Development Aspects Impressum Editors

Transferring eco-efficiency and the challenge of “greening” developing countries

After enjoying a high-polluting and high-energy consumption stage, developed countries are now entering a less-polluting production-consumption stage thanks to the growing awareness, application and use of cleaner or “eco-efficient” tech- nologies, resulting in a green paradigm shift (box 1). Yet, in this new stage de- veloped countries still face other challenges (e.g. chemical waste management, threats to ecosystems and unsustainable growth).

Source: International Environmental Technology Centre, United Nations Environment Programme (2003)

Developing and/or emerging economies still rely, to a large degree, on heavy in- dustries for their economic growth. This is further compounded by the absence of accessible eco-efficient or “environmentally sound” technologies for mainstream use in communities across developing countries. Clearly, these same supply con- straints, coupled with the global push for a green paradigm shift, inversely create a higher and more urgent demand for both high- and low-tech eco-efficient tech- nologies to be made available for use in developing countries.

A ground-breaking study released in January 2011 by the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA) tracks flows of North-South invest- ment and knowledge, looking specifically at technology transfer trends. The study stresses the need to prioritize technology development and transfer through four core areas, including the promotion of university-industry-government partner- ships, where existing research centres can be used to acquire, adapt and diffuse new technologies and emerging green solutions to a wider user-base, thereby at- taining greater economies of scale.
In spite of such suggestions, greener technologies, such as eco-efficient trans- port, eco-sanitation technologies or low-carbon fuels, continue to be viewed as expensive and inaccessible technologies by low-income populations. However, in recent years countries such as Brazil and Costa Rica among others have pioneered a low-carbon growth agenda at the national level.¹ Many of today’s most innovative low-tech, low-cost and eco-efficient technologies are being generated in emerging economies, enabling leapfrogging towards greener growth. There is considerable market potential for greater South–South/North–South technology transfer and foreign direct investment (FDI) as these green infant industries evolve, achieve economies of scale and become more cost-efficient. Equally, for low-income com- munities, with the leadership of local governments, private sector and other actors, accessing these more eco-efficient technologies can also become a reality.

1 Since 2008, under the leadership of then President Oscar Arias, Costa Rica became the first nation to pledge carbon neutrality by 2021, spurring a top-down generation of policy, financing, an entrepre- neurial test bed and various incentives to go low carbon and carbon neutral. See www.npr.org/player/ v2/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=19141333&m=19141278

To fully integrate this green growth agenda within current government plan- ning models and policies, it is of the utmost importance to decentralize green growth knowledge and practices, by providing local governments and local private sector with the know-how and access to new technologies. Communities across emerging markets are already seeking, adopting and even hosting indigenous, imported and innovative green solutions to improve urban services. These green solutions will need to achieve a critical mass if a global low-carbon and resource- efficient future is to be sustainably secured among emerging markets, however.

For decades now, the focus has been placed on the need for an enabling environment, including building knowledge, skills and capacities for sustainable technology transfer. The 1992 United Nations Earth Summit Programme of Action is commonly known as Agenda 21. Agenda 21’s Chapter 34 specifically focuses on the “Transfer of environmentally sound technology, cooperation, & capacity- building stating that there is a need for favorable access to and transfer of envi- ronmentally sound technologies” through a focus on “building up economic, tech- nical, and managerial capabilities for the efficient use and further development of transferred technology,” and “systematic training and capacity-building at all levels”. The chapter provides a comprehensive definition of the enabling environ- ment for sustainable technology transfer, with a focus on ensuring ESTs are acces- sible, appropriate, affordable and eventually sustainable (United Nations, 1992). In 2003, UNEP published a series of papers, including one report encompassing Chapter 34 of Agenda 21 into a more comprehensive guideline for technology transfer called the Seven “C”s (see box 2). The Seven “C”s guidelines take the concept of technology transfer into a more practical approach, that also proposes focusing on the technology transfer process through a more contextualized or “community specific” approach.
Recently, multilateral environmental agreements have also developed provi- sions for stimulating and guiding sustainable green technology transfer. The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) now promotes the transfer of renewable and clean energy technologies from developed to developing coun- tries through the Clean Development Mechanism and established a Technology Mechanism under the Convention “to enhance endogenous capacities and tech- nologies of developing countries” and ensure the diffusion of “environmentally sound technologies and know-how to developing countries” (United Nations Envi- ronment Management Group, 2011a). The World Trade Organization has equally echoed similar diffusion and transfer of technologies from developed country gov- ernments and companies to least developed country counterparts. UNCTAD notes in its 2012 Technology and Innovation Report (for energy) that “accumulation of technological know-how and learning capabilities is not an automatic process. Learning accompanies the acquisition of production and industrial equipment, in- cluding how to use and adapt it to local conditions” (United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, 2011). While the transfer of green technologies often focuses on basic services, such as energy, other basic services, such as sanitation and water, are equally in need of similar attention. In short, local public and private stakeholders alike need knowledge of green technologies across sectors – it is not enough to centralize Green Economy knowledge and planning at national levels.


Box 2: UNEP Seven “C”s guidelines for technology transfer

In 2003, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) published a frame- work report building on the Agenda 21 approach to technology transfer, promoting various methodologies, tools and guidelines following the “Seven ‘C’s” for sustain- able technology transfer. The paper is targeted to high level and national stakehold- ers, highlighting that national governments are charged with setting the enabling framework for technology transfer. It also emphasizes that “there is no ubiquitous approach to enhancing technology transfer – the suite of measures for address- ing barriers, and facilitating successful technology transfer, is typically community specific”.

The Seven “C”s framework rests on the following concepts:

3. 
   Context: Recipients and users choose an environmentally sound, economically viable and socially acceptable technology that is compatible with the national sustainable development agenda, local needs, culture and capacities
   
4. 
   Challenges: Barriers to successful technology transfers are context-specific, but can generally include shortfalls in technology creation, innovation and sourcing, underdeveloped enabling environments and lack of verified information. Small and medium enterprises are affected
   
5. 
   Choice: Decision-support tools that facilitate informed choice and provide sev- eral technology alternatives that characterize environmental and economic per- formance and potential social impact
   
6. 
   Certainty: Removing barriers and decreasing risks for key stakeholders and re- ducing uncertainties that may affect investment. Certainty is increased by en- suring macroeconomic policies maximize potential for technology transfer and protect property rights
   
7. 
   Communication: Effective two-way communication and cooperation between key stakeholders is essential. It allows synergizing contributions made by diverse players (from formal and informal networks) to the processes of technology transfer
   
8. 
   Capacity: Key players, within the public and private sectors and in civil society, must possess adequate skills to perform tasks assigned to them. Innovation must be encouraged and markets must support ESTs. Legal systems must also be strengthened
   
9. 
   Commitment: Commit to overcoming challenges and furthering capacity for technology transfer. Monitor and evaluate policies that affect the enabling en- vironment, and develop a strategic framework to promote the adoption and use of ESTs.
   

In the framework of this case study, UNITAR also suggests that the framework include an eighth term: “Collateral“. Collateral refers to assets required for financ- ing the actual technology transfer process, including acquisition of technologies, to ensure long-term local market viability, access and overall sustainability of the EST.