Chapter 9 Climate change
9.1
Climate change and its impacts on the ASEAN region is attracting increased
attention from ASEAN member states and Australia. While there are serious
consequences arising from climate change, there are also opportunities for those
ready to grasp them.
9.2
A detailed assessment of climate change and its impacts is not the major
focus of this inquiry. Consequently, evidence received by the Committee was
limited.
9.3
This chapter considers the evidence received concerning:
n the scale of the problem
and ASEAN’s response;
n cooperation between Australia
and the ASEAN member states; and
n challenges and
opportunities which Australia faces in its response to climate change.
Impact of climate change
9.4
Engineers Australia provided the Committee with assessments from the
International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the Lowy Institute on the
impact of climate change on the ASEAN region. The IPCC fourth report predicted
reduced crop yields, increased risks of hunger and water scarcity, damage to ecosystems,
population displacement, significant adverse effects on human health, and
increased urbanisation, with associated environmental impacts.[1]
9.5
The Lowy Institute suggested consequences such as:
n ‘economic damage and
risk to coastal cities’;
n increasing likelihood
of border disputes due to loss of land area;
n tensions over energy
supply;
n ‘increased
instability in weak and failing states’; and
n an increase on
migration pressures.[2]
9.6
DFAT’s submission summarised the situation:
Australia considers climate change to be a serious long-term
global challenge that will incrementally intensify climate-related stresses,
including extreme weather events, sea-level rise and resource availability.
Other impacts may include alterations to the geographical range of some
infectious diseases. Over time, these climate change impacts are also expected
to contribute additional stresses to local and regional stability, and resource
and food security. The countries of ASEAN, particularly those with low-lying
coastal and island communities, are vulnerable to the impacts of climate
change. Climate change in these areas has the potential to affect key
industries, notably tourism and agriculture.[3]
9.7
DIAC also drew attention to the high impacts of climate change on
‘mega-deltas’. (One of these—the Mekong Delta—the Committee notes is situated
across ASEAN member states.) The increased likelihood and severity of extreme
weather events such as flooding would interrupt food production and, DIAC
suggested, would increase internal displacement and pressures for migration to
Australia.[4]
ASEAN’s response
9.8
DFAT advised the Committee that there was a ‘growing awareness’ of
climate change amongst ASEAN member states.[5]
9.9
References to climate change and environmental issues are made in the following
declarations:
n ASEAN Vision 2020
(1997);[6]
n ASEAN Agreement on Transboundary
Haze Pollution in 2002;[7]
n ASEAN Concord II
(2003);[8]
n ASEAN Socio-Cultural
Community Plan of Action (2003);[9]
n Cebu Declaration on
East Asian Energy Security (2007); [10]
n ASEAN Declaration on
Environmental Sustainability (2007);
n Singapore Declaration
on Climate Change, Energy and the Environment (2007); and
n The ASEAN Charter
(2008).[11]
9.10
The ASEAN Declaration on Environmental Sustainability, released at the 3rd
East Asia Summit in November 2007, included ASEAN’s response to climate change
which was:
(14) To work closely with the international community
to better understand and adapt to the adverse impacts of climate change,
including, in particular, the related issues of greenhouse gas emissions and
carbon sinks;
(15) To agree that the pursuit of climate change and
energy security policies should avoid introducing barriers to trade and
investment;
(16) To intensify cooperation on the joint research,
development and deployment of low emission technologies for the cleaner use of
fossil fuels, recognising that fossil fuels will continue to play a major role
in our energy mix;
(17) To take concrete measures to promote the use of
renewable and alternative energy sources such as solar, hydro, wind, tide,
biomass, biofuels and geothermal energy, as well as, for interested parties,
civilian nuclear power, while ensuring safety and safeguards that are of
current international standards, and environmental sustainability throughout
the full life cycle of production and use;
(18) To improve energy efficiency in key sectors of
energy use through capacity building and information sharing of best practices
in managing energy use and the adoption of appropriate technologies and
practices;
(19) To undertake effective measures towards open and
competitive regional and international markets geared towards providing
affordable energy at all economic levels to facilitate the adoption of
energy-efficient and low-emission technologies.[12]
9.11
The Singapore Declaration on Climate Change, Energy and the Environment,
released on the following day, committed countries of the East Asia Summit ‘to
the common goal of stabilising atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations in the
long run, at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference
with the climate system’ and to ‘work to achieve a common understanding on a
long-term aspirational global emissions reduction goal to pave the way for a
more effective post-2012 international arrangement’.
9.12
Further, the Singapore Declaration committed to ongoing cooperation to
improve energy efficiency and the use of cleaner energy including ‘cooperating
for the development and use of civilian nuclear power, in a manner ensuring
nuclear safety, security and non-proliferation’ consistent with the IAEA
framework. It also committed to:
… cooperation on afforestation and
reforestation, and to reduce deforestation, forest degradation and forest
fires, including by promoting sustainable forest management, combating illegal
logging, protecting biodiversity, and addressing the underlying economic and
social drivers …[13]
9.13
Most recently, climate change was a topic discussed in the Track II 7th
Shangri-La Dialogue[14] in May 2008. The report
of the ‘Breakout Group 1’ which discussed climate change and
Asia-Pacific security included the following:
According to one military delegate,
time had run out for discussion: as the effects of climate change for the next
30 years were already fixed, policy action and coordination were essential.
Delegates believed global warming would exacerbate development problems and
cause tensions over, for example, water supplies and migration. There was also
a strong feeling that governments needed to channel more resources into related
science and technologies.
However, the debate revealed that the
issue took on many forms depending on the perspective of the viewer, with some
delegates choosing to focus more on issues of food and energy security. There
were also differing views on how to tackle climate change, with some delegates
suggesting that the present international emphasis on emissions cuts was too great
and that, for example, renewable and nuclear energy should receive more
attention. [15]
Australian government involvement
9.14
DFAT advised the Committee that Australia was involved in many of the
discussions and agreements on climate change involving ASEAN member countries
such as those leading to the Singapore Declaration on Climate Change, Energy
and the Environment (see above).[16]
9.15
Further, Australia was a member of the Asia-Pacific Network on Climate
Change, to which all ASEAN member states belonged except Burma and Brunei. The group, DFAT advised, provided ‘a platform for policy dialogue and
consultation through annual seminars and provision of information’.[17]
9.16
Other multilateral agreements, such as the Joint Declaration on
ASEAN-Australia Comprehensive Partnership, and its associated Plan of Action,
commit Australia to processes toward further agreements on climate change and
other environmental concerns.[18]
9.17
DFAT’s submission provided information on Australian’s $200 million International
Forest Carbon Initiative (IFCI) which supported deforestation reduction efforts
initiated through the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.
The aim was to ‘demonstrate that reducing emissions from deforestation and
forest degradation can be part of an equitable and effective international
agreement on climate change’. The focus was on developing practical
demonstration activities, particularly in Indonesia and Papua New Guinea.[19]
9.18
IFCI initiatives with Indonesia are coordinated through the
Indonesia-Australia Forest Carbon Partnership. Major activities were:
n $30 million for the Kalimantan Forests and Climate Partnership which trials ‘an innovative, market-oriented
approach to financing and implementing measures to reduce emissions from
deforestation and forest degradation in Central Kalimantan’—a design process
commenced in 2008; and
n $10 million for the
development of a Forest Resource Information System and a National Carbon
Accounting System—the aim being to develop national policy, regulatory frameworks,
and strategies to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation,
including the prevention and suppression of peat land fires.[20]
9.19
DFAT advised that other IFCI assistance included:
n acquisition of
historical satellite data on forest cover changes in South-East Asia and the
Pacific, and provision of this data to countries in the region; and
n the Asia-Pacific
Forestry Skills and Capacity Building Program, which will assist countries in
the region to develop their forest management expertise, combat illegal logging
and improve the carbon sequestration performance of their forests (with initial
projects including Indonesia, Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos).[21]
9.20
In addition, Australia had provided funds to the Mekong River Commission[22]
to ‘examine the impact of climate change on the water resources of the Mekong
Basin, particularly in relation to food production and fish resources’, and,
through AusAID, to other projects in Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam which focused on renewable energy and power distribution.[23]
9.21
Beyond its links with ASEAN, but relevant to the region, Australia also belongs
to the Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate, a ‘public-private
sector effort’ in which Australia, Canada, China, India, Japan, Korea, and the
United States cooperate ‘in an effort to address increased energy needs and the
associated issues of air pollution, energy security, and climate change’. The
countries involved collectively ‘account for more than half of the world’s
economy, population, and energy use’. Progress, therefore, would have wider
results, including for ASEAN countries.[24]
Opportunities for Australia
9.22
The AAS told the Committee that climate change presented opportunities
for Australia. Many of the challenges faced by the world were global in nature
and required a collaborative multinational response:
By strengthening its science and technology links with ASEAN
countries, Australia can contribute to the development of solutions to global
challenges such as climate change, sustainability and the security of food and
energy resources.[25]
9.23
The AAS submission added:
Australia, as a key developed economy in the southern
hemisphere, is conveniently located to observe the Southern Ocean, and can be a
provider of climate knowledge and climate-change solutions to all nations in
our hemisphere. This area of science ranks as a major emerging one, and will
become increasingly more a important to the nation’s economy.[26]
9.24
The ACTU, while registering concern over the parameters of employment as
ASEAN member states responded to climate change, anticipated benefits from the
increase in the number of ‘green jobs’ in environmental services that were
expected to emerge.[27] The ASU, CPSU and CEPU
agreed, envisaging a key role for Australia in providing technical support, and
exporting technical services, relevant to climate change, to ASEAN member
states.[28]
9.25
CSIRO noted that science and technology could make an appreciable
difference to the complex challenges of climate change in the ASEAN region,
where countries face rapid rate of change:
… as a complex mix of drivers such as rapid urbanisation,
climate change, energy affordability and food security combine with political
factors and population growth … Given that many natural resources such as
water, soil, forests and fish are already declining, more needs to be done to
understand how to respond to the increasing level of consumption.[29]
9.26
The Committee received specific evidence in the areas of:
n climate change
modelling and prediction;
n primary production
sustainability;
n energy efficiency and carbon emissions trading.
Climate change modelling and prediction
9.27
The AAS advised that Australia’s involvement in international bodies provided
opportunities for Australian scientists to engage with ASEAN on climate change.
Examples of these international bodies were:
n the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change;
n the Intergovernmental
Ocean Commission;
n the World Climate
Research Programme; and
n the International
Geosphere-Biosphere Programme.[30]
9.28
CSIRO told the Committee that it was assisting Indonesia to develop its
climate modelling capability and meteorological capacity:
… we are assisting them with the
IPCC climate projections. They are on a very coarse scale and do not provide
the necessary precision for making projections that can be used to make
decisions for the country, so we have been working with the bureau of
meteorology to take six of the global climate change models and bring them down
to a 60-kilometre resolution.[31]
9.29
The aim, CSIRO added, was to enable the Indonesians to use the climate
models, increase their coverage of Indonesia, and predict the impacts of
extreme climate events.[32]
Primary production sustainability
9.30
CSIRO told the Committee that meeting the challenges posed by rapid
change in a sustainable manner had become the aim of its recent work with ASEAN
countries, which focused on ‘sustainable agriculture, including animal diseases
and natural resource management issues’.[33] CSIRO provided several
examples:
n an assessment of the
impact by 2030 of climate change on the water resources and productivity of the
Mekong basin;
n collaboration on foot
and mouth disease, and white spot disease in prawns—this incidentally would
provide improved diagnostic and emergency response capabilities in Australia;
n research partnerships
with the Centre for International Forestry Research in Indonesia and the
International Rice Research Institute in the Philippines aimed at enhancing
regional sustainability and economic productivity; [34]
and
n collaboration with
the state department in Sarawak to characterise timber properties and assist in
planting acacias and eucalypts.[35]
9.31
A further example provided by the AAS was the Coral Triangle Initiative,
which was proposed by Indonesia’s President Yudhoyono in 2007.[36]
The project spanned a number of countries in the region, the largest of which
were Indonesia, the Philippines, Malaysia.[37] Australian universities
were involved in a ‘multilateral partnership on coral reefs, fisheries and food
security’, the aim being to respond to the two main threats to coral reefs: resource
exploitation and climate change.[38]
9.32
The AAS cautioned, however, that many research activities would ‘take
many years to show really powerful concrete results’ and, while providing an
opportunity for Australia, would require a long-term commitment.[39]
Energy efficiency and carbon emissions trading
9.33
Engineers Australia’s submission drew the Committee’s attention to the
Draft Garnaut Report which noted that in 2005, ASEAN countries collectively emitted
4.8 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions compared to 1.5 per cent by
Australia. The submission added:
… Australia has a vital interest in convincing ASEAN
countries that greenhouse gas reduction is essential to their futures in that
active ASEAN participation in securing an international agreement on climate
change mitigation is essential.[40]
9.34
Engineers Australia also advised the Committee that Australia could help
to improve energy efficiency by supplying technical support:
… energy efficiency measures and technologies offer
particular potential for international collaboration. Low energy efficiency is
widely recognised as a major contributor to excess energy use and to energy
related emissions in developed countries. Assisting ASEAN countries in becoming
more energy efficient will enable them to by-pass the mistakes made in other
countries while assisting them to meet development aspirations.[41]
9.35
Engineers Australia also noted that Australia was involved in a number
of ‘small cooperative activities’ in carbon emissions reduction, including the
International Forest Carbon Initiative; the Methane to Market Partnership; the
Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Partnership; and the Carbon
Sequestration Leadership Forum. There was, however:
… considerable scope for Australia to expand these activities
both in scale and in the coverage of countries. Rapid accumulation of knowledge
relating to carbon accounting, how it is applied to different countries carbon
challenges and how it relates to active participation in a comprehensive
international emissions reduction agreement are vital to Australia’s interests.[42]
9.36
Telstra considered there was the potential to alleviate carbon emissions
through the greater use of communications technology, including ‘demand-side
energy management’; video conferencing in lieu of air travel; real-time freight
management; better management of idle devices; and telecommuting.[43]
9.37
Telstra provided two examples where it had saved greenhouse gas
emissions through the use of new technology:
n in 2007, the use of
the video conferencing for some 20 000 hours of meetings had ‘saved around
4200 tonnes CO2 equivalent from avoided travel’; and
n installing GPS
devices in technicians’ vehicles, combined with improved routing scheduling and
better sequencing of work had led to an ‘estimated 19 per cent reduction in
greenhouse gas emissions per install/repair task.’[44]
9.38
Concerns were expressed to the Committee about the adoption of an emissions
trading scheme, especially if such a scheme was not adopted by Australia’s ASEAN
trading partners.
9.39
Australian Pork Ltd represented the impact of on primary producers:
The expected increase of production costs for Australian pork
producers due to the [Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme] would also further
reduce the industry’s competitiveness against comparatively lower cost of pig
production countries throughout the ASEAN region. There are currently no
emission targets for developing countries, especially some members in the
ASEAN. Most developing nations in the ASEAN have not complied with their
obligations under the Kyoto protocol and most understandably would not have the
resources to achieve this. Meat producers in the ASEAN would become more cost
competitive if they would not have to comply with greenhouse gas emission
mitigation from pig production activities.[45]
9.40
Australian Pork added, however, that the introduction of the scheme
should be seen ‘as an opportunity to engage other ASEAN members into greenhouse
gas emissions reduction and carbon trading.’[46]
9.41
The FCAI was more supportive of a trading scheme, but acknowledged it
would be a challenge to balance competing factors:
I think, to be clear, of all the
options that Australia has to contribute to efforts to address climate change,
a broadly based emissions trading system has to be at the front of the queue.
But clearly that has competing impacts. We need to ensure that … we design it
in such a way that it takes into account those competitive impacts and we do
not simply end up driving investment offshore into other markets where they do
not have the same effective policies in place.[47]
Committee comment
9.42
The Committee considers that ASEAN will respond to climate change in the
‘ASEAN Way’ (see Chapter 2) through dialogue, consensus, and incremental
progress.
9.43
The Committee believes there are significant opportunities for Australia
to offer leadership and technical assistance to ASEAN member countries as they
face the challenge wrought by climate change.
9.44
In the Committee’s view, Australia’s present climate change engagements
in the region, both government and non-government, are a good basis for meeting
these challenges. They contribute to positive relationships in the region and,
by enhancing capacity within ASEAN member states, build a foundation upon which
future collaborations can occur.
9.45
Regarding the introduction by Australia of an emissions trading scheme,
the Committee acknowledges concerns about compromising Australia’s
competitiveness in relation to its trading partners.
9.46
The Committee believes that one response to these concerns is for Australia to negotiate with ASEAN member states, and ASEAN as a single entity, with the object
of instituting, in time, an emissions trading scheme which is internationally
consistent and covers all countries in the region.
9.47
Arising from its review of human rights issues in Chapter 8 and
environment issues in this chapter, the Committee considers that human rights
including core labour standards and the environment should be pursued in future
FTAs. Australia should also take the opportunity to introduce such issues (if
they are not already included) when current FTAs are reviewed. Further, the Committee
believes that Parliament be advised of progress when DFAT reports to Parliament
under Recommendation 2.
9.48
The Committee notes that the major FTA Australia has entered into with
the US contains chapters on labour and the environment. The chapter on labour
includes a shared commitment to ensure that internationally recognised labour
principals are recognised and protected by law.[48]
Recommendation 8 |
|
9.49
|
The Committee recommends that human rights, core labour
standards, and the environment be pursued in future free trade agreements
and, when existing free trade agreements which do not contain such issues are
reviewed, these issues should be pursued.
|
Recommendation 9 |
|
9.50
|
The Committee recommends that when the Department of Foreign
Affairs and Trade reports annually to the Parliament under Recommendation 2,
progress with regard to human rights, core labour standards, and the environment
be included.
|
Senator
Michael Forshaw
Chair
June 2009