved | Does this target align with a 1.5-2°C trajectory? | Has a decarbonisation pathway(s) been modelled for your target? | Pathway summary | Please describe the target |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Percentage field | Numerical field | Percentage field | Select from:
| Select from:
| Text field | Text field |
[Add Row]
This question allows you to provide the details of your region-wide base year intensity target. You can provide information on multiple targets by adding additional rows. Please try to complete all the relevant fields of this table. This is a table question with the following fields:
Short target summary: Please include your short target summary in this field. Examples of short target summaries are presented below for total region-wide emissions and sectoral targets respectively.
Sectors covered: If you selected “Total region-wide emissions” in the sector field, please outline the relevant ones covered by your target in this field.
Gases covered: Please specify all the relevant Kyoto GHGs (CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs and SF6) covered by your emissions target.
Web link of target: If there is additional information regarding your target on your regions website, then please provide the web link in this field.
Examples of target summaries
For additional information on base year intensity targets, below are examples of targets that cover both total region-wide and individual sectors.
Sector | States and regions | Goal type | Example | Minimum inventory needs |
---|---|---|---|---|
Total region-wide emissions |
Yucatán |
Per emissions goal |
Reduce intensity of region-wide CO2e emissions by 40% by 2030 based on 2005 levels |
Inventory for 2005 and 2030 |
Total region-wide emissions |
Laikipia County |
Per capita goal |
Remain below 2 tonnes of GHG emission/capita through 2050 from 2015 levels while increasing energy access, access to clean drinking water, and food security. |
Inventory for 2015 and 2050 |
Total region-wide emissions |
Bavaria |
Per capita goal |
Reduce GHG emissions per capita to below 2 tons annually by 2050 from 2011 levels |
Inventory for 2011 and 2050 |
Industry | Alberta | Other | Industrial facilities (Facilities) that emit more than 100,000 tonnes of greenhouse gas (GHG) per year require emissions intensity reduction of 20% from facility specific historic baseline. | Inventory for specific historic baseline and subsequent years from 2017 (policy adoption) |
Sector | Year of target implementation | Intensity unit (Emissions per) | Base year | Base year emissions per intensity unit (metric tonnes CO2e per denominator) | Percentage reduction target in emissions intensity |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total region-wide emissions |
2010 |
Metric tonnes of CO2e per capita |
2002 |
2.1 | 15 |
Industry |
2012 |
Metric tonnes of CO2e per capita |
2010 |
1 | 30 |
Target year | Percentage of target achieved | Does this target align with a 1.5-2°C trajectory? |
Has a decarbonisation pathway(s) been modelled for your target? | Pathway summary | Please describe the target |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2050 |
20 | Yes |
No | N/A |
The target is for a 15% reduction on per capita emissions from 2002 by 2050. This target covers all 2006 IPCC sectors and all Kyoto GHGs. |
2030 |
30 | No |
Informal | The state is in the process of developing a pathway to achieve deep decarbonization of the energy system. We have taken the first step in analyzing the technical and economic feasibility in order to provide a basic vision for decarbonization for the state. |
The target ifs for a 30% reduction on per capita emissions from 2010 by 2050. This target covers all Kyoto GHGs. |
If “Baseline scenario (business as usual) target” is selected in response to 5.2:
Please complete the following table. The table is displayed over several rows for readability. You are able to add rows by using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table.
Sector | Year of target implementation | Base year | Base year emissions (metric tonnes CO2e) | Target year |
---|---|---|---|---|
Select from:
|
Numerical field |
Numerical field |
Numerical field |
Numerical field |
Estimated business as usual absolute emissions in target year (metric tonnes CO2e) | Percentage reduction target from business as usual | Percentage of target achieved | Does this target align with a 1.5-2°C trajectory? | Has a decarbonisation pathway(s) been modelled for your target? | Pathway summary | Please describe the target |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Numerical field | Percentage field | Percentage field | Select from:
| Select from:
| Text field | Text field |
[Add Row]
This question allows you to provide the details of your region-wide baseline scenario (business as usual) target. You can provide information on multiple targets by adding additional rows. Please try to complete all the relevant fields of this table. This is a table question with the following fields:
Short target summary: Please include your short target summary in this field. Examples of short target summaries are presented below for total region-wide emissions and sectoral targets respectively.
Sectors covered: If you selected “Total region-wide emissions” in the sector field, please outline the relevant ones covered by your target in this field.
Gases covered: Please specify all the relevant Kyoto GHGs (CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs and SF6) covered by your emissions target.
Web link of target: If there is additional information regarding your target on your regions website, then please provide the web link in this field.
Examples of target summaries
For additional information on baseline scenario targets, below are examples of targets that cover both total region-wide and individual sectors.
Sector | States and regions | Example | Minimum inventory needs |
---|---|---|---|
Total region-wide emissions |
Australian Capital Territory |
Reduce GHG emissions to achieve zero net emissions by 2050. |
Inventory for 2050 |
Total region-wide emissions |
Washington |
Limit GHG emissions to 88.4 MMTCO2e by 2020. |
Inventory for 2020 |
Total region-wide emissions |
Northwest Territories |
Limit GHG emissions increases to 2.500 Mt CO2e by 2020 and to 1.656 Mt CO2e in 2030. |
Inventory for 2020 and 2030 |
Energy | Alberta | No emissions (greenhouse gas and air contaminants) from coal-fired electricity generation by 2030. | Inventory for 2030 |
Sector | Year of target implementation | Base year | Base year emissions (metric tonnes CO2e) | Target year | Estimated business as usual absolute emissions in target year (metric tonnes CO2e) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total region-wide emissions |
2015 |
2005 |
740000000 |
2025 | 790000000 |
Transportation |
2012 |
2002 |
48000000 |
2030 | 38000000 |
Percentage reduction target from business as usual | Percentage of target achieved | Does this target align with a 1.5-2°C trajectory? |
Has a decarbonisation pathway(s) been modelled for your target? | Pathway summary | Please describe the target |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
20 |
10 | Don't know |
Yes | The decarbonisation pathway that has been modelled for this target outlines that energy demand reductions are needed. In addition also required is investment in energy-efficient and low-carbon technologies. Passenger cars will need to be predominately electric. |
Reduce region-wide emissions by 20% in 2025 compared to a BAU scenario. This target covers Energy, Transport and Industry sectors as well as all Kyoto GHGs. |
10 |
10 | No |
No | N/A |
Reduce region-wide emissions by 10% in 2030 compared to a BAU scenario for the Transport sector. This target only covers CO2. |
If “Fixed level target” is selected in response to 5.2:
Please complete the following table. The table is displayed over several rows for readability. You are able to add rows by using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table.
Sector | Year of target implementation | Carbon neutrality target? | Target year | If 'No' selected in Carbon neutrality target: Target year absolute emissions (metric tonnes CO2e) |
---|---|---|---|---|
Select from:
|
Numerical field | Select from:
|
Numerical field | Numerical field |
Percentage of target achieved | Does this target align with a 1.5-2°C trajectory? | Has a decarbonisation pathway(s) been modelled for your target? | Pathway summary | Please describe the target |
---|---|---|---|---|
Percentage field | Select from:
| Select from:
| Text field | Text field |
[Add Row]
This question allows you to provide the details of your region-wide fixed level target. You can provide information on multiple targets by adding additional rows. Please try to complete all the relevant fields of this table. This is a table question with the following fields:
Short target summary: Please include your short target summary in this field. Examples of short target summaries are presented below for total region-wide emissions and sectoral targets respectively.
Sectors covered: If you selected “Total region-wide emissions” in the sector field, please outline the relevant ones covered by your target in this field.
Gases covered: Please specify all the relevant Kyoto GHGs (CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs and SF6) covered by your emissions target.
Web link of target: If there is additional information regarding your target on your regions website, then please provide the web link in this field.
Examples of target summaries
For additional information on baseline scenario targets, below are examples of targets that cover both total region-wide and individual sectors.
Sector | States and regions | Example | Minimum inventory needs |
---|---|---|---|
Total region-wide emissions |
Australian Capital Territory |
Reduce GHG emissions to achieve zero net emissions by 2050. |
Inventory for 2050 |
Total region-wide emissions |
Washington |
Limit GHG emissions to 88.4 MMTCO2e by 2020. |
Inventory for 2020 |
Total region-wide emissions |
Northwest Territories |
Limit GHG emissions increases to 2.500 Mt CO2e by 2020 and to 1.656 Mt CO2e in 2030. |
Inventory for 2020 and 2030 |
Energy |
Alberta |
No emissions (greenhouse gas and air contaminants) from coal-fired electricity generation by 2030. |
Inventory for 2030 |
Sector | Year of target implementation | Carbon neutrality target? | Target year | Percentage of target achieved | Does this target align with a 1.5-2°C trajectory? | Has a decarbonisation pathway(s) been modelled for your target? | Pathway summary | Please describe the target |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total region-wide emissions |
2010 | Yes |
2050 |
30 |
Yes |
No | N/A |
To reduce state-wide CO2-e emissions to net zero by 2050 and covers all 2006 IPCC sectors as well as all Kyoto GHGs |
Energy |
2010 | Yes |
2040 |
50 |
Yes |
Yes | The decarbonisation pathway modelled incorporates energy efficiency and low-carbon technology and infrastructure, including low-carbon electricity which is primarily provided by solar and wind resources, while natural gas generation continues to provide energy when solar and wind are not available until the year 2040 when energy storage is expected to contribute in meeting demand during these periods. |
No emissions from energy generation by 2040. This target covers only CO2 emissions. |
If “No target” is selected in response to 5.2:
Please complete the following table:
Reason | Explanation |
---|---|
Select from
|
Text field |
Please give more details on why you do not have a region-wide target by selecting the most suitable option from the drop-down options provided in the “Reason” field and give an explanation in the context of you region. Select “Other” if you have a different reason that best explains your region’s lack of emissions reduction target and specify it in the text field provided.
Select one of the following options:
To respond to this question, please select “Yes” or “No” from the drop-down menu. Please note this question applies to government operations only. If you want to report information about your targets that are in place at the region-wide level, please see question 5.2. Responding “Yes” directs you to question 5.4, where you will be asked to specify the types of target you have for your government operations. Responding “No” directs you to question 5.5 to explain the reason behind your response.
If “Yes” is selected in response to 5.3:
Select all that apply:
Please select all the relevant types of emissions reductions target that are in place for your government’s operations. Depending on the type of target you select, individual tables will appear allowing you to provide additional information about each of those target types.
Best practice:
It is considered good practice to set ambitious climate targets that encompass all of Kyoto greenhouse gases – carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulphur hexafluoride (SF6) and nitrogen trifluoride (NF3) – emitted by all IPCC sectors – Energy, Industry, Transport, Agriculture, Waste, and LULUCF.
Please make sure to reflect this in your response by specifying the sectors and gases covered by your government operations target in the comments field of the table for each type of target type selected. If you would like to report on your individual sector-specific emissions reduction targets, please select the sector in the sector field and specify the gases covered in the comments section.
If “Base year emissions target” is selected in response to 5.4:
Please complete the following table. The table is displayed over several rows for readability. You are able to add rows by using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table.
Sector | Year of target implementation | Base year | Base year emissions (metric tonnes CO2e) | Percentage reduction target |
---|---|---|---|---|
Select from:
|
Numerical field |
Numerical field |
Numerical field |
Percentage field |
Target year | Percentage of target achieved | Has a decarbonisation pathway(s) been modelled for your target? | Comments |
---|---|---|---|
Numerical field | Percentage field | Select from:
| Text field |
[Add Row]
This question allows you to provide the details of your base year emissions reduction target for your government operations. You can provide information on multiple targets by adding additional rows. Please try to complete all the relevant fields of this table. This is a table question with the following fields:
Short target summary: Please include a brief description of your target in this field.
Sectors covered: If you selected “Total” in the sector field, please outline the relevant ones covered by your target in this field.
Gases covered: Please specify all the relevant Kyoto GHGs (CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs and SF6) covered by your base year emissions target.
Sector | Year of target implementation | Base year | Base year emissions (metric tonnes CO2e) | Percentage reduction target |
---|---|---|---|---|
Total |
2010 |
1990 |
250000000 |
100 |
Industry |
2010 |
1990 |
80000000 |
100 |
Target year | Percentage of target achieved | Has a decarbonisation pathway(s) been modelled for your target? | Comments |
---|---|---|---|
2050 |
20 |
Yes |
Reduce emissions from government operations emissions for all 2006 IPCC sectors by 100% based on 1990 levels. This target covers CO2, methane and HFCs. |
2050 |
30 |
Informal |
Reduce emissions from industrial government operations sector by 100% based on 1990 levels. This target covers CO2 and methane. |
If “Base year intensity target” is selected in response to 5.4:
Please complete the following table. The table is displayed over several rows for readability. You are able to add rows by using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table.
Sector | Year of target implementation | Intensity unit (Emissions per) | Base year | Base year emissions per intensity unit (metric tonnes CO2e per denominator) |
---|---|---|---|---|
Select from:
|
Numerical field |
Select from:
|
Numerical field |
Numerical field |
Percentage reduction target in emissions intensity | Target year | Percentage of target achieved | Has a decarbonisation pathway(s) been modelled for your target? | Comments |
---|---|---|---|---|
Percentage field | Numerical field | Percentage field | Select from:
| Text field |
[Add Row]
This question allows you to provide the details of your base year intensity target for your government operations. You can provide information on multiple targets by adding additional rows. Please try to complete all the relevant fields of this table. This is a table question with the following fields:
Short target summary: Please include a brief description of your target in this field.
Sectors covered: If you selected “Total” in the sector field, please outline the relevant ones covered by your target in this field.
Gases covered: Please specify all the relevant Kyoto GHGs (CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs and SF6) covered by your base year emissions target.
Sector | Year of target implementation | Intensity unit (Emissions per) | Base year | Base year emissions per intensity unit (metric tonnes CO2e per denominator) |
---|---|---|---|---|
Total |
2010 |
Metric tonnes of CO2e per capita |
2002 |
2.1 |
Industry |
2012 |
Metric tonnes of CO2e per capita |
2010 |
1 |
Percentage reduction target in emissions intensity | Target year | Percentage of target achieved | Has a decarbonisation pathway(s) been modelled for your target? | Comments |
---|---|---|---|---|
15 |
2050 |
20 |
No |
Target is for a reduction of 15% per capita emissions from 2002 by 2050. This target covers all 2006 IPCC sectors and all Kyoto GHGs. |
30 |
2030 |
30 |
Informal |
Target is for a reduction of 30% reduction on per capita emissions from 2010 by 2050. This target covers all Kyoto GHGs. |
If “Baseline scenario (business as usual) target” is selected in response to 5.4:
Please complete the following table. The table is displayed over several rows for readability. You are able to add rows by using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table.
Sector | Year of target implementation | Base year | Base year emissions (metric tonnes CO2e) | Target year |
---|---|---|---|---|
Select from:
|
Numerical field | Numerical field |
Numerical field |
Numerical field |
Estimated business as usual absolute emissions in target year (metric tonnes CO2e) | Percentage reduction target from business as usual | Percentage of target achieved | Has a decarbonisation pathway(s) been modelled for your target? | Comments |
---|---|---|---|---|
Numerical field | Percentage field | Percentage field | Select from:
| Text field |
[Add Row]
This question allows you to provide the details of your baseline scenario (business as usual) target for your government operations. You can provide information on multiple targets by adding additional rows. Please try to complete all the relevant fields of this table. This is a table question with the following fields:
Short target summary: Please include your short target summary in this field.
Sectors covered: If you selected “Total region-wide emissions” in the sector field, please outline the relevant ones covered by your target in this field.
Gases covered: Please specify all the relevant Kyoto GHGs (CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs and SF6) covered by your emissions target.
Sector | Year of target implementation | Base year | Base year emissions (metric tonnes CO2e) | Target year |
---|---|---|---|---|
Total |
2015 |
2005 |
740000000 |
2025 |
Transport |
2012 |
2002 |
48000000 |
2030 |
Estimated business as usual absolute emissions in target year (metric tonnes CO2e) | Percentage reduction target from business as usual | Percentage of target achieved | Has a decarbonisation pathway(s) been modelled for your target? | Comments |
---|---|---|---|---|
790000000 |
20 |
10 |
Yes |
20% reduction in emissions in 2025 compared to a BAU scenario. This target covers Energy, Transport and Industry sectors as well as all Kyoto GHGs. |
38000000 |
10 |
10 |
Yes |
10% reduction in emissions in 2030 compared to a BAU scenario for the Transport sector. This target only covers CO2. |
If “Fixed level target” is selected in response to 5.4:
Please complete the following table.You are able to add rows by using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table.
Sector | Year of target implementation | Percentage reduction target | Target year | Percentage of target achieved | Has a decarbonisation pathway(s) been modelled for your target? | Comments |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Select from:
|
Numerical field |
Percentage field |
Numerical field |
Percentage field |
Select from:
|
Text field |
[Add Row]
This question allows you to provide the details of your fixed level target for your government operations. You can provide information on multiple targets by adding additional rows. Please try to complete all the relevant fields of this table. This is a table question with the following fields:
Short target summary: Please include your short target summary in this field.
Sectors covered: If you selected “Total region-wide emissions” in the sector field, please outline the relevant ones covered by your target in this field.
Gases covered: Please specify all the relevant Kyoto GHGs (CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs and SF6) covered by your emissions target.
Sector | Year of target implementation | Percentage reduction target | Target year | Percentage of target achieved | Has a decarbonisation pathway(s) been modelled for your target? | Comments |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total |
2010 |
100 |
2050 |
30 |
Informal |
To reduce government operations’ CO2-e emissions to net zero by 2050 and covers all 2006 IPCC sectors as well as all Kyoto GHGs |
Energy |
2010 |
100 |
2040 |
50 |
Yes |
No emissions from energy generation by 2040. This target covers only CO2 emissions. |
If “No” is selected in response to 5.3:
Please complete the following table:
Reason | Explanation |
---|---|
Select from:
|
Text field |
Please give more details on why you do not have a region-wide target by selecting the most suitable option from the drop-down options provided in the “Reason” field and give an explanation in the context of your regional government. Select “Other” if you have a different reason that best explains why your regional government does not have an emissions reduction target and specify it in the text field provided.
Select one of the following options:
To respond to this question, please select “Yes” or “No” from the drop-down menu. Responding “Yes” will direct you to question 5.6a, where you will be asked to provide details of your reduction target; responding “No” directs you to question 5.6b.
If “Yes” is selected in response to 5.6:
Please complete the following table. The table is displayed over several rows for readability. You are able to add rows by using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table.
Scale | Sector | Target type | Base year | Target year |
---|---|---|---|---|
Select from:
|
Select from:
|
Select from:
|
Numerical field |
Numerical field |
Target energy | Target (%) | Percentage of target achieved | Comments |
---|---|---|---|
Select from:
| Percentage field
| Percentage field | Text field |
[Add Row]
If you select “Yes” to question 5.6, please complete this table question with the following fields:
Increase efficiency: Increasing energy efficiency means getting more from the energy used to deliver goods and services through innovation, and/or cutting out wasted energy, reducing the energy used while maintaining output.
Reduce consumption: Targets refer to reducing consumption patterns of both final and primary energy and electricity to deliver goods and services that is delivering equal or greater output with less energy.
Electricity: As a widely used form of energy, targets refer to the efficiency of electric power systems – encompassing generation, transmission, distribution and utilization of electrical energy – that provide electricity to households, industry and transport sector among others.
Final energy: It refers to the form of energy available to end users for consumption such as households, industry and agriculture, following the conversion from primary energy carriers (e.g. crude oil, natural gas, coal, and renewables). Final forms of energy include, among others, electricity, heating oil, fuels, gas and district heat (Reference: European Nuclear Society).
Primary energy: Energy that has not been subjected to any conversion or transformation process. Primary energy includes non-renewable energy and renewable energy (Reference: European Council for an Energy Efficient Economies).
Short target summary: Please include your short target summary in this field. Examples of short target summaries are presented below.
Sectors covered: If you selected “Total” in the sector field, please outline the relevant ones covered by your target in this field.
Examples of target summaries
For additional information on energy efficiency targets, below are examples of targets that cover both total and individual sectors as well as region-wide and government operations target scale.
Scale | States and regions | Sectors | Target type | Target energy | Example |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Region-wide |
Navarra |
Total |
Increase efficiency |
Primary energy |
Increase energy efficiency by 30% by 2030 based on BAU scenario |
Region-wide |
Baden Wurttemberg |
Total |
Reduce consumption |
Final energy |
Reduce the consumption of end-use energy by 50% by 2050 based on 2010 levels |
Region-wide |
South Holland |
Industry |
Reduce consumption |
Final energy |
Reduce region-wide energy consumption by the industry sector by 6.5 % by 2020 based on 2015 levels |
Government operations |
Yucatan |
Energy |
Increase efficiency |
Electricity |
Reduce electricity consumption in public administration buildings by 10% by 2020 based on 2015 levels |
Scale | Sector | Target type | Base year | Target year |
---|---|---|---|---|
Region-wide |
Total |
Increase efficiency |
2013 |
2030 |
Government operations |
Industry |
Reduce consumption |
2000 |
2020 |
Target energy | Target (%) | Percentage of target achieved | Comments |
---|---|---|---|
Primary energy |
15 |
20 |
Increase region-wide primary energy efficiency for industrial and transport sectors by 15% by 2030 based on 2013. |
Electricity |
20 |
10 |
Reduce electricity consumption in state industrial buildings by 20% by 2020 based on 2000. |
If “No” is selected in response to 5.6
Please complete the following table:
Reason | Explanation |
---|---|
Select from:
|
Text field |
Please give more details on why you do not have an energy efficiency target by selecting the most suitable option from the drop-down options provided in the “Reason” field and give an explanation in the context of your region. Select “Other” if you have a different reason that best explains why your region does not have an energy efficiency target and specify it in the text field provided.
Select one of the following options:
To respond to this question, please select “Yes” or “No” from the drop-down menu. Responding “Yes” will direct you to question 5.7a, where you will be asked to provide details of your reduction target; responding “No” directs you to question 5.7b.
If “Yes” is selected in response to 5.7:
Please complete the following table.The table is displayed over several rows for readability. You are able to add rows by using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table.
Scale | Target type | Unit type | Base year | Total renewable production or consumption in base year | Target year |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Select from:
|
Select from:
| Select from:
|
Numerical field |
Numerical field
|
Numerical field |
Total renewable production or consumption in target year | Target (%) | Percentage of target achieved | Web link with target information | Comments |
---|---|---|---|---|
Numerical field
| Numerical field | Percentage field | Text field | Text field
|
[Add Row]
If you selected “Yes” to question 5.7, please complete this table question with the following fields:
Renewable electricity consumption: It is the electricity generated from renewable energy sources delivered to consumers (public and private). It can be defined as the ratio between the electricity produced from renewable energy sources and the gross national electricity consumption – which comprises national electricity generation from all fuels (including auto production), plus electricity imports, minus exports (Reference: European Environment Agency).
Renewable electricity production: It refers to the process of producing or generating electrical energy by transforming other forms of renewable energy, for example wind power or geothermal energy (Reference: Eurostat).
Renewable energy consumption: It is the consumption of energy from renewable sources. It can be defined as the energy commodities delivered for energy purposes to industry, transport, households, services, agriculture, forestry and fisheries, including electricity and heat consumed by the energy sector and losses of electricity and heat in distribution and transmission (Reference: Eurostat).
Renewable energy production: It refers to the primary production of energy from renewable sources, that is the extraction of energy products in a useable form from natural sources. This occurs when natural sources are exploited (e.g. hydro power plants, wind farms). Transforming energy from one form into another (from solar to heat) is not primary production (Reference: Eurostat).
Other: Please specify the type of target you have.
Examples of target summaries
For additional information on renewable energy targets, below are examples of target summaries.
Scale | States and regions | Target type | Examples |
---|---|---|---|
Region-wide |
Catalonia |
Renewable energy consumption |
Increase renewables to 20% of gross final energy consumption by 2020 |
Region-wide |
Sao Paulo |
Renewable energy production |
Increase the share of renewable energy in the region-wide energy mix to 69% by 2020. |
Government Operations |
Skane |
Renewable energy consumption |
Free of fossil fuels within public transport by the year 2020. |
Scale | Target type | Base year | Total renewable production or consumption in base year | Unit type | Target year |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Region-wide |
Renewable energy consumption |
2000 |
2816 |
MW |
2020 |
Government operations |
Renewable electricity production |
2000 |
750 |
MW |
2025 |
Total renewable production or consumption in target year | Target (%) | Percentage of target achieved | Comments |
---|---|---|---|
4500 | 20 | 10 | Increase renewable consumption by 20% of by 2020. |
1500 | 30 | 20 | Increase renewable production to 1,500 MW of production by 2025. |
If “No” is selected in response to 5.7:
Please complete the following table:
Reason | Explanation |
---|---|
Select from:
|
Text field |
Please give more details on why you do not have a renewable energy/electricity target by selecting the most suitable option from the drop-down options provided in the “Reason” field and give an explanation in the context of your region. Select “Other” if you have a different reason that best explains why your region does not have an renewable energy/electricity target and specify it in the text field provided.
This question covers which climate actions you are taking in your region. A total of 110 possible climate actions available, grouped into the 11 sectors as outlined below. To disclose the climate actions you are taking for a specific sector, simply click on the sector you wish to disclose your actions for, and tables will appear outlining the climate actions associated with selected sectors. You can select more than one sector and if your region currently does not have any climate actions planned or implemented, please skip this question.
Number of climate actions by sector:
Tables with relevant climate actions by sector will appear depending on the response to 5.8:
Please complete the following table:
Climate actions | Is your region taking this action? | What is the scale of its implementation? | Action description |
---|---|---|---|
Select from Appendix B
|
Select from:
|
Select from:
|
Text field
|
Tables with relevant climate actions by sector will appear depending on the response to 5.8. Each table will present all relevant climate actions for that sector asking you to provide additional information on the following fields:
Climate action | Description / Additional information |
---|---|
Promote sustainable farming practices (excluding soil health/carbon sequestration actions) |
More info: UC Davis - http://asi.ucdavis.edu/programs/sarep/about/what-is-sustainable-agriculture |
Improve soil health/soil carbon sequestration capacity | More info: Nature - https://www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/soil-carbon-storage-84223790 |
Improve institutional capacity of farmer and rural organizations |
More info: FAO - http://www.fao.org/rural-institutions/en/ |
Reduce methane emissions from agriculture (e.g. install dairy digesters, etc.) | More info: IEA - https://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/buildings_roadmap.pdf |
Climate action | Description / Additional information |
---|---|
Improve heating and cooling efficiency (e.g. audits, insulation, HVAC maintenance, white roofs, etc.) |
More info: IEA - https://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/buildings_roadmap.pdf |
Increase awareness/engage public on energy efficiency/clean energy programs |
More info: EEA - https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/achieving-energy-efficiency-through-behaviour/file |
Install biomass heating |
More info: Forest - https://ec.europa.eu/energy/intelligent/projects/sites/iee-projects/files/projects/documents/forest_guide_for_designers_and_architects_en.pdf |
Install clean cook stoves |
More info: Global Alliance for Clean Cook stoves - http://cleancookstoves.org/resources/272.html |
Install energy efficient lighting systems (e.g. LED) |
More info: WBDG - www.wbdg.org/resources/energy-efficient-lighting |
Install geothermal heating | More info: US EPA - https://www.epa.gov/rhc/geothermal-heating-and-cooling-technologies |
Install more efficient luminaires in outdoor lighting (e.g. LED) |
More info: EC - http://ec.europa.eu/environment/gpp/pdf/tbr/street_lighting_tbr.pdf |
Install smart energy meters/sub-meters |
Smart meters use digital technology to enable a customer to see real time energy consumption and cost in a way that might cause them to reduce their energy consumption and become more efficient. Source: CNEE - https://spotforcleanenergy.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/ee936982af6480acb10ae1ca83ea5913.pdf |
Install solar heating/hot water |
More info: Autodesk - https://sustainabilityworkshop.autodesk.com/buildings/solar-hot-water |
Promote and strengthen building energy performance rating/certification/benchmarking |
"Benchmarking" assesses building energy performance based on actual energy use information. Public disclosure and rating or certification of building energy performance can support investment in energy efficiency improvements and increase transparency to buyers and renters. Source: ACEEE - https://database.aceee.org/city/benchmarking-disclosure |
Promote energy efficient appliances |
More info: EC - https://ec.europa.eu/energy/en/topics/energy-efficiency/energy-efficient-products |
Set/strengthen appliance efficiency standards |
Examples: US Energy Department - https://energy.gov/eere/buildings/appliance-and-equipment-standards-program |
Set/strengthen HVAC efficiency standards | Example: California Energy Commission 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards For Residential And Nonresidential Buildings https://www.energy.ca.gov/2018publications/CEC-400... |
Set/strengthen lighting efficiency standards |
More info: EESI - http://www.eesi.org/papers/view/fact-sheet-energy-efficiency-standards-for-appliances-lighting-and-equipmen |
Switch from heating oil to natural gas |
Natural gas is a non-renewable and burns cleaner than oil or coal, nearly 30% less carbon dioxide than either heating oil or average utility plant, Source: Palliser, J. (2011). In the hot seat—Analyzing your heating options. Science Scope, 34(6), 66-72. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/43184089 |
Net Zero Carbon Buildings Commitment participants: reducing operating emissions of government-owned building portfolio | More info: World GBC- https://www.worldgbc.org/thecommitment |
Climate action | Description / Additional information |
---|---|
Enable net metering |
"Net metering" is a policy that allows unused distributed power to be delivered to the grid at a per kilowatt hour (kWh) credit. Customers are credited for any power they deliver to the grid and then after they use power, they are billed only for the “net” power they use over their generation (CNEE). Source: CNEE - https://spotforcleanenergy.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/e4a2cb1ddfe74438231b1ec98cdadae4.pdf |
Expand/improve transmission to integrate renewables |
Renewable Energy Integration focuses on incorporating renewable energy, distributed generation, energy storage, thermally activated technologies, and demand response into the electric distribution and transmission system. The integration also establishes viable business models for incorporating these technologies into capacity planning, grid operations, and demand-side management. Source: Office of Electricity Delivery & Energy Reliability https://energy.gov/oe/services/technology-development/renewable-energy-integration |
Install natural gas power |
More info: AEP - https://www.aep.com/about/IssuesAndPositions/Gener... |
Install biomass power |
More info: WBDG - https://www.wbdg.org/resources/biomass-electricity... |
Install carbon capture and storage (CCS) |
Carbon capture and geological storage (CCS) is a technique for trapping carbon dioxide emitted from large point sources such as power plants, compressing it, and transporting it to a suitable storage site where it is injected into the ground. Source: European Commission https://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/lowcarbon/ccs_en |
Install combined heat and power (CHP) or trigen | More info: UK GOV - https://www.gov.uk/guidance/combined-heat-and-power |
Install energy storage system |
More info: Energy Storage Association - http://energystorage.org/energy-storage/energy-storage-technologies |
Install hydropower |
More info: https://www.worldenergy.org/data/resources/resource/hydropower/ |
Install microgrids |
A microgrid is a localized grouping of electricity generation, energy storage, and loads that normally operates connected to a traditional centralized grid but can be disconnected and function autonomously. Source: Journal of Clean Energy Technologies - http://www.jocet.org/vol5/342-S012.pdf |
Install nuclear power |
More info: World Nuclear Association - http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/current-and-future-generation/nuclear-power-in-the-world-today.aspx |
Install smart grids |
"Smart grid" is an umbrella term describing an electrical transmission and distribution system that employs a full array of advanced electronic metering, communications, and control technologies. The grid would provide detailed feedback to customers and system operators on energy use and allow precise control of the energy flow in the grid. Source: ACEEE - http://aceee.org/policy-brief/smart-grid |
Install solar power (e.g. PV, CSP) |
More info: World Bank - http://blogs.worldbank.org/category/tags/solar-energy |
Install geothermal power |
More info: NREL - https://www.nrel.gov/workingwithus/re-geo-elec-production.html |
Install wind power (e.g. onshore, offshore) |
More info: AEWA - https://www.awea.org/wind-power-101 |
Install ocean/tidal/wave power |
More info: World Energy Council - https://www.worldenergy.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/WEResources_Marine_2016.pdf |
Measure energy productivity (e.g. GDP per unit of energy) |
Can be widely measure as the physical use of raw material to the economic performance of the whole economy. The policy target aims to improve the efficiency of the use of the resource. For the agricultural sector energy productivity would be the quantity of a given agricultural product per unit of energy required for its production. Sources: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0308521X7990012X |
Promote demand-side management programs |
Demand-side management (DSM) programs consist of the planning, implementing, and monitoring activities to provide cost-effective energy and capacity resources to help defer the need for new sources of power, including generating facilities, power purchases, and transmission and distribution capacity additions. Source: EIA - https://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/eia861/dsm/ |
Reform utility revenue policies and rate structures |
Efforts to reform the current utility regulatory construct have taken many forms, including regulating and rewarding utilities based on their performance against certain metrics, rather than the traditional rate of return based on spending. Source: CNEE - https://spotforcleanenergy.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/3c8cf27c34a31283233d35966d218e5e.pdf |
Phase out coal-fired/inefficient power stations |
More info: Climate Analytics - http://climateanalytics.org/briefings/eu-coal-phas... |
Set energy efficiency resource standards (EERS) |
An "energy efficiency resource standard" (EERS) establishes a percentage of energy demand reduction by a specific date or on an annual basis that a utility will achieve through demand reduction programs (e.g. x utility will achieve a 10% reduction in demand (or demand growth) over the next 10 years). Source: CNEE - https://spotforcleanenergy.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/1c7edec388b2b5bdeea29ede128e573d.pdf |
Climate action | Description / Additional information |
---|---|
Adopt feed in tariff for renewables |
Feed-In Tariffs are payments to ordinary energy users for the renewable electricity they generate. These can be presented as part of schemes that pays people for creating their own “green electricity”. Source: Feed-In Tariffs http://www.fitariffs.co.uk/fits/ |
Adopt reverse auction for renewables |
A "reverse auction" mechanism is an auction approach to procurement, wherein sellers, which meet certain minimum criteria, are eligible to submit non-negotiable price bids. The buyer (typically a utility) then selects winning sellers based on the lowest priced bids first, and signs non-negotiable standard contracts with the winning sellers, incorporating the prices bid by that seller. Source: SEIA - https://www.seia.org/initiatives/reverse-auction-mechanism |
Enable PACE (long term property tax based loans) financing |
"Property Assessed Clean Energy" (PACE) is a financing mechanism implemented by local governments that allows property owners to finance energy efficiency and renewable energy improvements via a voluntary property tax assessment collected by local governments, just as other public infrastructure investments are financed. Source: CNEE - https://spotforcleanenergy.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/32c1e5155f58039fd5d4602f69695008.pdf |
Establish GHG emissions trading program |
"GHG trading programs" harnesses market forces to reduce emissions cost-effectively. Also called "cap and trade," the program sets a cap on emissions and allows the market to determine a price on carbon, which drives investment decisions and spurs market innovation. Source: C2ES - https://www.c2es.org/content/cap-and-trade-basics/ |
Increase awareness/engage public on financing mechanisms and incentives for energy efficiency/clean energy |
Examples: Cambridge City Council - https://www.cambridge.gov.uk/grants-and-incentives-for-improving-your-homes-energy-efficiency |
Invest in clean tech R&D |
Policy examples include tax credit claims for companies in the clean tech Research and Development (R&D) sector (UK) and establishing funding programs to support clean energy R&D initiatives. More info: IEA - https://www.iea.org/media/etp/tracking2017/TrackingCleanEnergyInnovationProgress.pdf |
Issue green bonds |
"Green bonds" were created to fund projects that have positive environmental and/or climate benefits. The majority of the green bonds issued are green “use of proceeds” or asset-linked bonds. Proceeds from these bonds are earmarked for green projects but are backed by the issuer’s entire balance sheet. There have also been green "use of proceeds" revenue bonds, green project bonds and green securitized bonds. Source: CBI - https://www.climatebonds.net/market/explaining-green-bonds |
Promote on-bill financing |
"On-bill financing" is a mechanism for financing clean energy and energy efficiency projects in buildings in which investments are re-paid through a line-item in the utility bill. Source: CNEE - https://spotforcleanenergy.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/9b01946799e4b5aa2ad36382efb3d1e4.pdf |
Provide green mortgages |
Under a "green mortgage," a bank or mortgage lender offers a house buyer preferential terms if they can demonstrate that the property for which they are borrowing meets certain environmental standards. Source: WGBC - http://www.worldgbc.org/news-media/what-are-green-mortgages-how-will-they-revolutionise-home-energy-efficiency |
Provide loans/guarantees for energy efficiency/clean energy |
Examples: Queensland Farmers' Federation - https://www.qff.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/QFF-EnergySavers-Factsheet.pdf |
Provide tax incentives for clean energy |
Source: KPMG - http://www.kpmg-institutes.com/institutes/taxwatch/articles/2017/10/2017-green-tax-index.html |
Support clean tech clusters/companies |
A "clean tech cluster" is a group of clean tech companies located in close geographic proximity in order to encourage greater collaboration and innovation. Clusters bring together innovators and businesses to take research into production. Source: The Cleantech East network http://cleantecheast.uk/the-importance-of-cleantech-clusters/ |
Implement carbon tax |
A carbon tax is a form of explicit carbon pricing directly linked to the level of carbon dioxide emissions. Source: World Bank - https://www.worldbank.org/content/dam/Worldbank/document/SDN/background-note_carbon-tax.pdf |
Climate action | Description / Additional information |
---|---|
Collaborate with cities/local governments in reducing emissions/increasing resilience |
More info: Global Covenant of Mayors - https://www.globalcovenantofmayors.org/ |
Collaborate with national governments in reducing emissions/increasing resilience |
More info: UN-Habitat https://unhabitat.org/cop21-vertical-integration/ |
Collaborate with other states/regions in reducing emissions/increasing resilience |
More info: Initiative for Climate Action Transparency - http://www.climateactiontransparency.org/icat-guidance/non-state-subnational-action/ |
Support and incentivize businesses in reducing emissions/increasing resilience |
More info: Deloitte - https://www2.deloitte.com/uk/en/pages/real-estate/articles/carbon-penalties-and-incentives-report.html |
Complete a 2050 Pathways analysis (i.e. strategy for meeting mid-century GHG reduction goals) | More info: The Climate Group - https://www.theclimategroup.org/project/2050-pathways |
Climate action | Description / Additional information |
---|---|
Improve energy efficiency of industrial processes |
|
Support green manufacturing |
Green manufacturing is the application of green technology to curb the negative impacts of human involvement. Essentially is the introduction of environmental thinking into manufacturing processes, which involves transformation of industrial operations in using green energy, developing and selling green products and employing green processes in business operations. Source: Paul et al. / Procedia Materials Science 6 (2014) 1644 – 1649 |
Support digitalization of industry |
The inclusion of IoT into manufacturing processes as well as artificial intelligence and sensors, among others, creating efficiency through digitalization. Source: World Economic Forum - http://reports.weforum.org/digital-transformation/wp-content/blogs.dir/94/mp/files/pages/files/wef1601-digitaltransformation-1401.pdf |
Climate action | Description / Additional information |
---|---|
Establish GHG reduction plan for LULUCF (e.g. REDD+, etc.) |
More info: UNFCCC - http://unfccc.int/land_use_and_climate_change/lulucf/items/1084.php |
Promote conservation efforts for natural areas |
Example: Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife - http://www.oregonconservationstrategy.org/conservation-toolbox/conservation-in-urban-areas/ |
Promote sustainable forest management |
|
Undertake strategic environmental assessment | More info: EC - http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eia/sea-legalcontext.htm |
Promote sustainable coastal ecosystem management |
More info: EC - http://ec.europa.eu/environment/integration/research/newsalert/pdf/coastal_zones_sustainable_management_46si_en.pdf |
Establish guidelines for siting renewable power |
Guidelines should optimize siting options (where to deploy renewable power), getting more out of infrastructure that has already been built, sites that optimize the use of the grid, use of brownfield sites. More info: EPA - https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-04/documents/handbook_siting_repowering_projects.pdf |
Climate action | Description / Additional information |
---|---|
Improve public transport services (e.g. adopt, high speed rail, improve bus services, improve rail services) |
Example: CIVITAS - http://civitas.eu/measure/improving-public-transport-infrastructure |
Promote digitalization in the transport sector (e.g. real-time information) |
More info: Deloitte - https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/uk/Documents/bps/deloitte-uk-transport-digital-age.pdf |
Switch freight from trucks to rail |
Example: UK Department of Transport - https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/552492/rail-freight-strategy.pdf |
Increase awareness/engage public on private transport measures |
More info: UN - https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/2375Mobilizing%20Sustainable%20Transport.pdf |
Install electric vehicle charging infrastructure (i.e. home, work, highways, etc.) |
Example: US Department of Energy - https://www.afdc.energy.gov/fuels/electricity_infrastructure.html |
Promote alternative fuel production (e.g. biofuels, natural gas, hydrogen, etc.) |
Alternative fuels are transportation fuels that are not derived from petroleum, and they include ethanol, electricity, hydrogen, compressed or liquid natural gas, and gasoline and diesel derived from coal, natural gas, or biomass. Source: The National Academies Press (NAP) - https://www.nap.edu/read/18264/chapter/6 |
Set/strengthen fuel economy standards for cars/trucks |
Example: https://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/transport/vehicles/cars_en |
Set GHG emissions standards for vehicles |
"GHG emissions standards" require automakers to manufacture vehicles that collectively emit fewer GHGs, typically a given percentage lower than a previous model year for a specific vehicle type (e.g. 22% fewer GHGs than 2002 vehicles by 2012). Source: ACEEE - https://database.aceee.org/state/tailpipe-emission-standards |
Set low-carbon fuel standard |
A "low carbon fuel standard" sets GHG emissions limits for transportation fuels and relies on life-cycle analyses to estimate a fuel’s carbon intensity. It typically requires a regulated fuel provider to reduce its average fuel carbon intensity (AFCI) by some amount from a defined baseline year (e.g. 10% below 2010 levels by 2020). Source: ICCT - https://www.transportpolicy.net/standard/california-fuels-low-carbon-fuel-standard/ |
Set manufacturing requirements (e.g. zero-emission vehicle standard) |
"Manufacturing requirements" require automakers to produce a certain percentage of zero emission vehicles (ZEVs) by a given date (e.g. 16% of total vehicle sales by 2025). Source: ICCT - https://www.transportpolicy.net/standard/california-zev/ |
Switch to electric/hybrid vehicles in cars/taxis/government fleets |
Examples: Transport for London - https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/driving/ultra-low-emission-zone/cleaner-greener-taxis |
Switch to other lower-carbon fuel in cars/taxis/government fleets (e.g. biofuels, natural gas, hydrogen, etc.) |
More info: UN - https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/971430_Watson_Improving%20vehicle%20fuel%20economy%20to%20save%20money,%20reduce%20carbon%20emissions,%20and%20reliance%20on%20oil.pdf |
ZEV Challenge Participants: increasing number of ZEV’s in the public fleet | More info: The Climate Group - https://www.theclimategroup.org/project/zev-challenge |
Climate action | Description / Additional information |
---|---|
Adopt source separation policies (e.g. collection for dry recyclables, organic compostable waste, etc.) |
More info: IEA Bioenergy - http://task37.ieabioenergy.com/files/daten-redaktion/download/Technical%20Brochures/source_separation_web.pdf |
Establish waste reduction/recycling plan |
Examples: Queensland Government - https://www.premiers.qld.gov.au/publications/categories/plans/waste-reduction-recycling-plan.aspx |
Increase awareness/engage public on waste reduction/recycling measures |
Examples: EPA - https://www.epa.gov/recycle/reducing-waste-what-you-can-do |
Install advanced thermal treatment/waste to energy |
More info: Atkins - http://www.atkinsglobal.co.uk/en-GB/angles/all-angles/advanced-waste-treatment-technologies |
Install anaerobic digestion |
"Anaerobic digestion" is the process by which organic matter such as animal or food waste is broken down to produce biogas and bio-fertilizer. This process happens in the absence of oxygen in a sealed, oxygen-free tank called an anaerobic digester. Source: CCAC - http://www.ccacoalition.org/ru/node/2279 |
Install landfill gas management/landfill gas to energy |
"Landfill gas to energy" captures landfill gas to prevent methane from entering the atmosphere and utilizes it as an energy source. Source: CCAC - http://www.ccacoalition.org/en/activity/landfill-gas-capture-and-use |
Install municipal recycling points or centers (for residents or businesses) |
|
Install waste heat recovery |
More info: EPA - https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-07/documents/waste_heat_to_power_systems.pdf |
Implement practices and policies to promote circular economy |
The "circular economy" aims to eradicate waste—not just from manufacturing processes, as lean management aspires to do, but systematically, throughout the life cycles and uses of products and their components. Source: McKinsey - https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/sustainability-and-resource-productivity/our-insights/moving-toward-a-circular-economy |
Climate action | Description / Additional information |
---|---|
Adopt wastewater to energy initiatives (e.g. methane recovery for reuse) |
More info: NREL - https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy12osti/53341.pdf |
Install smart water meters |
"Smart water meters" use digital technology to enable a customer to see real time water consumption and cost in a way that might cause them to reduce their water consumption and become more efficient. Source: LBNL - https://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2017/01/f34/Exploring%20the%20Energy%20Benefits%20of%20Advanced%20Water%20Metering.pdf |
Promote water recycling or reclamation |
Water reclamation is the treatment or processing of wastewater to make it reusable with definable treatment reliability and meeting appropriate water quality criteria; water reuse is the use of treated wastewater (or reclaimed water) for a beneficial purpose. Source: UNFCCC - https://www.ctc-n.org/technologies/water-recycling-and-reclamation |
Climate action | Description / Additional information |
---|---|
Support hospitals and public health systems to reduce GHG emissions (e.g. renewable energy, energy efficiency, reduce waste, etc.) | State and regional governments can support government-owned and private hospitals to reduce GHG emissions through actions including: adopting renewable energy and energy efficiency in hospitals, incorporating zero-emission vehicles (ZEV) into hospital fleets, creating climate smart operating rooms (e.g. low-GHG anaesthetic gases, recycling gas waste, etc.), low-carbon procurement of pharmaceuticals, medical devices, and food, and reducing hospital waste (i.e. food, water, etc.). |
Support hospitals and public health systems to increase resilience to climate impacts (e.g. emergency response systems, microgrids, etc.) | State and regional governments can support government-owned and private hospitals to increase resilience to climate impacts through actions including: updating emergency response systems, installing micro-grids, and increasing distributed energy sources and energy storage capacity. |
Take steps to better integrate health policy and climate policy within the government | With all the links that exist between climate change and health care, state and regional governments are beginning to consider potential interdependencies and synergies between the two fields when making policy decisions, including by fostering better collaboration between independent government agencies and finding ways to engage non-government climate and health stakeholders in the policymaking process. |
Select one of the following options:
"Region-wide" refers to the jurisdictional boundary in which your regional government has undertaken measurements to reduce SLCPs. Please answer by selecting “Yes” or “No” from the options provided. If you select “Yes” you will be directed to question 5.9a.
These questions assist CDP in understanding to what extent your regional government is aware of these pollutants and what actions have been taken to reduce them. SLCPs can be collectively defined as gases and particles that contribute to global warming and have a relatively short lifetime in the atmosphere of a few days up to approximately 12 years. These pollutants contribute to as much as 40% of current global warming and are also responsible for dangerous air pollution, with detrimental impacts on human health, agriculture and ecosystems.
For more information on SLCPs, please visit the Climate and Clean Air Coalition (CCAC).
If “Yes” is selected in response to 5.9:
Select all that apply:
This question only applies when you have answered “Yes” to question 5.9. This question invites you to provide information as to the types of pollutants you are measuring within your region. Please select one or more from the options provided.
Select one of the following options:
Please answer this question by selecting “Yes” or “No”. An environmental assessment refers to the process by which your regional government has evaluated the potential environmental impacts of SLCPs for your region-wide. Environmental assessments are critical tools that can help to identify ways to minimize, mitigate or eliminate the impacts of SLCPs before the implementation of a plan, policy or project.
Additional information about environmental assessments can be found here: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eia/index_en.htm.
Select one of the following options:
Please answer this question by selecting “Yes” or “No”. This question refers to the economic analysis that your regional government has undertaken to identify the direct costs and value the anticipated benefits associated with the implementation of measures to mitigate your region-wide SLCPs. The economic assessment could relate to long-term economic benefits of SLCP mitigation related to issues of employment, poverty reduction and public health.
Additional information about economic
assessments can be found here: http://www.who.int/heli/economics/en/.
Case Study: California’s Short-Lived Climate Pollutants Reduction StrategyCalifornia State provided an economic assessment of measures in its SLCPs strategy. For example, the dairy manure measure identified to mitigate SLCPs has the potential to create jobs in California’s Central Valley. These jobs include construction jobs to build digesters and farm and waste management jobs to operate and maintain the facilities. In this analysis, it is assumed that the construction of an anaerobic digester for a 2,000 head dairy farm can result in 25 to 60 construction jobs and 2 to 5 full-time farm jobs. If digesters were built on farms accounting for about 1 million dairy cows, many in the San Joaquin Valley, it could result in over 30,000 construction jobs and 2,500 permanent jobs potentially providing employment opportunities in disadvantaged communities.
Reference: California Environmental Protection Agency, Air Resources Board (2017), Short-Lived Climate Pollutants Reduction Strategy. Available at https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/shortlived/meetings/03142017/final_slcp_report.pdf
|
Select one of the following options:
This question applies when your regional government has developed a plan, which focuses only on SLCPs mitigation. A plan refers to a set of actions and measures developed by a regional government that will establish guidelines for achieving the objectives stated in the plan. Please answer by selecting “Yes” or “No”. If you answered “Yes” you will be directed to question 5.12a, 5.12b, 5.12c and 5.12d. If you answered “No” you will be directed to 5.12e.
If "Yes" is selected in response to 5.12:
Select one of the following options:
Please answer by selecting “Pilot”, “Limited implementation” and Comprehensive implementation” from the options provided.
If "Yes" is selected in response to 5.12:
Please complete the following table.You are able to add rows by using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table.
Sectors covered in your region-wide plans to reduce SLCPs | Types of action to reduce SLCPs relevant to the sector |
---|---|
Select from:
|
Text field
|
[Add Row]
This question invites your region to disclose more information about the sectors covered by your region-wide plan to reduce SLCPs. The sectors of Agriculture, Energy, Industry, Transport, Buildings (commercial and residential) and Waste were identified by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the CCAC through the reducing global health risks through mitigation of short-lived climate pollutants report. This report focuses on a range of strategies and policies, which have the potential to slow-down the pace of climate, change and deliver benefits for health and air quality.
To support the implementation of actions that can help to reduce emissions from these pollutants, the CCAC and the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) also identified a set of 16 SLCP control measures, which are targeting SLCP emitting sectors, which includes those mentioned above. To find out more about these report please visit Time to act to reduce short-lived climate pollutants.
Please select as many options as apply to your region from the drop-down options in the table. The table has the following fields:
Sectors covered in your region-wide plans to reduce SLCPs | Types of action to reduce SLCPs relevant to the sector |
---|---|
Agriculture |
Improve manure management and animal feed |
Energy |
Recovery and utilisation of gas and fugitive emissions |
Industry |
Replace traditional brick kilns with improved kilns |
Transport |
Diesel particulate filters for road and off-road vehicles |
Residential buildings |
Replace traditional biomass cook stoves with |
Waste |
Separation and treatment of biodegradable |
If “Yes” is selected in response to 5.12:
Select one of the following options:
Please answer by selecting “Yes” or “No”. This rationale behind this question is to consider the mitigation of SLCPs holistically either through its inclusion in broader region-wide policies and/or climate action strategies. This is important considering that SLCPs can have far reaching impacts including harm public health, reduce food security, warm the atmosphere, increase ice and snow melting as well as disrupt weather patterns (Reference: WHO).
If "Yes" is selected in response to 5.12:
This is an open text question.
Please note that when copying from another document into the disclosure platform, formatting is not retained.
This is an open text field question, which invites you to comment on how your region's SLCPs plan has been integrated within your broader region-wide policies and/or climate action strategies. The information provided here will assist CDP to identify distinctions, similarities and comparative features between subnational governments in terms of progress towards the holistic integration of region-wide plans and strategies to reduce SLCPs.
If "No" is selected in response to 5.12:
Please complete the following table:
Reason | Explanation |
---|---|
Select from:
|
Text field |
This question has been changed to a table and asks regions to outline the reason why they do not have any plans to reduce SLCPs. The table has the following fields:
Reason | Explanation |
---|---|
Lack of understanding about these pollutants |
The current monitoring system is not designed to measure SLCPs |
Please attach your relevant document here.
Please use the attachment function to upload any assessments or plans related to how your region is addressing SLCPs. The attachment functionality allows you to upload multiple files in response to this question.
Please complete the following table. You are able to add rows by using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table.
Project area | Status of project | Status of financing | Project description | Total cost of project in the currency reported in question 1.1 | Total investment cost needed in the currency reported in question 1.1 (if relevant) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Select from:
|
Select from:
|
Select from:
|
Text field |
Numerical field |
Numerical field |
[Add Row]
The goal of this question is to understand what climate-change related projects your region is currently seeking external financing for from public or private institutions. These may be projects relating to renewable energy, sustainable transport, building or energy efficiency, waste or other climate-related areas. Use the table in this question to list the different projects your region is looking to attract financing for – you can add multiple projects by clicking “Add row”. If your region is not currently seeking financing on any relevant projects, please select “No relevant projects” in the Project Area field. The table has the following fields:
Scoping – If your region is in the process of developing a project plan, this is also known as the identification phase.
Pre-feasibility study – If your region is researching the feasibility of the project plan, this is known as the evaluation phase.
Pre-implementation – If your region has developed a project plan but not begun implementation, this is also known as the feasibility or definition phase.
Implementation – If the project has started implementation (execution).
Operation – If the project is in full operation.
Complete – If the project is complete.
Measurement and reporting – If the project is complete and results are being measured.
Project not funded and seeking partial funding – If the project is not funded and your region is seeking financing for part of the project. If your project is in this status, please use the Total investment cost needed (if relevant) field in the table to indicate the amount of finance being sought.
Project not funded and seeking full funding – If the project is not funded and seeking financing for the whole project. If your project is in this status, please indicate how much finance is being sought in the Total investment cost needed (if relevant) field of the table.
Project partially funded and seeking additional funding – If the project is partially financed, but your state/region is still seeking additional finance. If your project is in the status, please indicate how much finance has already been received and how much additional finance is being sought.
Project fully funded – If the project is fully financed, but your state/region is still seeking additional finance. If your project is in the status, please indicate how much finance has already been received and how much additional finance is being sought.
Other – Please use this option if there is a different status that best describes your region’s project(s).
Select one of the following options:
Please respond to indicate whether your region has undertaken a climate change risk or vulnerability assessment by selecting the most relevant option from the drop-down menu. If you select “Yes” you will be directed to questions 6.1a and 6.1b.
The effects of climate change my pose a significant risk to your region’s future development. A climate change risk or vulnerability assessment is a qualitative or quantitative scientific estimation the risks from or vulnerability to climate change. These assessments are most usually done within the context of a decision-making or planning process to address climate change impacts. Before developing an adaptation plan, it is important to understand how climate change is likely to affect your region - this is usually done by conducting a climate change risk or vulnerability assessment.
A vulnerability assessment is the analysis of the expected impacts, risks and the adaptive capacity of your region to the effects of climate change. Assessing the vulnerability of your region encompasses more than simple measurement of the potential harm caused by events resulting from climate change: it also includes an assessment of the region or sector's ability to adapt, sometimes referred to as "adaptive capacity".
To complete a vulnerability assessment, a region is likely to need to undertake the following steps:
Identifying the hazards to which your region is (or has historically been) exposed
Assessing the consequence and likelihood of the impact of these hazards on your region based on recent, expert-reviewed estimates where possible
Selecting climate change scenarios outlining possible future climate in the region
Understanding how the frequency and intensity of climate hazards will change under these scenarios
Assessing previously identified current and future hazard exposure usually under two (or more) climate change scenarios
Identifying the region’s critical assets and the relationships between them
Identifying likely impacts from current and future hazards on the region’s critical assets
Identifying strengths and weaknesses of the region’s adaptive capacity
Assessing the vulnerability of the region, based on the combination of the possible impacts of climate change and the region’s adaptive capacity
A high-quality vulnerability assessment involves engagement with a broad range of stakeholders. It is important to recognize the diverse expertise that different stakeholders provide. It is particularly critical to acknowledge local community and traditional indigenous knowledge and to be aware of different perspectives and values. Broad engagement can result in identification of previously overlooked areas of vulnerability or in a more nuanced understanding of the root cause of vulnerabilities and hence better-targeted adaptation responses.
If “Yes” is selected in response to 6.1:
Please attach your relevant document here.
This question allows states and regions to directly upload climate change risk or vulnerability assessment. The reporting platform allows you to upload multiple documents.
If “Yes” is selected in response to 6.1:
Please complete the following table:
Primary methodology | Comments |
---|---|
Select from:
|
Text field |
Answering this question will provide important information for other regions which are assessing the physical risks from climate change for the first time and may be interested in the methodology you used. In the first field you can choose from a list of the most commonly used methodologies and types of methodologies on which your assessment is based. Select “Other” to report something not covered in the existing list of values. Selecting other will allow you to write in the name of the methodology used. Select “Unknown” if you do not know on which methodology the assessment was based and select “No evaluation done” if a vulnerability assessment has not been carried out.
The following resources provide further information about physical risks and the methodology of risk assessment:
Select one of the following options:
Please respond to indicate whether your region has produced an adaptation plan by selecting “Yes” or “No” from the drop-down menu. If you select “Yes” you will be directed to question 6.2a and 6.2b. If you select “No” you will be directed to question 6.2c.
A climate adaptation plan (also known as climate resilience plan) can be defined as a planned response across the region’s services and departments in order to address and manage future climate change risks. The aim of such a plan is to ensure that climate change risks are addressed in a preventive manner by putting in place a set of concrete measures to tackle those risks.
Please complete the following table:
Publication title | Year of publication | Areas covered | Publication hyperlink |
---|---|---|---|
Text field |
Drop-down list: 2000 – 2019 |
Select all that apply:
|
Text field |
This is a table question with the following fields:
If “Yes” is selected in response to 6.2:
Please attach your relevant document here.
This question gives you the opportunity to upload your region's climate adaptation plan. The reporting platform allows you to upload multiple documents.
If “No” is selected in response to 6.2:
Please complete the following table. You are able to add rows by using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table.
Reason | Explanation |
---|---|
Select all that apply:
|
Text field |
[Add Row]
Some regions have not created an adaptation plan for a variety of reasons. Others are still in the process of completing their adaptation plan. This question gives you the opportunity to explain why you have not created an adaptation plan. This question allows states and regions to select the reason for their lack of climate adaptation plan. Multiple reasons can be selected by adding a row in response to this question. This is a table question with the following fields:
Reason | Explanation |
---|---|
Adaptation is covered under main region strategy |
We do not have a dedicated a climate adaptation plan as it is part of our region’s master plan. |
Lack of resources/funding |
We do not have additional resources to develop a separate climate adaptation plan and that is why it is part of our region’s master plan. |
This is an open text question.
Please note that when copying from another document into the disclosure platform, formatting is not retained.
Your goals can be of any type. Please use the text field to provide as much explanation on what your main goals are for adaptation and the status of those goals. Your adaptation goals could include information on your region's overall strategy and objectives across the different thematic areas covered by your adaptation plan.
Case Study: Australian Capital Territory’s Climate Adaptation Strategy – Living with a Warming ClimateThe Australian Capital Territory (ACT) Climate Change Adaptation Strategy – Living with a Warming Climate (the Adaptation Strategy) supports the community, its city and the natural environment to become more resilient to the impacts from climate change to 2020. The ACT Government’s objectives are:
Reference: ACT Government (2016). ACT Climate Change Adaptation Strategy Living With A Warming Climate. Available online at: https://www.environment.act.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/912478/ACT-Climate-Change-Adaptation-Strategy.pdf
|
Please complete the following table:
Working with local governments | Explanation |
---|---|
Select from:
|
Text field |
The aim of this question is to identify examples of vertical integration where local (city-level) governments collaborate with regional governments on climate adaptation. Please complete the table by selecting “Yes” or “No” and providing an explanation with relevance to your region’s climate adaptation work.
It has become increasingly evident that regional and local decisions are essential in the design and implementation of adaptation strategies to respond to climate change. In adaptation, there are a variety of reasons as to why subnational governments should work with local level decision-making. First, climate change impacts are manifested locally, affecting local livelihood activities, economic enterprises, human health, etc. Second, vulnerability and adaptive capacity are determined by local conditions. Regional or national vulnerability indices often mask the dramatic variations in vulnerability at local levels. Third, adaptation activities are often best observed and implemented at the local level. Decisions about livelihood strategies and investments drive adaptation. Local monitoring and evaluation of how policies, programs and projects are supporting adaptation are essential as they also provide a basis for learning, adjusting and eventually scaling up actions that are successful (OECD, 2009).
Local action will also provide essential insights for understanding the political economy of climate change policy. It will provide a vehicle to identify how incentives and interests interact at different levels of governance, to observe and understand direct local costs and benefits of action, including local co-benefits, and the local winners and losers of any particular set of policy choices. The evidence or perceptions of who wins and who loses, and the weight of co-benefits associated with any set of climate policies may significantly differ at local scales compared to aggregate region/nation-wide experience. This can open a range of opportunities for local action that may not exist at broader scales.
Please complete the following table:
Involvement in NAP | Explanation |
---|---|
Select from:
|
Text field |
The aim of this question is to identify examples of vertical integration on climate adaptation. Please complete the table by selecting “Yes” or “No” and providing an explanation in relevance to your region’s involvement.
The National Adaptation Plan (NAP) process emerged from the 16th Conference of the Parties (COP) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in Cancun in 2010, where Parties affirmed that “adaptation must be addressed with the same priority as mitigation” (UNFCCC, 2010). In the context of the NAP process, vertical integration is the process of creating intentional and strategic linkages between national and sub-national adaptation planning, implementation and monitoring and evaluation.
In a given country context, this may include multiple levels, including the local level. Vertical integration is not a single step in the NAP process – it is an ongoing effort to ensure on the one hand that local realities are reflected in the NAP, and on the other hand that the NAP enables adaptation at sub-national levels. It is driven by recognition of sub-national diversity in vulnerability to climate change, as well as the important role played by sub-national authorities and local organizations in advancing adaptation. Effective vertical integration requires an explicit commitment from national actors to have an inclusive and participatory NAP process, with ongoing dialogue between national and sub-national actors throughout all stages.
Additional Information: Understanding vertical integration in the NAP processThere are three main dimensions to vertical integration in the NAP process. Planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation are the main elements of the NAP process, and vertical integration is relevant throughout:
Reference: Dazé, A., Price-Kelly, H. and Rass, N., 2016. Vertical Integration in National Adaptation Plan (NAP) Processes: A guidance note for linking national and sub-national adaptation processes. International Institute for Sustainable Development. Winnipeg, Canada. Available online at: www.napglobalnetwork.org.
|
Select one of the following options:
The IPCC defines risk as the potential for consequences where something of value is at stake and where the outcome is uncertain, recognizing the diversity of values. Risk is often represented as probability or likelihood of occurrence of hazardous events or trends multiplied by the impacts if these events or trends occur (IPCC, 2014). For this question, please report whether climate change present significant physical risks to your region, by selecting “Yes”, “Do not know” or “No”. If you select “Yes” or "Do not know", you will be directed to questions 6.6a and 6.6b. If you select “No”, you will be directed to question 6.6c.
When identifying impacts from climate change, states and regions should think objectively of the ways in which changes in the climate conditions will affect their region’s ability to conduct business as usual. Information about impacts associated with climate change can be found on the website of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), in the report by Working Group II, “Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability”.
If "Yes" or "Do not know" is selected in response to 6.6:
Please complete the following table. You are able to add rows by using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table.
Climate change impact | Anticipated timescale | Estimated magnitude of potential impact | Estimated probability of impact | Impact description |
---|---|---|---|---|
Select from:
|
Select from:
|
Select from:
|
Select from:
|
Text field |
[Add Row]
This question asks you to detail the physical risks of climate change, which you expect to experience in your region, together with their anticipated timescales. Do not feel obliged to include every risk to the region - list only the most pertinent and important, for example, those that may have the biggest impact, magnitude or risk factor. Responses should be reported in the fields provided using the drop-down menus where appropriate, as detailed below:
Current - If your region is already experiencing the identified effect from climate change.
Short term - If you anticipate your region will experience the identified effect from climate change by 2025.
Medium term - If you anticipate your region will experience the identified effect from climate change between 2026 and 2050.
Long term - If you anticipate your region will experience the identified effect from climate change after 2051.
Extremely serious - If you anticipate that the expected effect of climate change poses the highest level of potential concern to your region. For example, you might choose this option if you expect large storms to have a significant impact on your region within a short time period.
Serious - If you anticipate that the expected effect of climate change poses a significant level of concern to your region. For example, you might choose this option if you expect large storms to have a significant impact on your region within a medium time frame.
Less serious - If you anticipate that the expected effect of climate change will have a lower impact within a longer timescale.
Other - Please specify the level of seriousness for the selected climate change impact.
It is up to the region to determine its level of risk and to make judgments about priorities: for example, whether a high impact risk with a long term timescale constitutes a more serious risk than a low impact risk with an immediate timescale.
Example of climate change effects and potential impacts relevant to regions
Increased cooling loads (buildings)
Decreased efficiency of energy generating plants and transmission and distribution lines (energy infrastructure)
Increase in morbidity and mortality from at-risk populations to extreme heat (human health)
Decreased water availability for hydroelectric power generation and for cooling water for thermal energy plants (energy)
Decreased potable water supply and resulting water use restrictions (water)
Increased potential for pipe breakage and failure of underground services due to soil / ground condition changes (water, waste)
Increased likelihood of combined sewer overloads (waste)
Increased likelihood of landslide and landslip and resulting damage (buildings)
Increased likelihood of service disruptions on freight and mobility infrastructure networks near coastal areas (marine terminals, airports, roads, rail) (transport)
Decreased efficacy of gravity fed wastewater and sewage systems in low-lying areas (waste)
Salinization of groundwater (water)
If “Yes” or "Do not know" is selected in response to 6.6:
Please complete the following table. You are able to add rows by using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table.
Climate change impact | Adaptation action | Status of action | Action description |
---|---|---|---|
Populated with selections from 6.6a column 1 |
Select from Appendix C
|
Select from:
|
Text field
|
[Add Row]
This question only applies if you have answered "Yes" to question 6.6. Please note that you must have filled out question 6.6a before attempting to answer this question. This is a table question with the following fields:
Climate change impact | Adaptation action | Status of action | Action description |
---|---|---|---|
Sea level rise |
Flood defenses – development and operation & storage |
Pre-implementation |
We are testing various sea walls and barriers around the port to prevent the low-lying areas from flooding. The most successful version will be rolled out region-wide. |
More frequent heat waves |
Shading in public spaces, markets |
Implementation |
Restaurants are able to expedite the cafe (outdoor seating) licensing process if they plant trees to provide shade in the public spaces around the location. |
If "No" is selected in response to 6.6:
Please complete the following table:
Reason | Explanation |
---|---|
Select from:
|
Text field |
This question provides options to explain the reason why climate change does not present physical risks for the region. This question is a table with the following fields:
This is an open text question.
Please note that when copying from another document into the disclosure platform, formatting is not retained.
A compounding factor is something that could intensify the impacts of climate change. These may include underlying conditions or characteristics of the region that may accentuate the severity. While a high level of predictability may be difficult, it is possible that climate change’s effects (e.g. extreme heat) may have increasing consequences due to compounding factors. These may include underlying conditions or characteristics of the region that may accentuate the severity. For example, it is understood that extreme heat raises the risk of wildfires, increasing the demand for water while simultaneously reducing its supply. Compounding factors could include terrain that is susceptible to wildfires or low annual rainfall.
Please complete the following table:
Does climate change threaten businesses in your region? | Explanation |
---|---|
Select from:
|
Text field |
Please respond by selecting “Yes”, “No” or “Do not know” from the drop-down menu. You might answer, “Yes” to this question if, for example, the dominant industry in your region is dependent on certain climatic conditions, like skiing.
For the explanation field, please explain how and why climate change threatens businesses in your region. Your answer could relate to how physical impacts of climate change will affect businesses operating in your region. Examples could include facilities / companies operating in a low-lying, increasingly flood-prone area or those businesses that are dependent on certain predictable weather conditions such as agriculture or tourism. The consideration of business viability could extend to higher costs of doing business, issues of workforce availability, transport disruptions, storm or flood damage, supply chain interruptions, or the health risks to residents due to frequent severe weather events. It may also be useful for other regions to understand how you assessed the risks to businesses in your region.
Select one of the following options:
Please respond by selecting “Yes”, “No” or “Don’t know” from the drop-down menu. If you answer “Yes” or “Don’t know” you will be directed to question 6.9a, if you answer “No” you will be directed to question 6.9b. Regional governments may encounter socio-economic risks as a result of climate change. Examples of such risks might health and wellbeing, (e.g. susceptibility to disease vectors or heat-related morbidity and mortality), crime, social unrest, migration, or quality of life.
If “Yes” or “Do not know” is selected in response to 6.9:
Please complete the following table.You are able to add rows by using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table.
Socio-economic risks | Anticipated timescale | Level of risk | Risk description | Actions taken to reduce risk |
---|---|---|---|---|
Select from:
|
Select from:
|
Select from:
|
Text field |
Text field |
[Add Row]
This question is structured as a table. The first field describes a number of possible social risks of climate change, which can be selected from the drop-down menu. Additional entries can be made in the question, using the ‘Add another’ button at the base of the question. This table has the following fields:
Current - If your region is already experiencing the identified effect from climate change.
Short term - if you anticipate your region will experience the identified effect from climate change by 2025.
Medium term - If you anticipate your region will experience the identified effect from climate change between 2026 and 2050.
Long term - If you anticipate your region will experience the identified effect from climate change after 2051.
Extremely serious - If you anticipate that the expected effect of climate change poses the highest level of potential concern to your region. For example, you might choose this option if you expect large storms to have a significant impact on your region within a short time period.
Serious - If you anticipate that the expected effect of climate change poses a significant level of concern to your region. For example, you might choose this option if you expect large storms to have a significant impact on your region within a medium time frame.
Less serious - If you anticipate that the expected effect of climate change will have a lower impact within a longer timescale.
Other - Please specify the level of risk associated with the socio-economic risk selected.
It is up to the region to determine its level of risk and to make judgments about priorities: for example, whether a high impact risk with a long term timescale constitutes a more serious risk than a low impact risk with an immediate timescale.
Socio-economic risk | Anticipated timescale | Level of risk | Risk description | Action taken to reduce risk |
---|---|---|---|---|
Increased risk to already vulnerable populations |
Medium term |
Serious |
With longer heat events, at-risk populations that have limited access to cooling centers or do not have air-conditioning units within their place of residence are more susceptible to facing heat-related illnesses or death |
A heat-health watch alert system has been enforced, which will trigger response from the government and public health system to communicate risks and cost-effective preventative measures during heat wave events. |
Increased conflict and/or crime |
Short term |
Less serious |
In addition, loss of power after extreme weather events, such as hurricanes, can mean higher incidence of crime (e.g. looting and theft) |
The region has implemented neighbourhood watch schemes across different municipalities to ensure that crime is prevented. |
If “No” is selected in response to 6.9:
Please complete the following table:
Reason | Explanation |
---|---|
Select from:
|
Text field |
This question provides options to explain the reason why your region is not exposed to socio-economic risks. This question is a table with the following fields:
Select one of the following options:
This question asks you to consider risks to the region’s water security. These risks may or may not be caused or exacerbated by climate change. Consider risks that stem from physical impacts as well as those that may result from regulatory, economic or social settings. If you select “Yes” or “Do not know” you will be directed to questions 7.1a and 7.2. If you select “No” you will be directed to question 7.1b.
Water is an issue of critical importance for regional governments. Water connects across sectors, places and people, as well as geographic and temporal scales. In most cases, hydrological boundaries and administrative perimeters do not coincide. Water policy is inherently complex and strongly linked to domains that are critical for development, including health, environment, agriculture, energy, spatial planning, regional development and poverty alleviation. To varying degrees, countries have allocated increasingly complex and resource-intensive responsibilities to subnational governments, resulting in interdependencies across levels of government that require co-ordination to mitigate fragmentation and manage water supply risks effectively (OECD, 2015).
If “Yes” or "Do not know" is selected in response to 7.1:
Please complete the following table. You are able to add rows by using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table.
Water security risks | Anticipated timescale | Estimated magnitude of potential impact | Estimated probability of impact | Risk description |
---|---|---|---|---|
Select from:
|
Select from:
|
Select from:
|
Select from:
|
Text field |
[Add Row]
This is a table question allowing states and regions to report on relevant water security risks. Multiple rows can be entered into the group using the ‘Add another’ button to the base of the group of question fields. This table has the following fields:
Current - if your region is already experiencing the identified effect from climate change
Short term - if you anticipate your region will experience the identified effect from climate change by 2025.
Medium term - if you anticipate your region will experience the identified effect from climate change between 2026 and 2050.
Long term - if you anticipate your region will experience the identified effect from climate change after 2051.
Extremely serious - If you anticipate that the expected effect of the water security risk poses the highest level of potential concern to your region.
Serious - If you anticipate that the expected effect of the water security risk poses a significant level of concern to your region. For example, you might choose this option if you expect large storms to have a significant impact on your region within a medium time frame.
Less serious - If you anticipate that the expected effect of the water security risk will have a lower impact within a longer timescale.
Other - Please specify the level of risk associated with the selected water security risk.
It is up to the region to determine its level of risk and to make judgments about priorities: for example, whether a high impact risk with a long term timescale constitutes a more serious risk than a low impact risk with an immediate timescale.
Water supply risks | Anticipated timescale | Estimated magnitude of potential impact | Estimated probability of impact | Risk description |
---|---|---|---|---|
Declining water quality |
Current |
Serious | High |
In summer during a low flow event, there is less water available to dilute effluent loadings, resulting in higher in-stream concentration of pollutants. |
If “No” is selected in response to 7.1:
Please complete the following table:
Reason | Explanation |
---|---|
Select from:
|
Text field |
This question provides options to explain the reason why your region is not exposed to water security risks. This question is a table with the following fields
If “Yes” or "Do not know" is selected in response to 7.1:
Please complete the following table. You are able to add rows by using the “Add Row” button at the bottom of the table.
Water security risks | Adaptation action | Action description |
---|---|---|
Populated with selections from 7.1a column 1 |
Select from:
|
Text field |
[Add Row]
This question is relevant only if you have answered, “Yes” to 7.1. The purpose of this question is to understand the actions you are taking to reduce the risks to your water security which you have identified in question 7.1a.
Water supply risks | Adaptation action | Action Description |
---|---|---|
Declining water quality |
Watershed preservation |
In order to increase the water quality of the river we are ensuring that no pesticide is used in parks bordering water streams |
This is an open text question.
Please note that when copying from another document into the disclosure platform, formatting is not retained.
Please provide any further information on the governance structure and mechanisms in your region for monitoring and safeguarding freshwater resources. For example, you may wish to include details of:
Please note that this year, we will be piloting a new Forest module in the questionnaire, which will only be relevant to a selected number of states and regions. More information on the list of countries for this Forest module pilot can be found here.
Important points about the Forest module:
This part of the 2019 reporting guidance provides additional support and information for states and regions that are requested to answer the forest module. The information you will provide in response to the Forest module’s questions will assist in making comparisons between states and regions. It will also help inform lessons learned that could assist other states and regions on their way to tackling deforestation and/or forest degradation or it could help further refine the collection of data.
Current natural forest area (in square km) | Reporting year used for your region's natural forest area | Comments on the methodology used to collect data and quantify natural forest area | Can you provide information on the ownership or tenure rights associated with your region's natural forest area? |
---|---|---|---|
Numerical field | Numerical field | Text field | Select from:
|
a) Primary forests that have not been subject to major anthropogenic impacts;
b) Regenerated (second-growth) forests that were subject to major anthropogenic impacts in the past (e.g., by agriculture) but where the main causes of impact have ceased or greatly diminished, and the ecosystem has attained much of the species composition, structure and function of prior or other contemporary natural ecosystems;
c) Managed natural forests;
d) Forests that have been partially degraded by anthropogenic causes (e.g., harvesting, fire, invasive species) but where the land has not been converted to another use neither the thresholds that define a forest have been lost.
If "Yes" is selected in response to question 8.1:"Can you provide information on the ownership or tenure rights associated with your region's natural forest area?"
Forest ownership category | Percentage of region's natural forest area characterized by the forest ownership category | Explanation |
---|---|---|
Public | Numerical field | Text field |
Private | Numerical field | Text field |
This table question has the following fields:
Category | Examples | Description |
---|---|---|
Public | Public land administered by the government | Typically includes all lands in the legal forest estate that are owned and administered exclusively by the government and that are not designated for use by communities and indigenous peoples (IPs). Note that this category includes some protected areas and forest lands awarded as concessions for logging, agri-industrial or silvicultural plantations, and mining |
Public | Public land designated for use by communities and IPs | Refers to forest lands set aside on a semi-permanent but conditional basis. In this category, governments retain ownership and entitlement to unilaterally negate local groups’ rights over entire areas. Local groups lack rights to sell or otherwise alienate land through mortgages or other financial instruments |
Private | Private land owned by communities and IPs | Refers to forest lands where rights cannot be unilaterally terminated by a government without some form of due process and compensation. Private landowners typically (but not always) have rights to access, sell, or otherwise alienate, manage, withdraw resources and exclude outsiders |
Private | Private lands owned by individuals and firms | Includes those lands where the rights cannot be unilaterally terminated by a government without due process or compensation |
Forest tenure categories providing examples of public and private designations (Source: FAO, Forest Tenure in Cambodia, Nepal and Vietnam).
Main drivers* | Total current annual deforestation rate (%)** | Comments |
---|---|---|
Select all that apply:
|
Numerical field **Note this column will not appear if “Deforestation and/or forest degradation is not an issue for the region” is selected in the “Main drivers” column. |
Text field |
*If you select “Deforestation and/or forest degradation is not an issue for the region” in response to the column "Main drivers" or leave the column blank, you will not be able to disclose information on the questions under the "Forest policy and implementation" and "Forest risks, impacts and opportunities" sections of the Forest module.
About the drivers of deforestation and/or forest degradation
This table question has the following fields:
If "Mining" is selected in response to question 8.2
Select all that apply:
This question only appears if “Mining” is selected for question 8.2. For the purpose of this question, there are two main activities that you can select. These activities refer to the LSM and ASM operations occurring within the region. LSM refers to the activity of major companies as well as to mid-tier and junior-level companies or to any formal company that complies with international performance standards. ASM is used in a broad sense to refer to all kinds of local and often informal mining activities (Adapted from: World Bank, Mining together: large-scale mining meets artisanal mining – a guide for action). You can select all relevant types of mining activities operating with your region. If “Other” is selected, please specify the type of mining activity that you are referring to.
If "Large-scale mining (LSM)" is selected in response to question 8.3
Regional government responsibility over issuing environmental permits | Please explain |
---|---|
Select from:
|
Text field |
a) Ensuring that extractive waste is managed without endangering human health or causing pollution (Article 4(1)); and
b) Ensuring that the operator takes all the
necessary measures to prevent or reduce as far as possible any adverse effects
on the environment and human health (Article 4(2)). This includes:
- The management of waste facilities while operational;
- The management of waste facilities following closure; and
- The prevention of major accidents and limiting the consequences on the environment and human health.
If "Yes - full" or "Yes - partial" is selected in response to question 8.4
Factors considered in the process for issuing environmental permits | Scope covered | Explanation |
---|---|---|
Select from:
|
Select all that apply: See drop-down options below |
Text field |
[Add row]
Scope covered drop-down options:
Environmental impacts
Socio-economic impacts
Mining closure plans
Other, please specify
Case study: British Columbia’s joint application information requirements for Mines Act and Environmental Management Act PermitsThe Mines Act (MA) permitting process, which for major mines is closely integrated with the Environmental Management Act (EMA) permitting process, includes geotechnical design and reclamation and closure plans.Mines Act permitting Applications for MA permits must include detailed designs for all project components and phases of mine life (exploration to closure). Proponents are expected to provide detailed engineering designs, management plans and monitoring programs. Planning needs to be sufficiently detailed in order to ensure the health and safety of mine personnel and the public, and the protection and reclamation of the land and watercourses affected by the mining activities. Environmental Management Act permitting There is emphasis on the environmental impact assessment (EIA) required as part of the application. Other requirements include:
|
If "Yes - partial" is selected in response to question 8.4
Other entities responsible | Please explain their involvement |
---|---|
Select all that apply:
|
Text field |
This is a table question with the following fields:
If "Artisanal or small-scale mining (ASM)" is selected in response to question 8.3
Region's management approach to ASM | Explanation |
---|---|
Select from:
|
Text field |
[Add row]
This table question has two following fields:
Case study: Intergovernmental Forum’s Mining Policy FrameworkExamples of ways of integrating informal ASM activities into the legal system: Creating clear legal frameworks and regulatory mechanisms to facilitate the organisation of ASM, access to property rights and ensuing obligations for ASM; Providing technical support to build the capacity of government or other bodies tasked with regulating and supporting the sector. Examples of ways of integrating informal ASM activities into the formal economic system: Improving savings in the artisanal mining community, establishing more acceptable forms of financing and encouraging responsible investment; Strengthening the appropriateness, viability and transparency of policies and systems for collection, management and reinvestment of ASM revenue. Examples of reducing the social and environmental impacts of ASM: Providing technical training to improve productivity and to safeguard the environment, and developing, disseminating and enforcing regulations with a particular emphasis on safeguarding water sources, reducing deforestation; Promoting the inclusion of ASM in rural development and job creation policies such that, where desired and realistic, alternative livelihoods are promoted. Source: IGF Mining Policy Framework – Mining and Sustainable Development |
If "Large-scale mining (LSM)" or "Artisanal or small-scale mining (ASM)" or "Other, please specify" is selected in response to question 8.3
This question focuses on whether states and regions are aware of the potential influence of mining operations on legally protected and internationally recognized areas. “Legally protected and internationally recognized areas” refer to protected areas that meets IUCN definition as well as the UNESCO World Heritage Sites, wetlands designated under the Ramsar Convention and Key Biodiversity Areas. If you select “Yes” to this question, a follow-up question (8.6a) will appear, which will request for the additional information regarding those legally protected and internationally recognized areas.
If "Yes" is selected in response to question 8.6
Name of area | Type of area | Protected Area category (IUCN classification)* | Please explain |
---|---|---|---|
Text field | Select all that apply:
|
Select from:
*Note this column only appears if “Protected Area” is selected in the previous column. |
Text field |
[Add row]
Ia) Strict Nature Reserve: Category Ia are strictly protected areas set aside to protect biodiversity and also possibly geological/geomorphical features, where human visitation, use and impacts are strictly controlled and limited to ensure protection of the conservation values. Such protected areas can serve as indispensable reference areas for scientific research and monitoring.
Ib) Wilderness Area: Category Ib protected areas are usually large unmodified or slightly modified areas, retaining their natural character and influence without permanent or significant human habitation, which are protected and managed so as to preserve their natural condition.
strong>II National Park: Category II protected areas are large natural or near natural areas set aside to protect large-scale ecological processes, along with the complement of species and ecosystems characteristic of the area, which also provide a foundation for environmentally and culturally compatible, spiritual, scientific, educational, recreational, and visitor opportunities.
III) Natural Monument or Feature: Category III protected areas are set aside to protect a specific natural monument, which can be a landform, sea mount, submarine cavern, geological feature such as a cave or even a living feature such as an ancient grove. They are generally quite small protected areas and often have high visitor value.
IV) Habitat/Species Management Area: Category IV protected areas aim to protect particular species or habitats and management reflects this priority. Many Category IV protected areas will need regular, active interventions to address the requirements of particular species or to maintain habitats, but this is not a requirement of the category.
V) Protected Landscape/ Seascape: A protected area where the interaction of people and nature over time has produced an area of distinct character with significant, ecological, biological, cultural and scenic value: and where safeguarding the integrity of this interaction is vital to protecting and sustaining the area and its associated nature conservation and other values.
VI) Protected area with sustainable use of natural resources: Category VI protected areas conserve ecosystems and habitats together with associated cultural values and traditional natural resource management systems. They are generally large, with most of the area in a natural condition, where a proportion is under sustainable natural resource management and where low-level non-industrial use of natural resources compatible with nature conservation is seen as one of the main aims of the area.
If "Deforestation and/or forest degradation is not an issue for the region" is selected in response to question 8.2
Safeguards in place | Explain how the safeguard is implemented |
---|---|
Select one from:
|
Text field |
[Add row]
The aim of this question is to collect information on how your region’s natural forest area is protected currently and any long-term interventions in place to manage deforestation and/or forest degradation. Please note that this is the only question that would appear if “Deforestation and/or forest degradation is not an issue for the region” is selected in question 8.2. Questions under the “Forest policy and implementation” and “Forest risks, impacts and opportunities” sections of the module will not appear.
This question has the following fields:
Select from:
The aim of this question is to allow states and regions to report on all policies relating to the management of deforestation and/or forest degradation. When reporting on the policies, consider all levels of governance that may influence your region’s work on deforestation and/or forest degradation. These policies could cover those that are specific to the boundaries of the region or those from federal and national-levels. For example, state and regional governments play a vital role in making progress towards national reductions of emissions from deforestation and overall forest degradation as their efforts represent a vital link between pilot projects and full national implementation. If “Yes” is selected to this question, you will be asked to provide information on the policies you have that address deforestation and/or forest degradation. When reporting on the policy description and enforcement field, comment on how the region is contributing towards the implementation of the policies reported.
If "Yes" is selected in response to question 8.8
Policy name | Year enforced | Forests-related issue covered by the policy | Drivers covered by the policy | Policy web link | Policy description and region's role in its enforcement |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Text field | Numerical field | Select all that apply form:
|
Select all that apply: Options pre-populated from drivers selected in question 8.2 |
Text field | Text field |
[Add row]
This question allows states and regions to provide additional information policies relating to the management of deforestation and/or forest degradation. Forest policies deal specifically with forest resources and their management when treating: socio-economic factors related to increasing the performance of the sector; the role of the forest and tree resource in land use and rural development; and nature conservation and environmental protection (Source: FAO – Policy and legal aspects of sustainable forest management).
Forests must be managed in a much more interdependent and complex context which requires a partnership process among all major actors and beneficiaries. For this to happen, it is essential that forest policies recognize the diversity of interests related to forest conservation and utilization as well as the need to involve major interest groups in forest management decisions through consultations in which they can express their expectations and their role in sustainable forest management. The prevailing political system in each country will have to determine how divergent interests are to be harmonized and how the costs and benefits are to be shared among the main actors and beneficiaries. In addition, there is a need to adapt the policy framework regularly in response to real changes so that it continues to provide an effective incentive for the long-term management of forests for sustainable development(Source: FAO – Policy and legal aspects of sustainable forest management).
This is a table question with the following fields:
- Deforestation is one form of conversion (conversion of natural forests)
- Change to natural ecosystems that meets this definition is considered to be conversion regardless of whether or not it is legally permitted (Adapted from: Accountability Framework Initiative (AFI), Core Principles and Definitions, 2018).
If "No" or "Do not know" is selected in response to question 8.8
Reason | Explanation |
---|---|
Select one from:
|
Text field |
This question allows states and regions to explain the primary reason as to why there are no policies on deforestation and/or forest degradation.This question is a table with the following fields:
Select from:
Endorsing and taking part in recognized global initiatives indicates greater environmental stewardship and transparency. If “Yes” or “No, but intending to participate or endorse in the next 2 years” is selected, states and regions will be allowed to report on those initiatives and their overall involvement. CDP has listed the following initiatives/conventions:
If "Yes" or "No, but intending to participate or endorse in the next 2 years" is selected in response to question 8.9
Global initiative/convention | Please describe your region’s involvement |
---|---|
Please select one from:
|
Text field |
[Add row]
This questions requests states and regions to select the different initiatives and conventions they currently or plan to participate in or endorse and to provide information on how the region’s overall involvement. This question has the following fields:
- Please select the “UN-REDD Programme” option if your region supports or is planning to support national REDD+ efforts. To see examples of subnational REDD+, please seeClimate Focus – The Why and How of Subnational REDD+
- Please select the “New York Declaration on Forests” option if your region is currently an endorser or is planning to be an endorser on the New York Declaration on Forests Global Platform.
- Please select the “Rio Branco Declaration” option if your region has pledged to the Declaration and is committed to reduce deforestation by 80% by 2020.
- Please select the “Bonn Challenge” option if your region has made a commitment and contributed towards the Bonn Challenge’s global effort to 150 million hectares of the world’s deforested and degraded land into restoration by 2020, and 350 million hectares by 2030.
- Please select the “UN Convention on Biological Diversity” option if the country your region is in has ratified the convention and your region is contributing to meet the convention’s main goals: conservation of biodiversity; sustainable use of biodiversity; fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising from the use of genetic resources.
- Please select the “UN Convention to Combat Desertification” option if the country your region is in has ratified the convention and your region is contributing to meet the convention’s main goals of combatting desertification and mitigating the effects of drought through national action programs that incorporate long-term strategies supported by international cooperation and partnership arrangements.
- Please select the “World Heritage Convention” option if the country your region is in has ratified the convention and your region is contributing to meeting the convention’s aims to promote cooperation among nations to protect heritage around the world that is of such outstanding universal value that its conservation is important for current and future generations.
- Please select the “Other” option if you wish to report another initiative/convention not included in the options provided. Please specify the name of the initiative/convention in the text field provided.
Select from:
If "Yes" is selected in response to question 8.10
Target type | Drivers covered by the target | Target start year | Base year | Base year figure |
---|---|---|---|---|
Select from:
|
Select all that apply: Options pre-populated from drivers reported in question 8.2. |
Numerical field | Numerical field | Numerical field |
Target (%) | Target year | Percentage achieved so far | Please describe the target |
---|---|---|---|
Numerical field | Numerical field | Numerical field | Text field |
[Add row]
This question requests the details of your region-wide targets to reduce deforestation and/or forest degradation. You can provide information on multiple targets by adding extra rows. Please complete the fields that are only relevant for your target. Use the “Please describe that target” field of this question to provide additional information about your target (e.g. if you are unable to provide numerical values relating to your target). The information you provide in this question will assist in making comparisons between states and regions. It will also help inform lessons learned that could assist other states and regions on their way to tackling deforestation and/or forest degradation or it could help further refine the collection of data on region-wide targets relating to this topic. This is a table question with the following fields:
- Any commitments or policies made by the region to which the target is linked
- Data used for the base year figure – e.g. total annual deforestation rate, natural forest cover during base year
- Website URL for your target if available
- Plans to meet the target
If "No" or "Do not know" is selected in response to question 8.10
Reason | Explanation |
---|---|
Select from:
|
Text field |
This question allows states and regions to explain the primary reason as to why they currently do not have region-wide targets to address deforestation and/or forest degradation. This question is a table with the following fields:
Please select from:
Given the growing understanding of the complexity and systemic nature of the issues underlying continuing forest loss in many geographies, jurisdictional approaches are increasingly compelling. They contain the building blocks to align multiple stakeholders and incentive mechanisms around core, common interests such as responsible commodity production, improved economic growth and livelihood opportunities, and a resilient natural resource base that can continue to provide crucial ecosystem services (Source: WWF – Tackling Deforestation Through A Jurisdictional Approach).
While involvement of all stakeholders who can influence or are affected by deforestation and land use change is important, government commitment is key, including as a convenor, coordinator, legislator and enforcer. There is growing awareness of the value of ‘jurisdictional approaches’ with government leadership at sub-national level. Examples of such initiatives are emerging, where governments and their partners are actively seeking investment and partnerships to advance their goals, and where companies are starting to engage in jurisdictional approaches. Partnership and engagement in jurisdictional approaches can take many forms, supporting the goals and plans of the jurisdictional approach in different ways.
If "Aware of jurisdictional approaches and implementing" is selected in response to question 8.11
Description of jurisdictional approach implemented | Forests-related issue addressed | Drivers addressed | Does this approach include a verification process? | Does this approach follow a multi-stakeholder governance structure? | Please explain |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Text field | Select all that apply:
|
Select all that apply: Options pre-populated from drivers reported in question 8.2 |
Select from:
|
Select from:
|
Text field |
[Add row]
This table question has the following fields:
- Deforestation is one form of conversion (conversion of natural forests)
- Change to natural ecosystems that meets this definition is considered to be conversion regardless of whether or not it is legally permitted (Adapted from: Accountability Framework Initiative (AFI), Core Principles and Definitions, 2018).
Case study: Examples of jurisdictional approachesMato Grosso’s Produce, Conserve and Include strategy At the Paris COP21 conference, Governor Pedro Taques announced the state’s new Produce, Conserve and Include (PCI) strategy under which the government and all relevant stakeholders across the state would set and implement joint targets for production of soy and beef, conservation of forest cover, and inclusion of all segments of society. In the following months, a multi-stakeholder process articulated timebound goals for each of the strategy’s three prongs. Through this evolution, the PCI’s vision emerged: increased commodity production through intensification of production on already-cleared land; protection of remaining forests and restoration of forests cleared above the amount allowed by law; participation by family farms, indigenous peoples, and other traditional communities in the state’s development, leading to increased living standards. Acre: Using REDD+ as a tool for consolidating a green economy Acre’s jurisdictional initiative is overseen and managed by multi-stakeholder councils comprised of governmental and non-governmental organizations. An important innovation in this regard is the Commission for Validation and Monitoring, which is made up of four civil society organizations and four governmental organizations. Another avenue for non-governmental involvement was an extensive and highly acclaimed public consultation process used to develop the SISA law. Forest conservation will result from a comprehensive legislative and policy framework that creates substantial incentives to direct development activities in a forest-friendly manner. The state government is promoting income-generating activities that are not premised on clearing forested areas such as: fish farming, Brazil nut processing, manufacturing, wood flooring and furniture production using sustainably managed timber, and reforestation with rubber, acai, and other native species Source: WWF – Tackling Deforestation Through A Jurisdictional Approach |
If “Aware of jurisdictional approaches but currently not implementing” is selected in response to question 8.1
Reason | Explanation |
---|---|
Select from:
| Text field |
[Add row]
This question allows states and regions to explain the reasons as to why they are not implementing jurisdictional approaches. This question is a table with the following fields:
Select from:
Case study: About Forest Management PlanningPlanning is an active process requiring careful thought about what could or should happen in the future and involves the coordination of all relevant activities for the purpose of achieving specified goals and objectives. Planning is an integral component of forest management. It is used for determining and expressing the goals and objectives that government and other actors have, and for deciding the targets and steps that should be taken in order to achieve those objectives.Planning need not be a complicated process, but it requires clear objectives, which a government or other group aims to achieve. It requires imagination and a willingness to consider all points of view having relevance to a given situation. The planning process should lead to the formation of a balanced outlook from which proposals for effective management can be written. An element of flexibility is desirable and necessary in order to cope with unforeseen events, which could affect the achievement of the objectives. A range of information is used in planning to evaluate the benefits and drawbacks of alternative courses of action, which enables preferred options to be determined, coordinated with other activities, and expressed in writing. Information should be of good quality. Information of questionable quality should either be discarded or, if used, it should be noted that it is of poor quality and one of the activities of the plan should be acquiring better quality information. Source: FAO – Guidelines for forest management planning Forest management planning is important for many reasons. For example, it can:
|
If "Yes" is selected in response to question 8.12
Publication title and attachment | Year of publication | Forests-related issue covered by the plan | Drivers covered by the plan | Stage of implementation | Please explain the process for implementing the plan |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Text field | Numerical field | Select all that apply:
|
Select all that apply: Options pre-populated from drivers reported in question 8.2 |
Select from:
|
Text field |
[Add row]
- Plan developed but not implemented – plan to implement actions has been developed and implementation tools have been identified.
- Plan being implemented – if your region has begun to implement actions from the forest management plan (execution).
- Implementation complete – if the actions identified in the plan have been fully implemented.
- Plan under development – your region has identified a vision and goals; and begun to organize resources to develop a plan.
- Plan update in progress – if your region has begun to update the forest management plan based on the progress and success of actions that have been executed.
- Other – if your plan is under a different stage of implementation that is not categorized by the options provided.
- The forest protection operations to be carried out.
- The forest development operations to be carried out, including silviculture.
- Other matters which are necessary or appropriate in order to implement management objectives effectively. This could include forest inventory, mapping, technical and social surveys, and public consultation. A management plan to be applied to State or private forest land should be approved by the Ministry responsible for forestry or other specified authority.
If "No" or "Intending to publish in the next 2 years" is selected in response to question 8.12
Reason | Explanation |
---|---|
Select one from:
|
Text field |
Select one from:
This question allows states and regions to provide information on monitoring systems in place within their jurisdictions. The need to be able to accurately monitor forest cover and quality is crucial to understanding the costs of deforestation and/or forest degradation. Forest monitoring could include measurements of certain parameters of forests (physical, chemical, and biological) to determine baselines to detect and observe changes over time. Without monitoring and the robust statistics, understanding the loss of biodiversity and reduction of carbon sequestration capacity that results from deforestation becomes much more difficult (Adapted from: Global Forest Atlas – Forest Monitoring).
If "Yes" is selected in response to question 8.13
Description of data collected | Geographic scope covered by the monitoring | Frequency of data collection | Do the results of forest monitoring inform your region's overall strategy to managing forests? | Please explain |
---|---|---|---|---|
Text field | Select from:
|
Select from:
|
Select from:
|
Text field |
[Add row]
a) Primary forests that have not been subject to major anthropogenic impacts;
b) Regenerated (second-growth) forests that were subject to major anthropogenic impacts in the past (e.g., by agriculture) but where the main causes of impact have ceased or greatly diminished, and the ecosystem has attained much of the species composition, structure and function of prior or other contemporary natural ecosystems;
c) Managed natural forests;
d) Forests that have been partially degraded by anthropogenic causes (e.g., harvesting, fire, invasive species) but where the land has not been converted to another use neither the thresholds that define a forest have been lost.
Case study: Forest monitoring in the AmazonForest monitoring in the Amazon basin is vital to map forest cover and identify areas of deforestation. Moreover, forest biomass measurement is a necessary step to identify total forest carbon stocks and establish baselines for carbon finance mechanisms such as REDD+. Forest inventory has traditionally been conducted by field plot measurements. H.H. Chapman and others at the Yale School of Forestry were some of the first foresters to develop a forest mensuration methodology in the United States. Today, allometric equations are then used to extrapolate total biomass and carbon content over a large scale. However, these biomass estimates vary between sites, and field plot measurements are costly and time consuming to replicate over a large area. Satellite data can be used to estimate forest cover across a large area at resolutions of 30 square meters for Landsat and 250 square meters for MODIS. A recent mapping project between the University of Maryland and Google created a detailed global map of forest cover change. Using Landsat images, the research confirmed a slowing down in Amazon forest cover loss in Brazil but increased deforestation in the dry forest area of the Cerrado and Chaco forest, in southern Brazil, Bolivia and Paraguay. Other studies using MODIS images also show the annual change in forest cover in South America. They found continued forest loss in the arc of deforestation extending from Para, Brazil, south to Mato Grosso, and west into Acre, while finding forest recovery in steep areas of the Andes, the Atlantic Forest of Brazil, and the dry Caatinga of northeast coastal Brazil. Source: Global Forest Atlas – Forest Inventory and Monitoring in the Amazon |
Select one:
It is important to provide details of your procedures for deforestation and/or forest degradation risk or vulnerability assessment so that CDP data users can consider the thoroughness of your region’s understanding of its forests-related risk exposure. If you have completed a risk assessment for your entire region, select “Yes”. If you have an environmental risk assessment that considers any inherent deforestation and/or forest degradation risks among other environmental issues, please select "Yes". Only select "No" if you have not conducted any form of risk assessment that included issues on deforestation and/or forest degradation.
If "Yes, risks are assessed" or "Yes, risks are partially assessed" is selected in response to question 8.14
Risk assessment procedure | Forests-related issue assessed | Drivers assessed | Frequency of assessment | Tools and methods used to identify and assess risks |
---|---|---|---|---|
Select from:
|
Select all that apply:
|
Select all that apply: Options pre-populated from drivers reported in question 8.2 |
Select from:
|
Select all that apply:
|
Issues considered | Stakeholders considered | Risk assessment web link | Explanation |
---|---|---|---|
Select all that apply:
| Select all that apply:
| Text field | Text field |
[Add row]
It is important to describe your risk assessment coverage and content so that data users can understand the thoroughness of your risk assessment processes and whether your adopted risk assessment procedures are appropriate for the context and risks. Reporting the frequency of your risk assessments helps demonstrate whether these aspects of your assessments are appropriate for the context and risks reported.
This is a table question with the following fields:
If "No, risks are not assessed" or "Do not know" is selected in response to question 8.14
Reason | Explanation |
---|---|
Select from:
|
Text field |
This question allows you to explain the primary reason as to why the region has not undertaken/has not been requested to undertake a risk assessment relating to deforestation and/or forest degradation. This question is a table with the following fields:
Select from:
Deforestation and forest degradation are major concerns for forest users and managers because it threatens their livelihoods. Deforestation not only leads to a reduction of available forest, it may also have adverse effects on the productivity, biodiversity and health of nearby remaining forests. For this question, please report whether the impact of deforestation and/or forest degradation presents significant risks to your region, by selecting “Yes”, “Do not know” or “No”. If you select “Yes” or "Do not know", you will be directed to questions 8.15a. If you select “No”, you will be directed to question 8.15b.
Deforestation and forest degradation can have severe socio-economic consequences: for example, it can threaten the livelihoods, cultures and survival of people who depend on forests, including indigenous peoples; weaken local and national economies; trigger social conflicts over natural resources; and cause population displacements. When identifying impacts of deforestation and/or forest degradation, states and regions should think objectively of the ways in which these issues will affect their region’s ability to conduct business as usual as well as the risks associated to their citizens.
If "Yes" or "Do not know" is selected in response to question 8.15
Impacts | Forests-related issue causing the impact | Driver causing the impact | Anticipated timescale | Impact seriousness |
---|---|---|---|---|
Select from:
|
Select all that apply:
|
Select all that apply: Options pre-populated from drivers reported in question 8.2 |
Select from:
|
Select from:
|
Impact description | Primary action taken | Status of action | Action description |
---|---|---|---|
Text field | Select from: See drop-down options below | Select from:
| Text field |
[Add row]
Primary action drop-down options:
This question allows states and regions to report on the current or anticipated impacts of deforestation and/or forest degradation as well as the primary actions they are taking to address these impacts. The FAO’s Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) Toolbox has a module on reducing deforestation has provided additional information and guidelines on how to address deforestation by:
-Identify deforestation areas (location and extent) using the most recent data obtained from existing monitoring systems or remote sensing, complemented by historical data, local knowledge, relevant reports and statistics, and an assessment of potential future threats in order to anticipate and minimize risk.
- Analyze the specific drivers based on data obtained from existing monitoring systems, local knowledge, and other available sources of information.
- Evaluate the impact of drivers at the local, national and, where possible, global scales, looking beyond the forest sector and considering the relationship of such drivers to all land-use activities.
- Analyze the underlying drivers, particularly those at the international level. This may need to be done using economic and social indicators, statistical analyses and modelling. It should include the mapping of the main actors associated with specific deforestation drivers and with forest restoration drivers.
- Collect qualitative information from stakeholders in order to understand the dynamics of the drivers. Of particular interest are the views of stakeholders living or working in areas where deforestation or forest degradation occur, and those living or working at sites that are showing signs of forest recovery. Such information can be gathered through, for example, key informant interviews, focus group discussions, participatory rural appraisals, and livelihood analysis, including household surveys.
-Taking a holistic approach that considers all scales: The drivers of deforestation are dynamic and interlinked and should therefore be addressed holistically. Because they occur at many scales (from local to global), strategies must integrate actions at various scales. Addressing regional or global drivers of deforestation is especially challenging and requires collaboration among countries.
- Different types of interventions: At all scales, three kinds of interventions may be considered: 1) incentives; 2) disincentives; and 3) creating an enabling environment. The table provides examples in each of these categories of measures that might be taken at various scales.
- Actions to reduce deforestation should be formulated and implemented with the engagement of all stakeholders in order to achieve legitimacy and buy-in. Because the most powerful drivers of deforestation are outside the forest sector, a cross-sectoral approach is crucial. An assessment of sectoral policies (e.g. forest, agriculture, mining, infrastructure and energy sectors), integrated land-use planning (e.g. a landscape approach), and the commitment to action by actors across sectors, are all essential for aligning sectoral interests in efforts to combat deforestation. Strategies should take into account the impacts of proposed actions on food security, local livelihoods, and climate-change mitigation and adaptation.
This is a table question with the following fields:
- Current – If your region is already experiencing the identified effect of deforestation and/or forest degradation.
- Short term – If you anticipate your region will experience the effect of deforestation and/or forest degradation by 2025.
- Medium term – If you anticipate your region will experience the identified effect of deforestation and/or forest degradation between 2026 and 2050.
- Long term – If you anticipate your region will experience the identified effect of deforestation and/or forest degradation after 2051.
- Unknown – If the information as to when your region will experience the identified effect of deforestation and/or forest degradation is not available.
If "No" is selected in response to question 8.15
Reason | Explanation |
---|---|
Select from:
|
Text field |
Select from:
Case study: Examples of benefits associated with forestsFood security and nutrition For example, a vital way in which forests contribute to food security and nutrition is in the provision of wood fuel as a household energy source. A sustainable energy supply is essential for proper and safe food and water use and therefore for family health. Likewise, the most recognized contribution of forests to food security and nutrition is the direct provision of forest foods, which can support a nutritious and diverse diet. Plants and animals found in forests provide important nutrient-rich dietary supplements, add variety to the bland diets common in rural, food-insecure households, and improve the taste and palatability of staple foods. Source: FAO – Forests, Food security and Nutrition Health and well-being Studies in countries such as Australia, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the United States indicate the significant benefits of trees, woodlands and green spaces to people’s overall health and well-being. There are many ways in which to categorize such benefits, but primarily the categories are physical, psychological and social. Benefits can be gained from being active in nature (e.g. walking or cycling in forests), and by viewing nature, for example while in transit between or within urban areas. In many developing countries, forests are central to cultures and ways of life — agricultural and forestry practices may be impossible to separate from beliefs and values. In Borneo, for example, rice cultivation in swidden systems is a central activity of Kenyah Dayak women. Without the forest (or access to it), this subsistence system, and the accompanying culture and way of life, would be endangered. Source: FAO – Health Benefits from Forests |
If "Yes" or "Do not know" is selected in response to question 8.16
Opportunity | Describe how the region is maximizing this opportunity |
---|---|
Select from:
|
Text field |
[Add row]
- Currently being experienced or are expected to arise in the future;
- Being managed or newly identified;
- Well understood or with high levels of uncertainty about the likelihood of the opportunity materializing and the extent to which it will impact the region.
If "No" is selected in response to question 8.16
Reason | Explanation |
---|---|
Select one from:
|
Text field |
“CDP” means CDP Worldwide, a company registered with the Charity Commission of England and Wales (registered charity no. 1122330 and company number 0513650).
Responding to the CDP States and Regions 2019 Questionnaire (the “Questionnaire”) is free. CDP has charitable status and seeks to use its limited funds effectively, so responses must be prepared and submitted at the expense of responding states and regions.
States and regions responding to the Questionnaire grant CDP a perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive, assignable, sub-licensable, royalty-free and global license to use their response and all copyright and database rights in their response for the uses set out in these terms. States and regions responding to the Questionnaire agree that CDP will own the databases in which that data is stored and represent that:
(a) the person submitting the response to CDP is authorized to do so;
(b) all necessary consents and permissions to submit the response to CDP have been obtained; and
(c) the response submitted to CDP:
(i) does not infringe the rights of any third party;
(ii) does not defame any third party; and
(iii) does not include Personal Data except for the Leader’s name and title (question 1.1) of the state/region.
When responding to the Questionnaire, each state/region will be given a choice as to whether its response is made public or non-public. We strongly encourage states and regions to make their responses public which means that the response will be made publicly available from the CDP website and may be used as outlined in paragraph 1 (Public responses). Non-public responses will not be made publicly available and will only be used as outlined in paragraph 2 (Non-public responses).
(a) made available as soon as it is received by CDP to its partners, appointed report writers and any other parties that CDP deem appropriate;
(b) made publicly available at www.cdp.net, and through our Open Data Portal (https://data.cdp.net/) and stored and preserved on CDP’s servers indefinitely thereafter;
(c) compiled in CDP databases and made available in original, modified or adapted form for use by commercial (for a fee or otherwise) and non-commercial organizations;
(d) amalgamated with information about the responding state/region from other public sources;
(e) used as a best practice example in CDP literature and research;
(f) used individually or as part of aggregate results in CDP’s reports and in any other research conducted or commissioned by CDP; and
(g) used in any other way that accords with CDP’s charitable mission.
2. Non-public responses
(a) used in the production of aggregate or anonymous statistics in any CDP report. CDP and its agents will make all reasonable efforts to safeguard the confidentiality of the data, including its use in a way that would not lead to the easy identification of its source; and
(b) made available as soon as it is received by CDP to:
(i) its data management partners and appointed report writers; and
(ii) The Climate Group from those states and regions affiliated with them (members of their States and Regions Alliance and the Under2 Coalition) and their appointed report writers; and
(iii) The Climate Group from those states and regions not affiliated with them, but who have agreed to share their non-public responses with The Climate Group.
The recipients of the data under 2 (b), agree to use non-public responses only in the production of aggregate or anonymous statistics to advance emissions management and climate governance and will make all reasonable efforts to safeguard the confidentiality of the data, including its use in a way that would prevent the easy identification of its source.
In order for responses to be included in annual reports and other announcements that CDP publish each year, they must be received by CDP by the date specified on the online dashboard. Responses will become ‘read-only’ after submission but can be amended after submission to CDP at any time by the main user until the end of the calendar year of the current reporting cycle.
AED United Arab Emirates dirham
AFN Afghani
ALL Lek
AMD Armenian Dram
ANG Netherlands Antillian Guilder
AOA Kwanza
ARS Argentine Peso
AUD Australian Dollar
AWG Aruban Guilder
AZN Azerbaijanian Manat
BAM Convertible Marks
BBD Barbados Dollar
BDT Bangladeshi Taka
BGN Bulgarian Lev
BHD Bahraini Dinar
BIF Burundian Franc
BMD Bermudian Dollar (customarily known as Bermuda Dollar)
BND Brunei Dollar
BOB Boliviano
BOV Bolivian Mvdol (Funds code)
BRL Brazilian Real
BSD Bahamian Dollar
BTN Ngultrum
BWP Pula
BYR Belarussian Ruble
BZD Belize Dollar
CAD Canadian Dollar
CDF Franc Congolais
CHE WIR Euro (complementary currency)
CHF Swiss Franc
CHW WIR Franc (complementary currency)
CLF Unidades de formento (Funds code)
CLP Chilean Peso
CNY Yuan Renminbi
COP Colombian Peso
COU Unidad de Valor Real
CRC Costa Rican Colon
CUP Cuban Peso
CVE Cape Verde Escudo
CYP Cyprus Pound
CZK Czech Koruna
DJF Djibouti Franc
DKK Danish Krone
DOP Dominican Peso
DZD Algerian Dinar
EEK Kroon
EGP Egyptian Pound
ERN Nakfa
ETB Ethiopian Birr
EUR Euro
FJD Fiji Dollar
FKP Falkland Islands Pound
GBP Pound Sterling
GEL Lari
GHS Cedi
GIP Gibraltar pound
GMD Dalasi
GNF Guinea Franc
GTQ Quetzal
GYD Guyana Dollar
HKD Hong Kong Dollar
HNL Lempira
HRK Croatian Kuna
HTG Haiti Gourde
HUF Forint
IDR Rupiah
ILS New Israeli Shekel
INR Indian Rupee
IQD Iraqi Dinar
IRR Iranian Rial
ISK Iceland Krona
JMD Jamaican Dollar
JOD Jordanian Dinar
JPY Japanese yen
KES Kenyan Shilling
KGS Som
KHR Riel
KMF Comoro Franc
KPW North Korean Won
KRW South Korean Won
KWD Kuwaiti Dinar
KYD Cayman Islands Dollar
KZT Tenge
LAK Kip
LBP Lebanese Pound
LKR Sri Lanka Rupee
LRD Liberian Dollar
LSL Loti
LTL Lithuanian Litas
LVL Latvian Lats
LYD Libyan Dinar
MAD Moroccan Dirham
MDL Moldovan Leu
MGA Malagasy Ariary
MKD Denar
MMK Kyat
MNT Tugrik
MOP Pataca
MRO Ouguiya
MTL Maltese Lira
MUR Mauritius Rupee
MVR Rufiyaa
MWK Kwacha
MXN Mexican Peso
MXV Mexican Unidad de Inversion (UDI) (Funds code)
MYR Malaysian Ringgit
MZN Metical
NAD Namibian Dollar
NGN Naira
NIO Cordoba Oro
NOK Norwegian Krone
NPR Nepalese Rupee
NZD New Zealand Dollar
OMR Rial Omani
PAB Balboa
PEN Nuevo Sol
PGK Kina
PHP Philippine Peso
PKR Pakistan Rupee
PLN Zloty
PYG Guarani
QAR Qatari Rial
RON Romanian New Leu
RSD Serbian Dinar
RUB Russian Ruble
RWF Rwanda Franc
SAR Saudi Riyal
SBD Solomon Islands Dollar
SCR Seychelles Rupee
SDG Sudanese Pound
SEK Swedish Krona
SGD Singapore Dollar
SHP Saint Helena Pound
SKK Slovak Koruna
SLL Leone
SOS Somali Shilling
SRD Surinam Dollar
STD Dobra
SYP Syrian Pound
SZL Lilangeni
THB Baht
TJS Somoni
TMM Manat
TND Tunisian Dinar
TOP Pa'anga
TRY New Turkish Lira
TTD Trinidad and Tobago Dollar
TWD New Taiwan Dollar
TZS Tanzanian Shilling
UAH Hryvnia
UGX Uganda Shilling
USD US Dollar
UYU Peso Uruguayo
UZS Uzbekistan Som
VEB Venezuelan bolívar
VND Vietnamese đồng
VUV Vatu
WST Samoan Tala
XAF CFA Franc BEAC
XAG Silver (one Troy ounce)
XAU Gold (one Troy ounce)
XBA European Composite Unit (EURCO) (Bonds market unit)
XBB European Monetary Unit (E.M.U.-6) (Bonds market unit)
ZAR South African Rand
1. Agriculture sector (5 possible actions)
Agriculture > Promote sustainable farming practices (excluding soil health/carbon sequestration actions)
Agriculture > Improve soil health/soil carbon sequestration capacity
Agriculture > Restore grasslands through rotational or prescribed grazing methods
Agriculture > Improve institutional capacity of farmer and rural organizations (e.g. educating farmers of innovative and cost-effective measures, providing financial support, etc.)
Agriculture > Reduce methane emissions from agriculture (e.g. install dairy digesters, etc.)
2. Buildings & Lighting sector (19 possible actions)
Buildings > Improve heating and cooling efficiency (e.g. audits, insulation, HVAC maintenance, white roofs, etc.)
Buildings > Increase awareness/engage public on energy efficiency/clean energy programs
Buildings > Install biomass heating
Buildings > Install clean cook stoves
Buildings > Install energy efficient lighting systems (e.g. LED)
Buildings > Install geothermal heating
Buildings > Install more efficient luminaires in outdoor lighting (e.g. LED)
Buildings > Install smart energy meters/sub-meters
Buildings > Install solar heating/hot water
Buildings > Promote and strengthen building energy performance rating/certification/benchmarking
Buildings > Require or encourage disclosure of energy information by building owners
Buildings > Promote energy efficient appliances
Buildings > Set/strengthen appliance efficiency standards
Buildings > Set/strengthen HVAC efficiency standards
Buildings > Set/strengthen lighting efficiency standards
Buildings > Switch from heating oil to natural gas
Buildings > Commit to reaching net-zero operating emissions in public buildings
Buildings > Establish a plan/roadmap for all new buildings to produce net-zero GHG emissions
Buildings > Net Zero Carbon Buildings Commitment participants: reducing operating emissions of government-owned building portfolio
3. Energy sector (22 possible actions)
Energy > Enable net metering
Energy > Expand/improve transmission to integrate renewables
Energy > Install natural gas power
Energy > Install biomass power
Energy > Install carbon capture and storage (CCS)
Energy > Install combined heat and power (CHP) or trigen
Energy > Install energy storage system
Energy > Install hydropower
Energy > Install microgrids
Energy > Install nuclear power
Energy > Install smart grids
Energy > Install solar power (e.g. PV, CSP)
Energy > Install geothermal power
Energy > Install wind power (e.g. onshore, offshore)
Energy > Install ocean/tidal/wave power
Energy > Measure energy productivity (e.g. GDP per unit of energy)
Energy > Promote demand-side management programs
Energy > Reform utility revenue policies and rate structures
Energy > Phase out coal-fired/inefficient power stations
Energy > Set energy efficiency resource standards (EERS)
Energy > Set a target of 100% zero-carbon power (i.e. based on a large-scale switch to renewable energy)
Energy > Control methane leaks from oil & gas operations
4. Finance & Economy sector (13 possible actions)
Finance & Economy > Adopt feed in tariff for renewables
Finance & Economy > Adopt reverse auction for renewables
Finance & Economy > Enable PACE (long term property tax based loans) financing
Finance & Economy > Establish GHG emissions trading program
Finance & Economy > Increase awareness/engage public on financing mechanisms and incentives for energy efficiency/clean energy
Finance & Economy > Invest in clean tech R&D
Finance & Economy > Issue green bonds
Finance & Economy > Promote on-bill financing
Finance & Economy > Provide green mortgages
Finance & Economy > Provide loans/guarantees for energy efficiency/clean energy
Finance & Economy > Provide tax incentives for clean energy
Finance & Economy > Support clean tech clusters/companies
Finance & Economy > Implement carbon tax
5. Governance sector (6 possible actions)
Governance > Collaborate with cities/local governments in reducing emissions/increasing resilience
Governance > Collaborate with national governments in reducing emissions/increasing resilience
Governance > Collaborate with other states/regions in reducing emissions/increasing resilience
Governance > Support and incentivize businesses in reducing emissions/increasing resilience
Governance > Support and incentivize citizens in adopting environmentally friendly practices
Governance > Complete a 2050 Pathways analysis (i.e. strategy for meeting mid-century GHG reduction goals)
6. Industry sector (6 possible actions)
Industry > Improve energy efficiency of industrial processes
Industry > Promote industrial symbiosis/industrial ecology programs
Industry > Promote reduced packaging
Industry > Support green manufacturing
Industry > Implement green public/private partnerships with industry
Industry > Support digitalization of industry
7. Land use sector (6 possible actions)
Land use > Establish GHG reduction plan for LULUCF (e.g. REDD+, etc.)
Land use > Promote conservation efforts for natural areas
Land use > Promote sustainable forest management
Land use > Promote sustainable coastal ecosystem management
Land use > Undertake strategic environmental assessment
Land use > Establish guidelines for siting renewable power
8. Transport sector (16 possible actions)
Mass Transit > Improve public transport services (e.g. adopt, high speed rail, improve bus services, improve rail services)
Mass Transit > Promote digitalization in the transport sector (e.g. real-time information)
Mass Transit > Switch freight from trucks to rail
Private Transport > Increase awareness/engage public on private transport measures
Private Transport > Install electric vehicle charging infrastructure (i.e. home, work, highways, etc.)
Private Transport > Promote alternative fuel production (e.g. biofuels, natural gas, hydrogen, etc.)
Private Transport > Set/strengthen fuel economy standards for cars/trucks
Private Transport > Set GHG emissions standards for vehicles
Private Transport > Set low-carbon fuel standard
Private Transport > Set manufacturing requirements (e.g. zero-emission vehicle standard)
Private Transport > Switch to electric/hybrid vehicles in cars/taxis/government fleets
Private Transport > Switch to other lower-carbon fuel in cars/taxis/government fleets (e.g. biofuels, natural gas, hydrogen, etc.)
Private Transport > Provide incentives for the purchase of zero-emission vehicles
Private Transport > Procure only zero-emission passenger vehicles for appropriate public fleets
Private Transport > Convert all appropriate public fleet vehicles to zero-emission vehicles
Private Transport > ZEV Challenge Participants: increasing number of ZEV’s in the public fleet
9. Waste sector (12 possible actions)
Waste > Adopt source separation policies (e.g. collection for dry recyclables, organic compostable waste, etc.)
Waste > Establish waste reduction/recycling plan
Waste > Increase awareness/engage public on waste reduction/recycling measures
Waste > Install advanced thermal treatment/waste to energy
Waste > Install anaerobic digestion
Waste > Install landfill gas management/landfill gas to energy
Waste > Install mechanical biological treatment
Waste > Install municipal recycling points or centers (for residents or businesses)
Waste > Install waste heat recovery
Waste > Implement practices and policies to promote circular economy
Waste > Reducing the municipal solid waste generation per capita
Waste > Reducing the amount of municipal solid waste disposed to landfill and incineration and increase the diversion rate away from landfill and incineration
10. Water sector (3 possible actions)
Water > Adopt wastewater to energy initiatives (e.g. methane recovery for reuse)
Water > Install smart water meters
Water > Promote water recycling or reclamation
11. Healthcare sector (3 possible actions)
Healthcare > Support hospitals and public health systems to reduce GHG emissions (e.g. renewable energy, energy efficiency, reduce waste, etc.)
Healthcare > Support hospitals and public health systems to increase resilience to climate impacts (e.g. emergency response systems, microgrids, etc.)
Healthcare > Take steps to better integrate health policy and climate policy within the government
Flood mapping
Heat mapping and thermal imaging
Landslide risk mapping
Sea level rise modelling
Biodiversity monitoring
Real time risk monitoring
Crisis management including warning and evacuation systems
Crisis planning and practice exercises
Public preparedness (including practice exercises/drills)
Community engagement/education
Projects and policies targeted at those most vulnerable
Testing/vaccination programmes for vector-borne disease
Disease prevention measures
Air quality initiatives
Incorporating climate change into long-term planning documents
Restrict development in at risk areas
Resilience and resistance measures for buildings
Hazard resistant infrastructure design and construction
Diversifying power/energy supply
Economic diversification measures
Flood defences – development and operation & storage
Storm water capture systems
Additional reservoirs and wells for water storage
Soil retention strategies
Implementing nature-based solutions for water
Tree planting and/or creation of green space
Green roofs/walls
White roofs
Shading in public spaces, markets
Cooling systems for critical infrastructure
Retrofit of existing buildings
Cooling centers, pools, water parks/plazas
Cool pavement
Water extraction protection
Promoting low flow technologies
Water butts/rainwater capture
Xeriscapes – low water landscaping design
Maintenance/repair – leaking infrastructure
Optimizing delivery fuel mix of water supply
Improve water supply distribution method
Promoting and incentivizing water efficiency
Water use restrictions and standards
Water efficient equipment and appliances
Water smart metering
Water use audits
Awareness campaign/education to reduce water use
Diversification of water supply
Other
© 2019 CDP Worldwide