1. FINANCE CLINIC: The Investment & Financial Flows Assessment and its application for LEDS & NAMAs

2. Presentation overview Introduction (25 mins) Context I&FF methodology overview Key results Clarifications I&FF Methodology: in depth (25 mins) Key definitions Approach Example: Namibia electricity generation Discussion (40 mins)

3. $6M global project funded by Norway, Switzerland, Finland, UNDP, UNF Implemented against backdrop of Bali Road Map (2008-12) Objectives Increased national capacity to co-ordinate inter-ministerial views & enhance participation in UNFCCC process Support for long-term climate change planning and priority setting, in order to provide a better understanding of the magnitude and intensity of national efforts required to tackle climate change UNDP project: Capacity Development for Policy Makers to Address Climate Change

4. What does the I&FF assessment seek to answer? From a development perspective, what does my country need to do to address climate change in selected key sectors, and what financial landscape will be required to achieve those needs?

5. Components of UNDP’s climate finance readiness framework I&FF can support

6. I&FF applicability to LEDS & NAMA development Methodological approach is scalable: Can be used to cost out a sectoral LEDS or a single NAMA Provides sense of who are the core investors & what types of policy changes might be required to attract investment Chile and Costa Rica: I&FF results for transport sector provided inputs to underlying analysis for transport NAMAs Colombia: I&FF study on panela being scaled up to NAMA Bangladesh: I&FF provided baseline information for climate public expenditure & investment review Niger: I&FF results incorporated into National Action Plan for Climate Change and National Development Plan Paraguay: I&FF results fed into national CC policy and national mitigation plan

7. Presentation overview Introduction (25 mins) Context I&FF methodology overview Key results Clarifications I&FF Methodology: in depth (25 mins) Key definitions Approach Example: Namibia electricity generation Discussion (40 mins)

8. Methodology development: Investment & Financial Flows Assessment Approach: I&FF approach adapted from UNFCCC methodology used for estimating global flows  bottom-up approach for national estimates Sectoral guidance chapters elaborated by five regional centres Extensive peer review process Applied in: Bangladesh, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Gambia, Honduras, Liberia, Namibia, Niger, Paraguay, Peru, Togo, Turkmenistan, Uruguay

9. WHAT ? What does national I&FF assessment seek to answer? The I&FF assessment considers: What are the adaptation/ mitigation options for key sectors in the next 25 years? Who is currently investing in the sector? Who are the major players & funding sources within government, private sector & households? What shifts/increases in I&FF will be needed in the sector? What will be the overall needs for additional I&FF to address climate change? What policies & incentives are suitable to induce the necessary shifts & changes?

10. For each sector, evaluate investments & financial flows for two policy scenarios: – Reference scenario – Adaptation or mitigation scenario Cost the additional flows needed to implement new adaptation or mitigation measures: that is, subtract the difference between the two scenarios Disaggregate by: years type of measures, investment entities (government, private sector, households), funding sources (domestic, ODA, …) I&FF methodology HOW ?

11. WHO ? I&FF assessment requires multi- disciplinary team For each sector: Environmental/climate specialists to build scenarios Planning experts to: Assess implications of the scenarios on existing development plans in chosen sectors & consider how mitigation or adaptation measures would be implemented Finance/economics experts to cost the measures Representatives from all relevant ministries Academic, NGO, & private sector inputs also useful

13. Example: Costa Rica (biodiversity – adaptation)

14. Presentation overview Introduction (25 mins) Context I&FF methodology overview Key results Clarifications I&FF Methodology: in depth (25 mins) Key definitions Approach Example: Namibia electricity generation Discussion (40 mins)

15. Key sectors identified for I&FF assessments under UNDP project

16. Overview: Results by sector SECTOR*COUNTRYMEASURES ANNUAL INCREMENTAL COST (MILLION US$) Energy (M) Bangladesh, Dominican Rep. Gambia, Liberia, Namibia, Togo, Turkmenistan, Uruguay Renewable energy, energy efficiency, transmission & distribution, modernizing power plants… 20 (Gambia) – 950 (Bangladesh) Transport (M) Ecuador, Honduras Transportation plan, filters in engines, emission control centres… 60 (Honduras) – 120 (Ecuador) Forestry (M) Ecuador, Gambia, Honduras, Liberia, Niger, Paraguay CO2 capture through afforestation & reforestation, institutional strengthening… 5 (Paraguay) – 150 (Honduras) Agriculture (A/M) Bangladesh, Colombia, Ecuador, Gambia, Liberia, Namibia, Niger, Paraguay, Peru, Togo, Uruguay Resistant livestock species & crops, early warning systems, restoration of soil quality, capacity building… 0.6 (Gambia) – 1890 (Bangladesh) * M = mitigation; A = adaptation

17. SECTOR*COUNTRYMEASURES ANNUAL INCREMENTAL COST (MILLION US$) Water (A) Bangladesh, Costa Rica, Dominican Rep. Gambia, Honduras, Peru, Turkmenistan Water supply & sanitation, efficient irrigation, erosion & flood control, implementing water law, rainwater harvesting… -0.1 (a net saving!) (Gambia) – 230 (Bangladesh) Health (A)Paraguay Fighting dengue, malaria, respiratory & diarrheal diseases 7 (Paraguay) Tourism (A) Dominican Republic Beach management, hurricane management by insurance 40 (Dominican Republic) Biodiversit y (A) Costa RicaConservation of ecosystems60 (Costa Rica) Fisheries (A) PeruAwareness raising, infrastructure for fish production 13 (Peru) * A = adaptation Overview: Results by sector (2)

18. Key takeaways: view I&FF results in context The I&FF assessments are not a mere costing exercise, but an analysis of the whole financial landscape of a sector All countries used same I&FF methodology, but decided individually what sectors to select & what measures to analyze within each sector  scope (& discount rate) has impact on the results Results comparable with those of World Bank (Economics of Adaptation to Climate Change) & UNFCCC (National Economic, Environment & Development Study (NEEDS))

19. Takeaways: Sectoral considerations Additional costs may seem large, but must be considered within context of planned baseline expenditures, e.g. in Peru, baseline for agriculture was US$5,435 M, while adaptation scenario was US$ 5,759 M  additional cost US$324 M (↑ 6%) In many cases, the assessments show shifts in investments are necessary, e.g. from one technology to another, or one subsector to another  policies are key Savings from implementing measures possible: esp. in energy mitigation due to increased energy efficiency, however those savings cannot always be shifted on to other measures in the scenarios because of the “owner” of the savings may differ

20. Examples Some measures result in net savings, e.g. in Namibia, replacing diesel generators with solar power in off-grid communities would generate $US 1,124 M in savings (due to low O&M), but solar has higher upfront cost In Dominican Republic, selected mitigation measures in electricity subsector require $5.82 billion of investments, but generate $16.12 billion in savings (from O&M)  what policy/ incentive mix would encourage uptake of these mitigation measures?

21. Lessons learned Creating BAU and climate change scenarios involves complex set of decisions and remains a challenge for many countries – additionally, policy makers may not always agree with proposed measures in the scenarios It is necessary to define very concrete measures for the scenarios so that they can be adequately costed and prioritized The separation of Operation & Maintenance costs from other investment costs (flows) was found to be very useful

22. All I&FF results online More information on the I&FF methodology, country results, & an extensive database: www.undpcc.org  Methodology in 4 languages: English, French, Spanish, Russian

23. Q&A CLARIFICATIO NS ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?

24. Presentation overview Introduction (25 mins) Context I&FF methodology overview Key results Clarifications I&FF Methodology: in depth (25 mins) Key definitions Approach Example: Namibia electricity generation Discussion (40 mins)

25. An investment flow (IF) is the capital cost of a new physical asset with a lifetime of more than 1 year, e.g. capital cost of a new power plant, a new automobile, a new household appliance, or a new agricultural irrigation system. Investment flows are limited to new physical assets because we are considering the climate change implications for the duration of the operating lives of the facilities and equipment purchased. Key definitions: Investment Flow

26. A financial flow (FF) is an ongoing expenditure on programmatic measures. Financial flows encompass expenditures other than those for expansion or installation of physical assets, e.g., agricultural extension program for farmers, a malaria prevention program to distribute mosquito nets. Key definitions: Financial Flow

27. Physical assets purchased with investment flows will have operation & maintenance (O&M) costs associated with them, i.e., ongoing fixed and variable costs such as salaries and raw materials O&M costs need to be included because they can vary considerably among investment flow types & have a significant effect on the total cost of an investment Key definitions: operation & maintenance (O&M)

28. Example: mitigation measures SectorInvestment TypeInvestment FlowsFinancial Flows Energy Construction of new high efficiency, fossil- fuel fired, power plant Capital costs of construction Equipment retrofit and education program for the commercial sector on energy end-use efficiency improvements Capital costs of equipment retrofits or replacements in commercial sector (e.g., retrofit of HVAC systems) Program implementation costs for government and commercial sector (e.g., audit of HVAC systems to determine leaks) Forestry Implementation of reduced impact logging operations Capital costs of new equipment to implement reduced impact logging techniques Agriculture Implementation of improved livestock feeding program Implementation costs, including raw materials and training

29. Key definitions: investment entities & financial sources Investment Entity Source of I&FF Funds HouseholdsDomesticEquity and debt Corporations Domestic Domestic equity (including internal cash flow) Domestic borrowing (bonds and loans) Foreign Foreign direct investment (FDI) Foreign borrowing (loans) Foreign aid (ODA) B Government DomesticDomestic funds (budgetary) Foreign Foreign borrowing (bonds and loans) Bilateral foreign aid (bilateral ODA) Multilateral foreign aid (multilateral ODA) B ODA (official development assistance) provided to private corporations is primarily foreign aid that is given to non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Identification of the entities responsible for the investment decisions, and the sources of the funds that are invested, is an important component of an I&FF assessment because this information is the starting point for the evaluation of policies to change those decisions.

30. Presentation overview Introduction (25 mins) Context I&FF methodology overview Key results Clarifications I&FF Methodology: in depth (25 mins) Key definitions Approach Example: Namibia electricity generation Discussion (40 mins)

31. Steps in the Sectoral Assessments of I&FF to Address Climate Change

32. Define detailed scope of the sector Identify preliminary mitigation (or adaptation) measures I&FF does not quantify co-benefits, however qualitative assessment is recommended Specify assessment period & base year Base year 2005 recommended (or latest available) Assessment period of 2005-2030 recommended Select analytical approach 1. Establish key parameters of assessment

33. Compile annual I&FF data, disaggregated by investment entity, source, & investment flow versus financial flow Compile annual historical O&M data, disaggregated by investment entity & source Compile other input data for scenarios 2. Compile historical I&FF data and other input data for scenarios

34. Compile historical annual data on investments, financial flows, and operation & maintenance costs At least 3 to 10 years of historical data should be collected I&FF data should be – Compiled for each investment type – Annual – Disaggregated by investment entity & source – Divided into investment & financial flows Compile information about the expected lifetimes of the assets in operation during the historical period 2. Compile historical I&FF data and other input data for scenarios

35. Cost accounting issues Constant 2005 US$ are recommended Costs for assets should be reported in the year in which they are expected to be incurred Discounting of costs should be done – it is recommended to apply one public discount rate and one private discount rate 2. Compile historical I&FF data and other input data for scenarios

36. 3. Define reference/baseline scenario Describe:  Socioeconomic trends  Technological change/advances  Business-as-usual investments  Define model/approach to be used for the assessment

37. 4. Derive I&FF for baseline scenario  Derive annual IF & FF estimates, disaggregated by investment entity (households, corporations, government) and source (domestic or external)  Derive annual O&M estimates, disaggregated by investment entity & source

38. Sector is selected for Adaptation  A baseline scenario & an adaptation scenario will be developed for that sector Sector is selected for Mitigation  A baseline scenario & a mitigation scenario will be developed for that sector

39.  Derive annual IF & FF estimates, disaggregated by investment entity (households, corporations, government) and source (domestic or external)  Derive annual O&M estimates, disaggregated by investment entity & source

40.  Estimate the changes in I&FF needed to implement the mitigation (or adaptation) measures in the sector in order to determine:  How cumulative incremental I&FF will change  How annual investments will change

41. Calculating how the cumulative changes in IF & FF between the baseline scenario & the climate change scenario will change: 1.First, estimate the total IF & FF needed to implement each investment type in the sector 2.Second, sum all the values from the first calculation to estimate the total IF & FF needed to implement all the investment types in the sector

42. Examples from Costa Rica Total cumulative sum of investments (2010-2030) in biodiversity sector, by investment type Baseline Adaptation scenario Difference Total cumulative sum of investments (2010-2030) in each sector, by funding source

43. Calculating how annual investments between the baseline scenario & the climate change scenario will change  First, estimate the IF & FF needed to implement each investment type in the sector -- shows how investments in individual investment types would change over time  Second, estimate the IF & FF needed to implement all investment types in the sector, for each source/ investment entity -- shows how investments by each source/investment entity change over time  Third, estimate IF & FF for all investment types in the sector, & for all sources -- shows how total investments in the sector change over time

44. Biodiversity Water Costa Rica: Annual additional cost of investments (2010-2030) for biodiversity & water sectors

45. 8. Evaluate policy implications  Determine policy instruments & measures to encourage changes in I&FF  Identify the entities that are responsible for the significant incremental changes in I&FF  Determine the predominant sources of their funds, important to distinguish between public & private sources of finance

46.  Integrate I&FF results, & evaluation of policy instruments & measures, across sectors, & across mitigation & adaptation  Summarize objectives of study, methodology, inputs, & results in report  Complete reporting templates 9. Synthesize results and complete report

47. Investment & financial flows example: Namibia (2011) Sub-sector: electricity generation Scope: national

48. Total electricity demand far exceeds local electricity supplies -- total installed electricity generation capacity in mid-2008 was 387 MW, while the peak demand exceeds 500 MW In 2005, some 50% imported from neighbouring countries such as South Africa and Zimbabwe Electricity demand expected to triple to about 10 TWh by 2030 Small population (2 million) over large land area (800,000 km²) High total annual per capita energy consumption due to: Energy-dependent sectors of mining and agriculture Long transport routes high reliance on imports of fuels, consumer goods and manufactured products Namibia context

49. Electricity Base Year IF & FF Data, By Investment Type, Investment Entity, and Funding Source (million 2005 US$) Electricity generation – historical IF, FF and O&M (base year 2005) HydroDieselCoal Investment Entity Category/Source of Funds IFFF O&M Costs IFFF O&M Costs IFFF O&M Costs Households Domestic Equity & debt Total Household Funds0,00 Corporations Domestic Domestic equity Domestic borrowing Total Domestic Sources0,00 Foreign FDI Foreign borrowing ODA Total Foreign Sources0,00 Total Corporation Funds0,00 Government Domestic Domestic funds0,00 11,520,00 0,110,00 0,25 Foreign Foreign borrowing0,00 Bilateral ODA0,00 Multilateral ODA0,00 Total Foreign Sources0,00 Total Government Funds0,00 11,520,00 0,110,00 0,25 Total Funds0,00 11,520,00 0,110,00 0,25 Data Sources: Based on model calculations using data from various sources

50. According to 2005 Rural Electrification Master Plan, only 1/3 of Namibia’s population had access to electricity (67% of urban areas and 10% of rural areas) Under the baseline scenario, assumed provision of power to supply electricity to all households is through off-grid diesel generation Total cost of investments estimated at US$1,147 million between 2005 to 2030 (NPV $US 2005) BAU based on new hydropower, coal and diesel investments Hydropower plants in 2012, 2013, 2017 and 2019 Coal plant in 2015 Diesel – rural electrification Namibia baseline scenario: electricity generation

51. Baseline Scenario: IF, FF, O&M Costs Cumulative Discounted IF, FF and O&M Estimates by Investment Type, Investment Entity and Funding Source (million 2005 US$) HydroDieselCoal Investment Entity Category/Source of Funds IFFF O&M Costs IFFF O&M Costs IFFF O&M Costs Households Domestic Equity & debt 97.690.001,024.82 Total Household Funds0.00 97.690.001,024.820.00 Corporations Domestic Domestic equity Domestic borrowing Total Domestic Sources0.00 Foreign FDI Foreign borrowing ODA Total Foreign Sources0.00 Total Corporation Funds0.00 Government Domestic Domestic funds550.26 204.6522.29 11.21162.12 98.94 Foreign Foreign borrowing0.00 Bilateral ODA235.82 0.009.55 0.0069.48 0.00 Multilateral ODA0.00 Total Foreign Sources235.820.00 9.550.00 69.480.00 Total Government Funds786.080.00204.6531.840.0011.21231.600.0098.94 Total Funds786.080.00204.65129.530.001,036.02231.600.0098.94

52. Baseline Scenario: IF, FF, O&M Costs Annual IF, FF and O&M Estimates by Investment Type (million 2005 US$) HydroDieselCoalAll investments Year IFFF O&M Costs IFFF O&M Costs IFFF O&M Costs IFFF O&M Costs 20050 11.52 - 0.11 - 0.25 - 11.88 20060 9.74 - 1.04 - 6.49 - 17.28 20070 9.20 - 0.29 - 2.22 - 11.71 20080 7.70 - 0.89 - 11.07 - 19.67 20090 7.21 - 0.25 - 4.79 - 12.24 20100 7.23 3.40 7.84 - 4.18 3.40 19.25 20110 6.69 32.64 9.41 - 3.87 32.64 19.98 2012214.72 8.49 0.93 10.75 - 2.69 215.65 21.93 2013113.46 9.07 1.08 12.32 - 2.49 114.54 23.88 20140 8.40 1.26 14.16 - 1.54 1.26 24.09 20150 7.78 1.46 16.30 231.60 7.35 233.05 31.43 20160 7.20 1.69 18.81 - 6.15 1.69 32.15 201783.39 7.56 1.97 21.72 - 5.69 85.36 34.97 20180 7.00 2.29 25.12 - 4.71 2.29 36.82 2019374.51 11.04 2.66 29.08 - 4.36 377.16 44.48 20200 10.22 3.09 33.68 - 4.03 3.09 47.94 20210 9.47 3.58 39.04 - 3.74 3.58 52.24 20220 8.77 4.16 45.26 - 3.46 4.16 57.49 20230 8.12 4.84 52.51 - 3.20 4.84 63.83 20240 7.52 5.62 60.92 - 2.97 5.62 71.41 20250 6.96 6.53 70.71 - 2.75 6.53 80.42 20260 6.44 7.59 82.08 - 2.54 7.59 91.07 20270 5.97 8.81 95.30 - 2.35 8.81 103.62 20280 5.52 10.24 110.66 - 2.18 10.24 118.37 20290 5.11 11.89 128.51 - 2.02 11.89 135.64 20300 4.74 13.82 149.25 - 1.87 13.82 155.85 Planned investments

53. National Development Plan (NDP), Vision 2030 and the White Paper on Energy Policy all commit to shift to renewable energy Significant investments in solar power and wind power (high propensity for both types of energy) Energy efficiency programme to address 5% growth in energy demand per year (simplifying assumption, the cost of the measures are assumed to be half the value of the saving in energy consumption ) Reduction of energy imports from 50% to 30% Namibia mitigation scenario: electricity generation

54. Mitigation Scenario: IF, FF, O&M costs Cumulative Discounted IF, FF and O&M Estimates by Investment Type, Investment Entity and Funding Source (million 2005 US$) HydroDieselCoalSolarWindEnergy Efficiency Investment Entity Category/Source of Funds IFFF O&M Costs IFFF O&M Costs IFFF O&M Costs IFFF O&M Costs IFFF O&M Costs IFFF O&M Costs Households Domestic Equity & debt 1.099 4 618 11 Total Household Funds0000000001.09904000618011 Corporations Domestic Domestic equity 28 6256 12 Domestic borrowing 21 0192 0 Total Domestic Sources0000000000004906448012 Foreign FDI 0 00 0 Foreign borrowing 21 0192 0 ODA 0 00 0 Total Foreign Sources000000000000210019200 Total Corporation Funds0000000000007006639012 Government Domestic Domestic funds550 20522 100 42 57 1 Foreign Foreign borrowing0 00 00 0 0 0 Bilateral ODA236 010 00 0 25 0 Multilateral ODA0 00 00 0 0 0 Total Foreign Sources2360010000000000002500 Total Government Funds78602053201000420000008201 Total Funds78602053201000421.0990470061.339024

55. Mitigation Scenario: IF, FF, O&M costs HydroDieselCoalSolarWindEnergy EfficiencyAll investments Year IFFFO&M CostsIFFF O&M Costs IFFF O&M Costs IFFF O&M Costs IFFF O&M Costs IFFF O&M Costs IFF O&M Costs 2005 - 11.52 - 0.11 - 0.25 - - - - - - - 11.88 2006 - 9.74 - 1.04 - 6.49 - - - - - - - 17.28 2007 - 9.20 - 0.29 - 2.22 - - - - - - - 11.71 2008 - 7.70 - 0.89 - 11.07 - - - - - - - 19.67 2009 - 7.21 - 0.25 - 4.79 - - - - - - - 12.24 2010 - 7.23 - 0.40 - 4.18 38.20 0.03 - - 123.76 0.27 161.96 12.11 2011 - 6.69 31.84 0.77 - 3.87 9.01 0.03 - - 114.60 0.50 155.44 11.88 2012 214.72 8.49 - 0.72 - 2.69 10.46 0.04 - - 106.11 0.70 331.30 12.63 2013 113.46 9.07 - 0.66 - 2.49 12.16 0.05 - - 98.25 0.86 223.86 13.13 2014 - 8.40 - 0.61 - 1.54 14.12 0.05 - - 90.97 1.00 105.09 11.60 2015 - 7.78 - 0.57 - 1.42 16.41 0.06 69.99 0.61 84.23 1.11 170.63 11.55 2016 - 7.20 - 0.53 - 0.66 19.06 0.07 - 0.57 77.99 1.20 97.05 10.22 2017 83.39 7.56 - 0.49 - 0.61 22.14 0.08 - 0.53 72.22 1.27 177.75 10.53 2018 - 7.00 - 0.45 - - 25.72 0.10 - 0.49 66.87 1.32 92.59 9.35 2019 374.51 11.04 - 0.42 - - 29.88 0.11 - 0.45 61.91 1.36 466.30 13.38 2020 - 10.22 - 0.20 - - 34.71 0.13 - 0.42 57.33 1.38 92.04 12.36 2021 - 9.47 - 0.19 - - 40.33 0.15 - 0.39 53.08 1.39 93.41 11.59 2022 - 8.77 - 0.17 - - 46.85 0.18 - 0.36 49.15 1.40 96.00 10.87 2023 - 8.12 - 0.16 - - 54.43 0.21 - 0.33 45.51 1.40 99.93 10.21 2024 - 7.52 - 0.15 - - 63.23 0.24 - 0.31 42.14 1.38 105.36 9.60 2025 - 6.96 - 0.14 - - 73.45 0.28 - 39.02 1.37 112.47 9.03 2026 - 6.44 - 0.13 - - 85.33 0.33 - 0.26 36.13 1.34 121.46 8.51 2027 - 5.97 - 0.12 - - 99.13 0.38 - 0.24 33.45 1.32 132.58 8.03 2028 - 5.52 - 0.11 - - 115.17 0.44 - 0.23 30.97 1.29 146.14 7.59 2029 - 5.11 - 0.10 - - 133.79 0.51 - 0.21 28.68 1.26 162.47 7.19 2030 - 4.74 - 0.09 - - 155.43 0.60 - 0.19 26.55 1.22 181.98 6.84 Annual IF, FF and O&M Estimates by Investment Type (million 2005 US$)

56. Cumulative Discounted IF, FF and O&M Estimates by Investment Type, Investment Entity and Funding Source (million 2005 US$) Investment Entity/ Source of Funds HydroDieselCoalSolarWindEnergy Efficiency All investment types ΔIFΔFFΔOMΔIFΔFFΔO&MΔIFΔFFΔO&MΔIFΔFFΔO&MΔIFΔFFΔO&MΔIFΔFFΔO&MΔIFΔFFΔO&M Households00-98-1025001,099400618111,619-493 Corporations000000007066391270918 Government000-232-570000822-150-57 Total Funds0 0-98 -1026-232 -571,099 470 61,339 242,179 -532 To achieve the mitigation scenario with lower CO2 emissions (from 1,927,270 CO 2 e/t to 6,780 CO 2 e/t) and increased energy self-sufficiency, Namibia will need an additional US$1,649 million over 2005-30

57. Incremental Annual IF, FF and O&M Estimates by Investment Type (million 2005 US$) HydroDieselCoalSolarWindEnergy EfficiencyAll investments Year ΔIFΔFFΔO&MΔIFΔFFΔO&MΔIFΔFFΔO&MΔIFΔFFΔO&MΔIFΔFFΔO&MΔIFΔFFΔO&MΔIFΔFFΔO&M 2005 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2006 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2010 - - -3.40 -7.44 - - 38.20 0.03 - - 123.76 0.27 158.57 -7.13 2011 - - -0.80 -8.64 - - 9.01 0.03 - - 114.60 0.50 122.80 -8.10 2012 - - -0.93 -10.04 - - 10.46 0.04 - - 106.11 0.70 115.64 -9.30 2013 - - -1.08 -11.66 - - 12.16 0.05 - - 98.25 0.86 109.32 -10.75 2014 - - -1.26 -13.54 - - 14.12 0.05 - - 90.97 1.00 103.84 -12.49 2015 - - -1.46 -15.73 -231.60 -5.93 16.41 0.06 69.99 0.61 84.23 1.11 -62.43 -19.88 2016 - - -1.69 -18.28 - -5.49 19.06 0.07 - 0.57 77.99 1.20 95.36 -21.93 2017 - - -1.97 -21.23 - -5.08 22.14 0.08 - 0.53 72.22 1.27 92.39 -24.44 2018 - - -2.29 -24.67 - -4.71 25.72 0.10 - 0.49 66.87 1.32 90.30 -27.47 2019 - - -2.66 -28.66 - -4.36 29.88 0.11 - 0.45 61.91 1.36 89.14 -31.09 2020 - - -3.09 -33.48 - -4.03 34.71 0.13 - 0.42 57.33 1.38 88.95 -35.58 2021 - - -3.58 -38.85 - -3.74 40.33 0.15 - 0.39 53.08 1.39 89.82 -40.65 2022 - - -4.16 -45.09 - -3.46 46.85 0.18 - 0.36 49.15 1.40 91.83 -46.61 2023 - - -4.84 -52.35 - -3.20 54.43 0.21 - 0.33 45.51 1.40 95.10 -53.61 2024 - - -5.62 -60.78 - -2.97 63.23 0.24 - 0.31 42.14 1.38 99.74 -61.81 2025 - - -6.53 -70.57 - -2.75 73.45 0.28 - 39.02 1.37 105.94 -71.39 2026 - - -7.59 -81.96 - -2.54 85.33 0.33 - 0.26 36.13 1.34 113.87 -82.57 2027 - - -8.81 -95.18 - -2.35 99.13 0.38 - 0.24 33.45 1.32 123.77 -95.60 2028 - - -10.24 -110.55 - -2.18 115.17 0.44 - 0.23 30.97 1.29 135.90 -110.78 2029 - - -11.89 -128.41 - -2.02 133.79 0.51 - 0.21 28.68 1.26 150.58 -128.45 2030 - - -13.82 -149.15 - -1.87 155.43 0.60 - 0.19 26.55 1.22 168.16 -149.01

58. Discussion What do you think of the applicability of the I&FF methodology as a tool for supporting development of NAMAs and LEDS? Do you think the I&FF methodology yields useful results for policy makers? If not, why not? What do you anticipate would be the main challenges that you would face in your country in applying the methodology (e.g., scenario development, specific types of data)? How would you proposed to overcome these challenges? Who would be most difficult to engage if you conducted an I&FF assessment at home (e.g., the Ministry of Finance, planners from key line Ministries, etc)?