Audit of the CO2 emissions trading systems

Report ID: 47

The Nordic–Baltic–Polish cooperative audit on emissions trading was performed in 2012 and involved the Supreme Audit Institutions (SAIs) of Denmark, Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, Poland and Sweden.1 The report builds on 13 individual national audit reports.

The aim of the cooperative audit was to assess:

• the effectiveness of the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) in reducing national greenhouse gas emissions or fostering technology development
• the proper functioning of the EU ETS: national registries, greenhouse gas emissions permits and emissions reporting
• the implementation and administration of Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and Joint Implementation (JI) programmes.

There are clear indications from the cooperative audit that the emissions limitation targets adopted in the Kyoto Protocol or through the EU Burden Sharing Agreement are likely to be met in all seven countries by the end of the first Kyoto Protocol commitment period (end of 2012). The countries have implemented the EU ETS in line with the current EU legislation and the provisions under the UNFCCC. However, the effectiveness of the system in reducing emissions is a major challenge. For the Nordic countries the EU ETS provided little incentive for long-term reductions in CO2 emissions as allowance prices have been low due to a general surplus of allowances in the system during the period 2008–2012. Taking into account the slower economic
growth than expected, emissions trading did not provide a strong market mechanism that has raised the costs of emissions related to production and given a competitive advantage to cleaner production.

The audits for Latvia, Lithuania and Poland have shown that emissions have increased at a slower pace than economic growth. However, in this audit it has not been possible to measure whether this can be attributed to the effectiveness of the EU ETS.

Source: https://www.nik.gov.pl/plik/id,4464,vp,5704.pdf

Enforcement of the European Waste Shipment Regulation

Report ID: 132

This cooperative audit on the enforcement of the European Waste Shipment Regulation is based on eight individual national audit reports, carried out by the supreme audit institutions of Bulgaria, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Poland, the Netherlands, Norway and Slovenia. The SAI of the Netherlands coordinated the compilation of the audit findings. The coordinated audit was launched in response to a decision taken by the Contact

Committee of Heads of EU SAIs and was conducted in close collaboration with the EUROSAI Working Group on Environmental Auditing.

About the audit

The objective of this coordinated audit is to improve the enforcement of the EWSR by providing information on the participating countries’ enforcement strategies and performances (in terms of results and the achievement of the desired effect). To achieve this objective, the national audits sought to answer the following questions:

• To what extent do the relevant authorities comply with the requirements arising from the EWSR?

• How do the authorities enforce the EWSR?

• What is known about the effectiveness of the enforcement measures?

This joint report gives insight into the differences among the countries involved, but does not provide systematic benchmarks. The eight national audits were not designed to provide specific benchmarks for the enforcement of the regulation.

Structure of this report

This report consists of five chapters, starting with this introduction, which provides background information on international waste shipments and the EWSR. The second chapter discusses the formal implementation requirements, the classification of waste and the information networks. Chapter 3 examines the enforcement network and provides information on enforcement practices in each of the eight countries. Chapter 4 looks at the way in which infringements of the EWSR are punished. A summary of the conclusions and recommendations is presented in chapter 5.

Informe Consolidado de la Auditoría Coordinada al Programa de Acción Mercosur Libre de Fiebre Aftosa (PAMA)

Report ID: 228

En el  2011 como parte del Plan de Acción de la Organización de las Entidades Fiscalizadoras Superiores del Mercosur y Asociados (EFSUR), las Entidades Fiscalizadoras Superiores (EFS) de Argentina, Brasil, Paraguay, Venezuela y Bolivia realizaron una auditoría coordinada sobre el Programa de Acción Mercosur Libre de Fiebre Aftosa - PAMA con el apoyo de GIZ.

El objetivo de la auditoría coordinada fue analizar la contribución del PAMA al combate de la fiebre aftosa, si los recursos utilizados por el programa estban siendo auditados y si se efectuaba un seguimiento adecuado, identificando, en ambos casos, aspectos de mejora para la gestión del programa.

El tema se eligió debido a la relevancia socioeconómica de la actividad ganadera en la región y por los riesgos de contagio del ganado en el Mercado Común del Sur (MERCOSUR) por causa de los recurrentes focos de la enfermedad en países de la región. Además, la auditoría del EFSUR de 2010 señaló la oportunidad de profundizar la investigación sobre los controles de proyectos de FOCEM, sugiriendo la fiscalización del PAMA, por ser un programa pluriestatal, y por las evidencias detectadas sobre deficiencias de control, considerando además que por  las características de dispersión de la enfermedad, solamente un esfuerzo articulado e integrado de los países podría otorgar contribuciones concretas.

La auditoría coordinada fue parte de un proyecto piloto para examinar la metodología de desarrollo de capacidades desarrollada en el ámbito del Programa GIZ/Olacefs.

Fuente: https://efsur.org/informes-de-auditoria/

WGEAs global audit on climate change, adaptation to Climate Change, are Governments prepared

Report ID: 12

This cooperative audit is based on eight individual national audit reports from Austria, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Malta, the Netherlands, Norway, Russia and Ukraine, and a factfinding study by the European Court of Auditors. Generally the national audits revealed that the countries assessed in this report are in an early stage in adapting to climate change. So far, adaptation activities are related to identifying risk and vulnerabilities and to some extent policy development. Actions identified in the national audits covered in this report are mainly a response to current challenges and not initiated due to anticipated medium-term and long-term climate change impacts.

The national audits revealed that most countries have prepared risk and vulnerability assessments of sufficient quality. Up to the time of concluding the national audits, only two of the eight countries had developed a comprehensive adaptation strategy.

In most countries, weaknesses in coordination of adaptation are identified. There is also a general lack of cost estimates of impacts of climate change or adaptation measures in policy documents. This increases the risk that climate change and adaptation issues are not being sufficiently addressed in decision-making processes

It is recommended that

• countries use adequate risk and vulnerability assessments for policy-making and consider the impacts of likely climate change scenarios with higher expected temperature increases than the 2-degrees scenario
• adaptation strategies and action plans should be developed and implemented at the government level
• the strategies should clearly specify the time-frame for implementation and the roles and responsibilities of all the parties involved
• governments should ensure coordinated adaptation policy and its implementation
• governments should provide knowledge, to the extent possible and meaningful, of the costs and benefits of climate change impacts and adaptation measures to ensure cost-effective implementation

Pacific Regional Report of the Cooperative Performance Audit: Managing Sustainable Fisheries

Report ID: 237

This report provides a regional overview of the process and outcomes of the third Cooperative Performance Audit in the Pacific region. At the aggregate level, it reports the significant findings about managing sustainable fisheries (in particular the tuna fishery) in the nine Pacific island countries, which were the focus of the audit. The report also records the achievements against Pacific Regional Audit Initiative (PRAI) objectives, including building performance auditing capacity within PASAI.

Nine PASAI member audit offices took part in the audit: PICT 1, the Federated States of Micronesia (FSM), Fiji, PICT 2, Palau, Samoa, the Solomon Islands, Tonga and Tuvalu. Owing to confidentiality reasons, the reports of two SAIs are not identified in this regional report, as they have not yet been made public within their jurisdictions. As a result, these Pacific island states are referred to as Pacific Island Country and Territory (PICT) - PICT 1 and 2. Of the SAIs participating in the third cooperative audit, the majority had participated in either the first or the second cooperative audit. The Solomon Islands SAI was new to the cooperative performance audit approach.

Key Findings

The main findings from each of the three lines of enquiry are presented below:

1. The overall finding for the first line of enquiry is that, while government objectives are set out in legislation, these objectives need to be reflected in sector planning arrangements.
2. The overall finding for the second line of enquiry is that, while there have been important sub-regional developments, it is difficult to provide assurance that economic returns to the Pacific island states involved in this audit, are uniformly fair and reasonable.
3. The overall finding for the third line of enquiry is that the accuracy of fishery data collection and analysis procedures as the basis for good decision making are less than optimal.