On the second proposed facility, Heister said it would address deforestation through the preparation of a system of positive financial incentives, including through capacity building and pilot performance-based payments. Noting the variable opportunity costs implied by different possible projects, he said the proposed facility would seek to “pick low-hanging fruit first.”

Marcela Main, Department of Foreign Affairs, Chile, presented host-country perspectives on the proposed facilities, emphasizing the host-country view that avoiding, rather than reducing, emissions should be prioritized. Main said host-countries: viewed the World Bank’s role in increasing certainty to be critical; encouraged a focus on the energy and transportation sectors; and expressed concern with the possibility of complicating the dynamics of private sector engagement.

David Ockwell, University of Sussex, noted that technology transfer is playing a stronger role in the climate change negotiations, but that barriers remain. He recalled the rationale for technology transfer, including targeting future greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from rapid developing economies. Highlighting that China is forecasted to surpass US levels of GHG emissions by 2010 and that India is expected to do so by 2030, he stressed the importance of supporting low carbon growth. Ockwell noted that the study analyzed case studies on coal gasification, LED lighting, biomass, hybrid vehicles and improving combustion efficiency.

Summarizing key policy considerations for low carbon technology transfer, he said that: there is no “one policy fits all” solution; technology transfer between countries is as important as transfers from the research and development (R&D) stage to commercialization; technology transfer must take place as part of a wider process of technological capacity building; and there is a need to foster knowledge flows that contribute to the accumulation of technological capacity.

Ockwell flagged intellectual property rights (IPRs) as one of the barriers for successful technology transfer, while noting that in the case of LED lighting in India, the greater barrier was not IPRs, but insufficient capacity. Ockwell pointed out to the need to have a national policy environment in the receiving country that encourages the role of such technology.

In the ensuing discussion, participants debated, inter alia: the ability of the study to be applied to other developing countries that are not growing as fast as China and India; the dangers of transferring a type of technology that is not mature enough to assist the receiving country; the critical need for more empirical research in smaller countries; and availability of funds.