Page - 8 - in options, Volume summer 2019

IIASA research looked into the pitfalls and provided guidance for climate and energy policies aiming to reach multiple objectives. Many governments use well-founded science to drive effective policies in an effort to meet climate change, energy, and development objectives. These multi- target policies are often linked to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). In a study of seventeen climate and energy policies — many of them national flagship programs — IIASA researchers and colleagues offer policy guidance and explain why many policies fail to achieve all their objectives. Why well-intended policies sometimes miss the mark In the cases studied, policies were driven by both climate and development concerns. “Such policies are less easy to design, implement, and monitor because they often require coordination across implementing agencies,” explains IIASA researcher Shonali Pachauri. Poor policy design can mean that a single dominant objective works to the disadvantage of others. Often that dominant objective is linked to the agency tasked with its execution. An energy ministry lacking expertise in climate or development might for example fail to adequately meet additional goals. The researchers found that adhering to three specific design principles can lead to more effective multi- objective policies. Complementarity: Balancing multiple objectives Researchers identified a prevailing misconception that a single instrument can achieve multiple policy objectives. In South Korea for instance, a renewable energy policy also aimed to develop renewable technologies into viable industries. The policy however lacked industrial elements and so failed to achieve significant impact. “Multiple objectives are often implicit in policies, but they are rarely made explicit,” says Pachauri. Policy portfolios and dedicated design features are recommended for balancing multiple objectives. Adaptability: Policy reacting to change Policies can be seen as a sequence of measures with contingency plans ready for deployment as objectives change. They must be durable but adaptable. Germany’s Energiewende program is cited as a successful example. First designed to promote renewables as an alternative to nuclear power, the focus is now shifting to climate mitigation – originally a secondary objective. “When original objectives prove to be unachievable, reform and policy re-design is crucial to align it with the changed objectives,” says coauthor Michael Pahle from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK). Transparency: Track impacts across all objectives If synergies and trade-offs change over time, transparency is essential to ensure the right policy reform, which means comprehensive monitoring of all relevant factors. Policies must have suitable indicators and assessment systems. As an example, Brazil’s biodiesel policy included a social inclusion target designed to benefit smallholder farmers. However, independent evaluations concluded the government used unreliable data and that the policy failed to achieve the social inclusion goals. “Institutionalized and inclusive evaluation will facilitate policy success,” concludes coauthor Roberto Schaeffer of the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro. Further info: Pahle M, Schaeffer R, Pachauri S, Jiyong E, et al. (2019). Report on case studies assessing the effectiveness of existing policies. CD-LINKS Deliverable 1.1. (forthcoming) www.iiasa.ac.at/policybrief/22 Shonali Pachauri: pachauri@iiasa.ac.at Science into policy Written by: Kerry Skyring Designing effective multi-objective policies www.iiasa.ac.at8 Options Summer 2019