MCA4Climate - Guidance for scientifically sound climate change planning
(Redirected from UNEP-Multi-Criteria Analysis for Climate Change (MCA4Climate))
MCA4climate is designed to assist governments in preparing climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies by identifying policies that are low in cost, environmentally effective, and consistent with national development goals. The model provides a structured approach for evaluating economic, social, and environmental outcomes of policies. The use of multi-criteria analysis (MCA) enables the integration of cost-benefit analyses with other kinds of analyses, which increases the transparency of the decision-making process.
When to Use This Tool
This tool is most useful for development impacts assessments focused on:
Learn more about the topics for assessing the impacts of low-emission development strategies (LEDS).
Economic, social, and environmental outcomes of climate policies. Policy options are categorized into 12 areas, four covering mitigation and eight covering adaptation.
How to Use This Tool
Level of Expertise
The model can incorporate both quantitative and qualitative data into the MCA framework.
Examples of how Multicriteria Analysis for Climate (MCA4climate) has helped people assessing the impacts of low-emission development strategies in countries and regions:
Three case-studies available at http://www.mca4climate.info/report-and-guidance/decision-support-tool/
The importance of scientifically sound, long-term national climate change plans and strategies has become recognised in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change: while there is no legal requirement for parties to develop such plans, these look to play an increasingly central role, particularly in the context of the various financing mechanisms being discussed by the parties to the Convention. MCA4Climate anticipates these developments by offering an analytical framework that governments can use to develop their climate change policy plans and strategies.
We have divided ‘climate change planning’ in three different areas: economy-wide planning, sector-specific planning and project-level planning. The tools we provide for each of these three areas are listed below.
Economy-wide planning - guidance on issues related to macro-economic modelling, such as discount rates and co-benefits - guidance on linkages between fiscal policy and climate policy, such as subsidies and budget policy - guidance on issues related to uncertainty, such as extreme events and risk management - guidance on available ‘off-the-shelf’ macro-economic models that a country could use
Sector-specific planning - guidance for developing baselines - guidance for developing sensitivity analyses of baselines and scenarios - guidance on available ‘off-the-shelf’ micro-economic models that a country could use
Project-level planning - guidance on monitoring, reporting and verification procedures - guidance on available ‘off-the-shelf’ financial models that a country could use
Most important of all, we are finalising a decision support tool that can be applied at all three levels above – economy-wide planning, sector-specific planning and project-level planning. In essence, the tool can be used to determine the most beneficial policy outcome when several different and even conflicting priorities have to be considered. It relies on multi-criteria analysis, thus allowing users to consider factors that are not easy to monetise. It is structured around twelve themes, four under mitigation and eight under adaptation, to make the approach more specific to the type of problem that may be of interest to the user.
The decision support tool can be used at the level of economy-wide planning to draw up broad policy strategies, at the level of sector-specific planning to prepare low emission development strategies, and also for project-level planning to prepare NAMAs (and NAPAs). For example, in the case of a government interested in using the tool to prepare a set of NAMAs, the tool allows the user to consider not only cost-effectiveness considerations (as they may come out of a cost-curve) for a given NAMA, but also issues related to legal and administrative barriers, implementation barriers and social barriers such as public opposition to that particular NAMA.