FOI - C40 Cities and ARUP Deadline 2020 Report [Oct 2021]

Your request

Headline Finding no. 4 of the Deadline 2020 programme stresses the importance of climate action taken during the period from 2016 to 2020. In light of this finding, did the GLA set any targets for this period? What were they? Was there any assessment of the GLA’s success or failure in reaching them?

In respect of Headline Finding no. 5, that wealthier, high carbon cities must deliver the
largest greenhouse gas emissions reductions, were any targets recommended for London
by C40, or were any pathways for London identified by the C40-Arup 2CAP model? What
is the relationship between such targets and the Zero Carbon London emissions
pathways?

Headline Finding 5 refers to 14,000 new actions being required from 2016 to 2020. How many of these were in London? And, if possible, what were they, and which of them were
successfully implemented?

The Deadline 2020 report recommended that C40 Cities share a global emissions budget
of 22 GtCO2e in 2020-2100. Did C40, or the GLA, identify London’s share of this
budget? How was London’s share calculated?

In section 3.6.1 of the Deadline 2020 report (Table 4 on page 34), it is recommended
that 25 cities in the “steady decline” category should jointly make cumulative emissions
savings of 0.2 GtCO2e between 2016 and 2020. Did C40, or the GLA, identify London’s
share of this savings target? If so, what was it, and was it reached?

The C40-Arup 2CAP model (described on page 41 of the Deadline 2020 report)
presumably outputted emissions trajectories for individual cities. Did it do so for London?
Could you make these trajectories available to me and/or to the public?

Our response

The Mayor was voted into City Hall in May 2016 and shortly afterwards he embarked on
producing a range of Mayoral strategies, one of those was the London Environment
Strategy.

He set targets as part of that strategy and they were the three carbon budgets
from 2018 to 2032 in the London Environment Strategy. The first of which was a 40 per
cent reduction in carbon emissions for the period from 2018-2022, the subsequent
targets were a 50 per cent reduction during 2023-2027 and a 60 per cent reduction
during 2028-2030.

The carbon budgets are monitored against the London Emissions Greenhouse Gas
Inventory (LEGGI) on an annual basis. In 2018 we incorporated additional sectors into
the LEGGI methodology, providing emission estimates for the five major IPCC emission
sectors in line with the latest international best practice, and the data showed that
London’s CO2e emissions were 32.4 million tonnes. This is a 29 per cent reduction on
1990 levels and a 37 per cent reduction since the peak of emissions in 2000.

We are on track for a 40 per cent reduction by the end of this current carbon budgeting
period.

The Deadline 2020 report stated that reducing the risk of climate change will require a
focus not just on reduction targets set in the future, but a minimisation of cumulative
emissions.

With an overall emissions budget established for C40, each member city was assigned to
one of four trajectory groups defined by specific city characteristics and London was one
of the C40 cities that was allocated to a Steady Decline pathway.

These are cities with a GDP per capita over $15,000 but emissions lower than the
average for C40, (the city is sufficiently developed to immediately reduce emissions),
but a less rapid rate of reduction is required than for the Steep Decline group. London’s emissions trajectory fits within the Steady Decline pathway that London was allocated to as part of the Deadline 2020 report.

Subsequent to the publishing of the Mayor’s London Environment Strategy (LES) and
the C40/ARUP Deadline 2020 report, the Mayor has committed to a more ambitious
target of net zero by 2030 and our emissions reduction trajectory will be updated later
this year.

For further information and insights in to the proposed trajectories for the various
groupings of cities please see Chapter 3 of the Deadline 2020 report attached.

We do not have a list of which of those 14,000 actions were relevant or needed to be
taken in London. For more information about how the actions will be supported by C40
please see Chapter 6 – Accessing C40 Cities’ contribution to the Paris Agreement.

The Deadline 2020 report states that: Section 6.I – How C40 will unlock action in cities -C40 will support member cities to achieve their targets by engaging mayoral leadership;
providing technical assistance to set and deliver robust emissions inventories, targets
and plans; facilitating peer to peer exchange of best practice; removing barriers to
action; and achieving a strong collective voice.

Please see the following reports for a summary of actions that we have undertaken in
London: The One Year on Report and the Second Progress Report.

This was calculated using the modelling explained in Appendix A which was undertaken
by ARUP and C40 to establish the overall emissions budget and indicative city budgets
for the then 84 C40 city members.

In reference to this answer, and the following two answers below, the city-produced
Climate Action Plans, in London’s case our 1.5⁰C Climate Action Plan, then superseded
the indicative targets and budgets generated as part of the Deadline 2020 report
because they use robust local emissions data, tailored modelling and trajectories that
inform cities’ actual targets and actions.

For more information, please see Appendices A.1 to A.7.

Deadline 2020 was a C40 and ARUP led report. C40 didn’t allocate us or any individual
cities a specific share of these cumulative emissions savings they just presented a
cumulative share across the 25 cities in the ‘Steady Decline’ category. C40 then reviewed
our proposed trajectories in the LES and the 1.5⁰C Climate Action Plan to confirmed that
our trajectories were consistent with both the Paris 1.5⁰C Agreement and their Deadline
2020 report.

Deadline 2020 was a C40 and ARUP led report and, as with the answer above, C40
didn’t provide outputted emissions trajectories for individual cities but had a cumulative
total saving for the cities in the ‘steady decline’ category. C40 then reviewed our
proposed trajectories in the LES and the 1.5⁰C Climate Action Plan to assess if they were
compliant with the Paris Agreement and their Deadline 2020 report.

The scenarios discussed in Deadline 2020 are the outputs of C40 and Arup’s Climate
Action Pathways (2CAP) model. The 2CAP model was developed to take on board the
wealth of city data that C40 has collected since Climate Action in Megacities 1.0 in
2011. It enables a consistent, impartial assessment of the necessary programmes of
action that cities need to take in order to meet their assigned emissions targets.

Further detail of the model’s structure and assumptions are presented in Appendix A,
and the companion methodological report.

If you have any further questions relating to this matter, please contact me, quoting
reference MGLA150921-3056.