Gail Karlsson, ENERGIA, explained why gender is connected to energy issues. She reported that 2 billion people worldwide get their household energy from biomass sources such as firewood and dung, and that the long hours of labor spent gathering and using this fuel are chiefly performed unpaid by women. This presents a development challenge, as it severely hampers women’s ability to undertake education or perform more economically productive work. She emphasized women’s prominent role in energy use, and said they need to be more involved in policy decisions.

Rose Mensah-Kutin, Abantu for Development, Ghana, spoke on African initiatives and challenges in promoting gender and energy. She said that improved energy access for women removes the daily burden of fuel gathering and allows benefits such as better health and productivity.

Khamarunga Banda, University of Witswatersrand, South Africa, reported on improvements in her country such as energy legislation and incorporating women into power structures and political discourse. She noted that inequality often stems from women’s subordinate position in many cultures.

Yogita Bhikabhai, Pacific Islands Applied Geoscience Commission (SOPAC), Fiji, highlighted that women in the Pacific suffer severe health impacts from cooking smoke and lack of electricity for refrigeration, and that poor lighting compromises women’s ability to study or undertake productive work at night. She outlined a SOPAC programme that uses flyers, posters and radio spots to promote gender equality in energy use.

Anoja Wickramasinghe, University of Peradeniya, Sri Lanka, reiterated that women need access to modern energy options to allow education, development and increases in productivity to occur. She said that gender-neutral poverty eradication efforts do not solve gender-poverty issues, urged for women to be represented in policymaking, and called for financial services that facilitate energy access for women.

Indira Shakya, Gender in Energy and Water Network, Nepal, outlined technological solutions introduced in Nepal such as household biogas plants that process dung to produce clean gas for light and cooking. Noting that cooking with firewood causes deforestation as well as respiratory disorders from smoke, she described solutions including community forestry management and improved cooking stoves.

In the ensuing discussion, participants noted that large infrastructure projects and central grids often cannot efficiently provide energy to widespread rural communities, and supported a decentralized and flexible system.

Hironori Hamanaka, IGES, noted that two rounds of consultations on the future climate regime beyond 2012 for the Asia-Pacific region occurred in 2005 and 2006. He said the second round of consultations focused on energy security and development needs, the clean development mechanism (CDM), technology development and transfer, and adaptation.

Ancha Srinivasan, IGES, discussed the findings of the 2006 consultations, highlighting that countries recognized that the CDM is an effective tool to mobilize climate-friendly policies and investment despite its shortcomings. Srinivasan hoped that CSD-15 would reaffirm the need for an equitable and sustainable development-oriented carbon trading system.

P.R. Shukla, Indian Institute of Management, highlighted India’s increasing carbon emissions, and noted the challenge of crafting the post-Kyoto climate regime to align development, energy and climate. He said the future climate regime has an opportunity to broaden its climate-centric focus to include development, so that the MDGs can be achieved concomitantly with a low-carbon society.

Noting Asia’s diversity, Mikiko Kainuma, National Institute for Environmental Studies, Japan, stated that it is essential to have a shared vision of climate stabilization and sustainable development, and said that to achieve these goals, actions should be taken beginning at the community level.

Yulia Suryanti, Ministry of Environment, Indonesia, shared her country’s efforts to mainstream climate change and sustainable development principles into national development plans. She outlined programmes to address adaptation, such as one on enhanced energy conservation, stressed the lack of funding for the adaptation activities, and called on the international community to help.

Angela Churie Kallhauge, Swedish Energy Agency, described her country’s experience in achieving greenhouse gas emissions reductions without limiting development, reporting a 7% decrease in emissions in 2005, from 1990 levels. She also emphasized that adaptation is not separate from development, and hoped for the UNFCCC to point out how resources can best be mobilized to address adaptation.

Rae Kwon Chung, UNESCAP, questioned whether the CDM could be redesigned as a global emission reduction mechanism, and as a voluntary emission reduction mechanism for non-Annex 1 Parties after 2012. He suggested that this could be achieved if certain portions of certified emission reductions are discounted.