This document discusses ways to assess the ambition level of countries' intended nationally determined contributions (INDCs) to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. It outlines five approaches: comparing INDCs to business-as-usual emissions projections; comparing to effort-sharing models; comparing to estimates of mitigation potential; comparing to decarbonization indicators; and comparing policies to good practice packages. Each approach provides different information but combining multiple approaches can provide the most comprehensive assessment. The level of complexity can also vary from simple to more detailed analyses depending on the method and data used.

1. Assessing ambition of INDCs
REGIONAL TECHNICAL DIALOGUE ON INTENDED NATIONALLY DETERMINED CONTRIBUTIONS TO
THE 2015 AGREEMENT UNDER THE UNFCCC
10-12th of November 2014, Mexico City, Mexico
Markus Hagemann
m.hagemann@newclimate.org

2. About NewClimate Institute
Non-profit research institute founded Nov. 2014 by 7
former Ecofys colleagues
Offices in Berlin and Cologne (Germany)
Areas of expertise
Climate negotiations
Tracking clilmate action
Climate and development
Climate financing
Carbon market mechanisms
www.newclimate.org 2

3. Ways to assess mitigation
contributions by countries
Comparison
To BAU
To effort sharing
To mitigation potential
Of decarbonisation indicators
To good practice policy package / policy menu
www.newclimate.org 3

4. Comparison to BAU
BAU is counterfactual
BAU includes many different developments
Example Brazil
36.1% to 38.9%
below BAU in 2020
www.newclimate.org 4

5. Comparison to effort sharing
Large range of effort sharing approaches, e.g. per capita, carbon
budgets, equal costs, …
www.newclimate.org 5

6. Comparison to potential
Large uncertainties
Assumptions on base
line?
Assumptions on cost
elements?
Model used?
Source: Fekete et al. 2013. Climate
change mitigation in emerging
economies: From potentials to actions.
http://www.umweltbundesamt.de/sites/default/fil
es/medien/378/publikationen/cc_19_2013_vorabe
xemplar_fkz_3711_41_120_ueberarbeitet_12_12_
13_.pdf
www.newclimate.org 6

7. Comparison to
decarbonisation indicators
kWh/
cap Pledge
CO2/
kWh
Current policy
Current policy
Pledge
Activity
Required for
2°C
Current best
practice
Global
average
2010 2050
Required for
2°C
Global average
2010 2050
Current best
practice
Intensity
www.newclimate.org 7

8. Comparison to low carbon
policy package
Possible approach
1. Choose area of
intervention
2. Identify BP
incentives and
barriers
3. Develop
benchmarks
4. Rate policy against
benchmark
www.newclimate.org 8

9. Policy package (2) – example building
sector- energy efficiency
Indicator for incentives Benchmark for evaluating against best
practice
• Incentive (regulation, support and
information) for use of efficient appliances,
including air conditioning
4: 2-3% per year
0: No incentive
Method: fraction of appliance covered and stringency of
the standards (Japanese Top runner or ecodesign
directive). If air conditioning is a major consumer, then
buidling standards need to be considered)
• Efficiency standards for new buildings for all
types of buildings
4: Zero emissions buildings by 2014
2: Zero emissions buildings by 2020
0: No trajectory to zero energy buildings
• Incentive for high retrofit rates for all types of
existing buildings (for complete retrofit, i.e. full
building envelope & upgrade supply system)
4: > 3% per year (average 2010-2020) and >2% afterwards
0: < 1 % per year
• Policy for efficiency improvement for other
than heating fuel uses (cooking, hot water
use)
4: > 3% per year (average 2010-2020) and >2% afterwards
0: < 1 % per year
• Level of energy and/or CO2 taxes (applicable
to electricity fuel consumption in buildings)
4: tax is > 100% of energy price
0: no tax
www.newclimate.org 9

10. Policy package (cont.) – final
overview
www.climateactiontracker.org
Source: Climate Action Tracker
country assessment example
www.newclimate.org 10

11. Complexity of analysis
Comparison More
simple
>>>>>> More complex
To BAU
To effort sharing
To mitigation
potential
Of decarbonisation
indicators
To good practice
policy package /
policy menu
Downscale
regional BAU
Bottom up
development of BAU
Use IPCC effort
sharing ranges
Own effort
sharing model
Categorization of
measures
Bottom up
modelling of MACC
Use of existing
literature
Development of country
specific indicators
Application of existing
policy menues
Dev. of counrty spec.
policy menues
www.newclimate.org 11

12. Suitable approaches for
different types of commitments
Business as
usual (BAU)
Effort
sharing
Mitigation
potential
Decarboni-sation
indicators
Good
practice
policy
package
Inspirational
national long term
emissions goal
National short
term emissions
target
Energy / sectoral
targets
Highlight policies
and projects
www.newclimate.org
Legend
Primary
Secondary
12

13. Ways to assess contributions
Comparison Considerations
To BAU • BAU is counterfactual
To effort sharing • Wide rage of possible outcomes
To mitigation potential • Costs compared to a BAU, which is
counterfactual
Of decarbonisation indicators • Forward looking, no BAU necessary
• Indicators close to actions, specially on sectoral
level
To good practice policy package
/ policy menu
• Forward looking, no BAU necessary
• How is the package defined?
www.newclimate.org 13

14. Conclusions
Assessing ambition
Allows for comparison of country offers in the international process
Supports countries’ domestic processes for the development of INDCs
Options to assess ambition
All 5 options can provide valuable information to assessing ambition
No silver bullet approach, ideally all are combined
Some approaches might be better suited depending on target types
Data use
Every option can be implemented in a relatively simple or more
complex manner
www.newclimate.org 14

15. Thanks for your attention!
Gracias por su tiempo!
Contact: Markus Hagemann, m.hagemann@newclimate.org
BLOG: http://newclimate.org/2014/10/29/how-to-assess-the-level-
of-ambition-of-an-intended-nationally-determined-contribution/
www.newclimate.org 15