Shocks and Global Imbalances—Part II: Environment and Climate

videoType

dynamic-media

videoDmUrl

keyFrameImage

timestamp

00:00 Great.

00:00 Welcome back,

00:01 uh,

00:01 to those of you in the room and the many more of you who chose to join us online.

00:05 Thank you very much for participating in today's,

00:07 uh,

00:08 this is the first of three,

00:10 KCP 20th anniversary kickoff events with opportunities to,

00:14 uh,

00:15 look back on past research,

00:17 think about current issues,

00:18 and look forward to future research,

00:19 and in particular how that knowledge is

00:21 used to generate change through policy impact.

00:24 So,

00:25 Um,

00:26 we just finished our session this morning on,

00:29 on,

00:29 uh,

00:30 on migration and forced displacement,

00:32 which transits also,

00:33 you know,

00:34 quite naturally into the current session on,

00:37 on climate change,

00:38 although we haven't had actually that much discussion

00:40 of climate-induced migration in the previous session.

00:43 Uh,

00:44 there's no need for me to,

00:45 uh,

00:45 you know,

00:46 burn up air time by persuading you guys how important this topic is.

00:50 So what I'll do is I'll just,

00:52 I'll,

00:52 I'll briefly introduce our presenters,

00:54 um,

00:55 and,

00:55 uh,

00:56 uh,

00:57 and then we'll,

00:57 we'll turn to our panelists,

00:59 and I think all of our panelists are joining us online for this event.

01:02 So,

01:02 it's a real pleasure to welcome,

01:04 um,

01:05 Carolyn Fisher,

01:05 who is a research manager for sustainability and,

01:10 um,

01:10 sustainability,

01:11 sustainability and infrastructure.

01:14 And a whole bunch of other things,

01:15 um,

01:16 in,

01:16 uh,

01:16 in the research department,

01:18 uh,

01:18 in,

01:18 in the World Bank,

01:20 um,

01:20 and also we have Ayan

01:22 Coville,

01:23 um,

01:24 joining us,

01:24 uh,

01:25 online from South Africa,

01:26 and he is,

01:27 uh,

01:27 Carolyn's counterpart in the development impact evaluation dime,

01:31 uh,

01:32 department in deck

01:33 also working on the same set of issues.

01:35 Oh,

01:35 hi,

01:36 Aidan,

01:36 we see your face here for a moment.

01:37 Uh,

01:39 great to have you.

01:40 So we'll start with um a

01:42 presentation from,

01:43 uh,

01:44 from Carolyn and Aiden,

01:46 and then we'll,

01:47 uh,

01:47 uh,

01:47 and then we'll turn over to our panel.

01:49 So the,

01:49 the floor is yours,

01:50 Carolyn.

01:50 Great,

01:51 um,

01:51 thanks,

01:52 Art.

01:52 um,

01:53 uh,

01:53 so,

01:54 uh,

01:54 so Aiden and I are gonna

01:56 talk a bit about what we'll call it knowledge for climate change.

01:59 We're certainly indebted to the KCP program,

02:02 uh,

02:03 for supporting research and,

02:05 uh,

02:05 you know,

02:05 20 year anniversary is a great time to take stock.

02:09 Um,

02:09 also,

02:10 sort of the larger

02:12 issues in research surrounding climate change which have certainly evolved

02:15 quite a bit over the past couple of decades.

02:18 Um,

02:19 so addressing climate change has really grown as a development priority.

02:23 So we,

02:24 uh,

02:24 see over the years,

02:25 this is back,

02:26 so 20 years ago,

02:28 um,

02:29 uh,

02:29 there's some initial work,

02:31 uh,

02:31 thinking about making sustainable commitments,

02:33 more in sustainability,

02:36 um,

02:36 and then in 2010,

02:37 we had a world development report on development and climate change,

02:42 and this has grown into climate change action plans.

02:48 So I'm going to be talking about more the mitigation and

02:51 low carbon growth side and then hand it over to Aiden.

02:54 He'll talk about adaptation and resilience because these are

02:57 both two important pillars

02:59 of climate change and development agenda.

03:03 Sort of thinking back to where climate

03:06 change sort of entered the economics conversation,

03:10 probably

03:11 one of the most influential.

03:13 Uh,

03:14 you know,

03:14 thinkers,

03:15 in this was

03:17 Bill Nordhaus,

03:18 who subsequently won the Nobel Prize,

03:20 but back in 1982,

03:23 he approached this,

03:24 this question of recognizing that the climate is this global

03:29 public good and it's a global commons to manage.

03:32 So his papers how fast should we graze the.

03:35 Global commons thinking about how

03:37 should you know how fast should we use up this uh this resource as we're

03:42 pumping emissions into the atmosphere and potentially creating climate change

03:46 and so he developed this initial intuition about,

03:50 you know,

03:50 how it depends on when we think,

03:53 you know,

03:53 clean technologies are going to come along,

03:55 how fast economies are growing.

03:58 Um,

03:59 and,

03:59 and you know what we think about discount rates,

04:02 uh,

04:03 to,

04:03 to back out,

04:04 you know,

04:04 what is the sort of shadow cost of CO2

04:08 in the global economy,

04:10 and this evolved to become really the concept of the social cost of carbon,

04:15 um.

04:15 Uh,

04:16 so he went on to develop the first,

04:18 um,

04:18 integrated assessment models,

04:20 uh,

04:20 IAMs,

04:22 uh,

04:22 most famously DICE,

04:24 the dynamic integrated Climate Econy model and Rice,

04:27 the regional version

04:28 is built on,

04:29 uh,

04:30 on frameworks by,

04:31 um,

04:32 uh,

04:32 Alan Mann,

04:34 uh,

04:34 and Richels,

04:35 um,

04:36 and,

04:36 and have really these,

04:38 these kinds of models have really proliferated today and,

04:41 um,

04:42 have,

04:42 have done a lot of work in trying to understand what.

04:45 Uh,

04:46 the

04:47 social cost of carbon is sort of balancing the

04:51 benefits of growth and energy and,

04:53 and the costs and damages of climate change in the future.

04:58 Um,

04:59 I was,

05:00 I was under the impression that basically the,

05:02 the social cost of carbon,

05:04 these estimates coming out of models,

05:05 just like,

05:06 you know,

05:06 has just basically gone up over time as the news keeps getting,

05:10 getting worse.

05:11 But actually Richard Told recently did a retrospective study,

05:16 and then there's a lot more movement around.

05:18 So this,

05:19 so,

05:19 this is adjusted.

05:21 Into

05:22 I forget what your dollars,

05:23 but into consist into real dollars,

05:25 um,

05:26 and,

05:27 um,

05:27 and we do see really maybe over the past

05:30 two decades more of an upward trend,

05:32 but there was a lot of,

05:34 a lot of noise early on

05:36 and the,

05:37 you know,

05:38 the social cost of carbon.

05:40 Um,

05:41 you know,

05:41 has really arose out of,

05:43 you know,

05:44 economists need and certainly,

05:45 you know,

05:46 in the United States regulatory framework need to do cost benefit analysis.

05:49 So you want,

05:50 uh,

05:51 some sort of,

05:51 uh,

05:52 uh,

05:52 reflection of the damages of,

05:55 of greenhouse gas emissions,

05:57 but it's,

05:57 you know,

05:57 it's very sensitive to,

05:59 uh,

05:59 assumptions that you make about what are the damage functions,

06:03 uh,

06:03 are there tipping points,

06:05 what's happening with population growth,

06:07 uh.

06:09 As information evolved about

06:12 how about the climate cycle,

06:13 the physical

06:15 response of the climate

06:17 to accumulated greenhouse gasses,

06:20 uncertainties,

06:21 etc.

06:22 Um,

06:23 so these have really evolved over time and,

06:26 and are now getting to be quite,

06:28 quite large.

06:29 Recent

06:30 study by,

06:31 um,

06:32 review by Resources for the Future,

06:35 uh,

06:35 has pegged it,

06:36 uh,

06:37 you know,

06:37 as maybe 3 or 4 times what the latest EPA,

06:41 um,

06:42 uh,

06:42 social cost of carbon is.

06:44 At the same time though,

06:45 now,

06:46 now you're getting sort of growing sort of criticisms of

06:49 this repro of this approach because it's very difficult to capture

06:53 all of the uncertainties and potential damages

06:57 and costs and,

06:58 um,

06:59 and so.

07:00 There's a,

07:00 there's a push to go

07:02 sort of thinking beyond the social cost of carbon and really just thinking about,

07:06 OK,

07:06 we're running out of our climate carbon budget to avoid,

07:10 um,

07:11 you know,

07:11 uh,

07:12 serious climate change and so how do we just get,

07:16 um,

07:16 get the job done.

07:17 So there's a recent,

07:18 um.

07:19 Publication by Nick Stern,

07:21 Joe Stiglitz,

07:22 and,

07:23 um,

07:23 Ann Taylor

07:24 on the economics of immense risk,

07:26 urgent action,

07:27 and radical change,

07:29 recognizing that sort of the incremental approach that economists often take

07:33 is not

07:34 necessarily sufficient to the task of addressing,

07:37 uh,

07:37 climate change.

07:40 We also see that climate negotiations have

07:44 have evolved quite a bit over the past 30 years.

07:47 Um,

07:48 so,

07:48 uh,

07:49 started out in,

07:50 so in 1992 we had the Earth Summit in Rio,

07:53 which

07:53 sort of sounded the initial alarm.

07:56 Um,

07:57 and,

07:58 uh,

07:58 and here

07:59 we came up with the idea and the

08:01 principle of common but differentiated responsibilities recognizing that

08:06 developed countries have,

08:08 have,

08:08 uh,

08:09 both,

08:09 you know,

08:10 historic,

08:11 uh,

08:11 um.

08:12 Responsibility for uh for uh

08:16 for the greenhouse gas emissions and also are

08:19 better able to to address uh address this

08:23 um but all countries have some responsibility for

08:26 uh for addressing the problem.

08:29 Um,

08:30 then we get to the Kyoto Protocol in 1997.

08:34 So this is the first attempt to really

08:36 get an agreement on actually doing something on

08:39 reducing and making commitments to reduce emissions,

08:42 and it took what we'll,

08:43 I'll call the more of a cap and trade approach.

08:46 Um,

08:46 so there were a set of emissions targets for,

08:50 uh,

08:50 Annex One.

08:51 So,

08:51 so these are developed countries for the most part.

08:54 Um,

08:55 but also included a bunch of flexibility mechanisms,

08:58 joint implementation,

09:00 a clean development mechanism

09:02 as a way to get,

09:03 um,

09:03 developing countries,

09:05 uh,

09:06 uh,

09:07 on the path towards reducing,

09:08 reducing emissions,

09:10 really building on,

09:12 you know,

09:12 arguably the success in the United States of the,

09:16 of,

09:16 uh,

09:17 emissions trading and the sulfur dioxide program and expanding it

09:21 to,

09:21 to this idea that.

09:23 Uh,

09:23 cost-effective reductions,

09:26 um,

09:26 you know,

09:27 mean,

09:28 uh,

09:28 that everyone should,

09:30 should,

09:30 um,

09:31 uh,

09:32 should have,

09:33 uh,

09:34 similar carbon price and,

09:35 and markets for,

09:37 uh,

09:37 for emissions can help implement that.

09:41 Um,

09:42 the Kyoto,

09:43 uh,

09:43 went into effect and then sort of,

09:45 uh,

09:46 uh,

09:46 and we had the first commitment period,

09:49 uh,

09:49 2008 to 2012,

09:51 and then it,

09:52 uh,

09:53 but it,

09:53 uh,

09:54 didn't really,

09:55 um,

09:55 pick up steam.

09:57 In Copenhagen in 2009,

10:00 the tactics switched to this sort of pledge and review approach with

10:05 nationally appropriate

10:06 mitigation actions for non-Annex 1 countries,

10:11 so for the developing countries,

10:14 and then we ended up with the Paris Agreement in 2015,

10:18 which is basically this approach for all countries,

10:20 so nationally determined contributions,

10:22 each country.

10:24 Says you know what they're gonna promise to do,

10:27 um,

10:28 uh,

10:29 and but it's not necessarily a set target it may be a,

10:32 a,

10:32 a mix of policies,

10:34 um,

10:35 and then,

10:35 you know,

10:36 bringing in these issues of,

10:37 well,

10:38 um,

10:38 you know,

10:39 galvanizing,

10:40 uh,

10:40 climate finance or promising climate finance,

10:43 uh,

10:44 for developing countries and starting to talk about loss and damage.

10:47 Um,

10:48 and then the COP 26,

10:49 uh,

10:50 last year in Glasgow

10:51 is basically was further developing the the Paris rulebook.

10:55 So,

10:56 so for the rules for,

10:57 um,

10:58 uh,

10:59 there's still this idea of,

11:00 of making of trading across countries.

11:03 So this international transfer of mitigation outcomes,

11:07 um,

11:07 and as a sort of international

11:10 flexibility mechanisms and these and,

11:12 and a bunch of other rules for,

11:13 um.

11:15 Uh,

11:15 for monitoring and verification and transparency and a

11:18 lot of these things that you need,

11:21 um,

11:21 we see the research,

11:22 uh,

11:23 has sort of followed along and,

11:25 and fed back,

11:26 uh,

11:27 uh,

11:27 with the,

11:28 um,

11:28 with the negotiation strategy.

11:30 So early on we saw a lot of work

11:32 on,

11:33 you know,

11:33 what is like appropriate burden sharing and cost effective policies,

11:38 global policies for climate change.

11:40 A lot of this focused on emissions trading,

11:43 uh,

11:43 design.

11:44 And linking the um EU ETS,

11:47 you know,

11:48 begins in

11:50 2005 here

11:52 and then we see a lot of,

11:53 um,

11:54 uh,

11:55 uh,

11:56 you know,

11:56 research sort of comparing,

11:58 well,

11:58 what,

11:58 OK,

11:58 economists were convinced that carbon pricing is the right instrument,

12:02 but,

12:03 you know,

12:03 should we do it through taxes or through cap and trade systems,

12:06 a lot of literature.

12:08 Um,

12:08 comparing,

12:09 uh,

12:09 emissions trading versus versus taxes

12:13 tends tending to land on the side of taxes,

12:17 um,

12:18 but then after Copenhagen,

12:19 as,

12:20 as we see and,

12:20 and leading into Paris,

12:22 we see this,

12:24 um,

12:24 you know,

12:25 we,

12:25 we see that the movement towards

12:27 these unilateral approaches,

12:30 unilateral commitments,

12:32 um.

12:33 Uh,

12:34 leads to,

12:34 uh,

12:35 a research agenda on looking at,

12:37 you know,

12:38 unilateral climate policies and trade.

12:40 So this is a global economy

12:42 country and,

12:43 you know,

12:44 trying to address a public good problem,

12:45 and each,

12:47 uh,

12:47 country is determining its own,

12:49 uh,

12:50 uh,

12:51 it's,

12:51 its own contributions,

12:54 um.

12:55 Uh,

12:56 since this isn't just,

12:57 uh,

12:58 you know,

12:58 emissions cap and trade scheme,

13:00 there is a really a mix of policies that they're looking at,

13:04 and there are because there are a mix of challenges,

13:06 uh,

13:06 the,

13:07 um,

13:07 the

13:08 externality,

13:09 the social cost of.

13:11 Of carbon emissions is not the only issue.

13:13 There are other

13:14 market failures that we need to worry about,

13:16 so we see more

13:18 research,

13:19 um,

13:19 related to,

13:20 to these interactions,

13:22 um,

13:23 and,

13:23 and,

13:24 and

13:25 leading in then to,

13:26 um,

13:27 uh,

13:28 concern about ideas about,

13:29 you know,

13:30 how do we encourage,

13:32 you know,

13:33 this pledge and review scene,

13:34 how do we encourage more ambition.

13:37 Among unilateral policy contributions,

13:40 so the ideas of climate clubs and questions of political economy come to the fore.

13:46 Um,

13:47 and,

13:47 and now just,

13:48 you know,

13:49 there's a lot more nuance,

13:50 a lot more detail thinking about,

13:53 you know,

13:53 what are behavioral,

13:54 um,

13:56 uh,

13:56 barriers,

13:56 behavioral economics is coming into it,

13:59 uh,

14:00 technology,

14:00 technological change,

14:02 uh,

14:03 um,

14:03 innovation spillovers,

14:05 um,

14:05 and also what are the co-benefits of climate policies because it's

14:09 operating in tandem with a much bigger space of development challenges.

14:15 Just a,

14:16 uh,

14:16 quick,

14:16 some quick highlights of,

14:18 uh,

14:18 KCP research.

14:19 Um,

14:20 so on the road to Copenhagen,

14:21 so prior to,

14:23 uh,

14:24 to Copenhagen,

14:25 um,

14:26 there was attention to sort of how do we mitigate climate change by avoiding lock-in

14:32 to high carbon energy systems.

14:34 Um,

14:35 what are the options really in developing countries for cleaner

14:39 energy and what are the barriers to adoption and sustainability.

14:43 Um,

14:44 And,

14:45 uh,

14:45 um,

14:46 some questions on biofuels and then actually a lot,

14:49 one of the outputs of the first stage of the KCP was the,

14:53 uh,

14:53 World Development report on development and climate change.

14:56 So that's,

14:57 um,

14:57 a major contribution.

15:00 Um,

15:01 in the second,

15:02 uh,

15:02 phase of the KCP,

15:04 uh,

15:04 we see more nuance coming in.

15:06 So low carbon technologies and development.

15:08 So how,

15:10 how does demand for biofuels influence biodiversity.

15:14 Um,

15:15 uh,

15:15 how does the,

15:17 you know,

15:17 the,

15:18 do electricity markets,

15:19 so,

15:20 um,

15:21 uh,

15:22 and how does competition in these,

15:24 in the structure of these markets influence the,

15:26 uh,

15:27 the shift to low carbon generation?

15:29 Questions on forestry,

15:31 cook stoves,

15:31 etc.

15:33 um,

15:33 and then there was a lot of support for,

15:35 um.

15:36 Uh,

15:36 assessing green growth opportunities in developing countries,

15:39 so really building up the modeling tools that we have at the bank to,

15:43 um,

15:44 uh,

15:45 to model low carbon growth,

15:48 um,

15:48 scenarios and,

15:50 and,

15:50 uh,

15:51 um,

15:52 consider,

15:53 you know,

15:53 how to reduce poverty in a sustainable way.

15:58 Um,

15:59 how much time

16:00 do I have?

16:02 OK,

16:02 so,

16:03 uh,

16:03 just quickly,

16:04 sort of going back to the,

16:06 the early roots though,

16:07 I,

16:07 I just,

16:08 I wanna highlight that the World Bank has really been instrumental

16:11 in,

16:12 um,

16:13 in,

16:13 um,

16:14 collecting and disseminating knowledge about carbon pricing

16:18 as a climate policy tool.

16:20 We've had the state and trends of carbon pricing and this shows that,

16:23 you know,

16:23 carbon pricing instruments have really

16:26 expanded over the past,

16:27 you know,

16:28 this is the 30 years.

16:29 Um,

16:30 and now cover,

16:31 uh,

16:31 close to,

16:32 um,

16:32 a quarter of global,

16:34 global emissions

16:35 and the World Bank's own effort has had have had something to do with this.

16:39 So

16:40 this is a handbook on emissions trading in practice,

16:43 um,

16:44 and we see that carbon pricing is not just a thing for developed countries.

16:48 So we see,

16:49 so here's the,

16:49 in the blue,

16:51 the blue bubbles at $100 a ton are basically.

16:54 Europe

16:55 on the x axis is how much the economy that's covered,

16:59 so it depends on on the um

17:01 how big the ETS is as a share of their emissions,

17:04 but we see lower down actually there

17:06 um a lot of um developing and emerging economies that do have carbon pricing

17:12 and this is,

17:13 you know,

17:13 this is an entry point and,

17:15 and,

17:15 um,

17:16 and a recognition that these are becoming important,

17:19 uh,

17:20 uh,

17:20 mechanisms for them to meet their commitments,

17:23 um.

17:25 Uh,

17:25 something,

17:26 uh,

17:26 that we're working on now is,

17:28 is thinking,

17:29 recognizing that direct carbon pricing

17:32 is only part of the story.

17:34 Um,

17:34 most countries have,

17:36 uh,

17:36 also a lot of indirect taxes on fossil fuels,

17:40 uh,

17:40 as well as subsidies to fossil fuels,

17:43 um,

17:43 that,

17:43 you know,

17:43 can contribute to the extent to which,

17:47 uh,

17:47 you know,

17:48 fuel costs,

17:49 total costs are aligned with their.

17:51 Carbon costs and so when we look at

17:53 uh the total carbon prices including these uh like indirect uh

17:59 indirect taxes

18:01 um

18:01 we see a picture where there are a

18:03 substantial number of developing countries that are,

18:07 uh,

18:07 you know,

18:08 that have carbon costs that are,

18:11 uh,

18:12 that are quite

18:13 that are quite aligned and even higher than many developed countries.

18:17 So some research priorities,

18:20 um,

18:20 related to this,

18:22 um,

18:22 you know,

18:23 thinking about the carbon that's embodied in trade,

18:26 um,

18:27 so as we see,

18:28 uh,

18:28 you know,

18:29 uh,

18:30 the carbon border adjustment mechanisms,

18:32 uh,

18:33 come out,

18:34 understanding,

18:34 well how much carbon in that trade is,

18:36 is already priced,

18:38 so what are really the incentives.

18:40 Uh,

18:40 trade based on carbon price differentials.

18:43 Um,

18:44 how,

18:45 how large can we estimate the co-benefits,

18:48 uh,

18:48 from reducing greenhouse gas emissions,

18:51 and a lot of these,

18:51 uh,

18:52 and a lot of developing and emerging economies,

18:55 uh,

18:55 have very,

18:57 uh,

18:57 large,

18:58 um,

18:59 uh,

18:59 air pollution

19:00 problems that,

19:01 um,

19:02 that

19:03 can

19:04 increase the benefits of,

19:05 uh,

19:06 of carbon,

19:07 um,

19:08 cost alignment.

19:09 Um,

19:09 informality is another question.

19:11 So the,

19:11 you know,

19:12 there's a long literature on interactions,

19:14 uh,

19:14 between,

19:15 uh,

19:15 emissions taxes and the broader tax system.

19:19 These,

19:19 some of these lessons

19:21 can be quite different in a context with a large share of informality.

19:25 Um,

19:26 Energy access,

19:26 of course,

19:27 is,

19:28 uh,

19:29 important to,

19:29 to think about and then.

19:31 You know,

19:31 what role

19:35 does carbon pricing,

19:36 carbon cost alignment play

19:38 in the

19:39 NDCs of developing countries,

19:41 many of whom have already adopted net zero targets,

19:44 and it's important to think about what is the

19:46 enabling environment that that we're creating and what role can

19:51 these sort of market-based policies

19:53 play.

19:54 Thanks.

19:58 So I'll hand this over to Aiden,

20:00 yeah.

20:02 Thanks,

20:02 Carolyn.

20:03 Uh,

20:03 let me see if I can.

20:05 It

20:07 Slides up.

20:10 Let's do the

20:12 pattern turnover.

20:14 Can you guys uh see the slides OK?

20:18 Uh,

20:18 yep,

20:18 they're up.

20:20 They

20:21 OK,

20:22 excellent.

20:23 So,

20:24 um,

20:26 Yeah,

20:26 thanks.

20:27 Thanks,

20:27 Carolyn.

20:27 So,

20:28 uh,

20:28 so,

20:29 uh,

20:29 jumping on from,

20:30 uh,

20:30 Carolyn's description on the

20:32 mitigation side,

20:33 I was gonna start discussing a little bit on the,

20:35 on the,

20:36 uh,

20:36 adaptation side.

20:37 And I,

20:38 I,

20:38 I think what we can do is start with,

20:40 uh,

20:40 Kubler Ross,

20:41 who,

20:41 uh,

20:41 was,

20:42 uh,

20:42 actually had an incredible foresight

20:44 and summarized the evolution of climate change

20:47 research and responses back in 1969.

20:49 Uh,

20:49 but since the term climate Climate Change wasn't really a thing there.

20:53 Uh,

20:53 she called it stages of grief instead.

20:56 Um,

20:56 and

20:57 what we mean by this is that,

20:58 uh,

20:59 uh,

21:00 we,

21:00 we,

21:00 we see that climate change research actually started out,

21:03 uh,

21:03 somewhere over here

21:05 in the denial phase for,

21:07 for,

21:07 for,

21:07 for,

21:07 for many,

21:08 many years.

21:09 Uh,

21:09 but since we've spent so long over there,

21:11 it's been,

21:11 there's been a very historical lag in the adaptation literature,

21:14 right?

21:15 So the idea is,

21:17 Uh,

21:17 you know,

21:18 climate is something in the future and therefore,

21:20 uh,

21:20 adaptation is not as,

21:22 as important anymore,

21:23 uh,

21:23 or at the moment.

21:24 But obviously,

21:25 today,

21:25 uh,

21:25 we're around about,

21:27 um,

21:28 somewhere over here,

21:29 we're realizing that the only way that we can get

21:31 out of this giant hole is actually experimenting with solutions,

21:34 uh,

21:35 since climate change and its effects are already here.

21:37 And this fundamentally includes experimenting with adaptation solutions too.

21:41 Um,

21:42 so.

21:42 In 2003 that a seminal work documented the

21:46 first signs that living systems were actually changing

21:49 because of a warming,

21:50 a warming planet,

21:51 uh,

21:52 finding that 279 species had started their movement

21:55 towards the poles in line with climate predictions.

21:58 Uh,

21:58 despite the slow start,

22:00 the good news is that there's actually been

22:03 exponential growth in climate adaptation research going up by about 28%.

22:08 Uh,

22:09 per annum,

22:09 uh,

22:10 growth in,

22:10 in kind of climate adaptation evidence.

22:12 Uh,

22:13 and it broadly covers 33 broad areas.

22:16 One is

22:17 improving data and measurement.

22:19 Second,

22:19 on,

22:20 um,

22:21 understanding the actual impacts of climate change.

22:23 And finally,

22:24 third is on research,

22:25 trying to understand the solutions,

22:26 the actual effectiveness of adaptation solutions.

22:30 So while it's impossible to be comprehensive in this short time,

22:34 uh,

22:34 what I'll do rather is just sort of zoom in.

22:36 Um,

22:37 and focus on a few of those data points,

22:40 uh,

22:40 from the graph,

22:41 which will help illustrate the evolution of some of the selected KCP research,

22:45 uh,

22:45 over the,

22:45 uh,

22:46 20 years on a specific issue,

22:48 uh,

22:49 before zooming back out and looking at the broader,

22:51 broader relevance.

22:52 So it starts

22:53 back in the early 2000s.

22:55 At this time,

22:55 it was well understood that sea level rises from melting ice caps,

22:59 posed a really Significant development challenge.

23:02 Uh,

23:02 and Susmita Dasgupta from DCRG and a team of multidisciplinary,

23:06 local and international researchers

23:08 initially set out to try to find out what might affect,

23:11 uh,

23:12 understand how the sea level rise might affect,

23:13 uh,

23:14 people and found that in Bangladesh was actually

23:16 one of the countries on the front line,

23:18 uh,

23:18 with up to 5 million people potentially being

23:20 directly affected if there was a 3-meter,

23:23 uh,

23:23 sea level rise.

23:24 But while extreme weather events such as storm surges and the aftermath,

23:28 uh,

23:29 captured the attention of politicians and media,

23:31 uh,

23:31 the teams actually research found that there was

23:33 something that was a very overlooked dimension.

23:35 And this was the silent increase in salinization of water and soil over time.

23:41 And so,

23:41 which was actually a much more proximate challenge for residents in Bangladesh.

23:46 And so over the next 10 years,

23:47 the team helped unpack a range of different,

23:50 um,

23:50 impacts,

23:50 highlighting Just how critical these issues

23:53 of salinization were.

23:54 So they showed,

23:55 for instance,

23:55 that drinking water,

23:56 drinking more saline water could increase dehydration and infant mortality,

24:00 uh,

24:01 increased soil and irrigation,

24:02 uh,

24:03 water salinity would reduce agricultural yields.

24:06 Uh,

24:06 salinity increases road erosion,

24:08 and the maintenance costs actually have to triple to address this.

24:11 And overall,

24:12 sort of ultimately,

24:13 this,

24:14 this increases poverty

24:15 and out migration as a coping mechanism.

24:18 So,

24:19 the next step was really to try to explore ways to adapt to the encroaching salinity.

24:23 And

24:23 the team started to unpack adaptation options

24:26 ranging from saline resistant seeds,

24:29 uh,

24:29 alternative farming,

24:30 changing livelihoods to tourism or agriculture,

24:32 or maybe a combination of

24:34 nature-based solutions and infrastructure.

24:37 And this sort of breadth of research review and research

24:40 was then complemented by independent but highly related research

24:44 by another de research team led by Florence Condilas which began to ask

24:48 how do we actually get people to

24:50 adopt some of these new adaptation adaptation approaches

24:54 and how effective can they actually be in practice.

24:57 Uh,

24:57 so running a large scale randomized control trial in Bangladesh as well,

25:01 uh,

25:01 the team was able to show that,

25:03 um,

25:04 one particular adaptation option,

25:05 saline resistant seeds,

25:07 were able to offset the negative

25:09 impacts of increased salinization on crop yields.

25:11 And,

25:12 um,

25:13 When they looked at how to diffuse knowledge,

25:15 they saw that demonstration plots were,

25:17 were able to diffuse knowledge and increase take-up

25:20 of these seeds.

25:20 But,

25:21 but despite these improvements in the seeds,

25:23 uh,

25:23 and take-up waned over time,

25:25 and this kind of highlighted the difficulty,

25:27 uh,

25:27 difficult interplay between adaptation technologies and behavioral responses,

25:32 uh,

25:32 that will need,

25:33 uh,

25:33 to,

25:33 to,

25:34 to ensure sort of the effectiveness of these adaptation,

25:37 um,

25:37 approaches.

25:38 And so this gave us a rich understanding of

25:40 the nature of the problem and potential solutions.

25:43 Of course,

25:43 it opens up all sorts of other questions,

25:45 uh,

25:46 about what to grapple with going forward.

25:48 So,

25:48 for instance,

25:48 is incentivizing technology adoption,

25:50 uh,

25:51 the right thing to do,

25:52 or should we be helping people switch livelihoods altogether,

25:54 uh,

25:55 or even migrate?

25:56 Uh,

25:56 so this gives us,

25:57 so,

25:57 so

25:58 this gives us a little bit of a,

25:59 like a microcosm of the broader adaptation research evolution,

26:03 uh,

26:03 which we can now zoom out,

26:05 uh,

26:05 and try to understand

26:07 the broader research advances

26:08 in data,

26:09 measuring climate impacts and adaptation options.

26:13 Luckily,

26:14 uh,

26:14 we're not in 1972,

26:16 uh,

26:16 and the advances in data

26:18 have helped us clear up the picture,

26:20 uh,

26:20 and open up

26:21 new

26:22 new opportunities for,

26:23 for research.

26:25 Um,

26:25 and so one example of this that's very salient

26:28 has been the huge strides over the year,

26:30 uh,

26:30 uh,

26:31 over the years in improvements in satellite and mobility data.

26:34 Uh,

26:35 in 1972,

26:36 LANSA satellite imagery was the only game in town

26:39 and only provided 40-meter.

26:41 Resolution

26:42 and also was not publicly available.

26:44 So 20 years later,

26:45 the first nighttime lights data started switching on.

26:48 Uh,

26:48 the first private sector high resolution satellites

26:50 started popping up in the early 2000s.

26:53 NASA started measuring satellite-based pollution data in 2004.

26:57 2007 saw a revolution in all of our day to day lives,

27:01 which was the iPhone.

27:02 Uh,

27:02 but the smartphone revolution also brought with

27:04 it the ability to get more granular data

27:07 on where and when people move.

27:09 Uh,

27:10 and in reality,

27:10 all of these data sources are only really useful

27:13 if you have the right tools.

27:14 Uh,

27:15 so including the computing power and

27:17 machine learning approaches to actually processing,

27:19 uh,

27:19 processing them.

27:20 So in 2010,

27:21 uh,

27:21 at COP 26,

27:22 actually,

27:23 Google Earth Engine was unveiled,

27:25 uh,

27:25 making large data processing more accessible.

27:28 So over this period,

27:29 the spatial and temporal resolution has been increasing

27:32 consistently over time while costs of these,

27:35 uh,

27:35 data,

27:35 data sources have actually been coming down dramatically

27:38 as well,

27:38 making high-definition

27:40 Earth observation a reality for,

27:41 for,

27:42 for,

27:42 for researchers.

27:43 And so,

27:44 combining these advances in remote sensing

27:46 and computing power with economic population data

27:49 has opened further opportunities to,

27:51 to,

27:51 to map climate and vulnerability.

27:53 And so an example of this is the researchers

27:55 that have used high-resolution flood hazard and population maps,

27:59 as well as

28:00 Poverty estimates from World Bank's Global Subnational Atlas,

28:03 uh,

28:03 of poverty and also the global monitoring database

28:06 to estimate that 1.47 billion people

28:09 globally are directly exposed to the risk of intense flooding

28:12 and almost 600 million of these are poor.

28:16 So,

28:16 these data foundations have also helped researchers,

28:19 uh,

28:19 extend

28:20 some of the insights of integrated assessment models

28:23 along the lines that Carolyn was discussing earlier

28:25 to get much stronger empirically founded evidence

28:28 on the nature of the actual impacts of climate change,

28:31 feeding further into some of the,

28:32 um,

28:33 SEC estimates,

28:34 for example.

28:35 And a really,

28:36 really nice example of this at the forefront of the research.

28:38 Uh,

28:39 at the moment,

28:39 there's some work by Carlton and others,

28:41 uh,

28:42 looking at,

28:43 uh,

28:43 combining

28:44 global data sets,

28:45 uh,

28:45 with climate models to map out the full mortality risk

28:49 of climate change through to 2100,

28:51 accounting for adaptation costs.

28:53 And while there's a bit too much,

28:55 uh,

28:55 going on in this next slide,

28:57 uh,

28:57 here,

28:58 uh,

28:58 I'll try to highlight two stark messages.

29:01 The first related mortality alone,

29:05 could,

29:05 uh,

29:06 sorry,

29:06 heat-related mortality alone,

29:07 um,

29:08 could be as high as cancer,

29:10 currently the second largest cause of death worldwide by 2100.

29:14 And secondly,

29:16 um,

29:16 the mortality effects will be heavily skewed towards low-income countries

29:20 that live in hotter climates to begin with

29:22 and have less effective adaptation options.

29:26 But

29:26 I guess the question now is what about specific adaptation,

29:29 um,

29:30 activities?

29:31 And so alongside the data revolution,

29:34 uh,

29:34 we've seen that there's been,

29:35 there's also been a credibility revolution in economics over the past 25 years,

29:39 acknowledging that finding correlations can be misleading

29:43 and using experimental and quasi-experimental tools to try

29:46 to isolate the causal effects of intervention.

29:48 Uh,

29:49 it's so critical for understanding what works.

29:52 A recent review of adaptation interventions in the literature

29:55 though has found that just a tiny proportion,

29:56 1.4%

29:58 of studies reviewed

29:59 could actually provide concrete evidence of risk reduction linked to,

30:03 uh,

30:03 adaptation practices.

30:05 Despite this,

30:05 though,

30:06 there's actually a lot we've learned over the years.

30:08 And while we've known for some time that cash transfers

30:11 can mitigate the effects of shocks,

30:12 there's now growing evidence that income levels are

30:15 a hugely important factor determining adaptation effectiveness,

30:18 which points to economic growth as a vital tool for adaptation.

30:22 And while insurance against weather risk seems to be like a no-brainer 20 years ago,

30:27 we now know that take-up for basic rainfall insurance limits effectiveness,

30:31 even though it reduces risk and improves investments when it's actually used.

30:35 Um,

30:36 more broadly,

30:37 adoption of climate adaptation technologies can

30:39 be constrained by softer constraints like

30:42 information.

30:43 And social norms,

30:44 but also harder constraints like complementary factors

30:46 of production such as land and labor.

30:49 Nature-based solutions have great potential for both adaptation and mitigation,

30:53 but there have been concerns about,

30:54 uh,

30:55 greenwashing and,

30:56 and this actually increases the need

30:58 for continued uh rigorous research in,

31:00 in,

31:01 in the space.

31:02 And then finally,

31:02 linking to Some of the first session today,

31:05 uh,

31:05 climate change is,

31:06 is likely to spur migration,

31:08 but it is

31:09 the most vulnerable that may actually not even be able to afford to move,

31:13 uh,

31:13 which further exacerbates the inequalities and exposure to climate impacts.

31:16 So the evidence on interventionist support

31:18 to actually help migration or relocation,

31:21 uh,

31:21 suggests that there could be potential impacts,

31:23 but

31:25 often not really related specifically to climate movement.

31:28 And there's obviously a growing importance,

31:30 importance for us to

31:31 try to unpack this issue further.

31:33 So that sort of leads to the last part,

31:36 which is

31:37 sort of taking stock of what we know

31:39 to move forward,

31:40 uh,

31:40 in what we see as a few key areas for future research.

31:44 So the first

31:45 is,

31:45 like in the migration discussion earlier,

31:47 connecting ever more comprehensive data sets will

31:49 be key to understanding amputation needs.

31:52 Uh,

31:52 but this brings really important privacy issues,

31:54 right?

31:55 So

31:55 KCP finance research has actually helped show that anonymization of location,

32:00 uh,

32:00 by jittering,

32:01 uh,

32:02 um,

32:02 or reducing the granularity of GPS points,

32:05 for instance.

32:05 For instance,

32:06 is less of an issue for accuracy than the actual

32:08 remote sensing tools that are being used for weather measures,

32:11 uh,

32:11 when looking at,

32:12 uh,

32:12 things like agricultural productivity.

32:15 Um,

32:15 but

32:16 what might be the limits to this?

32:17 And how should we think about this balance between,

32:19 um,

32:20 privacy and getting,

32:21 getting accurate,

32:22 um,

32:22 analysis?

32:23 And what about when we add in things like smartphones and CDR and mobile data?

32:27 Um,

32:28 second,

32:29 we've shown for some time that vulnerability is inherently dynamic.

32:32 And so,

32:33 how do we think about who,

32:35 how and when to support a moving target?

32:37 Uh,

32:38 leaning into this challenge,

32:39 we,

32:39 we need to draw on the history of theoretical and empirical work,

32:43 uh,

32:43 to,

32:44 to,

32:44 to do a better job at really targeting

32:46 variance and outcomes,

32:47 not just levels,

32:48 identifying not just who to support,

32:50 but with what,

32:51 but actually when to provide the support

32:54 and thinking carefully about the welfare implications of all of this.

32:58 Third,

32:59 we need to take empirical causal estimates of specification,

33:03 specific adaptation approaches really seriously,

33:06 particularly in relation to slow onset,

33:08 onset climate impacts,

33:09 which are relatively less covered.

33:11 Um,

33:12 this is particularly important within the context

33:14 of increasing concerns of maladaptation where,

33:17 uh,

33:17 despite best intentions,

33:19 there might be unintended negative consequences that might occur.

33:22 But also on the flip side,

33:23 being able to make sure we actually

33:25 Capture all the potential co-benefits of adaptation approaches.

33:28 So key to this discussion

33:30 has to be when we should be considering incremental

33:33 versus transformative adaptation.

33:35 Well,

33:36 increasing frequency of droughts might be

33:38 addressed through adoption of droughts,

33:40 drought resistant seeds.

33:42 How do we weigh up the incremental support with,

33:44 say,

33:45 changing the,

33:45 uh,

33:45 changing to new crops altogether

33:47 or new livelihoods or ultimately migrating?

33:51 With a significant funding gap,

33:52 uh,

33:53 a significant funding gap and adaptation and known adaptation limits,

33:56 both hard and soft,

33:58 it's absolutely crucial for us to start getting a

34:00 stronger handle on the cost-effectiveness of alternative strategies.

34:04 And lastly,

34:06 um,

34:06 our focus often goes to the more salient issue of adapting to

34:10 both the slow onset of climate change and extreme weather events,

34:13 but there are other critical adaptation areas we really can't forget.

34:17 There's ample evidence that risk dampens growth through underinvestment,

34:21 but radical uncertainty of extreme climate events that can't be quantified

34:25 places us in a whole new ballgame.

34:27 How does this uncertainty about climate outcomes,

34:30 not just,

34:31 uh,

34:31 the,

34:31 the effects of the climate itself,

34:33 affect people's decisions?

34:34 And how do we think about managing these risks?

34:37 In other words,

34:37 building protective support to future issues

34:40 versus responsive support when,

34:42 when they happen.

34:43 And how do these actually interact.

34:45 And so new work by FA and

34:47 Shavi and Dekarge uh will be exploring these in the coming months.

34:50 And finally,

34:51 connecting the dots with the earlier discussion on mitigation,

34:54 uh,

34:54 we know that some of the best mitigation policies

34:57 will also have significant distributional implications.

35:00 What can we learn about how to support people in places

35:03 to adapt to the face,

35:04 uh,

35:05 uh to the face of another significant climate change-related shock,

35:09 which is ensuring economic,

35:11 ensuring economic and,

35:12 and labor transitions that will come

35:14 from countries's low carbon growth and growth policies.

35:18 And so,

35:19 to wrap up,

35:20 at times we might

35:21 think like with the latest headlines,

35:22 it feels like we're in a bit of a trough,

35:24 but let's not forget which direction we'll

35:26 be going with a little bit of experimentation

35:28 and hopefully KCP and climate research more broadly

35:31 will help us uh light up that path.

35:34 Thank you very much.

35:38 Thanks very much,

35:39 Aidan.

35:39 Uh,

35:39 it's a great slide to close on.

35:41 You know,

35:41 we had some discussion of,

35:42 you know,

35:43 mental health as being important for refugees in the,

35:46 uh,

35:46 in the first presentation.

35:47 I didn't really expect mental health to be raised in the current one,

35:51 but,

35:51 uh,

35:52 but this is actually a really good framework for,

35:54 for thinking about it.

35:55 So,

35:56 um,

35:56 we're going to turn to our,

35:58 our three panelists next,

36:00 but what I'd like to do also just to make it

36:02 a little bit more of a conversation rather than sort of a

36:05 Very linear progression is to blend in a bit of the Q&A sort of in between the,

36:09 um,

36:10 in,

36:10 in between the,

36:11 uh,

36:11 the,

36:11 uh,

36:12 the,

36:12 uh,

36:12 the panelists' interventions.

36:15 Um,

36:15 so I'll kind of give a warning to those of us who've joined more recently online.

36:20 If you can please put your

36:22 questions,

36:22 uh,

36:23 comments,

36:23 observations that you'd like,

36:25 uh,

36:25 brought into the room in the,

36:26 uh,

36:26 in the Q&A function in Zoom so that,

36:29 uh,

36:29 we can see them.

36:30 And maybe after our,

36:32 um,

36:32 after our next panelist we'll take,

36:34 uh,

36:34 after our first panelist,

36:36 I'll ask,

36:36 uh,

36:37 uh,

36:37 Marcelo Ocarina to,

36:38 uh,

36:38 to,

36:39 to summarize some of those questions that are coming in.

36:41 And then between our 2nd and 3rd panelist,

36:43 we'll take a few questions,

36:44 uh,

36:45 from,

36:45 uh,

36:46 from the room as well so that we have the,

36:47 uh,

36:48 uh,

36:48 a bit more of a discussion.

36:50 And,

36:50 and I'll also sort of kick off the sort of

36:53 more,

36:53 you know,

36:54 discussion aspect of this by

36:56 sort of asking a question that I was reflecting on a little bit.

36:59 In

37:00 uh and,

37:01 and I think it was um.

37:03 Uh,

37:04 and it was,

37:04 uh,

37:04 for me it was again sort of quite stark that there were sort of,

37:07 you know,

37:07 two halves to our presentation.

37:08 We had a discussion about,

37:10 um,

37:10 mitigation.

37:11 We had a discussion or a presentation about adaptation primarily,

37:14 and I was thinking about how that connects to

37:17 also sort of the mission of the KCP and,

37:19 you know,

37:19 the,

37:19 the mission of research at the World Bank to influence policy,

37:22 you know,

37:22 one of our main levers is that we do so through.

37:26 Through the World Bank's activities

37:28 and then,

37:28 you know,

37:29 as many of you are aware,

37:30 the World Bank is sort of really thinking hard about how it

37:33 is that it sort of defines its space in the policy dialogue

37:37 right now,

37:37 given the reality that,

37:39 you know,

37:39 there's only a small number of sort of globally significant emitters

37:44 among our client countries where we have the sort of deepest policy dialogue.

37:48 So in a,

37:48 in a world like that where we talk to countries

37:51 for whom primarily adaptation is a concern,

37:54 yet.

37:54 You know,

37:55 the whole sort of solution to climate change is

37:57 going to be a combination of adaptation mitigation.

37:59 How is it that,

38:00 that we sort of position our analysis to,

38:02 and our research to have the most impact,

38:05 you know,

38:05 do we go all in on selling countries on co-benefits,

38:08 for example?

38:09 Uh,

38:10 as a,

38:11 as an incentive for even globally less significant mitigators to,

38:16 to,

38:16 to,

38:16 to mitigate more,

38:18 do we,

38:19 you know,

38:19 press more on the,

38:21 um,

38:22 on the analytic agenda of calling sort of the world's attention to,

38:26 you know,

38:26 negative carbon prices around countries.

38:29 For example,

38:29 was in,

38:30 uh,

38:30 in,

38:31 uh,

38:31 uh,

38:31 in countries around the world,

38:32 as was the case in Carolynn's presentation,

38:35 or do we,

38:35 um,

38:36 you know,

38:36 go all in on adaptation,

38:38 or is it some combination of those?

38:40 So this is a little bit of question both about the content of research,

38:42 but also about how we use it to generate change,

38:45 uh,

38:45 as,

38:46 uh,

38:46 as the,

38:46 the name of the KCP uh implies.

38:49 So it'd be great to hear from,

38:50 you know,

38:50 those in the room,

38:51 from our panelists,

38:52 um,

38:52 others on,

38:53 on,

38:53 on these points.

38:54 So,

38:55 I,

38:55 I'll quickly introduce,

38:56 um,

38:56 the three panelists online,

38:58 um,

38:59 uh,

39:00 all together,

39:00 and then we'll just go,

39:01 uh,

39:02 uh,

39:02 from,

39:02 uh,

39:03 from one to the next.

39:04 So,

39:05 uh,

39:05 first up,

39:06 we have Carolyn Kooski,

39:07 who is the associate vice president for Economics

39:09 and Policy at the Environmental Defense Fund.

39:13 Um,

39:13 then we'll turn to Elizabeth Robinson,

39:15 who is the director of the Grantham Research

39:17 Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.

39:20 And,

39:20 uh,

39:21 then,

39:21 uh,

39:21 last but not least among our panelists,

39:23 oh,

39:23 we have all of them on screen right now at once.

39:25 That's great.

39:26 Um,

39:26 we have Andy Hinsley,

39:27 who is the growth research team leader,

39:30 um,

39:30 at the United Kingdom,

39:32 uh,

39:32 FCDO.

39:33 Um,

39:34 so,

39:35 without further ado,

39:36 I'll turn over to Carolyn.

39:37 I'll ask each of the panelists to try to confine your remarks

39:40 to about 10 minutes so that we have some time for,

39:43 uh,

39:43 discussion in between and afterwards,

39:45 since we do need to wrap up around noon.

39:47 So,

39:47 Carolyn,

39:48 the floor is yours.

39:49 Great,

39:50 thank you.

39:50 Can you hear me OK?

39:52 Yes,

39:52 we hear you great.

39:53 OK,

39:53 that's great.

39:54 I'm just gonna not use PowerPoint and just share some,

39:56 uh,

39:56 remarks verbally with everyone.

39:58 So

39:58 it's so wonderful to be here.

40:00 Thanks for having me.

40:01 Um,

40:01 and I'll note I'm standing in for Suzie Kerr,

40:03 who I know has been involved in the KCP program,

40:05 um,

40:06 and since her regrets.

40:08 Uh,

40:08 so I thought I'd add a few remarks to this really informative,

40:11 uh.

40:11 The Presentation we just heard

40:13 focused more on the adaptation side to that

40:15 point about things being a little bit divided,

40:17 um,

40:18 and I wanted to talk about sort of risk management as a frame and how that's evolved,

40:22 the growing work on equity,

40:23 and then end with,

40:24 um,

40:25 some

40:25 further reflections on research priorities and how to better link

40:29 research to policy.

40:31 So I wanted to start by talking about

40:33 risk management as this frame for climate impacts

40:36 and begin with a little bit of history.

40:38 So for many decades there's been a field of scholarship on disasters,

40:42 and this has also led to a

40:44 sort of specific policy agenda domestically and internationally

40:47 around disaster risk reduction.

40:50 And you know,

40:50 maybe about a decade ago there began to be calls to unite this work with

40:54 With what was then,

40:55 as we saw in that nice graph,

40:57 a sort of nascent research agenda around climate adaptation,

41:00 and I think now we're really starting to see that happen

41:02 and they see these kind of two bodies of work come together

41:05 and inform each other.

41:06 So for example,

41:07 the disaster research has evolved from a focus on response and recovery,

41:12 on designing hazard mitigation to thinking

41:14 more about non-structural approaches and vulnerability,

41:17 and This real emphasis on climate resilience and sort of integrated

41:21 disaster risk management that's tightly linked

41:23 with thinking about climate impacts,

41:25 and I think that's led to

41:26 a more holistic

41:28 approach that's helped integrate the management of climate risks

41:31 into a broader suite of programs and decisions,

41:33 which

41:34 of course is really critical since we're

41:36 now seeing climate extremes and stresses really impacting

41:38 all parts of economy and society.

41:42 I think the disaster risk management perspective also

41:44 offers certain framings for climate adaptation work.

41:47 So for example,

41:47 disaster risk is often conceptualized as the intersection of hazard,

41:50 exposure,

41:51 and vulnerability.

41:52 And that's a frame for research on the topic,

41:54 but it also reflects the approach of sort of broader risk assessments,

41:59 um,

41:59 like for example,

42:00 the catastrophe models that have developed since the late 1990s and are now used

42:04 by the insurance sector and other large private and public sector entities.

42:08 They're made up of those three modules,

42:10 a hazard model,

42:11 an

42:11 an exposure essentially database,

42:13 what are the people or properties or things that we care about,

42:15 and the vulnerability sort of relating those two things together.

42:18 And I think we've made enormous strides over the last few decades,

42:22 again,

42:22 kind of

42:23 all that great,

42:24 you know,

42:24 data advances that we were just talking about,

42:26 um,

42:26 in the hazard modeling and the data used to inform,

42:29 develop,

42:29 and validate those models,

42:30 and we're also simultaneously starting to get much better exposure data,

42:34 but I do agree that we've made,

42:36 as we heard,

42:36 some less progress on the vulnerability modeling,

42:39 both physical and social.

42:41 We now have,

42:42 you know,

42:42 great laundry lists of all the specific.

42:44 That we know inform vulnerability,

42:46 but I think less understanding of the specific relationships

42:50 between the hazard and those particular

42:52 aspects of vulnerability of either physical vulnerability

42:55 like at a structure level or populations,

42:57 and then how to target policy intervention specifically

43:01 in order to improve those disaster outcomes beyond

43:04 just a broad development or anti-poverty measures.

43:06 So

43:07 I think that's an area that we'll see,

43:09 you know,

43:09 work grow.

43:11 Let me switch gears now because I also wanted to

43:13 stress another kind of trend I'm seeing,

43:14 which is that there's now

43:16 a sort of incredibly robust body of research that just continues to grow,

43:20 documenting the links between poverty and disaster impacts,

43:23 and we now know,

43:25 the poorest are disproportionately impacted,

43:27 they face greater exposure from hazards,

43:29 they might live in less safe structures

43:30 or have less access to preparedness resources

43:33 or information on.

43:34 Risks they have higher vulnerability from existing stresses

43:37 and lack of resources and really insufficient access

43:40 to the needed funds for recovery from the

43:43 sort of economic shock that disasters really are

43:46 and these disproportionate impacts are evident at all scales

43:49 right from a household up to a country level,

43:51 and that's now spurring a policy focus on

43:54 how to improve equity in these disaster outcomes,

43:56 which I think is very

43:57 much welcome.

43:58 Um,

43:59 and much research

44:00 is also stressing how broader development and social safety net programs are

44:05 playing an increasingly important role in

44:07 climate adaptation and the management of climate

44:10 extremes,

44:10 and I think that's really true globally.

44:12 So programs that were not originally

44:14 Designed as being

44:15 part of disaster recovery or being climate adaptation

44:18 programs are nonetheless now playing that role,

44:20 and I think that requires us to now rethink these programs

44:23 and approaches since they're going to continue to be further stressed

44:27 as climate impacts advance.

44:30 So most of my work has focused on how we manage the financial aspects of recovery,

44:34 and at any scale we see sort of inequities here.

44:36 There's insufficient savings or reserves.

44:39 Credit is unavailable for some groups,

44:41 or they can't service more debt,

44:43 and at all scales,

44:44 again from households,

44:46 you know,

44:46 up to sort of international aid,

44:47 we see

44:48 that government support post disaster can often

44:50 be just insufficient to meet needs.

44:53 It can be really delayed and take too long.

44:54 are poorly matched to needs.

44:56 And so while all those sources of financial recovery,

44:59 I think,

45:00 need our attention and reform,

45:01 that also suggests this important role for insurance.

45:05 But unfortunately,

45:06 insurance against disasters can be expensive,

45:08 and those who need it the most are the least able to afford it.

45:11 So that's led to a growing number

45:12 of innovations about how we develop inclusive insurance

45:15 and new models to reach those that are not served by the current market.

45:19 And again,

45:20 these go from the household level,

45:21 like all the approaches we've seen globally,

45:23 um,

45:24 to develop and refine uh parametric microinsurance models

45:27 up to the country level,

45:28 like the Caribbean Risk Insurance Facility and similar country-level pools.

45:32 And I think we're now starting to have like

45:34 a number of these examples that have really been tested

45:36 so that we can pull out lessons learned and better

45:39 identify what types of interventions are most effective in which

45:42 um contexts.

45:45 OK,

45:45 now to end on two more things,

45:46 I just wanted to tee up a few

45:48 kind of research questions that I see is important and then,

45:50 and then talk about the link to policy.

45:52 Uh,

45:52 so just 4 that I'll put out there for folks.

45:55 First,

45:55 you know,

45:56 we are in an environment now of constant change

45:59 and one where it seems that the climate related impacts

46:02 around extreme events keep being worse than we thought.

46:05 And so I think

46:06 we need to take that lens,

46:08 uh,

46:08 to what we're thinking about designing policy and think of.

46:11 About

46:12 more deeply sort of the optimal timing and

46:14 sequencing of of investments that are needed to

46:17 kind of be cost effective and also effective

46:20 at managing these risks while they're growing over time

46:23 and how do we rethink our institutions

46:25 to be more adaptive and to be better at learning by

46:28 doing and maybe we can apply some of the work,

46:30 you know,

46:31 years ago and ongoing on sort of adaptive ecological management

46:35 to thinking about our institutions in the face of climate.

46:38 Um,

46:38 we also all know that we need to increase the capacity

46:41 for individuals and institutions and countries and communities to adapt,

46:46 but I think we need to go deeper on what

46:47 that means specifically and how do we actually achieve it?

46:50 How do we know we're achieving it?

46:52 Maybe what can we learn from the disaster

46:53 risk reduction world on building preparedness capacity,

46:56 like

46:57 the success of lots of early warning systems

46:58 to apply more to thinking about climate adaptation.

47:01 And then I mentioned,

47:03 you know,

47:03 that we have a lot of policies now that weren't designed

47:05 to be climate adaptation policies but are playing that role,

47:08 and that's really positive.

47:10 But we also have policies

47:11 that were developed and put in place without regards to climate impacts that

47:16 are now hindering us from making good progress on climate adaptation and actually

47:19 being sort of,

47:20 um,

47:21 yeah,

47:21 being challenges to doing more that we want with adaptation.

47:25 And so I think we need to

47:26 turn some research attention to those and how to reform them.

47:29 And then finally I'll just mention,

47:31 you know,

47:32 it's been in the news lately.

47:33 I think we do need a greater focus on

47:36 these overlapping crises,

47:37 right?

47:37 Adam Cheuse has just kind of repopulized this with,

47:40 with,

47:40 with the term polycrisis,

47:42 and the World Bank

47:43 kind of summed that up,

47:44 you know,

47:44 by mentioning

47:45 we're seeing,

47:45 you know,

47:46 poverty,

47:46 food shortages,

47:47 energy shocks,

47:48 debt crises,

47:49 climate change,

47:50 inflation,

47:51 war all at the same time,

47:52 and unfortunately often that means

47:54 that the impacts are much worse than any of.

47:56 Those

47:56 individually,

47:57 um,

47:58 but that's what disaster researchers have been,

48:00 you know,

48:00 calling attention to for quite some time,

48:01 looking at things like compounding disasters and cascading disasters,

48:05 and I think there's recognition of how impacts can be really nonlinear,

48:08 but again,

48:09 more on like what do we do to stop

48:11 that sort of cascade of impacts,

48:13 how do we

48:14 manage these multiple threats at the same time,

48:16 um,

48:17 and,

48:17 and

48:17 maintain our capacity to respond despite multiple types of stresses and impacts.

48:23 OK,

48:23 I just wanted to end um with a minute by talking about how

48:26 just personal reflections on how research could be

48:28 better linked to policy making to drive impact.

48:31 Um,

48:32 I think that economics has sometimes underaddressed the needs

48:35 of a class of decision makers or decision problems,

48:39 um,

48:39 that as some scholars have recently been highlighting to go back to the beginning,

48:43 a risk management perspective

48:44 might help.

48:45 So cases where decision makers,

48:47 particularly in the face of catastrophic risk.

48:49 Want to identify outcomes that perform well

48:52 under many plausible futures or they want to

48:54 define their risk tolerance and then find the options to kind of stay within that

48:59 and maybe relatedly I think researchers could,

49:02 and this came up already,

49:03 look a little bit more at co-benefits and solving multiple problems

49:07 through,

49:07 you know,

49:08 one policy because decision makers can build coalitions around policy solutions

49:13 that solve many problems at the same time or create.

49:15 Benefits for diverse stakeholders,

49:17 um,

49:18 but I don't think,

49:18 you know,

49:19 but researchers tend to focus in

49:21 on just one and so maybe again more

49:23 broadly this is really sort of recognizing that the

49:26 political needs and institutional constraints that drive implementation

49:30 possibilities need to be sort of more integrated into

49:34 the research

49:35 findings and the development of the research questions as well,

49:39 and that suggests,

49:40 right,

49:40 which is now very.

49:41 Widely recognized and being tackled in a number of ways

49:44 that for research to be impactful,

49:46 it has to have a very tight link

49:47 to the practitioners or policymakers

49:50 and I think that's being done now in a number

49:52 of ways and I'll highlight two that I think

49:54 um

49:55 yeah,

49:55 are really impactful.

49:56 So the first is organizations

49:58 that essentially become boundary spanning by uniting within them

50:01 both the research and the policy or practice,

50:03 and that's true for a lot of the organizations

50:05 represented here today,

50:06 of course,

50:07 um.

50:08 And these groups can then provide

50:09 these translation services between research and practice

50:12 and help identify those policy windows

50:14 where information,

50:15 research information can be most relevant,

50:17 and that's not the role of an academic researcher,

50:20 but it's the role of a boundary spanner,

50:22 right?

50:22 And it's,

50:22 I think,

50:23 now widely recognized as a really important function.

50:26 Um,

50:26 we're also seeing funders recognize this need for better integration and

50:30 deliberately seek to support and establish those types of partnerships.

50:34 So one example is one I've been involved with here domestically,

50:37 which is the National Science Foundation Civic Innovations Program,

50:40 and we were in their first cohort,

50:41 and they

50:42 essentially were only taking proposals for linked

50:46 research and practice where a community group,

50:48 a government,

50:49 a nonprofit was actually a co-PI.

50:51 On the project and was actively involved in the design of the research,

50:55 the implementation,

50:56 and then was going to use it,

50:57 um,

50:58 was going to use it for that implementation so that at the out the

51:01 outcome that was being funded was not a research paper but an actual pilot

51:05 on the ground that was informed by the research

51:07 and so I think these types of approaches,

51:09 um,

51:10 yeah,

51:10 are really starting to move the needle,

51:12 um,

51:13 on impact

51:14 and

51:15 um.

51:16 I'll just say one last thing.

51:18 I think social science has also done a really excellent job with,

51:21 you know,

51:21 evaluation methods and being able to evaluate policies,

51:25 identify impacts,

51:27 and then use that to

51:29 improve them.

51:30 But I think it's also time to kind of take bodies of

51:32 evidence and research very early in the policy process to help.

51:36 Develop

51:37 the,

51:38 you know,

51:38 initial design and innovation at the beginning

51:40 and that can help sort of de-risk policy

51:43 innovation and I think

51:44 you're now seeing a bunch of places recognize that these kind

51:46 of principles of accelerators and incubators used in the private sector

51:50 can also be applied to the public sector around some of these challenges.

51:54 OK,

51:54 I'll stop there.

51:55 Thank you so much.

51:57 It's great.

51:57 Thanks very much,

51:58 Carolyn.

51:58 Um,

51:59 I,

51:59 you,

51:59 you must be spending a lot of time in camouflage at the World Bank because

52:03 a lot of these uh discussions around boundaries spanning role of sort of research,

52:07 uh,

52:07 and linking research to policies obviously very much our,

52:10 our,

52:11 our

52:11 bread and butter as a big research department in a big policy institute.

52:16 Um,

52:17 so before we go to,

52:18 uh,

52:18 to Elizabeth,

52:19 um,

52:20 uh,

52:21 do you have,

52:21 do you have anything from the,

52:22 OK,

52:23 we don't have anything from online right now.

52:25 So while our online colleagues are overcoming their bashfulness,

52:28 I'll just open up,

52:29 see if there's,

52:30 uh,

52:30 one or two comments or reflections from people in the room here.

52:34 Um,

52:34 thanks,

52:34 Govinda.

52:35 Sorry for the formality,

52:36 but if you don't mind using the mic for the benefit of people online.

52:41 Yeah,

52:43 I'm Govinder Tina working with,

52:45 uh,

52:45 Calvin Fisher's team.

52:46 So just two words I'd like to highlight.

52:48 One is the contribution from the KCP.

52:51 One is visibility,

52:52 and the second is diversity.

52:54 The visibility just example is that,

52:56 so

52:56 with the budget we got from KCP we produced

53:00 about 17 journal articles on biofuels.

53:03 So KCP is the only funding

53:06 that provided support for biofuel research in the World Bank,

53:09 and it gives the bank a lot of visibility and also contributed

53:13 to

53:13 clarify some of the key

53:16 issues.

53:16 For example,

53:16 the food versus fuel debate and also biofuel and the climate change mitigation.

53:21 The second thing,

53:22 the diversity.

53:23 So the KCP budget really help us to diversify the,

53:27 the geographical diversification for the research.

53:30 So we cover country from Latin America,

53:32 Argentina,

53:33 Brazil,

53:33 and Mexico,

53:34 from,

53:35 from the Central Asia and Eastern Europe,

53:38 Georgia.

53:38 Armenia and Ukraine,

53:40 from sub-Saharan Africa,

53:41 Zimbabwe,

53:42 Zambia,

53:42 and Mali,

53:43 frommena,

53:44 Morocco,

53:45 from East Asia and Pacific,

53:47 China and Thailand,

53:48 and from South Asia and Nepal.

53:49 So it's a really good diversity

53:52 and that's a very good use of the KCP funding.

53:54 Thank you very much.

53:57 Uh,

53:57 uh,

53:58 thanks,

53:58 Govinda.

53:59 Um,

53:59 let's

54:01 turn over to Elizabeth.

54:02 Um,

54:03 uh,

54:03 the floor is yours for about,

54:05 uh,

54:05 uh,

54:06 again 10 minutes,

54:07 and,

54:07 uh,

54:08 then we'll do another round either online or,

54:10 uh,

54:10 from,

54:10 from,

54:11 from the room before we go to,

54:12 go to you,

54:13 Andy.

54:15 Thanks so much.

54:15 Um,

54:16 yeah,

54:16 it's quite interesting,

54:17 I think when I was thinking of like,

54:19 sort of,

54:19 you know,

54:19 how to respond to,

54:20 um,

54:21 Carolyn and,

54:22 um,

54:22 Aiden,

54:23 the points you made are are quite,

54:25 are quite linked to sort of what I was thinking.

54:27 And,

54:27 and I suppose my sort of take-home point in a way is when we're talking about

54:30 low and middle-income countries and the trajectory we want to see them on in the next

54:34 28 years,

54:35 because we're really talking about what's going to happen up to 2050.

54:39 It's really hard to think about mitigation and adaptation separately.

54:42 Because these countries at the moment may not be emitters,

54:45 uh,

54:45 but if they were to grow like we want them to,

54:48 but follow the same trend pathways as high-income countries,

54:51 they would become large emitters.

54:52 And so I sort of tend to think of

54:55 mapping out that pathway rather than adaptation mitigation separate,

54:58 and really,

54:59 how do you find the right growth pathway for these countries?

55:02 How do you enable them to choose the right growth pathway

55:05 that is compatible with net zero at a global level

55:07 and that builds resilience?

55:09 And,

55:10 and,

55:10 and if we think about some of the really key,

55:12 key problems for these countries,

55:13 we could argue it's energy security and it's

55:16 food security and probably water security too.

55:18 I'm sure other people have,

55:19 have others that are on their priority list.

55:22 And so,

55:22 I think,

55:23 um,

55:23 you know,

55:24 we,

55:24 we,

55:24 we can map out the transition pathways and to some extent,

55:27 they have been,

55:27 but we're not necessarily seeing

55:28 countries on resilient climate-comparable pathways.

55:31 And I,

55:31 I,

55:32 I was just thinking when I listened to the presentation from Carolyn that,

55:35 you know,

55:35 so maybe 1020 years ago that we would sort

55:37 of hear this argument that if poor countries,

55:39 could grow,

55:40 actually,

55:40 what they need is to grow rapidly and then they'll be able to adapt.

55:43 And,

55:43 and that might have been a reasonable conversation 20 years ago,

55:46 but with 1.1 degrees already and 1.5 degrees out of sight,

55:49 we realized that that's not,

55:50 we can't just

55:51 say grow,

55:52 whatever.

55:53 So we need to see those low carbon growth rates.

55:55 Uh,

55:55 and so,

55:56 how can,

55:56 how

55:57 low-income countries grow is um really important.

55:59 So,

55:59 essential to any discussion,

56:00 I think is climate finance,

56:01 and of course,

56:02 you all at the bank know that,

56:03 um,

56:04 and also choosing that those already harmed by climate

56:07 change and not harmed by the growth pathways.

56:09 And so,

56:09 I suppose,

56:10 you know,

56:10 there,

56:10 there's some puzzles,

56:11 and maybe there's some of the puzzles that we need to answer,

56:14 which is if low-carbon energy is white,

56:16 low-cost,

56:16 why are we not seeing it

56:18 rolled out across EMICS?

56:19 And,

56:20 and maybe that's partly because we don't really understand enough,

56:22 um,

56:23 about,

56:24 I sort of think about this as the frictions.

56:26 So,

56:26 who gains,

56:27 who loses?

56:28 Who's still investing,

56:29 investing in fossils and why?

56:30 And how does the financing risk profile change?

56:33 So,

56:33 you know,

56:34 what could development finance actually offer in that respect?

56:37 And,

56:38 and,

56:38 and I think also,

56:38 you know,

56:39 it also talks about the political barriers as well.

56:42 So why do companies investing in fossil fuels

56:44 not seem concerned about their stranded assets?

56:46 You know,

56:46 do they,

56:47 are they just doubling down?

56:48 Do they know something we don't know?

56:50 Um,

56:50 and,

56:50 and,

56:51 and how do we win the sort of,

56:52 um,

56:52 propaganda war arguably,

56:54 um,

56:54 about renewables versus fossils?

56:57 Uh,

56:57 I,

56:57 I work a lot on climate change and health,

56:59 and so we think a lot about the co-benefits.

57:01 And,

57:02 you know,

57:02 another puzzle,

57:03 which is if air pollution is killing millions of people each year,

57:05 which it is,

57:06 why are we not seeing rapid phase-out of burning fossil fuels?

57:09 And what is the evidence base that might help that?

57:12 So is this a matter of,

57:13 uh,

57:14 climate funds for investment?

57:16 Is this a matter of political will?

57:17 Is this a matter of not having those numbers?

57:20 Is It's a matter of providing the data that shows

57:22 just how much pressure you're putting on your health services.

57:24 And that very much touches,

57:25 I think,

57:26 was it Aiden who was,

57:27 who,

57:27 who was raising some of those issues.

57:29 And I was just thinking as well,

57:30 Aiden,

57:30 you sort of talked about the data that's available to us.

57:33 And I think there's a tremendous amount of amazing

57:35 data that we can use and we can access

57:38 so that we can actually provide the evidence

57:40 base for governments to make sensible policies.

57:43 I am,

57:44 I'm gonna touch on integrated assessment models a little bit just because

57:47 Carolyn did emphasize them I think because they sort of talked to

57:50 a problem with us and us economists,

57:52 and I am an economist,

57:53 trained economist,

57:54 I'm an environmental economist,

57:55 but,

57:56 but I think,

57:56 um,

57:57 and,

57:57 and,

57:57 and,

57:57 and Carolyn did mention the,

57:59 the,

57:59 the Stearns Stiglitz and Taylor paper that is well worth a read.

58:03 Um,

58:03 and,

58:04 and I think many of us who are actually more on the,

58:06 on the side of actually how do we make things happen,

58:09 just look at integrated assessment models and like and go,

58:13 So what and where are you coming from?

58:15 Because so much of the,

58:16 when you read the literature about

58:17 IANS,

58:19 you,

58:19 you're sort of looking for,

58:20 what really matters.

58:21 So what really matters is how do we get to net zero?

58:23 How do we keep temperatures at a certain level?

58:26 How do we guardrail,

58:27 as Nick Stern and,

58:28 and his colleagues,

58:29 right?

58:29 And there's no discussion about that at all.

58:31 I think this discussion of what is the social cost of capital,

58:34 I'm not really sure how it's interesting.

58:36 I think much more interesting is

58:38 we know we need to get to net zero because we know

58:40 the kind of world we want to live in in the future,

58:42 and the kind of world we want in the future

58:45 is one that is not where we've got above 2 degrees and ideally closer to 1.5.

58:49 And then the question is really,

58:51 how does pricing carbon help us to get there?

58:54 And you know,

58:54 economists love elegant models and we love elegance.

58:57 And,

58:57 and,

58:58 you know,

58:58 we can show if we think about how

59:00 understanding has developed over the last sort of 2030 years,

59:03 the scientists came and they've shown us each year

59:05 more and more clearly that climate change is happening,

59:07 it's caused by humans.

59:08 And then the economists came along,

59:10 we designed very nice environmental policy instruments,

59:13 and those showed,

59:13 you know,

59:14 how we can internalize the externalities and how we can

59:17 price carbon and do our shadow prices and stuff.

59:19 But where we are right now in 2022

59:22 is that we need action.

59:23 And actually,

59:23 the last,

59:24 uh,

59:24 when Carolyn showed the,

59:25 um,

59:26 one of her slides,

59:27 she showed the World Bank Climate change action plan.

59:29 And the question is how do we get action?

59:31 And I think what we need to remember as

59:32 economists is that getting stuff done is really messy.

59:35 Um,

59:36 economics is necessary,

59:37 but it's certainly far from sufficient.

59:39 Uh,

59:40 we need to think about how you change behavior.

59:42 So if we look at carbon pricing,

59:43 for example,

59:45 we can take two real extremes.

59:47 So,

59:47 I'm poor,

59:48 you slap a carbon price on something,

59:50 it doesn't matter what,

59:50 let's just take

59:51 flying

59:52 and I stopped flying.

59:53 So you've changed my behavior with the carbon price,

59:55 no revenue change

59:57 for the government,

59:58 or I'm rich,

59:59 you've put a carbon tax on.

1:00:00 So I don't change my behavior to it comes to flying,

1:00:03 but I just pay the tax.

1:00:04 Um,

1:00:04 it's just a minor inconvenience.

1:00:06 And then the question is,

1:00:06 what does the government do with that tax revenue?

1:00:09 Does the government therefore change behavior in

1:00:11 some other way to reduce emissions?

1:00:12 Does it invest in low carbon?

1:00:14 And then we can look at companies in exactly the same way.

1:00:16 So a lot of I think how we need to move is how we change behavior of governments,

1:00:20 of companies,

1:00:21 of individuals.

1:00:22 And economists just haven't done very well on that.

1:00:25 I'm only critique economists because I am one and

1:00:26 thinking about what we haven't done well enough.

1:00:28 We haven't really thought about the messiness.

1:00:31 So I think um,

1:00:33 I think so,

1:00:33 just,

1:00:33 just to sort of bring this to a focus,

1:00:35 because I think it,

1:00:35 it,

1:00:36 it will,

1:00:36 I think questions,

1:00:37 there there haven't been many questions,

1:00:38 but I think questions are always quite,

1:00:40 quite interesting,

1:00:41 is first of all,

1:00:42 we've got to,

1:00:43 um,

1:00:44 recognize that it's,

1:00:44 we need action now.

1:00:45 And so the research really has to be providing the evidence base for that action.

1:00:49 Probably a lot of the time we're talking to ministers of um finance,

1:00:53 and so we're saying,

1:00:54 what is the way,

1:00:55 what is the way to get the evidence there in a way that people listen to.

1:00:58 And I think that's why,

1:00:59 um,

1:00:59 um,

1:01:00 I think Carolyn,

1:01:01 your point.

1:01:02 About,

1:01:02 um,

1:01:03 working,

1:01:03 you know,

1:01:03 with the people on the ground really matters

1:01:05 right from the start of research projects.

1:01:07 I think a lot of our supplied,

1:01:09 um,

1:01:09 researchers are doing that now and it's,

1:01:11 it's really important.

1:01:12 And so,

1:01:12 for example,

1:01:13 you know,

1:01:13 what,

1:01:14 what are actually the health benefits in terms of reducing air pollution?

1:01:18 And we can look at those in terms of pressure on health services.

1:01:21 We can look at that in terms of economic growth.

1:01:23 And then,

1:01:24 for example,

1:01:24 we can look at,

1:01:25 I've lost my train of thought now,

1:01:27 but,

1:01:28 um,

1:01:28 but what,

1:01:29 what it takes,

1:01:29 what are the margins does it take,

1:01:31 therefore,

1:01:31 to,

1:01:32 to say that it is worth Investing in renewable energy.

1:01:35 So,

1:01:35 if we add on those health costs,

1:01:36 if we add on those,

1:01:38 you know,

1:01:38 drag on growth

1:01:39 from the harm that,

1:01:40 um,

1:01:41 air pollution is doing to,

1:01:42 um,

1:01:42 labor supply,

1:01:43 for example,

1:01:44 it might just tip the balance and then we

1:01:46 need to think about the risk profiles changing.

1:01:49 So,

1:01:50 overall,

1:01:50 I think there's,

1:01:50 you know,

1:01:51 there is scope for research,

1:01:52 but it has to be really,

1:01:53 of course,

1:01:54 I'm a,

1:01:54 I'm a,

1:01:54 I'm a researcher,

1:01:55 I should hope there is,

1:01:56 but we need to use the data we have.

1:01:58 We've got tremendous,

1:01:59 um,

1:01:59 tremendously detailed data.

1:02:01 We've got the error,

1:02:02 um,

1:02:02 error 5 data that gives us temperatures across the globe.

1:02:04 We've got Amazing food insecurity data,

1:02:07 uh,

1:02:07 that we can,

1:02:07 we've got amazing data on crop yield,

1:02:09 crop yield potentials.

1:02:10 We can overlay these data.

1:02:12 We can use econometrics now,

1:02:13 for example,

1:02:14 to attribute the extent to which

1:02:16 outcomes,

1:02:17 human outcomes,

1:02:18 not just climate outcomes are affected by climate change.

1:02:21 So some of the research that I'm doing with a colleague,

1:02:23 we can look at food insecurity outcomes and we can show to

1:02:26 what extent those food security is getting worse because of climate change

1:02:31 as opposed to all the other reasons that

1:02:32 food insecurity might have decoupled from growth,

1:02:35 which happened in about 2017,

1:02:37 which could be conflict,

1:02:38 it could be inequality,

1:02:39 it could be soils being exhausted.

1:02:41 Um,

1:02:42 yeah,

1:02:42 so I think my take on point is economics is

1:02:44 messy and economists have to wake up to that,

1:02:46 work with social sciences,

1:02:47 and understand that what might seem like a first-best

1:02:50 solution in the real world won't necessarily happen.

1:02:53 Thank you.

1:02:56 I think that's generally valuable advice that you ended on,

1:03:00 uh,

1:03:00 Elizabeth,

1:03:00 that we could bear in mind across a whole range of,

1:03:03 uh,

1:03:03 uh,

1:03:03 of different areas,

1:03:04 not just climate research.

1:03:06 So,

1:03:07 let me again,

1:03:08 you know,

1:03:08 pause,

1:03:08 see if anybody would like to chip in from the floor here or from online via the,

1:03:13 uh,

1:03:14 via the chats,

1:03:15 uh,

1:03:16 before we turn over to,

1:03:17 to Andy.

1:03:18 Again,

1:03:19 uh,

1:03:20 Don't be shy.

1:03:22 I've generally not known my deck colleagues to be so.

1:03:26 Right.

1:03:27 Well,

1:03:27 while,

1:03:27 while overcoming your bashfulness again,

1:03:29 uh,

1:03:30 we'll turn to Andy for your intervention and then,

1:03:34 uh,

1:03:34 and then we'll close,

1:03:35 uh,

1:03:35 with,

1:03:36 uh,

1:03:36 with some reflections,

1:03:37 uh,

1:03:37 from our two main speakers.

1:03:39 So the floor is yours,

1:03:40 Andy.

1:03:42 OK,

1:03:42 thank you,

1:03:43 Art.

1:03:43 Thank you for

1:03:44 inviting me.

1:03:45 Uh,

1:03:46 happy birthday to KCP

1:03:48 uh,

1:03:48 it's a big moment hitting,

1:03:49 hitting 20

1:03:50 so you're out of that,

1:03:51 that awkward childhood phase and,

1:03:52 and launching into adulthood.

1:03:54 Um,

1:03:55 I'm sure like ra raising children,

1:03:57 the 1st 20 years will be the hardest and then,

1:03:59 uh,

1:03:59 be plain sailing from,

1:04:00 from here on.

1:04:01 But we've,

1:04:01 um,

1:04:02 we've enjoyed our,

1:04:03 our long-term partnership

1:04:04 with KCP from,

1:04:06 uh,

1:04:06 from the UK.

1:04:07 Uh,

1:04:08 yeah,

1:04:08 so,

1:04:08 uh,

1:04:09 congratulations.

1:04:10 Uh,

1:04:10 so I'm Andy Hinsley.

1:04:11 I'm the,

1:04:12 uh,

1:04:12 team leader of,

1:04:13 of the Economic growth research team

1:04:15 in the UK's Foreign Commonwealth and,

1:04:17 and Development Office.

1:04:18 I'm gonna come at,

1:04:19 uh,

1:04:19 this,

1:04:20 this issue today from an economic development angle.

1:04:23 It's been,

1:04:23 it's been touched on a few times.

1:04:25 I was gonna start by trying to convince you of the importance of growth,

1:04:29 um,

1:04:30 and income increases for,

1:04:31 for,

1:04:32 for adaptation and,

1:04:33 and resilience.

1:04:33 I think Aiden,

1:04:34 and,

1:04:34 and some of the other speakers have done a pretty good job of that already,

1:04:38 but.

1:04:38 Uh,

1:04:39 it's to say poverty reduction is going to remain the,

1:04:41 the main challenge facing low-income countries,

1:04:44 uh,

1:04:44 in whatever form,

1:04:45 whatever is causing that poverty.

1:04:47 As,

1:04:47 as humanity,

1:04:48 the only

1:04:49 successful mechanism pathway that we found

1:04:52 to deliver sustained poverty reduction is sustained economic growth.

1:04:55 So the question is not should low-income countries go for growth,

1:04:57 the question that they will go for growth.

1:04:59 The question is,

1:05:00 is that,

1:05:00 is that growth going to be,

1:05:01 um,

1:05:02 low carbon,

1:05:03 uh,

1:05:03 resilient growth,

1:05:05 or is it going to be high carbon growth?

1:05:07 Uh,

1:05:07 and we as a,

1:05:07 as a global community,

1:05:08 as,

1:05:08 as a research community need to enable them

1:05:11 and equip them with the tools and the evidence to,

1:05:14 to move to greener,

1:05:16 greener forms of,

1:05:17 of growth,

1:05:18 uh,

1:05:18 not just for their own,

1:05:19 for,

1:05:19 for,

1:05:20 for global benefit,

1:05:21 global public good benefit,

1:05:22 but also for,

1:05:23 uh,

1:05:24 for their own,

1:05:25 uh,

1:05:25 sustainability of their own trajectories as.

1:05:28 Global regulation around embedded carbon gets more restricted

1:05:33 and risks of stranded assets as we've heard earlier,

1:05:37 it will be in their own interests to

1:05:39 move on to greener growth paths.

1:05:41 So I want to touch on 3

1:05:43 transitions,

1:05:44 3 transformations that I think are really important.

1:05:47 Um,

1:05:49 As part of thinking about

1:05:51 green growth,

1:05:53 the energy

1:05:54 transition,

1:05:55 and spatial mobility,

1:05:57 connectivity transformation,

1:05:58 and then a jobs,

1:05:59 production sectoral transformation,

1:06:02 and then if there's time I might make a point about state capability at the end,

1:06:05 although others have touched on it,

1:06:06 so.

1:06:08 So energy,

1:06:08 I think energy is in some ways the most fundamental

1:06:12 transition

1:06:14 as energy power is critical to growth,

1:06:16 and we've seen

1:06:17 in the current global

1:06:19 cost of energy crisis how quickly it's become a cost of everything crisis.

1:06:23 Energy is just fundamental to

1:06:25 how we produce goods and services in any modern economy.

1:06:29 Ali,

1:06:29 low-income countries already

1:06:31 consume more energy per capita than,

1:06:34 uh,

1:06:34 high-income countries did at a similar level of,

1:06:37 uh,

1:06:37 of development,

1:06:38 uh,

1:06:38 previously in their,

1:06:39 in their trajectories,

1:06:40 but to grow.

1:06:42 Uh,

1:06:42 low income countries are going to need to

1:06:43 radically increase their energy production and consumption levels,

1:06:48 uh,

1:06:48 and also energy access,

1:06:49 but that's a common,

1:06:50 it's a

1:06:51 difficult issue,

1:06:52 and we'll come onto that in a moment,

1:06:54 um.

1:06:55 And for the broader growth pathways to be green,

1:06:58 they're going to need to electrify a lot more of their economies,

1:07:01 such as transport sectors or cooking.

1:07:05 So we need to make this electricity

1:07:07 low carbon.

1:07:09 So what's holding back this transition to abundant low carbon

1:07:14 electricity?

1:07:14 So on the generation side,

1:07:17 I think the cost of capital for renewables is a big issue.

1:07:20 So the costs of capital are much higher

1:07:23 in emerging developing markets than advanced or China and current interest rate

1:07:27 increases are not helping with that.

1:07:30 So that's a major barrier and we see

1:07:32 in Africa.

1:07:34 Particularly,

1:07:34 a major constraint to governments being able to borrow to invest in,

1:07:38 in these new tech technologies is fiscal space,

1:07:41 uh,

1:07:41 to invest in green infrastructure,

1:07:42 even where there is

1:07:44 reasonably concessional finance from MDVs,

1:07:47 MDVs available,

1:07:49 uh,

1:07:49 a lot of countries increasingly are in such tight fiscal,

1:07:52 uh,

1:07:53 problems,

1:07:54 they're not,

1:07:54 not even able to borrow at concessional rates.

1:07:56 So there's a major question around where the finance is,

1:07:59 is going to come from.

1:08:01 For generation,

1:08:02 um,

1:08:03 even countries that have cracked the generation,

1:08:06 uh,

1:08:06 issue,

1:08:07 um,

1:08:08 transmission is becoming an increasing pinch point.

1:08:11 Um,

1:08:12 increasing number of countries have,

1:08:14 uh,

1:08:15 can't use all of their generation capacity

1:08:17 because of lack of transmission infrastructure.

1:08:19 Now,

1:08:20 commonly,

1:08:21 um,

1:08:21 transmission utilities.

1:08:23 Uh,

1:08:24 often have pretty good engineering skills,

1:08:27 pretty good

1:08:28 master plans,

1:08:29 um,

1:08:30 strategic capability,

1:08:31 but they're lacking,

1:08:32 lacking finance.

1:08:33 It's really,

1:08:33 it's,

1:08:34 it's even harder to get finance for transmission infrastructure

1:08:37 than it is,

1:08:37 is for generation.

1:08:38 Um,

1:08:40 and particularly so with,

1:08:41 with climate finance.

1:08:42 Most grid investments don't,

1:08:45 are,

1:08:45 are,

1:08:45 are not currently thought of as green enough to,

1:08:47 to count for,

1:08:48 for climate finance,

1:08:49 despite the fact that.

1:08:51 Uh,

1:08:51 the,

1:08:52 the more you can build a strong integrated grid,

1:08:54 you can take much higher shares of intermittent renewables in your,

1:08:57 in your generation mix.

1:08:59 So that,

1:08:59 that's an issue that researchers need to get,

1:09:01 get our heads around and,

1:09:03 and find ways of,

1:09:04 of demonstrating the benefits so that climate finance can play a stronger role.

1:09:08 Then on the distribution side,

1:09:10 so I mentioned access earlier,

1:09:12 there's a real tension here.

1:09:13 Too many countries are going for

1:09:15 last-mile connection of sub-commercial households,

1:09:18 um,

1:09:18 and borrowing cheap money to do it.

1:09:20 And that's just,

1:09:21 it's just killing utility finances.

1:09:24 Uh,

1:09:24 it's killing the ability of utilities to be able to invest,

1:09:28 uh,

1:09:28 and it's,

1:09:29 it's causing real problems for growth as,

1:09:31 uh,

1:09:32 or,

1:09:32 or structural

1:09:33 transformation as,

1:09:34 as,

1:09:35 uh,

1:09:35 industry is,

1:09:36 um,

1:09:37 is not able to get the,

1:09:39 the,

1:09:39 the,

1:09:40 uh,

1:09:40 low-cost reliable power that it needs to,

1:09:43 needs to grow.

1:09:45 Uh,

1:09:45 so we really need to think about the tensions of,

1:09:48 um,

1:09:49 seeking last mile connection too,

1:09:51 too early in the,

1:09:52 in the development process if it's gonna harm,

1:09:55 harm growth.

1:09:57 And then then on the,

1:09:58 the governance and policy side,

1:10:00 so at the national level,

1:10:02 uh,

1:10:03 countries really need to improve the quality of their,

1:10:06 of their

1:10:06 power sector regulation.

1:10:09 Poor quality regulations is really making it difficult for the private sector,

1:10:12 private investors to

1:10:14 be able to operate.

1:10:16 Uh,

1:10:16 Nigeria is a good example of just

1:10:19 incredibly difficult regulatory environment for private investors.

1:10:23 Um,

1:10:24 and then at the regional level,

1:10:27 we really need to improve the governance of regional power trading arrangements.

1:10:32 I mentioned the importance of grids.

1:10:33 That's true within a country.

1:10:34 It's,

1:10:34 it's even more true at the regional level.

1:10:38 Um,

1:10:39 we need to deal with bottlenecks and regional interconnections,

1:10:42 interconnects between

1:10:44 countries because you can really have a much more efficient grid that

1:10:48 maximizes the opportunities of,

1:10:51 uh,

1:10:51 renewable generation,

1:10:52 really drive up the,

1:10:53 the share of,

1:10:54 of renewables in the generation mix if you can trade that power,

1:10:57 uh,

1:10:57 across,

1:10:58 across countries.

1:10:59 But the governance of those,

1:11:00 of those trading arrangements is really holding back,

1:11:03 uh,

1:11:04 holding back that opportunity.

1:11:06 The second transformation is,

1:11:08 is on spatial mobility and around urban issues.

1:11:11 Um,

1:11:12 so urban urbanization is critical for growth,

1:11:14 um,

1:11:16 but cities are also,

1:11:18 uh,

1:11:21 Cities can be very good for building resilience,

1:11:24 but can also be very,

1:11:24 very vulnerable in and of themselves.

1:11:28 Climate impacts are also going to be a big driver of

1:11:31 urban growth and movements to

1:11:34 urban areas.

1:11:37 And,

1:11:39 you know,

1:11:39 as in the conflict and migration session earlier,

1:11:42 I think we need to be really forward-looking here.

1:11:44 Um,

1:11:45 so one of the speakers earlier was talking about

1:11:47 trying to do more predictive analysis of movements of people.

1:11:51 We know that,

1:11:52 um,

1:11:52 that things like droughts and floods in rural areas

1:11:55 are going to drive people into urban areas.

1:11:56 We know there is going to be a long-term shift,

1:11:59 increasing the pace of urbanization,

1:12:01 uh,

1:12:02 through,

1:12:02 through climate migration.

1:12:03 So we need to get ahead of that and plan for it.

1:12:06 Um,

1:12:06 in,

1:12:07 in the conflict space that maybe you can't get ahead of it,

1:12:09 maybe you have to be reactive in the climate space,

1:12:11 we need to get ahead of it.

1:12:13 We know that it's coming.

1:12:14 We know that it will be a long-term,

1:12:16 uh,

1:12:16 shift.

1:12:17 So we,

1:12:18 we,

1:12:18 we have to get on it,

1:12:19 um.

1:12:20 And put plans in place to enable climate migrants when they

1:12:24 come to integrate so they're not straining local labor markets,

1:12:27 they're not straining local

1:12:28 housing markets or,

1:12:30 or public services,

1:12:31 but that they're able to integrate that,

1:12:34 uh,

1:12:34 they can gain the skills quickly that they

1:12:36 need to benefit local labor markets or that,

1:12:40 or that they're not just

1:12:41 ending up in the most vulnerable parts of urban areas,

1:12:44 but there,

1:12:44 there's some planning around moving them into more,

1:12:46 more sustainable parts of,

1:12:47 of cities.

1:12:49 And I think

1:12:50 policymakers are also going to need to think about,

1:12:54 um,

1:12:55 the,

1:12:55 the coming major disruptions to

1:12:58 vulnerable urban areas.

1:13:00 So I think there's,

1:13:01 there's evidence showing that,

1:13:02 uh,

1:13:02 or,

1:13:02 or predictions showing that,

1:13:04 um,

1:13:04 average flood losses in coastal cities is,

1:13:07 is estimated to increase by a factor of 10 from 2005 to 2050.

1:13:12 So these are some of our most productive locations,

1:13:16 and there are strong network externalities that

1:13:19 tie people and activities into these places.

1:13:22 The policymakers is going to think hard,

1:13:23 going to have to think hard about

1:13:26 whether to try and protect locations,

1:13:29 and invest in that protection or whether to start to

1:13:32 unpick some of those network externalities and start to shift

1:13:36 people and shift activity to,

1:13:38 to more resilient locations.

1:13:40 Uh,

1:13:41 and then a,

1:13:41 a jobs,

1:13:42 production,

1:13:43 uh,

1:13:43 structural transformation.

1:13:46 Um,

1:13:47 so there is pretty major

1:13:49 tech technological change around,

1:13:52 uh,

1:13:52 green growth,

1:13:53 um.

1:13:54 In energy in other sectors,

1:13:57 but it's also the direction of

1:14:01 technological change is really going to shift what

1:14:03 the opportunities are for developing countries to grow.

1:14:05 So we need to think hard about

1:14:07 what developing countries are going to be making and exporting in 10 years,

1:14:11 in 20 years

1:14:13 in in a globally green,

1:14:16 low carbon economy.

1:14:18 Uh,

1:14:18 and then again getting ahead and thinking what type of skills,

1:14:22 what type of labor force are those,

1:14:24 uh,

1:14:25 newer industries going to

1:14:27 require.

1:14:28 There are potential opportunities in,

1:14:30 in a green economy,

1:14:31 um,

1:14:31 such as green

1:14:33 hydrogen production in some places,

1:14:35 but there are serious issues to think about,

1:14:38 um,

1:14:38 both the,

1:14:39 the broader macro effects,

1:14:40 uh,

1:14:42 uh,

1:14:42 some potentially Dutch disease type effects,

1:14:44 but also,

1:14:45 um.

1:14:47 Issues such as the heavy need for water and

1:14:49 production of green hydrogen and what that does to local

1:14:52 local water supplies.

1:14:54 Uh,

1:14:55 because the,

1:14:55 the areas that,

1:14:56 that may be most suitable to renewable powered,

1:14:59 uh,

1:14:59 green hydrogen production may also be the most water,

1:15:01 water vulnerable.

1:15:03 On the research side,

1:15:04 I think we need

1:15:05 much

1:15:06 sharper,

1:15:07 wider models for green growth.

1:15:08 I think we need to link.

1:15:11 Our structural and spatial transformation models,

1:15:14 uh,

1:15:15 in with um,

1:15:17 with low carbon transition issues much more directly uh incorporating.

1:15:22 Developing countries specific

1:15:25 technology trajectories and

1:15:27 uh bespoke costs of capital into those models and we need,

1:15:31 as always,

1:15:31 as many have mentioned,

1:15:32 much more data,

1:15:33 much more freely available so that more researchers can

1:15:36 work on these things

1:15:38 and then we need to think harder about um.

1:15:41 Green skills

1:15:43 about how labor forces need to be upgraded,

1:15:45 um,

1:15:45 particularly,

1:15:46 uh,

1:15:46 for investing in,

1:15:47 in green infrastructure,

1:15:48 so things like installation and

1:15:51 maintenance,

1:15:52 uh,

1:15:53 I think given time I will,

1:15:54 I will stop there

1:15:56 hand it back up to you all.

1:15:59 Uh,

1:15:59 thanks very much,

1:16:00 Andy,

1:16:00 for those,

1:16:01 uh,

1:16:01 those observations and particularly for reminding us about,

1:16:04 you know,

1:16:04 the reality that development first and foremost in,

1:16:08 in the banks client countries is gonna require growth and

1:16:10 so it's more a question of how clean it is

1:16:12 and also for reminding us about

1:16:13 the unintended consequences of well-intentioned policies.

1:16:17 I mean,

1:16:17 it's just to amplify on your point about,

1:16:20 um,

1:16:20 you know,

1:16:21 the risks of,

1:16:22 uh.

1:16:22 Of sort of last mile connections,

1:16:25 particularly through sort of decentralized tools like mini grids,

1:16:29 rooftop solar,

1:16:30 and so on.

1:16:31 You know,

1:16:31 you'd pointed out about the adverse effects of that on,

1:16:34 on the incentives for utilities,

1:16:36 but there's also,

1:16:37 you know,

1:16:37 the adverse effects going the opposite direction,

1:16:39 which is that the incentives to invest in those technologies

1:16:43 are,

1:16:44 are limited by the risk of them becoming stranded assets when grids come into town.

1:16:49 So you have sort of a

1:16:50 damned if you do,

1:16:51 damned if you don't kind of situation with uh,

1:16:54 with this that I don't think we have sort of a clean handle on.

1:16:56 And yet the capital constraints that you point out that limit.

1:17:00 Uh,

1:17:01 uh,

1:17:01 this,

1:17:02 you know,

1:17:02 sort of large scale,

1:17:03 um,

1:17:03 both,

1:17:04 you know,

1:17:04 grid and generation investments

1:17:06 are the ones that are also pushing us to these sort of

1:17:08 less expensive solutions that,

1:17:10 then,

1:17:11 you know,

1:17:11 may pose problems in the long run.

1:17:13 Um

1:17:15 All right.

1:17:15 So,

1:17:16 we're,

1:17:16 you know,

1:17:16 running close to the end of our time.

1:17:18 What I thought I would do is

1:17:20 maybe turn to,

1:17:21 uh,

1:17:22 our,

1:17:22 uh,

1:17:22 our initial speakers,

1:17:23 Carolyn and Aiden,

1:17:24 and ask them for,

1:17:25 you know,

1:17:26 2 minutes of uh reflections on what you've heard,

1:17:29 thoughts,

1:17:29 reactions,

1:17:30 um,

1:17:31 and then,

1:17:31 uh,

1:17:32 and then,

1:17:32 and then we'll close for the morning.

1:17:35 So,

1:17:35 uh,

1:17:35 do you want to go ahead,

1:17:36 Carolyn,

1:17:37 or do you want the last word?

1:17:41 Um,

1:17:41 I'll let Aiden have the last word.

1:17:43 Um,

1:17:44 uh,

1:17:45 thanks,

1:17:45 Art,

1:17:45 and thanks to all of the,

1:17:46 um,

1:17:47 all of the panelists as well for some great comments.

1:17:50 Um,

1:17:51 I think,

1:17:51 so Art,

1:17:52 you raised sort of this question of the

1:17:54 mitigation adaptation or dichotomy,

1:17:57 and I,

1:17:58 I think it happens a bit naturally because usually we think of adaptation.

1:18:01 As something that should be in the interest of local governments,

1:18:06 um,

1:18:06 to deal with

1:18:07 the,

1:18:08 the challenge with climate

1:18:10 adaptation though is that the costs are being borne by

1:18:14 the

1:18:15 countries who are the poorest and least responsible

1:18:18 for the,

1:18:19 the risks that they're the heightened risks that they're

1:18:22 facing due to climate change and so the,

1:18:25 um,

1:18:25 you know,

1:18:26 the challenge there is really getting,

1:18:28 uh,

1:18:28 the financing for,

1:18:30 um.

1:18:31 Uh,

1:18:32 for developing countries,

1:18:34 uh,

1:18:34 mitigation is,

1:18:36 is a little

1:18:37 different,

1:18:37 uh,

1:18:38 so mitigation is a contribution to a global public good

1:18:43 of avoided um,

1:18:44 climate change.

1:18:45 So it's,

1:18:46 you know,

1:18:47 it's not generally,

1:18:49 you know,

1:18:49 fully in the interest of,

1:18:51 of a,

1:18:53 um,

1:18:54 you know,

1:18:54 of a local government.

1:18:56 Um,

1:18:56 and so,

1:18:58 uh,

1:18:58 so it requires encouragement.

1:19:01 It requires international,

1:19:03 uh,

1:19:03 negotiations and,

1:19:05 and leverage,

1:19:06 and,

1:19:07 um,

1:19:08 and so,

1:19:09 you know,

1:19:10 in the context of,

1:19:11 um,

1:19:12 you know,

1:19:13 developing countries,

1:19:14 you know,

1:19:15 so the World Bank,

1:19:16 we,

1:19:17 uh,

1:19:17 you know,

1:19:17 we

1:19:18 are representing,

1:19:20 uh,

1:19:20 the world.

1:19:21 And,

1:19:22 and so,

1:19:23 uh,

1:19:24 you know,

1:19:25 we should not,

1:19:26 um.

1:19:27 You know,

1:19:28 we have an opportunity,

1:19:30 uh,

1:19:30 to try to discourage free riding and help solve this problem

1:19:35 which,

1:19:36 uh,

1:19:37 you know,

1:19:37 with the damages fall predominantly on,

1:19:40 on poor countries

1:19:42 so there are conversations to be had for a lot of,

1:19:44 uh,

1:19:45 you know,

1:19:45 for low income countries.

1:19:46 The question isn't really mitigation right now.

1:19:49 It's,

1:19:49 it's avoiding.

1:19:50 Uh,

1:19:51 high carbon growth.

1:19:52 So,

1:19:52 so every,

1:19:53 every country,

1:19:55 um,

1:19:56 you know,

1:19:56 is participating in the climate negotiations.

1:19:59 Every country has to think about what is a low carbon growth,

1:20:03 um,

1:20:03 growth path because

1:20:04 the global business as usual has complete.

1:20:08 Completely changed.

1:20:08 So how do we,

1:20:09 how do we do that?

1:20:10 And part of the conversation then I,

1:20:12 I,

1:20:13 um,

1:20:14 like Carolynn's comments about,

1:20:16 uh,

1:20:16 creating coalition.

1:20:17 So talking about co-benefits,

1:20:19 talking about other

1:20:21 rationales to,

1:20:22 uh,

1:20:23 so,

1:20:23 uh,

1:20:23 that are in the interest of the country to contribute to the global public good,

1:20:27 but,

1:20:27 um.

1:20:28 Um,

1:20:28 but encouraging this,

1:20:29 and,

1:20:30 and we know that the carbon pricing is difficult.

1:20:33 The United States is not able to do it,

1:20:35 but,

1:20:36 um,

1:20:36 something like the Inflation Reduction Act in the US is,

1:20:39 is,

1:20:40 you know,

1:20:40 it's actually much more expensive

1:20:43 than a policy package that includes pricing and,

1:20:45 and,

1:20:46 and,

1:20:46 you know,

1:20:47 a subsidies,

1:20:48 strictly subsidies approach

1:20:49 may be out of reach for a lot of,

1:20:51 a lot of countries

1:20:52 unless the subsidies are,

1:20:54 you know.

1:20:56 Uh,

1:20:56 from the developed world.

1:20:57 So,

1:20:58 uh,

1:20:58 on both sides,

1:20:59 finance is the key.

1:21:05 Thanks,

1:21:05 Carolyn.

1:21:05 Um,

1:21:06 Aiden,

1:21:07 uh,

1:21:08 forces you to wrap us up.

1:21:11 Great,

1:21:12 great.

1:21:12 Thanks.

1:21:12 Thanks so much,

1:21:13 and I,

1:21:13 I see we're,

1:21:14 we're sort of run out of time here,

1:21:15 so I'll keep,

1:21:16 keep it short.

1:21:16 But,

1:21:16 uh,

1:21:17 thanks,

1:21:17 thanks to everybody for the great,

1:21:18 uh,

1:21:19 comments and feedback and,

1:21:20 uh,

1:21:21 uh,

1:21:21 both,

1:21:22 both in the audience and also the panelists.

1:21:23 That was,

1:21:24 uh,

1:21:24 fantastic.

1:21:24 And,

1:21:25 yeah,

1:21:25 I mean,

1:21:25 I think just to,

1:21:26 um,

1:21:27 reiterate the points that have been,

1:21:28 uh,

1:21:29 um,

1:21:30 came up already about,

1:21:31 you know,

1:21:32 thinking about

1:21:33 this balance between the adaptation and the mitigation side.

1:21:35 To be honest,

1:21:36 when,

1:21:37 when Carolyn and I were,

1:21:38 were,

1:21:38 were talking about how to split up the

1:21:40 presentations,

1:21:40 we just thought

1:21:41 that would be the easiest structure.

1:21:42 She'll take the,

1:21:43 um,

1:21:44 mitigation,

1:21:44 I'll take the adaptation,

1:21:45 and that gives us a nice sort of coordination framework that we can then,

1:21:49 uh,

1:21:49 sort of get,

1:21:50 get out the key messages

1:21:53 in a sort of simple coordinated way,

1:21:54 and we could do that as two people.

1:21:56 But then obviously thinking about

1:21:57 all the issues around coordination for

1:22:00 Uh,

1:22:00 climate,

1:22:01 uh,

1:22:01 climate more broadly,

1:22:02 and also climate research specifically,

1:22:04 we really need to think carefully about this,

1:22:06 right?

1:22:06 So,

1:22:06 for instance,

1:22:07 um,

1:22:08 when,

1:22:08 when we want to think about multidisciplinary,

1:22:10 um,

1:22:11 research,

1:22:11 how do we go about this and how do we trade off

1:22:13 the balance between

1:22:14 the sort of coordination,

1:22:16 uh,

1:22:16 costs associated with

1:22:18 me as a statistician slash economist,

1:22:20 uh,

1:22:21 reaching out to an agronomist or an earth scientist to think about

1:22:24 how we can sort of facilitate and.

1:22:26 Coordinate a sort of coherent and cogent research that can be potentially,

1:22:30 um,

1:22:31 uh,

1:22:31 more interesting as a,

1:22:33 as a sort of multidisciplinary approach,

1:22:35 uh,

1:22:36 but at the same time comes with costs,

1:22:37 right?

1:22:37 And so,

1:22:38 we have in our sort of own microcosm of,

1:22:40 of research,

1:22:41 and many of these questions of sort of,

1:22:43 uh,

1:22:44 costs and coordination that we have to think about.

1:22:46 And,

1:22:46 and I really liked,

1:22:47 um,

1:22:48 uh,

1:22:48 the earlier discussion,

1:22:49 uh,

1:22:50 point in the,

1:22:51 in,

1:22:51 in,

1:22:51 in the.

1:22:52 Migration,

1:22:53 uh,

1:22:53 where,

1:22:53 where,

1:22:54 where,

1:22:54 where the team was talking about how,

1:22:57 how,

1:22:57 um,

1:22:58 World Bank researcher helps to sort of facilitate vertically integrated,

1:23:01 uh,

1:23:02 research to try to answer bigger questions that might not necessarily be able to be,

1:23:07 uh,

1:23:07 answered by individual researchers.

1:23:09 And I think,

1:23:09 you know,

1:23:10 going forward,

1:23:10 uh,

1:23:11 imagining a world where we can,

1:23:13 uh,

1:23:13 balance out those coordination costs and thinking about how to,

1:23:16 how to,

1:23:17 how,

1:23:17 how to coordinate things.

1:23:18 About some of the big questions

1:23:19 that are going to require,

1:23:21 um,

1:23:22 sort of across,

1:23:23 across the board,

1:23:23 um,

1:23:24 collaborations,

1:23:24 I think will be,

1:23:25 uh,

1:23:26 will be really interesting and important.

1:23:27 And,

1:23:27 and maybe the last point is just,

1:23:29 uh,

1:23:29 there was a lot of discussion around data and how this is going to really help,

1:23:32 um,

1:23:33 sort of support new research and new evidence.

1:23:35 But then,

1:23:35 uh,

1:23:36 on the other hand,

1:23:36 also

1:23:37 the importance of making sure

1:23:39 all of the research that's being done

1:23:41 is integrated into policy discussions and dialogue.

1:23:44 And I think there's,

1:23:45 there's an interesting balance there as well,

1:23:46 which is that,

1:23:47 you know,

1:23:48 hands,

1:23:48 you know,

1:23:49 getting your hands dirty in the field and

1:23:50 working on sort of empirical work where you,

1:23:52 where,

1:23:52 where you need to collect the data

1:23:54 means often you actually have to directly,

1:23:56 uh,

1:23:56 link to policymakers and discussions

1:23:59 and,

1:23:59 and things like that.

1:23:59 Whereas when data is already available to you,

1:24:02 uh,

1:24:02 there's a lot of things you can do that doesn't necessarily require,

1:24:06 um,

1:24:07 reaching out and having,

1:24:08 having that coordinated link with,

1:24:09 with policy.

1:24:10 And so thinking about

1:24:11 making sure that as data grows and as,

1:24:13 as we get more opportunities to do a lot more interesting,

1:24:15 uh,

1:24:16 questions,

1:24:16 making sure that doesn't,

1:24:17 uh,

1:24:17 break down the links between what researchers are doing and what policy,

1:24:21 uh,

1:24:21 makers and,

1:24:22 and decision makers are,

1:24:23 are sort of thinking and making sure,

1:24:25 uh,

1:24:25 there is that sort of structured,

1:24:27 uh,

1:24:27 coordination on that front as well.

1:24:28 But otherwise,

1:24:29 thanks,

1:24:29 thanks very much for,

1:24:30 for the discussion and,

1:24:31 uh,

1:24:32 and all of the,

1:24:33 uh,

1:24:33 all of the comments.

1:24:34 I'm really excited to

1:24:35 see where this goes.

1:24:37 Thanks.

1:24:38 Uh,

1:24:39 thank you,

1:24:39 Aiden.

1:24:39 Uh,

1:24:40 so,

1:24:40 uh,

1:24:41 let me wrap us up by,

1:24:42 uh,

1:24:42 this session by,

1:24:43 by thanking our,

1:24:44 uh,

1:24:44 our panelists,

1:24:45 Carolyn Kooski,

1:24:46 Elizabeth Robinson,

1:24:47 and,

1:24:47 and Andy Hinsley.

1:24:49 Also a big thank you again to our,

1:24:51 uh,

1:24:51 our two presenters,

1:24:52 um,

1:24:52 Aiden and Carolyn.

1:24:54 And also,

1:24:55 of course,

1:24:55 to,

1:24:56 uh,

1:24:56 to the,

1:24:56 to the,

1:24:57 the KCP team who organized this event and,

1:25:00 uh,

1:25:01 Karina and Bin Tao.

1:25:02 And I just wanted to mention again that we will have,

1:25:05 um,

1:25:05 so we have two upcoming events in,

1:25:08 uh,

1:25:08 in this series of 20th anniversary.

1:25:10 Celebrations in

1:25:12 January,

1:25:12 right,

1:25:13 Karina,

1:25:13 one of the next two.

1:25:14 We're,

1:25:14 we're scheduling them for early next year,

1:25:16 so it's going to be a prolonged birthday celebration,

1:25:18 but that's,

1:25:19 that's worthwhile when,

1:25:20 uh,

1:25:21 when,

1:25:21 when it's,

1:25:21 uh,

1:25:21 when it's a landmark event for

1:25:23 an important vehicle.

1:25:25 So,

1:25:25 thanks again to everybody,

1:25:27 uh,

1:25:28 wishing you a good rest of the day,

1:25:29 a good rest of your evening for those of you who are joining us from Europe and beyond.

1:25:32 Thank you.

showAllTimestamps

no

transcript

Great. Welcome back, uh, to those of you in the room and the many more of you who chose to join us online. Thank you very much for participating in today's, uh, this is the first of three, KCP 20th anniversary kickoff events with opportunities to, uh, look back on past research, think about current issues, and look forward to future research, and in particular how that knowledge is used to generate change through policy impact. So, Um, we just finished our session this morning on, on, uh, on migration and forced displacement, which transits also, you know, quite naturally into the current session on, on climate change, although we haven't had actually that much discussion of climate-induced migration in the previous session. Uh, there's no need for me to, uh, you know, burn up air time by persuading you guys how important this topic is. So what I'll do is I'll just, I'll, I'll briefly introduce our presenters, um, and, uh, uh, and then we'll, we'll turn to our panelists, and I think all of our panelists are joining us online for this event. So, it's a real pleasure to welcome, um, Carolyn Fisher, who is a research manager for sustainability and, um, sustainability, sustainability and infrastructure. And a whole bunch of other things, um, in, uh, in the research department, uh, in, in the World Bank, um, and also we have Ayan Coville, um, joining us, uh, online from South Africa, and he is, uh, Carolyn's counterpart in the development impact evaluation dime, uh, department in deck also working on the same set of issues. Oh, hi, Aidan, we see your face here for a moment. Uh, great to have you. So we'll start with um a presentation from, uh, from Carolyn and Aiden, and then we'll, uh, uh, and then we'll turn over to our panel. So the, the floor is yours, Carolyn. Great, um, thanks, Art. um, uh, so, uh, so Aiden and I are gonna talk a bit about what we'll call it knowledge for climate change. We're certainly indebted to the KCP program, uh, for supporting research and, uh, you know, 20 year anniversary is a great time to take stock. Um, also, sort of the larger issues in research surrounding climate change which have certainly evolved quite a bit over the past couple of decades. Um, so addressing climate change has really grown as a development priority. So we, uh, see over the years, this is back, so 20 years ago, um, uh, there's some initial work, uh, thinking about making sustainable commitments, more in sustainability, um, and then in 2010, we had a world development report on development and climate change, and this has grown into climate change action plans. So I'm going to be talking about more the mitigation and low carbon growth side and then hand it over to Aiden. He'll talk about adaptation and resilience because these are both two important pillars of climate change and development agenda. Sort of thinking back to where climate change sort of entered the economics conversation, probably one of the most influential. Uh, you know, thinkers, in this was Bill Nordhaus, who subsequently won the Nobel Prize, but back in 1982, he approached this, this question of recognizing that the climate is this global public good and it's a global commons to manage. So his papers how fast should we graze the. Global commons thinking about how should you know how fast should we use up this uh this resource as we're pumping emissions into the atmosphere and potentially creating climate change and so he developed this initial intuition about, you know, how it depends on when we think, you know, clean technologies are going to come along, how fast economies are growing. Um, and, and you know what we think about discount rates, uh, to, to back out, you know, what is the sort of shadow cost of CO2 in the global economy, and this evolved to become really the concept of the social cost of carbon, um. Uh, so he went on to develop the first, um, integrated assessment models, uh, IAMs, uh, most famously DICE, the dynamic integrated Climate Econy model and Rice, the regional version is built on, uh, on frameworks by, um, uh, Alan Mann, uh, and Richels, um, and, and have really these, these kinds of models have really proliferated today and, um, have, have done a lot of work in trying to understand what. Uh, the social cost of carbon is sort of balancing the benefits of growth and energy and, and the costs and damages of climate change in the future. Um, I was, I was under the impression that basically the, the social cost of carbon, these estimates coming out of models, just like, you know, has just basically gone up over time as the news keeps getting, getting worse. But actually Richard Told recently did a retrospective study, and then there's a lot more movement around. So this, so, this is adjusted. Into I forget what your dollars, but into consist into real dollars, um, and, um, and we do see really maybe over the past two decades more of an upward trend, but there was a lot of, a lot of noise early on and the, you know, the social cost of carbon. Um, you know, has really arose out of, you know, economists need and certainly, you know, in the United States regulatory framework need to do cost benefit analysis. So you want, uh, some sort of, uh, uh, reflection of the damages of, of greenhouse gas emissions, but it's, you know, it's very sensitive to, uh, assumptions that you make about what are the damage functions, uh, are there tipping points, what's happening with population growth, uh. As information evolved about how about the climate cycle, the physical response of the climate to accumulated greenhouse gasses, uncertainties, etc. Um, so these have really evolved over time and, and are now getting to be quite, quite large. Recent study by, um, review by Resources for the Future, uh, has pegged it, uh, you know, as maybe 3 or 4 times what the latest EPA, um, uh, social cost of carbon is. At the same time though, now, now you're getting sort of growing sort of criticisms of this repro of this approach because it's very difficult to capture all of the uncertainties and potential damages and costs and, um, and so. There's a, there's a push to go sort of thinking beyond the social cost of carbon and really just thinking about, OK, we're running out of our climate carbon budget to avoid, um, you know, uh, serious climate change and so how do we just get, um, get the job done. So there's a recent, um. Publication by Nick Stern, Joe Stiglitz, and, um, Ann Taylor on the economics of immense risk, urgent action, and radical change, recognizing that sort of the incremental approach that economists often take is not necessarily sufficient to the task of addressing, uh, climate change. We also see that climate negotiations have have evolved quite a bit over the past 30 years. Um, so, uh, started out in, so in 1992 we had the Earth Summit in Rio, which sort of sounded the initial alarm. Um, and, uh, and here we came up with the idea and the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities recognizing that developed countries have, have, uh, both, you know, historic, uh, um. Responsibility for uh for uh for the greenhouse gas emissions and also are better able to to address uh address this um but all countries have some responsibility for uh for addressing the problem. Um, then we get to the Kyoto Protocol in 1997. So this is the first attempt to really get an agreement on actually doing something on reducing and making commitments to reduce emissions, and it took what we'll, I'll call the more of a cap and trade approach. Um, so there were a set of emissions targets for, uh, Annex One. So, so these are developed countries for the most part. Um, but also included a bunch of flexibility mechanisms, joint implementation, a clean development mechanism as a way to get, um, developing countries, uh, uh, on the path towards reducing, reducing emissions, really building on, you know, arguably the success in the United States of the, of, uh, emissions trading and the sulfur dioxide program and expanding it to, to this idea that. Uh, cost-effective reductions, um, you know, mean, uh, that everyone should, should, um, uh, should have, uh, similar carbon price and, and markets for, uh, for emissions can help implement that. Um, the Kyoto, uh, went into effect and then sort of, uh, uh, and we had the first commitment period, uh, 2008 to 2012, and then it, uh, but it, uh, didn't really, um, pick up steam. In Copenhagen in 2009, the tactics switched to this sort of pledge and review approach with nationally appropriate mitigation actions for non-Annex 1 countries, so for the developing countries, and then we ended up with the Paris Agreement in 2015, which is basically this approach for all countries, so nationally determined contributions, each country. Says you know what they're gonna promise to do, um, uh, and but it's not necessarily a set target it may be a, a, a mix of policies, um, and then, you know, bringing in these issues of, well, um, you know, galvanizing, uh, climate finance or promising climate finance, uh, for developing countries and starting to talk about loss and damage. Um, and then the COP 26, uh, last year in Glasgow is basically was further developing the the Paris rulebook. So, so for the rules for, um, uh, there's still this idea of, of making of trading across countries. So this international transfer of mitigation outcomes, um, and as a sort of international flexibility mechanisms and these and, and a bunch of other rules for, um. Uh, for monitoring and verification and transparency and a lot of these things that you need, um, we see the research, uh, has sort of followed along and, and fed back, uh, uh, with the, um, with the negotiation strategy. So early on we saw a lot of work on, you know, what is like appropriate burden sharing and cost effective policies, global policies for climate change. A lot of this focused on emissions trading, uh, design. And linking the um EU ETS, you know, begins in 2005 here and then we see a lot of, um, uh, uh, you know, research sort of comparing, well, what, OK, economists were convinced that carbon pricing is the right instrument, but, you know, should we do it through taxes or through cap and trade systems, a lot of literature. Um, comparing, uh, emissions trading versus versus taxes tends tending to land on the side of taxes, um, but then after Copenhagen, as, as we see and, and leading into Paris, we see this, um, you know, we, we see that the movement towards these unilateral approaches, unilateral commitments, um. Uh, leads to, uh, a research agenda on looking at, you know, unilateral climate policies and trade. So this is a global economy country and, you know, trying to address a public good problem, and each, uh, country is determining its own, uh, uh, it's, its own contributions, um. Uh, since this isn't just, uh, you know, emissions cap and trade scheme, there is a really a mix of policies that they're looking at, and there are because there are a mix of challenges, uh, the, um, the externality, the social cost of. Of carbon emissions is not the only issue. There are other market failures that we need to worry about, so we see more research, um, related to, to these interactions, um, and, and, and leading in then to, um, uh, concern about ideas about, you know, how do we encourage, you know, this pledge and review scene, how do we encourage more ambition. Among unilateral policy contributions, so the ideas of climate clubs and questions of political economy come to the fore. Um, and, and now just, you know, there's a lot more nuance, a lot more detail thinking about, you know, what are behavioral, um, uh, barriers, behavioral economics is coming into it, uh, technology, technological change, uh, um, innovation spillovers, um, and also what are the co-benefits of climate policies because it's operating in tandem with a much bigger space of development challenges. Just a, uh, quick, some quick highlights of, uh, KCP research. Um, so on the road to Copenhagen, so prior to, uh, to Copenhagen, um, there was attention to sort of how do we mitigate climate change by avoiding lock-in to high carbon energy systems. Um, what are the options really in developing countries for cleaner energy and what are the barriers to adoption and sustainability. Um, And, uh, um, some questions on biofuels and then actually a lot, one of the outputs of the first stage of the KCP was the, uh, World Development report on development and climate change. So that's, um, a major contribution. Um, in the second, uh, phase of the KCP, uh, we see more nuance coming in. So low carbon technologies and development. So how, how does demand for biofuels influence biodiversity. Um, uh, how does the, you know, the, do electricity markets, so, um, uh, and how does competition in these, in the structure of these markets influence the, uh, the shift to low carbon generation? Questions on forestry, cook stoves, etc. um, and then there was a lot of support for, um. Uh, assessing green growth opportunities in developing countries, so really building up the modeling tools that we have at the bank to, um, uh, to model low carbon growth, um, scenarios and, and, uh, um, consider, you know, how to reduce poverty in a sustainable way. Um, how much time do I have? OK, so, uh, just quickly, sort of going back to the, the early roots though, I, I just, I wanna highlight that the World Bank has really been instrumental in, um, in, um, collecting and disseminating knowledge about carbon pricing as a climate policy tool. We've had the state and trends of carbon pricing and this shows that, you know, carbon pricing instruments have really expanded over the past, you know, this is the 30 years. Um, and now cover, uh, close to, um, a quarter of global, global emissions and the World Bank's own effort has had have had something to do with this. So this is a handbook on emissions trading in practice, um, and we see that carbon pricing is not just a thing for developed countries. So we see, so here's the, in the blue, the blue bubbles at $100 a ton are basically. Europe on the x axis is how much the economy that's covered, so it depends on on the um how big the ETS is as a share of their emissions, but we see lower down actually there um a lot of um developing and emerging economies that do have carbon pricing and this is, you know, this is an entry point and, and, um, and a recognition that these are becoming important, uh, uh, mechanisms for them to meet their commitments, um. Uh, something, uh, that we're working on now is, is thinking, recognizing that direct carbon pricing is only part of the story. Um, most countries have, uh, also a lot of indirect taxes on fossil fuels, uh, as well as subsidies to fossil fuels, um, that, you know, can contribute to the extent to which, uh, you know, fuel costs, total costs are aligned with their. Carbon costs and so when we look at uh the total carbon prices including these uh like indirect uh indirect taxes um we see a picture where there are a substantial number of developing countries that are, uh, you know, that have carbon costs that are, uh, that are quite that are quite aligned and even higher than many developed countries. So some research priorities, um, related to this, um, you know, thinking about the carbon that's embodied in trade, um, so as we see, uh, you know, uh, the carbon border adjustment mechanisms, uh, come out, understanding, well how much carbon in that trade is, is already priced, so what are really the incentives. Uh, trade based on carbon price differentials. Um, how, how large can we estimate the co-benefits, uh, from reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and a lot of these, uh, and a lot of developing and emerging economies, uh, have very, uh, large, um, uh, air pollution problems that, um, that can increase the benefits of, uh, of carbon, um, cost alignment. Um, informality is another question. So the, you know, there's a long literature on interactions, uh, between, uh, emissions taxes and the broader tax system. These, some of these lessons can be quite different in a context with a large share of informality. Um, Energy access, of course, is, uh, important to, to think about and then. You know, what role does carbon pricing, carbon cost alignment play in the NDCs of developing countries, many of whom have already adopted net zero targets, and it's important to think about what is the enabling environment that that we're creating and what role can these sort of market-based policies play. Thanks. So I'll hand this over to Aiden, yeah. Thanks, Carolyn. Uh, let me see if I can. It Slides up. Let's do the pattern turnover. Can you guys uh see the slides OK? Uh, yep, they're up. They OK, excellent. So, um, Yeah, thanks. Thanks, Carolyn. So, uh, so, uh, jumping on from, uh, Carolyn's description on the mitigation side, I was gonna start discussing a little bit on the, on the, uh, adaptation side. And I, I, I think what we can do is start with, uh, Kubler Ross, who, uh, was, uh, actually had an incredible foresight and summarized the evolution of climate change research and responses back in 1969. Uh, but since the term climate Climate Change wasn't really a thing there. Uh, she called it stages of grief instead. Um, and what we mean by this is that, uh, uh, we, we, we see that climate change research actually started out, uh, somewhere over here in the denial phase for, for, for, for, for many, many years. Uh, but since we've spent so long over there, it's been, there's been a very historical lag in the adaptation literature, right? So the idea is, Uh, you know, climate is something in the future and therefore, uh, adaptation is not as, as important anymore, uh, or at the moment. But obviously, today, uh, we're around about, um, somewhere over here, we're realizing that the only way that we can get out of this giant hole is actually experimenting with solutions, uh, since climate change and its effects are already here. And this fundamentally includes experimenting with adaptation solutions too. Um, so. In 2003 that a seminal work documented the first signs that living systems were actually changing because of a warming, a warming planet, uh, finding that 279 species had started their movement towards the poles in line with climate predictions. Uh, despite the slow start, the good news is that there's actually been exponential growth in climate adaptation research going up by about 28%. Uh, per annum, uh, growth in, in kind of climate adaptation evidence. Uh, and it broadly covers 33 broad areas. One is improving data and measurement. Second, on, um, understanding the actual impacts of climate change. And finally, third is on research, trying to understand the solutions, the actual effectiveness of adaptation solutions. So while it's impossible to be comprehensive in this short time, uh, what I'll do rather is just sort of zoom in. Um, and focus on a few of those data points, uh, from the graph, which will help illustrate the evolution of some of the selected KCP research, uh, over the, uh, 20 years on a specific issue, uh, before zooming back out and looking at the broader, broader relevance. So it starts back in the early 2000s. At this time, it was well understood that sea level rises from melting ice caps, posed a really Significant development challenge. Uh, and Susmita Dasgupta from DCRG and a team of multidisciplinary, local and international researchers initially set out to try to find out what might affect, uh, understand how the sea level rise might affect, uh, people and found that in Bangladesh was actually one of the countries on the front line, uh, with up to 5 million people potentially being directly affected if there was a 3-meter, uh, sea level rise. But while extreme weather events such as storm surges and the aftermath, uh, captured the attention of politicians and media, uh, the teams actually research found that there was something that was a very overlooked dimension. And this was the silent increase in salinization of water and soil over time. And so, which was actually a much more proximate challenge for residents in Bangladesh. And so over the next 10 years, the team helped unpack a range of different, um, impacts, highlighting Just how critical these issues of salinization were. So they showed, for instance, that drinking water, drinking more saline water could increase dehydration and infant mortality, uh, increased soil and irrigation, uh, water salinity would reduce agricultural yields. Uh, salinity increases road erosion, and the maintenance costs actually have to triple to address this. And overall, sort of ultimately, this, this increases poverty and out migration as a coping mechanism. So, the next step was really to try to explore ways to adapt to the encroaching salinity. And the team started to unpack adaptation options ranging from saline resistant seeds, uh, alternative farming, changing livelihoods to tourism or agriculture, or maybe a combination of nature-based solutions and infrastructure. And this sort of breadth of research review and research was then complemented by independent but highly related research by another de research team led by Florence Condilas which began to ask how do we actually get people to adopt some of these new adaptation adaptation approaches and how effective can they actually be in practice. Uh, so running a large scale randomized control trial in Bangladesh as well, uh, the team was able to show that, um, one particular adaptation option, saline resistant seeds, were able to offset the negative impacts of increased salinization on crop yields. And, um, When they looked at how to diffuse knowledge, they saw that demonstration plots were, were able to diffuse knowledge and increase take-up of these seeds. But, but despite these improvements in the seeds, uh, and take-up waned over time, and this kind of highlighted the difficulty, uh, difficult interplay between adaptation technologies and behavioral responses, uh, that will need, uh, to, to, to ensure sort of the effectiveness of these adaptation, um, approaches. And so this gave us a rich understanding of the nature of the problem and potential solutions. Of course, it opens up all sorts of other questions, uh, about what to grapple with going forward. So, for instance, is incentivizing technology adoption, uh, the right thing to do, or should we be helping people switch livelihoods altogether, uh, or even migrate? Uh, so this gives us, so, so this gives us a little bit of a, like a microcosm of the broader adaptation research evolution, uh, which we can now zoom out, uh, and try to understand the broader research advances in data, measuring climate impacts and adaptation options. Luckily, uh, we're not in 1972, uh, and the advances in data have helped us clear up the picture, uh, and open up new new opportunities for, for research. Um, and so one example of this that's very salient has been the huge strides over the year, uh, uh, over the years in improvements in satellite and mobility data. Uh, in 1972, LANSA satellite imagery was the only game in town and only provided 40-meter. Resolution and also was not publicly available. So 20 years later, the first nighttime lights data started switching on. Uh, the first private sector high resolution satellites started popping up in the early 2000s. NASA started measuring satellite-based pollution data in 2004. 2007 saw a revolution in all of our day to day lives, which was the iPhone. Uh, but the smartphone revolution also brought with it the ability to get more granular data on where and when people move. Uh, and in reality, all of these data sources are only really useful if you have the right tools. Uh, so including the computing power and machine learning approaches to actually processing, uh, processing them. So in 2010, uh, at COP 26, actually, Google Earth Engine was unveiled, uh, making large data processing more accessible. So over this period, the spatial and temporal resolution has been increasing consistently over time while costs of these, uh, data, data sources have actually been coming down dramatically as well, making high-definition Earth observation a reality for, for, for, for researchers. And so, combining these advances in remote sensing and computing power with economic population data has opened further opportunities to, to, to map climate and vulnerability. And so an example of this is the researchers that have used high-resolution flood hazard and population maps, as well as Poverty estimates from World Bank's Global Subnational Atlas, uh, of poverty and also the global monitoring database to estimate that 1.47 billion people globally are directly exposed to the risk of intense flooding and almost 600 million of these are poor. So, these data foundations have also helped researchers, uh, extend some of the insights of integrated assessment models along the lines that Carolyn was discussing earlier to get much stronger empirically founded evidence on the nature of the actual impacts of climate change, feeding further into some of the, um, SEC estimates, for example. And a really, really nice example of this at the forefront of the research. Uh, at the moment, there's some work by Carlton and others, uh, looking at, uh, combining global data sets, uh, with climate models to map out the full mortality risk of climate change through to 2100, accounting for adaptation costs. And while there's a bit too much, uh, going on in this next slide, uh, here, uh, I'll try to highlight two stark messages. The first related mortality alone, could, uh, sorry, heat-related mortality alone, um, could be as high as cancer, currently the second largest cause of death worldwide by 2100. And secondly, um, the mortality effects will be heavily skewed towards low-income countries that live in hotter climates to begin with and have less effective adaptation options. But I guess the question now is what about specific adaptation, um, activities? And so alongside the data revolution, uh, we've seen that there's been, there's also been a credibility revolution in economics over the past 25 years, acknowledging that finding correlations can be misleading and using experimental and quasi-experimental tools to try to isolate the causal effects of intervention. Uh, it's so critical for understanding what works. A recent review of adaptation interventions in the literature though has found that just a tiny proportion, 1.4% of studies reviewed could actually provide concrete evidence of risk reduction linked to, uh, adaptation practices. Despite this, though, there's actually a lot we've learned over the years. And while we've known for some time that cash transfers can mitigate the effects of shocks, there's now growing evidence that income levels are a hugely important factor determining adaptation effectiveness, which points to economic growth as a vital tool for adaptation. And while insurance against weather risk seems to be like a no-brainer 20 years ago, we now know that take-up for basic rainfall insurance limits effectiveness, even though it reduces risk and improves investments when it's actually used. Um, more broadly, adoption of climate adaptation technologies can be constrained by softer constraints like information. And social norms, but also harder constraints like complementary factors of production such as land and labor. Nature-based solutions have great potential for both adaptation and mitigation, but there have been concerns about, uh, greenwashing and, and this actually increases the need for continued uh rigorous research in, in, in the space. And then finally, linking to Some of the first session today, uh, climate change is, is likely to spur migration, but it is the most vulnerable that may actually not even be able to afford to move, uh, which further exacerbates the inequalities and exposure to climate impacts. So the evidence on interventionist support to actually help migration or relocation, uh, suggests that there could be potential impacts, but often not really related specifically to climate movement. And there's obviously a growing importance, importance for us to try to unpack this issue further. So that sort of leads to the last part, which is sort of taking stock of what we know to move forward, uh, in what we see as a few key areas for future research. So the first is, like in the migration discussion earlier, connecting ever more comprehensive data sets will be key to understanding amputation needs. Uh, but this brings really important privacy issues, right? So KCP finance research has actually helped show that anonymization of location, uh, by jittering, uh, um, or reducing the granularity of GPS points, for instance. For instance, is less of an issue for accuracy than the actual remote sensing tools that are being used for weather measures, uh, when looking at, uh, things like agricultural productivity. Um, but what might be the limits to this? And how should we think about this balance between, um, privacy and getting, getting accurate, um, analysis? And what about when we add in things like smartphones and CDR and mobile data? Um, second, we've shown for some time that vulnerability is inherently dynamic. And so, how do we think about who, how and when to support a moving target? Uh, leaning into this challenge, we, we need to draw on the history of theoretical and empirical work, uh, to, to, to do a better job at really targeting variance and outcomes, not just levels, identifying not just who to support, but with what, but actually when to provide the support and thinking carefully about the welfare implications of all of this. Third, we need to take empirical causal estimates of specification, specific adaptation approaches really seriously, particularly in relation to slow onset, onset climate impacts, which are relatively less covered. Um, this is particularly important within the context of increasing concerns of maladaptation where, uh, despite best intentions, there might be unintended negative consequences that might occur. But also on the flip side, being able to make sure we actually Capture all the potential co-benefits of adaptation approaches. So key to this discussion has to be when we should be considering incremental versus transformative adaptation. Well, increasing frequency of droughts might be addressed through adoption of droughts, drought resistant seeds. How do we weigh up the incremental support with, say, changing the, uh, changing to new crops altogether or new livelihoods or ultimately migrating? With a significant funding gap, uh, a significant funding gap and adaptation and known adaptation limits, both hard and soft, it's absolutely crucial for us to start getting a stronger handle on the cost-effectiveness of alternative strategies. And lastly, um, our focus often goes to the more salient issue of adapting to both the slow onset of climate change and extreme weather events, but there are other critical adaptation areas we really can't forget. There's ample evidence that risk dampens growth through underinvestment, but radical uncertainty of extreme climate events that can't be quantified places us in a whole new ballgame. How does this uncertainty about climate outcomes, not just, uh, the, the effects of the climate itself, affect people's decisions? And how do we think about managing these risks? In other words, building protective support to future issues versus responsive support when, when they happen. And how do these actually interact. And so new work by FA and Shavi and Dekarge uh will be exploring these in the coming months. And finally, connecting the dots with the earlier discussion on mitigation, uh, we know that some of the best mitigation policies will also have significant distributional implications. What can we learn about how to support people in places to adapt to the face, uh, uh to the face of another significant climate change-related shock, which is ensuring economic, ensuring economic and, and labor transitions that will come from countries's low carbon growth and growth policies. And so, to wrap up, at times we might think like with the latest headlines, it feels like we're in a bit of a trough, but let's not forget which direction we'll be going with a little bit of experimentation and hopefully KCP and climate research more broadly will help us uh light up that path. Thank you very much. Thanks very much, Aidan. Uh, it's a great slide to close on. You know, we had some discussion of, you know, mental health as being important for refugees in the, uh, in the first presentation. I didn't really expect mental health to be raised in the current one, but, uh, but this is actually a really good framework for, for thinking about it. So, um, we're going to turn to our, our three panelists next, but what I'd like to do also just to make it a little bit more of a conversation rather than sort of a Very linear progression is to blend in a bit of the Q&A sort of in between the, um, in, in between the, uh, the, uh, the, uh, the panelists' interventions. Um, so I'll kind of give a warning to those of us who've joined more recently online. If you can please put your questions, uh, comments, observations that you'd like, uh, brought into the room in the, uh, in the Q&A function in Zoom so that, uh, we can see them. And maybe after our, um, after our next panelist we'll take, uh, after our first panelist, I'll ask, uh, uh, Marcelo Ocarina to, uh, to, to summarize some of those questions that are coming in. And then between our 2nd and 3rd panelist, we'll take a few questions, uh, from, uh, from the room as well so that we have the, uh, uh, a bit more of a discussion. And, and I'll also sort of kick off the sort of more, you know, discussion aspect of this by sort of asking a question that I was reflecting on a little bit. In uh and, and I think it was um. Uh, and it was, uh, for me it was again sort of quite stark that there were sort of, you know, two halves to our presentation. We had a discussion about, um, mitigation. We had a discussion or a presentation about adaptation primarily, and I was thinking about how that connects to also sort of the mission of the KCP and, you know, the, the mission of research at the World Bank to influence policy, you know, one of our main levers is that we do so through. Through the World Bank's activities and then, you know, as many of you are aware, the World Bank is sort of really thinking hard about how it is that it sort of defines its space in the policy dialogue right now, given the reality that, you know, there's only a small number of sort of globally significant emitters among our client countries where we have the sort of deepest policy dialogue. So in a, in a world like that where we talk to countries for whom primarily adaptation is a concern, yet. You know, the whole sort of solution to climate change is going to be a combination of adaptation mitigation. How is it that, that we sort of position our analysis to, and our research to have the most impact, you know, do we go all in on selling countries on co-benefits, for example? Uh, as a, as an incentive for even globally less significant mitigators to, to, to, to mitigate more, do we, you know, press more on the, um, on the analytic agenda of calling sort of the world's attention to, you know, negative carbon prices around countries. For example, was in, uh, in, uh, uh, in countries around the world, as was the case in Carolynn's presentation, or do we, um, you know, go all in on adaptation, or is it some combination of those? So this is a little bit of question both about the content of research, but also about how we use it to generate change, uh, as, uh, as the, the name of the KCP uh implies. So it'd be great to hear from, you know, those in the room, from our panelists, um, others on, on, on these points. So, I, I'll quickly introduce, um, the three panelists online, um, uh, all together, and then we'll just go, uh, uh, from, uh, from one to the next. So, uh, first up, we have Carolyn Kooski, who is the associate vice president for Economics and Policy at the Environmental Defense Fund. Um, then we'll turn to Elizabeth Robinson, who is the director of the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment. And, uh, then, uh, last but not least among our panelists, oh, we have all of them on screen right now at once. That's great. Um, we have Andy Hinsley, who is the growth research team leader, um, at the United Kingdom, uh, FCDO. Um, so, without further ado, I'll turn over to Carolyn. I'll ask each of the panelists to try to confine your remarks to about 10 minutes so that we have some time for, uh, discussion in between and afterwards, since we do need to wrap up around noon. So, Carolyn, the floor is yours. Great, thank you. Can you hear me OK? Yes, we hear you great. OK, that's great. I'm just gonna not use PowerPoint and just share some, uh, remarks verbally with everyone. So it's so wonderful to be here. Thanks for having me. Um, and I'll note I'm standing in for Suzie Kerr, who I know has been involved in the KCP program, um, and since her regrets. Uh, so I thought I'd add a few remarks to this really informative, uh. The Presentation we just heard focused more on the adaptation side to that point about things being a little bit divided, um, and I wanted to talk about sort of risk management as a frame and how that's evolved, the growing work on equity, and then end with, um, some further reflections on research priorities and how to better link research to policy. So I wanted to start by talking about risk management as this frame for climate impacts and begin with a little bit of history. So for many decades there's been a field of scholarship on disasters, and this has also led to a sort of specific policy agenda domestically and internationally around disaster risk reduction. And you know, maybe about a decade ago there began to be calls to unite this work with With what was then, as we saw in that nice graph, a sort of nascent research agenda around climate adaptation, and I think now we're really starting to see that happen and they see these kind of two bodies of work come together and inform each other. So for example, the disaster research has evolved from a focus on response and recovery, on designing hazard mitigation to thinking more about non-structural approaches and vulnerability, and This real emphasis on climate resilience and sort of integrated disaster risk management that's tightly linked with thinking about climate impacts, and I think that's led to a more holistic approach that's helped integrate the management of climate risks into a broader suite of programs and decisions, which of course is really critical since we're now seeing climate extremes and stresses really impacting all parts of economy and society. I think the disaster risk management perspective also offers certain framings for climate adaptation work. So for example, disaster risk is often conceptualized as the intersection of hazard, exposure, and vulnerability. And that's a frame for research on the topic, but it also reflects the approach of sort of broader risk assessments, um, like for example, the catastrophe models that have developed since the late 1990s and are now used by the insurance sector and other large private and public sector entities. They're made up of those three modules, a hazard model, an an exposure essentially database, what are the people or properties or things that we care about, and the vulnerability sort of relating those two things together. And I think we've made enormous strides over the last few decades, again, kind of all that great, you know, data advances that we were just talking about, um, in the hazard modeling and the data used to inform, develop, and validate those models, and we're also simultaneously starting to get much better exposure data, but I do agree that we've made, as we heard, some less progress on the vulnerability modeling, both physical and social. We now have, you know, great laundry lists of all the specific. That we know inform vulnerability, but I think less understanding of the specific relationships between the hazard and those particular aspects of vulnerability of either physical vulnerability like at a structure level or populations, and then how to target policy intervention specifically in order to improve those disaster outcomes beyond just a broad development or anti-poverty measures. So I think that's an area that we'll see, you know, work grow. Let me switch gears now because I also wanted to stress another kind of trend I'm seeing, which is that there's now a sort of incredibly robust body of research that just continues to grow, documenting the links between poverty and disaster impacts, and we now know, the poorest are disproportionately impacted, they face greater exposure from hazards, they might live in less safe structures or have less access to preparedness resources or information on. Risks they have higher vulnerability from existing stresses and lack of resources and really insufficient access to the needed funds for recovery from the sort of economic shock that disasters really are and these disproportionate impacts are evident at all scales right from a household up to a country level, and that's now spurring a policy focus on how to improve equity in these disaster outcomes, which I think is very much welcome. Um, and much research is also stressing how broader development and social safety net programs are playing an increasingly important role in climate adaptation and the management of climate extremes, and I think that's really true globally. So programs that were not originally Designed as being part of disaster recovery or being climate adaptation programs are nonetheless now playing that role, and I think that requires us to now rethink these programs and approaches since they're going to continue to be further stressed as climate impacts advance. So most of my work has focused on how we manage the financial aspects of recovery, and at any scale we see sort of inequities here. There's insufficient savings or reserves. Credit is unavailable for some groups, or they can't service more debt, and at all scales, again from households, you know, up to sort of international aid, we see that government support post disaster can often be just insufficient to meet needs. It can be really delayed and take too long. are poorly matched to needs. And so while all those sources of financial recovery, I think, need our attention and reform, that also suggests this important role for insurance. But unfortunately, insurance against disasters can be expensive, and those who need it the most are the least able to afford it. So that's led to a growing number of innovations about how we develop inclusive insurance and new models to reach those that are not served by the current market. And again, these go from the household level, like all the approaches we've seen globally, um, to develop and refine uh parametric microinsurance models up to the country level, like the Caribbean Risk Insurance Facility and similar country-level pools. And I think we're now starting to have like a number of these examples that have really been tested so that we can pull out lessons learned and better identify what types of interventions are most effective in which um contexts. OK, now to end on two more things, I just wanted to tee up a few kind of research questions that I see is important and then, and then talk about the link to policy. Uh, so just 4 that I'll put out there for folks. First, you know, we are in an environment now of constant change and one where it seems that the climate related impacts around extreme events keep being worse than we thought. And so I think we need to take that lens, uh, to what we're thinking about designing policy and think of. About more deeply sort of the optimal timing and sequencing of of investments that are needed to kind of be cost effective and also effective at managing these risks while they're growing over time and how do we rethink our institutions to be more adaptive and to be better at learning by doing and maybe we can apply some of the work, you know, years ago and ongoing on sort of adaptive ecological management to thinking about our institutions in the face of climate. Um, we also all know that we need to increase the capacity for individuals and institutions and countries and communities to adapt, but I think we need to go deeper on what that means specifically and how do we actually achieve it? How do we know we're achieving it? Maybe what can we learn from the disaster risk reduction world on building preparedness capacity, like the success of lots of early warning systems to apply more to thinking about climate adaptation. And then I mentioned, you know, that we have a lot of policies now that weren't designed to be climate adaptation policies but are playing that role, and that's really positive. But we also have policies that were developed and put in place without regards to climate impacts that are now hindering us from making good progress on climate adaptation and actually being sort of, um, yeah, being challenges to doing more that we want with adaptation. And so I think we need to turn some research attention to those and how to reform them. And then finally I'll just mention, you know, it's been in the news lately. I think we do need a greater focus on these overlapping crises, right? Adam Cheuse has just kind of repopulized this with, with, with the term polycrisis, and the World Bank kind of summed that up, you know, by mentioning we're seeing, you know, poverty, food shortages, energy shocks, debt crises, climate change, inflation, war all at the same time, and unfortunately often that means that the impacts are much worse than any of. Those individually, um, but that's what disaster researchers have been, you know, calling attention to for quite some time, looking at things like compounding disasters and cascading disasters, and I think there's recognition of how impacts can be really nonlinear, but again, more on like what do we do to stop that sort of cascade of impacts, how do we manage these multiple threats at the same time, um, and, and maintain our capacity to respond despite multiple types of stresses and impacts. OK, I just wanted to end um with a minute by talking about how just personal reflections on how research could be better linked to policy making to drive impact. Um, I think that economics has sometimes underaddressed the needs of a class of decision makers or decision problems, um, that as some scholars have recently been highlighting to go back to the beginning, a risk management perspective might help. So cases where decision makers, particularly in the face of catastrophic risk. Want to identify outcomes that perform well under many plausible futures or they want to define their risk tolerance and then find the options to kind of stay within that and maybe relatedly I think researchers could, and this came up already, look a little bit more at co-benefits and solving multiple problems through, you know, one policy because decision makers can build coalitions around policy solutions that solve many problems at the same time or create. Benefits for diverse stakeholders, um, but I don't think, you know, but researchers tend to focus in on just one and so maybe again more broadly this is really sort of recognizing that the political needs and institutional constraints that drive implementation possibilities need to be sort of more integrated into the research findings and the development of the research questions as well, and that suggests, right, which is now very. Widely recognized and being tackled in a number of ways that for research to be impactful, it has to have a very tight link to the practitioners or policymakers and I think that's being done now in a number of ways and I'll highlight two that I think um yeah, are really impactful. So the first is organizations that essentially become boundary spanning by uniting within them both the research and the policy or practice, and that's true for a lot of the organizations represented here today, of course, um. And these groups can then provide these translation services between research and practice and help identify those policy windows where information, research information can be most relevant, and that's not the role of an academic researcher, but it's the role of a boundary spanner, right? And it's, I think, now widely recognized as a really important function. Um, we're also seeing funders recognize this need for better integration and deliberately seek to support and establish those types of partnerships. So one example is one I've been involved with here domestically, which is the National Science Foundation Civic Innovations Program, and we were in their first cohort, and they essentially were only taking proposals for linked research and practice where a community group, a government, a nonprofit was actually a co-PI. On the project and was actively involved in the design of the research, the implementation, and then was going to use it, um, was going to use it for that implementation so that at the out the outcome that was being funded was not a research paper but an actual pilot on the ground that was informed by the research and so I think these types of approaches, um, yeah, are really starting to move the needle, um, on impact and um. I'll just say one last thing. I think social science has also done a really excellent job with, you know, evaluation methods and being able to evaluate policies, identify impacts, and then use that to improve them. But I think it's also time to kind of take bodies of evidence and research very early in the policy process to help. Develop the, you know, initial design and innovation at the beginning and that can help sort of de-risk policy innovation and I think you're now seeing a bunch of places recognize that these kind of principles of accelerators and incubators used in the private sector can also be applied to the public sector around some of these challenges. OK, I'll stop there. Thank you so much. It's great. Thanks very much, Carolyn. Um, I, you, you must be spending a lot of time in camouflage at the World Bank because a lot of these uh discussions around boundaries spanning role of sort of research, uh, and linking research to policies obviously very much our, our, our bread and butter as a big research department in a big policy institute. Um, so before we go to, uh, to Elizabeth, um, uh, do you have, do you have anything from the, OK, we don't have anything from online right now. So while our online colleagues are overcoming their bashfulness, I'll just open up, see if there's, uh, one or two comments or reflections from people in the room here. Um, thanks, Govinda. Sorry for the formality, but if you don't mind using the mic for the benefit of people online. Yeah, I'm Govinder Tina working with, uh, Calvin Fisher's team. So just two words I'd like to highlight. One is the contribution from the KCP. One is visibility, and the second is diversity. The visibility just example is that, so with the budget we got from KCP we produced about 17 journal articles on biofuels. So KCP is the only funding that provided support for biofuel research in the World Bank, and it gives the bank a lot of visibility and also contributed to clarify some of the key issues. For example, the food versus fuel debate and also biofuel and the climate change mitigation. The second thing, the diversity. So the KCP budget really help us to diversify the, the geographical diversification for the research. So we cover country from Latin America, Argentina, Brazil, and Mexico, from, from the Central Asia and Eastern Europe, Georgia. Armenia and Ukraine, from sub-Saharan Africa, Zimbabwe, Zambia, and Mali, frommena, Morocco, from East Asia and Pacific, China and Thailand, and from South Asia and Nepal. So it's a really good diversity and that's a very good use of the KCP funding. Thank you very much. Uh, uh, thanks, Govinda. Um, let's turn over to Elizabeth. Um, uh, the floor is yours for about, uh, uh, again 10 minutes, and, uh, then we'll do another round either online or, uh, from, from, from the room before we go to, go to you, Andy. Thanks so much. Um, yeah, it's quite interesting, I think when I was thinking of like, sort of, you know, how to respond to, um, Carolyn and, um, Aiden, the points you made are are quite, are quite linked to sort of what I was thinking. And, and I suppose my sort of take-home point in a way is when we're talking about low and middle-income countries and the trajectory we want to see them on in the next 28 years, because we're really talking about what's going to happen up to 2050. It's really hard to think about mitigation and adaptation separately. Because these countries at the moment may not be emitters, uh, but if they were to grow like we want them to, but follow the same trend pathways as high-income countries, they would become large emitters. And so I sort of tend to think of mapping out that pathway rather than adaptation mitigation separate, and really, how do you find the right growth pathway for these countries? How do you enable them to choose the right growth pathway that is compatible with net zero at a global level and that builds resilience? And, and, and if we think about some of the really key, key problems for these countries, we could argue it's energy security and it's food security and probably water security too. I'm sure other people have, have others that are on their priority list. And so, I think, um, you know, we, we, we can map out the transition pathways and to some extent, they have been, but we're not necessarily seeing countries on resilient climate-comparable pathways. And I, I, I was just thinking when I listened to the presentation from Carolyn that, you know, so maybe 1020 years ago that we would sort of hear this argument that if poor countries, could grow, actually, what they need is to grow rapidly and then they'll be able to adapt. And, and that might have been a reasonable conversation 20 years ago, but with 1.1 degrees already and 1.5 degrees out of sight, we realized that that's not, we can't just say grow, whatever. So we need to see those low carbon growth rates. Uh, and so, how can, how low-income countries grow is um really important. So, essential to any discussion, I think is climate finance, and of course, you all at the bank know that, um, and also choosing that those already harmed by climate change and not harmed by the growth pathways. And so, I suppose, you know, there, there's some puzzles, and maybe there's some of the puzzles that we need to answer, which is if low-carbon energy is white, low-cost, why are we not seeing it rolled out across EMICS? And, and maybe that's partly because we don't really understand enough, um, about, I sort of think about this as the frictions. So, who gains, who loses? Who's still investing, investing in fossils and why? And how does the financing risk profile change? So, you know, what could development finance actually offer in that respect? And, and, and I think also, you know, it also talks about the political barriers as well. So why do companies investing in fossil fuels not seem concerned about their stranded assets? You know, do they, are they just doubling down? Do they know something we don't know? Um, and, and, and how do we win the sort of, um, propaganda war arguably, um, about renewables versus fossils? Uh, I, I work a lot on climate change and health, and so we think a lot about the co-benefits. And, you know, another puzzle, which is if air pollution is killing millions of people each year, which it is, why are we not seeing rapid phase-out of burning fossil fuels? And what is the evidence base that might help that? So is this a matter of, uh, climate funds for investment? Is this a matter of political will? Is this a matter of not having those numbers? Is It's a matter of providing the data that shows just how much pressure you're putting on your health services. And that very much touches, I think, was it Aiden who was, who, who was raising some of those issues. And I was just thinking as well, Aiden, you sort of talked about the data that's available to us. And I think there's a tremendous amount of amazing data that we can use and we can access so that we can actually provide the evidence base for governments to make sensible policies. I am, I'm gonna touch on integrated assessment models a little bit just because Carolyn did emphasize them I think because they sort of talked to a problem with us and us economists, and I am an economist, trained economist, I'm an environmental economist, but, but I think, um, and, and, and, and Carolyn did mention the, the, the Stearns Stiglitz and Taylor paper that is well worth a read. Um, and, and I think many of us who are actually more on the, on the side of actually how do we make things happen, just look at integrated assessment models and like and go, So what and where are you coming from? Because so much of the, when you read the literature about IANS, you, you're sort of looking for, what really matters. So what really matters is how do we get to net zero? How do we keep temperatures at a certain level? How do we guardrail, as Nick Stern and, and his colleagues, right? And there's no discussion about that at all. I think this discussion of what is the social cost of capital, I'm not really sure how it's interesting. I think much more interesting is we know we need to get to net zero because we know the kind of world we want to live in in the future, and the kind of world we want in the future is one that is not where we've got above 2 degrees and ideally closer to 1.5. And then the question is really, how does pricing carbon help us to get there? And you know, economists love elegant models and we love elegance. And, and, you know, we can show if we think about how understanding has developed over the last sort of 2030 years, the scientists came and they've shown us each year more and more clearly that climate change is happening, it's caused by humans. And then the economists came along, we designed very nice environmental policy instruments, and those showed, you know, how we can internalize the externalities and how we can price carbon and do our shadow prices and stuff. But where we are right now in 2022 is that we need action. And actually, the last, uh, when Carolyn showed the, um, one of her slides, she showed the World Bank Climate change action plan. And the question is how do we get action? And I think what we need to remember as economists is that getting stuff done is really messy. Um, economics is necessary, but it's certainly far from sufficient. Uh, we need to think about how you change behavior. So if we look at carbon pricing, for example, we can take two real extremes. So, I'm poor, you slap a carbon price on something, it doesn't matter what, let's just take flying and I stopped flying. So you've changed my behavior with the carbon price, no revenue change for the government, or I'm rich, you've put a carbon tax on. So I don't change my behavior to it comes to flying, but I just pay the tax. Um, it's just a minor inconvenience. And then the question is, what does the government do with that tax revenue? Does the government therefore change behavior in some other way to reduce emissions? Does it invest in low carbon? And then we can look at companies in exactly the same way. So a lot of I think how we need to move is how we change behavior of governments, of companies, of individuals. And economists just haven't done very well on that. I'm only critique economists because I am one and thinking about what we haven't done well enough. We haven't really thought about the messiness. So I think um, I think so, just, just to sort of bring this to a focus, because I think it, it, it will, I think questions, there there haven't been many questions, but I think questions are always quite, quite interesting, is first of all, we've got to, um, recognize that it's, we need action now. And so the research really has to be providing the evidence base for that action. Probably a lot of the time we're talking to ministers of um finance, and so we're saying, what is the way, what is the way to get the evidence there in a way that people listen to. And I think that's why, um, um, I think Carolyn, your point. About, um, working, you know, with the people on the ground really matters right from the start of research projects. I think a lot of our supplied, um, researchers are doing that now and it's, it's really important. And so, for example, you know, what, what are actually the health benefits in terms of reducing air pollution? And we can look at those in terms of pressure on health services. We can look at that in terms of economic growth. And then, for example, we can look at, I've lost my train of thought now, but, um, but what, what it takes, what are the margins does it take, therefore, to, to say that it is worth Investing in renewable energy. So, if we add on those health costs, if we add on those, you know, drag on growth from the harm that, um, air pollution is doing to, um, labor supply, for example, it might just tip the balance and then we need to think about the risk profiles changing. So, overall, I think there's, you know, there is scope for research, but it has to be really, of course, I'm a, I'm a, I'm a researcher, I should hope there is, but we need to use the data we have. We've got tremendous, um, tremendously detailed data. We've got the error, um, error 5 data that gives us temperatures across the globe. We've got Amazing food insecurity data, uh, that we can, we've got amazing data on crop yield, crop yield potentials. We can overlay these data. We can use econometrics now, for example, to attribute the extent to which outcomes, human outcomes, not just climate outcomes are affected by climate change. So some of the research that I'm doing with a colleague, we can look at food insecurity outcomes and we can show to what extent those food security is getting worse because of climate change as opposed to all the other reasons that food insecurity might have decoupled from growth, which happened in about 2017, which could be conflict, it could be inequality, it could be soils being exhausted. Um, yeah, so I think my take on point is economics is messy and economists have to wake up to that, work with social sciences, and understand that what might seem like a first-best solution in the real world won't necessarily happen. Thank you. I think that's generally valuable advice that you ended on, uh, Elizabeth, that we could bear in mind across a whole range of, uh, uh, of different areas, not just climate research. So, let me again, you know, pause, see if anybody would like to chip in from the floor here or from online via the, uh, via the chats, uh, before we turn over to, to Andy. Again, uh, Don't be shy. I've generally not known my deck colleagues to be so. Right. Well, while, while overcoming your bashfulness again, uh, we'll turn to Andy for your intervention and then, uh, and then we'll close, uh, with, uh, with some reflections, uh, from our two main speakers. So the floor is yours, Andy. OK, thank you, Art. Thank you for inviting me. Uh, happy birthday to KCP uh, it's a big moment hitting, hitting 20 so you're out of that, that awkward childhood phase and, and launching into adulthood. Um, I'm sure like ra raising children, the 1st 20 years will be the hardest and then, uh, be plain sailing from, from here on. But we've, um, we've enjoyed our, our long-term partnership with KCP from, uh, from the UK. Uh, yeah, so, uh, congratulations. Uh, so I'm Andy Hinsley. I'm the, uh, team leader of, of the Economic growth research team in the UK's Foreign Commonwealth and, and Development Office. I'm gonna come at, uh, this, this issue today from an economic development angle. It's been, it's been touched on a few times. I was gonna start by trying to convince you of the importance of growth, um, and income increases for, for, for adaptation and, and resilience. I think Aiden, and, and some of the other speakers have done a pretty good job of that already, but. Uh, it's to say poverty reduction is going to remain the, the main challenge facing low-income countries, uh, in whatever form, whatever is causing that poverty. As, as humanity, the only successful mechanism pathway that we found to deliver sustained poverty reduction is sustained economic growth. So the question is not should low-income countries go for growth, the question that they will go for growth. The question is, is that, is that growth going to be, um, low carbon, uh, resilient growth, or is it going to be high carbon growth? Uh, and we as a, as a global community, as, as a research community need to enable them and equip them with the tools and the evidence to, to move to greener, greener forms of, of growth, uh, not just for their own, for, for, for global benefit, global public good benefit, but also for, uh, for their own, uh, sustainability of their own trajectories as. Global regulation around embedded carbon gets more restricted and risks of stranded assets as we've heard earlier, it will be in their own interests to move on to greener growth paths. So I want to touch on 3 transitions, 3 transformations that I think are really important. Um, As part of thinking about green growth, the energy transition, and spatial mobility, connectivity transformation, and then a jobs, production sectoral transformation, and then if there's time I might make a point about state capability at the end, although others have touched on it, so. So energy, I think energy is in some ways the most fundamental transition as energy power is critical to growth, and we've seen in the current global cost of energy crisis how quickly it's become a cost of everything crisis. Energy is just fundamental to how we produce goods and services in any modern economy. Ali, low-income countries already consume more energy per capita than, uh, high-income countries did at a similar level of, uh, of development, uh, previously in their, in their trajectories, but to grow. Uh, low income countries are going to need to radically increase their energy production and consumption levels, uh, and also energy access, but that's a common, it's a difficult issue, and we'll come onto that in a moment, um. And for the broader growth pathways to be green, they're going to need to electrify a lot more of their economies, such as transport sectors or cooking. So we need to make this electricity low carbon. So what's holding back this transition to abundant low carbon electricity? So on the generation side, I think the cost of capital for renewables is a big issue. So the costs of capital are much higher in emerging developing markets than advanced or China and current interest rate increases are not helping with that. So that's a major barrier and we see in Africa. Particularly, a major constraint to governments being able to borrow to invest in, in these new tech technologies is fiscal space, uh, to invest in green infrastructure, even where there is reasonably concessional finance from MDVs, MDVs available, uh, a lot of countries increasingly are in such tight fiscal, uh, problems, they're not, not even able to borrow at concessional rates. So there's a major question around where the finance is, is going to come from. For generation, um, even countries that have cracked the generation, uh, issue, um, transmission is becoming an increasing pinch point. Um, increasing number of countries have, uh, can't use all of their generation capacity because of lack of transmission infrastructure. Now, commonly, um, transmission utilities. Uh, often have pretty good engineering skills, pretty good master plans, um, strategic capability, but they're lacking, lacking finance. It's really, it's, it's even harder to get finance for transmission infrastructure than it is, is for generation. Um, and particularly so with, with climate finance. Most grid investments don't, are, are, are not currently thought of as green enough to, to count for, for climate finance, despite the fact that. Uh, the, the more you can build a strong integrated grid, you can take much higher shares of intermittent renewables in your, in your generation mix. So that, that's an issue that researchers need to get, get our heads around and, and find ways of, of demonstrating the benefits so that climate finance can play a stronger role. Then on the distribution side, so I mentioned access earlier, there's a real tension here. Too many countries are going for last-mile connection of sub-commercial households, um, and borrowing cheap money to do it. And that's just, it's just killing utility finances. Uh, it's killing the ability of utilities to be able to invest, uh, and it's, it's causing real problems for growth as, uh, or, or structural transformation as, as, uh, industry is, um, is not able to get the, the, the, uh, low-cost reliable power that it needs to, needs to grow. Uh, so we really need to think about the tensions of, um, seeking last mile connection too, too early in the, in the development process if it's gonna harm, harm growth. And then then on the, the governance and policy side, so at the national level, uh, countries really need to improve the quality of their, of their power sector regulation. Poor quality regulations is really making it difficult for the private sector, private investors to be able to operate. Uh, Nigeria is a good example of just incredibly difficult regulatory environment for private investors. Um, and then at the regional level, we really need to improve the governance of regional power trading arrangements. I mentioned the importance of grids. That's true within a country. It's, it's even more true at the regional level. Um, we need to deal with bottlenecks and regional interconnections, interconnects between countries because you can really have a much more efficient grid that maximizes the opportunities of, uh, renewable generation, really drive up the, the share of, of renewables in the generation mix if you can trade that power, uh, across, across countries. But the governance of those, of those trading arrangements is really holding back, uh, holding back that opportunity. The second transformation is, is on spatial mobility and around urban issues. Um, so urban urbanization is critical for growth, um, but cities are also, uh, Cities can be very good for building resilience, but can also be very, very vulnerable in and of themselves. Climate impacts are also going to be a big driver of urban growth and movements to urban areas. And, you know, as in the conflict and migration session earlier, I think we need to be really forward-looking here. Um, so one of the speakers earlier was talking about trying to do more predictive analysis of movements of people. We know that, um, that things like droughts and floods in rural areas are going to drive people into urban areas. We know there is going to be a long-term shift, increasing the pace of urbanization, uh, through, through climate migration. So we need to get ahead of that and plan for it. Um, in, in the conflict space that maybe you can't get ahead of it, maybe you have to be reactive in the climate space, we need to get ahead of it. We know that it's coming. We know that it will be a long-term, uh, shift. So we, we, we have to get on it, um. And put plans in place to enable climate migrants when they come to integrate so they're not straining local labor markets, they're not straining local housing markets or, or public services, but that they're able to integrate that, uh, they can gain the skills quickly that they need to benefit local labor markets or that, or that they're not just ending up in the most vulnerable parts of urban areas, but there, there's some planning around moving them into more, more sustainable parts of, of cities. And I think policymakers are also going to need to think about, um, the, the coming major disruptions to vulnerable urban areas. So I think there's, there's evidence showing that, uh, or, or predictions showing that, um, average flood losses in coastal cities is, is estimated to increase by a factor of 10 from 2005 to 2050. So these are some of our most productive locations, and there are strong network externalities that tie people and activities into these places. The policymakers is going to think hard, going to have to think hard about whether to try and protect locations, and invest in that protection or whether to start to unpick some of those network externalities and start to shift people and shift activity to, to more resilient locations. Uh, and then a, a jobs, production, uh, structural transformation. Um, so there is pretty major tech technological change around, uh, green growth, um. In energy in other sectors, but it's also the direction of technological change is really going to shift what the opportunities are for developing countries to grow. So we need to think hard about what developing countries are going to be making and exporting in 10 years, in 20 years in in a globally green, low carbon economy. Uh, and then again getting ahead and thinking what type of skills, what type of labor force are those, uh, newer industries going to require. There are potential opportunities in, in a green economy, um, such as green hydrogen production in some places, but there are serious issues to think about, um, both the, the broader macro effects, uh, uh, some potentially Dutch disease type effects, but also, um. Issues such as the heavy need for water and production of green hydrogen and what that does to local local water supplies. Uh, because the, the areas that, that may be most suitable to renewable powered, uh, green hydrogen production may also be the most water, water vulnerable. On the research side, I think we need much sharper, wider models for green growth. I think we need to link. Our structural and spatial transformation models, uh, in with um, with low carbon transition issues much more directly uh incorporating. Developing countries specific technology trajectories and uh bespoke costs of capital into those models and we need, as always, as many have mentioned, much more data, much more freely available so that more researchers can work on these things and then we need to think harder about um. Green skills about how labor forces need to be upgraded, um, particularly, uh, for investing in, in green infrastructure, so things like installation and maintenance, uh, I think given time I will, I will stop there hand it back up to you all. Uh, thanks very much, Andy, for those, uh, those observations and particularly for reminding us about, you know, the reality that development first and foremost in, in the banks client countries is gonna require growth and so it's more a question of how clean it is and also for reminding us about the unintended consequences of well-intentioned policies. I mean, it's just to amplify on your point about, um, you know, the risks of, uh. Of sort of last mile connections, particularly through sort of decentralized tools like mini grids, rooftop solar, and so on. You know, you'd pointed out about the adverse effects of that on, on the incentives for utilities, but there's also, you know, the adverse effects going the opposite direction, which is that the incentives to invest in those technologies are, are limited by the risk of them becoming stranded assets when grids come into town. So you have sort of a damned if you do, damned if you don't kind of situation with uh, with this that I don't think we have sort of a clean handle on. And yet the capital constraints that you point out that limit. Uh, uh, this, you know, sort of large scale, um, both, you know, grid and generation investments are the ones that are also pushing us to these sort of less expensive solutions that, then, you know, may pose problems in the long run. Um All right. So, we're, you know, running close to the end of our time. What I thought I would do is maybe turn to, uh, our, uh, our initial speakers, Carolyn and Aiden, and ask them for, you know, 2 minutes of uh reflections on what you've heard, thoughts, reactions, um, and then, uh, and then, and then we'll close for the morning. So, uh, do you want to go ahead, Carolyn, or do you want the last word? Um, I'll let Aiden have the last word. Um, uh, thanks, Art, and thanks to all of the, um, all of the panelists as well for some great comments. Um, I think, so Art, you raised sort of this question of the mitigation adaptation or dichotomy, and I, I think it happens a bit naturally because usually we think of adaptation. As something that should be in the interest of local governments, um, to deal with the, the challenge with climate adaptation though is that the costs are being borne by the countries who are the poorest and least responsible for the, the risks that they're the heightened risks that they're facing due to climate change and so the, um, you know, the challenge there is really getting, uh, the financing for, um. Uh, for developing countries, uh, mitigation is, is a little different, uh, so mitigation is a contribution to a global public good of avoided um, climate change. So it's, you know, it's not generally, you know, fully in the interest of, of a, um, you know, of a local government. Um, and so, uh, so it requires encouragement. It requires international, uh, negotiations and, and leverage, and, um, and so, you know, in the context of, um, you know, developing countries, you know, so the World Bank, we, uh, you know, we are representing, uh, the world. And, and so, uh, you know, we should not, um. You know, we have an opportunity, uh, to try to discourage free riding and help solve this problem which, uh, you know, with the damages fall predominantly on, on poor countries so there are conversations to be had for a lot of, uh, you know, for low income countries. The question isn't really mitigation right now. It's, it's avoiding. Uh, high carbon growth. So, so every, every country, um, you know, is participating in the climate negotiations. Every country has to think about what is a low carbon growth, um, growth path because the global business as usual has complete. Completely changed. So how do we, how do we do that? And part of the conversation then I, I, um, like Carolynn's comments about, uh, creating coalition. So talking about co-benefits, talking about other rationales to, uh, so, uh, that are in the interest of the country to contribute to the global public good, but, um. Um, but encouraging this, and, and we know that the carbon pricing is difficult. The United States is not able to do it, but, um, something like the Inflation Reduction Act in the US is, is, you know, it's actually much more expensive than a policy package that includes pricing and, and, and, you know, a subsidies, strictly subsidies approach may be out of reach for a lot of, a lot of countries unless the subsidies are, you know. Uh, from the developed world. So, uh, on both sides, finance is the key. Thanks, Carolyn. Um, Aiden, uh, forces you to wrap us up. Great, great. Thanks. Thanks so much, and I, I see we're, we're sort of run out of time here, so I'll keep, keep it short. But, uh, thanks, thanks to everybody for the great, uh, comments and feedback and, uh, uh, both, both in the audience and also the panelists. That was, uh, fantastic. And, yeah, I mean, I think just to, um, reiterate the points that have been, uh, um, came up already about, you know, thinking about this balance between the adaptation and the mitigation side. To be honest, when, when Carolyn and I were, were, were talking about how to split up the presentations, we just thought that would be the easiest structure. She'll take the, um, mitigation, I'll take the adaptation, and that gives us a nice sort of coordination framework that we can then, uh, sort of get, get out the key messages in a sort of simple coordinated way, and we could do that as two people. But then obviously thinking about all the issues around coordination for Uh, climate, uh, climate more broadly, and also climate research specifically, we really need to think carefully about this, right? So, for instance, um, when, when we want to think about multidisciplinary, um, research, how do we go about this and how do we trade off the balance between the sort of coordination, uh, costs associated with me as a statistician slash economist, uh, reaching out to an agronomist or an earth scientist to think about how we can sort of facilitate and. Coordinate a sort of coherent and cogent research that can be potentially, um, uh, more interesting as a, as a sort of multidisciplinary approach, uh, but at the same time comes with costs, right? And so, we have in our sort of own microcosm of, of research, and many of these questions of sort of, uh, costs and coordination that we have to think about. And, and I really liked, um, uh, the earlier discussion, uh, point in the, in, in, in the. Migration, uh, where, where, where, where the team was talking about how, how, um, World Bank researcher helps to sort of facilitate vertically integrated, uh, research to try to answer bigger questions that might not necessarily be able to be, uh, answered by individual researchers. And I think, you know, going forward, uh, imagining a world where we can, uh, balance out those coordination costs and thinking about how to, how to, how, how to coordinate things. About some of the big questions that are going to require, um, sort of across, across the board, um, collaborations, I think will be, uh, will be really interesting and important. And, and maybe the last point is just, uh, there was a lot of discussion around data and how this is going to really help, um, sort of support new research and new evidence. But then, uh, on the other hand, also the importance of making sure all of the research that's being done is integrated into policy discussions and dialogue. And I think there's, there's an interesting balance there as well, which is that, you know, hands, you know, getting your hands dirty in the field and working on sort of empirical work where you, where, where you need to collect the data means often you actually have to directly, uh, link to policymakers and discussions and, and things like that. Whereas when data is already available to you, uh, there's a lot of things you can do that doesn't necessarily require, um, reaching out and having, having that coordinated link with, with policy. And so thinking about making sure that as data grows and as, as we get more opportunities to do a lot more interesting, uh, questions, making sure that doesn't, uh, break down the links between what researchers are doing and what policy, uh, makers and, and decision makers are, are sort of thinking and making sure, uh, there is that sort of structured, uh, coordination on that front as well. But otherwise, thanks, thanks very much for, for the discussion and, uh, and all of the, uh, all of the comments. I'm really excited to see where this goes. Thanks. Uh, thank you, Aiden. Uh, so, uh, let me wrap us up by, uh, this session by, by thanking our, uh, our panelists, Carolyn Kooski, Elizabeth Robinson, and, and Andy Hinsley. Also a big thank you again to our, uh, our two presenters, um, Aiden and Carolyn. And also, of course, to, uh, to the, to the, the KCP team who organized this event and, uh, Karina and Bin Tao. And I just wanted to mention again that we will have, um, so we have two upcoming events in, uh, in this series of 20th anniversary. Celebrations in January, right, Karina, one of the next two. We're, we're scheduling them for early next year, so it's going to be a prolonged birthday celebration, but that's, that's worthwhile when, uh, when, when it's, uh, when it's a landmark event for an important vehicle. So, thanks again to everybody, uh, wishing you a good rest of the day, a good rest of your evening for those of you who are joining us from Europe and beyond. Thank you.

showAllTranscripts

no

duration

PT1H25M38S

scene7File

worldbank/KCP_Climate_Change

scene7Domain

scene7FileAvs

worldbank/KCP_Climate_Change-AVS

title

KCP Climate Change.

description

KCP Climate Change.

showTimestampAndTranscript

yes