II Bridging the Gap Between Modeling and Real Policy Development

Designing a National Policy Framework for NAMAs

Lessons Learnt from Thailand

Bundit Limmeechokchai

Abstract This section presents lessons learnt from Thailand in climate policy design. Thailand has filled the gap between modelling analyses and climate policy development in its Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Action (NAMA). Thailand's mitigation pledge under NAMA framework was successfully designed and communicated to UNFCCC in COP20. The integrated assessment modelling analysis plays an important role in the development of Thailand NAMA. Consensus building was derived from several discussions among stakeholders of NAMA implementation. Criteria for selection of greenhouse gas countermeasures were based on cost optimization by using a module of the Asia-Pacific Integrated Model called 'AIM/Enduse', abatement costs, co-benefits and feasibility of implementation. In addition, economic feasibility of countermeasures in NAMA actions was also assessed. Then, NAMA implementation has been prepared based on assumptions concerning limitations of resources, capital requirement, timing and appropriateness for Thailand.

Since 2012 Thailand's mitigation pledge to UNFCCC has been prepared on the basis of domestic appropriate measures. Co-benefits of NAMAs are also assessed, and they reveal positive aspects of GHG mitigation under NAMA framework. Results found that Thailand has high potential of GHG emission reduction by both domestically supported NAMAs and internationally supported NAMAs about 23–73 million tonnes CO2 per year in 2020 or approximately accounted for 7–20 % in 2020 of the total GHG emissions. The NAMA actions include measures in (1) renewable electricity, (2) energy efficiency, (3) biofuels in transportation and (4) environmental sustainable transport system. These GHG countermeasures are in line with the national policy and plans of ministries of energy and transport in order to avoid the conflict between climate policy and policies of the related ministries. Results of cost optimization, co-benefits, economics and appropriateness are also necessary for communication among policymakers, administrators, academic researchers and the public on consensus building.

Finally, to ensure the quantified GHG reduction in 2020 and the transparency of Thailand's NAMA implementation, the measurement reporting and verification (MRV) process is required. The MRV process of these NAMAs needs cooperation among related ministries. These lessons learnt from Thailand, when modified as needed, can be a 'good practice' of climate policy design.

Keywords Thailand NAMA • Integrated assessment modelling • Renewable energy • Energy efficiency • Co-benefits of GHG Mitigation • AIM/Enduse

< Prev   CONTENTS   Next >