Philippines

Critically Insufficient4°C+ World

NDCs with this rating fall well outside of a country’s “fair share” range and are not at all consistent with holding warming to below 2°C let alone with the Paris Agreement’s stronger 1.5°C limit. If all government NDCs were in this range, warming would exceed 4°C.

Highly insufficient< 4°C World

NDCs with this rating fall outside of a country’s “fair share” range and are not at all consistent with holding warming to below 2°C let alone with the Paris Agreement’s stronger 1.5°C limit. If all government NDCs were in this range, warming would reach between 3°C and 4°C.

Insufficient< 3°C World

NDCs with this rating are in the least stringent part of a country’s “fair share” range and not consistent with holding warming below 2°C let alone with the Paris Agreement’s stronger 1.5°C limit. If all government NDCs were in this range, warming would reach over 2°C and up to 3°C.

2°C Compatible< 2°C World

NDCs with this rating are consistent with the 2009 Copenhagen 2°C goal and therefore fall within a country’s “fair share” range, but are not fully consistent with the Paris Agreement long term temperature goal. If all government NDCs were in this range, warming could be held below, but not well below, 2°C and still be too high to be consistent with the Paris Agreement 1.5°C limit.

1.5°C Paris Agreement Compatible< 1.5°C World

This rating indicates that a government’s NDCs in the most stringent part of its “fair share” range: it is consistent with the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C limit.

Role model<< 1.5°C World

This rating indicates that a government’s NDC is more ambitious than what is considered a “fair” contribution: it is more than consistent with the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C limit.

Summary Table

Paris Agreement targets

The Philippines’ Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) is a 70% reduction in GHG emissions below BAU projections by 2030, condition on financial, technological and capacity building support (Government of The Philippines, 2015).

The NDC target does not distinguish LULUCF emissions reductions from the reductions in other sectors and lacks a BAU scenario emissions projections used to quantify the NDC target. The BAU is based on projections developed by the CAT in 2015 since it represents a pathway built with information available during the formulation of the NDC (see Assumptions). If we apply the 70% emissions reductions target to non-LULUCF emissions, the NDC could result in emissions decreasing below 2010 levels (excluding LULUCF) by 2030. If the government expects larger carbon sinks from LULUCF than in our analysis, other sectors would have to decarbonise less to achieve the emissions reduction target.

The need for a transformation in all sectors is recognised in the NDC as it states that the Philippines “views the need to peak its emissions as an opportunity to transition as early as it can to an efficient, resilient, adaptive, sustainable clean energy-driven economy, and it is determined to do so with partners from the global community.” Presenting which portion of the commitment should be met by the LULUCF sector and which portion from other sectors would be in line with the mentioned transformation and peaking.

The Philippines’ Climate Change Commission is in the process of revising its NDC, and has proposed a tentative NDC that makes progress in defining mitigation strategies and targets for all sectors. The tentative NDC revises the conditional target from 70% to 67% below BAU by 2030 (Climate Change Commission, 2017), a weakening of its level of ambition if based on the same BAU. The draft also presents sectoral reductions but not sector BAU projections making it difficult to quantify the emissions reductions contributions and evaluate the ambition level.