text:
What Is The Difference Between Snowdrops And Lily Of The Valley?
Ornamental Articles » Bulbs
What Is The Difference Between Snowdrops And Lily Of The Valley? Snowdrops and the lily of the valley are two of the most popular spring flowers to grow in the garden they have a similar appearance in terms of their flower shape and color however there are some significant differences so what are those differences?
Both the snowdrops and lily of the valley are plants with small white cup-shaped flowers that typically reach 6 to 8 inches tall. However, the lily of the valley foliage is generally reminiscent of a hosta with relatively lush thick leaves and it has many flowers coming off a flower stalk whereas snowdrops have relatively sparse foliage with a single flower being produced from each flowering stem.
In addition to these physical differences, the plants also differ in the extent to which they spread throughout the garden. Lily of the valley is a plant that is known to be relatively invasive and will spread relatively quickly through underground rhizomes. Whereas snowdrops are grown from single bulbs and will multiply over time, however, the rate of this spread is generally relatively slow and most gardeners need to transplant the bulbs on a consistent basis year-on-year to get a large spread of these plants.
Additionally, these plants also flower at different times during the spring. Snowdrops are renowned as being one of the earliest flowering bulbs in the garden whereas lily-of-the-valley plants will flower in mid to late spring which is another way of differentiating between the plants.
About Lily Of The Valley
Lily of the valley is a plant that is generally found in woodlands settings and was originally native to the northern parts of Europe and Asia. However, once it was transported into parts of North America it has become an invasive species.
The plant itself is popular among florists because of its sweetly scented flowers, however, this plant is also known to be highly toxic to humans and many other animals which makes it an ideal plant for growing in areas that have large populations of deer or rabbit as they will not touch it.
The plant typically grows 6 to 8 inches tall and will spread quickly to form dense colonies that will outcompete most other plants in the right conditions. The plant generally prefers to grow in part to full shade in relatively moist soil that is rich in nutrients but also free draining. In dry conditions plant's growth is generally restricted significantly.
This makes the plants an ideal ground cover in relatively shady conditions at the base of trees with large canopies, however, it is important to restrict the plant's movement around the garden by regularly removing any unwanted plants.
In terms of climate tolerance, lily-of-the-valley plants are well adapted to relatively cool conditions and survive and thrive in the northern parts of the US.
About Snowdrops
Snowdrops, like the lily of the valley, have small delicate flowers however the number are blooms produced by an individual plant is significantly lower. The plant itself is produced from bulbs and is a popular herbaceous plant in places like the UK where the plant thrives. They are most commonly used in woodland settings to create an early flower display with most varieties producing a bloom before the 20th of March in the Northern Hemisphere.
The plants themselves have foliage that is reminiscent of an allium with the plant having relatively strappy leaves that are narrow and flat. Typically, this foliage will appear in late winter before being followed by the production of a flower. The plants are an excellent option for growing in areas where there is a large amount of wildlife as they are highly resistant to deer and other animals and generally do not have any significant disease problems.
However, these plants have the advantage over the lily of the valley because they are not nearly as toxic and therefore can be used in-home garden even if you have pets. The flowers if ingested will create a mild stomach upset but they are not likely to cause any serious or long-lasting problems.
The plants prefer rich moist and free-draining soil that has plenty of nutrients. They are typically planted on mass by gardeners in woodlands under trees and at the front of borders. The bulbs typically need to be planted around 2 to 3 inches deep with a spacing of approximately 2 to 3 inches between each bulb.
The bulbs generally require virtually no maintenance throughout the year and will happily flower year-on-year without any intervention from the gardener. They do not require deadheading and foliage should definitely not be cut back after the plant has flowered because the bulbs need to store additional sugars from the foliage for the following year.
Most gardeners wanting to increase their stocks of bulbs will typically divide snowdrops after they have flowered ideally as the foliage is beginning to wane. This is considered the best time because it is easy to find the plants and is unlikely to affect the flowering for the coming season.
Like the lily-of-the-valley these plants are also highly resistant to cold conditions and will quite happily survive down to Zone 3 in most cases, however, the plants are generally not recommended for zones greater than 8 or 9 because the plants need a period of cold to flower properly.
I hope you found this article informative and have great success growing these flowers at home in your own garden if you have any additional comments or questions please leave them in the section below.
Rose vs Tulip: What Is The Difference And Which One Is Better?
Are Calendula Deer Resistant? (And How To Protect Them)
Do Zinnia Seeds Need Light To Germinate?
Is It Too Late To Sow Cosmos Seeds?


text:
Opinion: Danny Murphy knows nothing about Newcastle United
Danny Murphy is obviously unaware of the true size of Newcastle United.
By Bryan Nelson@the_BryanNelson Sep 25, 2018, 8:49pm BST
Share All sharing options for: Opinion: Danny Murphy knows nothing about Newcastle United
Photo by Michael Regan/Getty Images
What constitutes a big club? Is it top five finishes? Is it competing in European football year after year? Is it the size of the international fanbase? Or is it 50,000+ attendance figures week-in and week-out for home matches, with some of the highest away attendance numbers in the Premier League?
Truth is, I don't know anymore. But apparently Danny Murphy and Ian Abrahams from BBC do, because according to them, an international support base, and 52,000 weekly supporters doesn't mean Newcastle United are a big club.
I'll give them the fact that Newcastle United hasn't won anything. That's true. But the idea that you walk down the street and don't see anyone wearing Newcastle United shirts is insane. Newcastle United has a massive fanbase, and I'd love to use our connections here at Coming Home Newcastle to prove that with Toon Army America.
These comments are absurd. A trophy doesn't make you a big club. You could have a stadium capacity of 20,000 and win the Premier League, and I still don't think I'd consider you a big club. You have a smaller support base than most, but you have one hell of a team that won the Premier League. In the 90s, Newcastle United was among the top clubs in the Premier League, seven years ago the club competed in Europe following a top five finish. The club has proven time and again that it can compete.
The support base is what makes a club massive. Manchester United is massive because its success amassed a large support base, as did Liverpool, and now Manchester City. Would Manchester City be considered a huge club 10-12 years ago? Absolutely not, they didn't have the support that Manchester United had, and since their success they've gotten to the point where they can be considered big.
Newcastle United has always had these numbers. Whether it be the Championship or the Premier League, Newcastle United has one of the largest and most dedicated support bases in all of football, and I'll fight you on that. To say that Newcastle has nothing else is an insult to the community that has built itself around its club.
Listen to this abomination here...
I'd like to distance myself from Ian's comments. Having lived & worked in Newcastle I can confirm it's a great night out, has the best sports bookshop in the world @BackPageShop & warm generous people eg @nufcfoodbank. And Leazes Park right by SJP is beautiful, check out my photo pic.twitter.com/631OUO6SIu
— talkSPORTDrive (@talkSPORTDrive) September 24, 2018

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


I create designs for active humanoids. If you bike, run, paddle, climb, hike, or do pretty much any activity outdoors, you are the bomb and you know it. You deserve accouterments that show your bombness. I have said accouterments.
Come in my store, I'm friendly!


text:
What Are Some Of The Challenges That You May Face In Online Learning
Being around other people is one of the most essential skills in communication. But you don't necessarily have to be around other people to be able to talk to them face-to-face.
A new report by MIT found that the biggest digital transformation for employers is that they have increased their expectations for managers. The survey asked employers about their digital education for managers and frontline managers.
Inconsistent Learning From Various Learning Platforms, Especially for Managers
Recent survey findings from The Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) speak to the divergent educational experiences workers receive today, from traditional learning programs on video-based tools, to web-based learning platforms, to online small-group, interactive courses. Without some kind of evaluation system, it becomes hard to tell which programs provide the best outcomes, according to the study, which estimates that the "difference between the most successful and the most unsuccessful programs is minimal, and can vary by a point or two."
The one thing that all the programs do have in common, though, is that they're inconsistent in their outcomes. That is: some programs show consistent growth in employees and others don't. And how those programs are evaluated matters. Program results show an astounding correlation with how much time supervisors put into the program. Those who tested strongly early on in the course see their managers more involved in helping them out after six months. However, program results that say managers are well-served after six months do not predict growth over time.
Thinking of online learning as a way to enhance managerial effectiveness doesn't help. And some organizations are saying that they're investing in online learning programs that provide extremely mixed results. Online-education survey results for managers show that a majority of employers don't think managers who receive online degrees are equipped to tackle all current or future tasks. Meanwhile, online educational leaders say that few employers provide any kind of metrics or evaluation tools for managers' success in online programs.
People Prefer Skills Over Knowledge
Many employers want a manager who has mastered enough skills to do their job. Yet, on average, that skill-engagement figure for managers who are willing to take an online course for an executive level is around 40%.
Rabbhi Mirzai of the communications & HR consulting firm Upturn praises the academic work done in the field of human resources. He says that by providing a better narrative of skills, "many universities and organizations are more widely recognized as being able to prepare people for their chosen career path" as well as "the dynamics of successful careers." But he adds that it's also important that employers "own up to the failings and emphasize alternatives."
The most obvious issues here are high student debt and difficulty finding quality providers. But one of the more surprising findings in a recent study funded by the Clayman Institute for Gender Research at Stanford University is that "one of the first advantages of learning online is mastery." Some of the users' reported benefits were "immediate recognition of oneself and the issues they face."
Online Learning Could Help Managing Careers
The biggest challenge of online learning for employers is a slight conflict between educational gains and career outcomes. And online learning providers will need to ensure that managers get "value-for-money" and take the time required for effective online learning.
Recognizing the limitations of some technology and learning tools and then finding other alternatives is certainly an excellent idea. Two big tech transformations of the past decade have cut through the traditional hierarchies and eliminated the employee hierarchy. People are now empowered to learn, grow, and prosper based on their abilities instead of on where they started.
"It is precisely the most part of their work and daily life that managers must bridge the gap between high-level skills and workplace skills. In other words, managers must make sure that every manager has the right skills and basic competence to learn and grow."
—Kailash Sahu, an administrator at Mukesh, the Internet company that redesigned the way its employees functioned
Mary S Arendt
How To Completge Online Learning
What Is My Learning Style Online Quiz
What Is The Best Online Course For Learning German 2017
Estimate How Many Students Are Learning Online
How Do Learners Obtain Skills From Online Learning
What Limits Did The Teach Act Put On Sharing Copyrighted Material In An Online Learning Environment
Why Is Online Learning Ineffective
What Is The Best Online Learning For Money Management


text:
MHI puts SpaceJet on ice as it looks to cut costs
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI) has announced that it is halting its SpaceJet program which would have seen Japan produce its firs commercial aircraft for over 50 years. The result will see a 50% drop in staff numbers within its commercial aviation sector, while enabling the company to reduce annual costs by 120 billion yen (US$1.15 billion). Staffing changes will include the reduction of 2,000 jobs overseas, 3,000 employees moved internally, and a further 1,000 employees moved to outside companies.
"We will work to review where we stand, make improvements and assess possible program restart," MHI said in its business plan for its regional jet. MHI has posted a 62.5% decline in second-quarter operating profit to 12.7 billion yen, while it expects a 50 billion yen ($478 million) operating profit, appreciably better than an earlier forecast of no profit.
The Spicejet was originally scheduled to launch in 2013, but the project has been continually beset by design and technical problems, which has seen that schedule delayed six separate times. Japan's ANA holdings had ordered 23 of the SpaceJets, but like so many airlines it has seen profitability challenged by the COVID-19 pandemic and is now looking to reduce its fleet by 10% instead.
There was good news for MIH though as it also announced that Japan had chosen the company to develop a new stealth fighter, which should be ready by the mid-2030s and which has a current budget of US$40 billion.
Previous Previous post: New chapter at BER: easyJet takes off with inaugural flight
Next Next post: Domodedovo Airport renews ISAGO certification


Nairobi – Human rights groups have welcomed moves to change a Kenyan law passed to curb the spread of HIV and Aids, which criminalises pregnant women who pass HIV and Aids to their babies, saying it discouraged people from finding out their status.
The 2006 law says that a person who knows they are HIV positive must tell "any sexual contact" of their status in advance and could be jailed for seven years if they "knowingly and recklessly" placed another person at risk of being infected.
The High Court ruled this section of the law unconstitutional on March 18 as "it could be interpreted to apply to women who expose or transmit HIV to a child during pregnancy, delivery or breastfeeding".
The law was introduced to curb the spread of HIV and Aids in Kenya, which has the fourth largest HIV positive population in the world – 1.7 million people.
Rights groups argue that it discriminates against women, who are often the first members of a family to find out their HIV status as they are usually tested while pregnant.
"This law has inflicted fear, shame and punishment on countless Kenyans, especially pregnant women," Evelyne Opondo, Africa director of the New-York based Centre for Reproductive Rights (CRR), said in a statement on Monday.
CCR submitted an amicus brief in a case brought against the government by the Aids Law Project, a charity providing legal services and counselling to people living with HIV.
The charity argued that the law discourages people from finding out their status and could even prevent those with HIV giving first aid or playing sports for fear of being prosecuted.
The law also puts women at risk of violence or rejection by their husbands because it allows doctors to disclose patients' status to their next of kin, it said.
"If we want to reduce the spread of HIV and Aids and put an end to the stigma, violence and discrimination surrounding the disease, our public policies must be based on medical evidence and grounded in human rights," Jacinta Nyachae, executive director of the AIDS Law Project, said in the statement.
The High Court advised the government to review the law to avoid further litigation.


text:
2030 Agenda and Development Cooperation
Infrastructure Investment and Financing
Social Cohesion and the Future of Welfare Systems
Sustainable Energy, Water and Food Systems
Trade, Investment and Growth
Latest Policy Briefs
Overarching Visions
G20 Performance
G20 Insights > Policy Briefs > Financing energy efficiency of buildings: Green instruments and policy guidance
Climate Change, Sustainable Energy & Environment
Download as PDF Download as PDF Print
Financing energy efficiency of buildings: Green instruments and policy guidance
Fatih Yilmaz
Nawaz Peerbocus
Rishikesh Ram Bhandary
Fang Zhang
Kelly Sims Gallagher
Venkatachalam Anbumozhi (Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA))
Kaliappa Kalirajan (Australian National University)
November 22, 2020 | Last updated: December 10, 2020
Tags: Climate change and environmental sustainability
Despite ongoing efforts, there continues to be a significant investment gap in building energy efficiency (BEE). Given the limited public resources, targeted green finance instruments can help bridge this gap. However, mainstreaming green finance is fraught with several challenges, including the lack of a global taxonomy and incoherent policy guidance. In this policy brief, we first propose improving national BEE standards, especially in the developing members of the G20, and to reduce differences between the national and global standards, which can significantly contribute to establishing a global taxonomy of green finance for BEE. Next, we propose a more focused and progressive implementation of the G20 Tokyo Declaration with systemic policy action, aligning fiscal and financial policy priorities with low-carbon energy transition goals that can catalyze the development of green finance.
Achieving climate change goals necessitates a significant improvement in building energy efficiency (BEE), which lags due to lack of finance. Buildings account for 31% of global final energy consumption and around one-third of direct and indirect carbon dioxide emissions (IEA 2019). To meet the Paris Agreement's 1.5°C benchmark, global emissions from buildings need to be reduced by half by 2030. Achieving this goal requires an 80% cut in emissions below 2010 levels by 2050, mostly through increased energy efficiency (IPCC 2018). Investing in energy efficiency for existing buildings and establishing higher energy efficiency standards for new ones can significantly reduce energy consumption and cut down carbon emissions. These benefits are particularly significant in countries exposed to extreme weather conditions, such as those in the Gulf Region (e.g., UNECE 2018; UNEP FI and IPEEC 2019).[1] However, financing energy efficiency investments is a challenge for many households and small business owners. They often do not have the financial capacity to cover the initial costs, even though future energy savings can significantly contribute to the recovery of the initial investment. G20 countries must mobilize private finance by leveraging scarce public finance to address the multi-trillion-dollar investment gap.
Green finance has tremendous potential to bridge the investment gap. However, without a global taxonomy and coherent policy guidance, this potential will remain unfulfilled (Anbumozhi et al. 2018). A comprehensive global taxonomy to classify energy efficiency investments according to the shades of "green" and "brown" does not currently exist at the G20 level (Bak et al. 2017). Creating such a global taxonomy is difficult in the absence of local BEE standards, especially for developing G20 members, or in the presence of significant differences in standards across G20 members. Apart from bridging the financing gap, specific green finance instruments such as mortgages, in general, appear to be less risky[2] and create many positive externalities for the environment and society. Yet, such positive attributes are currently not incorporated in the pricing of green finance instruments in many G20 countries because fiscal, financial, and energy policies do not adequately incentivize reflecting the "true cost" of conventional financing programs. The net consequence is that green finance instruments are artificially priced at a higher level and are generally not widely accessible, thereby leading to underinvestment in green assets.
Proposal I
Bridging local energy efficiency standards for buildings with global standards can significantly contribute to the development of a global taxonomy of green assets.
Given their different physical locations and local climate conditions, some variations in local BEE standards across G20 members is expected. However, the absence of local BEE standards or their sharp divergence from global standards would hinder efforts to establish a global taxonomy of green assets. Without a global taxonomy, it would be challenging to correctly price local assets in global markets. With the establishment of the International Partnership for Energy Efficiency Corporation (IPEEC) in 2009, the G20 members have already taken substantial steps toward establishing BEE standards, both locally and globally. The IPEEC provided many platforms for discussions and studies to support its members to develop energy efficiency standards. Many G20 countries have already implemented various policies to improve BEE. However, some developing G20 members still do not have specific building standards and procedures in place, while the existing BEE standards vary across countries in scope, targets, and investments. Figure 1 presents the level of BEE performance of G20 member countries. The figure indicates substantial differences in the scores across the G20 countries and highlights the need for further work to improve national BEE standards and harmonize the sharp contrasts. France and Germany, in the EU, are among the few G20 members with long-term strategies for the retrofitting of existing buildings (Climate Transparency 2019). Emerging G20 economies, such as Russia, India, and Saudi Arabia, follow a relatively weaker implementation of retrofitting standards and monitoring mechanisms for new net-zero buildings.
This lack of harmonized and universal standards limits the comparison of local building assets globally, and thus, impedes the efforts to mobilize private investments, both local and international, for the financing of domestic energy efficiency projects, especially in developing G20 member countries. With the ending of the IPEEC's operations in 2019 and the establishment of the Energy Efficiency Hub (EEH), a platform for global collaboration on energy efficiency, the focus should be on a higher mandate. While supporting the establishment and improvement of BEE standards in member countries, the EEH should also lead the efforts toward establishing universal standards for BEE that would significantly contribute to the global taxonomy of green assets.
Proposal II
A systematic policy approach to leadership for mainstreaming green finance is required among regulatory agencies both locally and globally.
Green finance instruments have the potential to accelerate the transition to a lowcarbon economy. Recognizing this fact, the G20 has already taken initial action, including forming the Energy Efficiency Finance Task Group (EEFTG), one of nine dedicated task groups under the IPEEC to promote collaboration in financing energy efficiency. The EEFTG has already interacted with many G20 governments and the financial industry in raising awareness among many public and private entities, although the desired impact is yet to be achieved. A quick survey of the current practices implemented among G20 members shows that green financial products primarily for BEE appear to be available despite significant limitations in coverage. The scope of these instruments, their availability in practice, and their effectiveness significantly vary across countries. Table 1 presents some of the widely used green finance instruments for BEE, such as green mortgages, retrofitting loans, and other loans (e.g., appliances), for selected G20 members. For instance, acting as a pioneer, the EU implemented several financing schemes, including the recent Energy Efficient Mortgages Action Plan (EeMAP 2018) initiative that has been put into action as a joint effort of several private financial institutions and regulatory bodies. However, the initiative is currently in the pilot stage with limited accessibility.
Moreover, a systemic approach in government policy is crucial to mainstream green finance for BEE, where fiscal and financial policies should complement each other. However, most of the policy actions aiming to bolster the spread of green finance among G20 members seem to be partial and uncoordinated. Covering the interest cost of green loans, providing guarantee coverage for green mortgages, and allowing deduction of interest payments from tax returns are some of the general policies implemented among G20 countries. Specifically, Saudi Arabia has recently provided zero-interest and partially subsidized loans for the deployment of more energyefficient cooling systems for buildings. China has also provided subsidies for energyefficient appliances and new buildings to increase the economic incentives for energy efficiency improvement. In the United States, the Federal Housing Authority's (FHA) Energy Efficient Mortgage program enables homeowners to finance the cost of adding energy efficiency features to new or existing houses as part of an FHA-insured home purchase or refinancing mortgage. Although these policies have spurred the development of green finance to certain levels, they are far from being capable of mainstreaming green finance that can address the multi-trillion-dollar investment gap.
Some G20 members, such as Germany and Japan, however, offer relatively better practices that are close to being systemic. Such a systemic approach sets a new direction for financing BEE by enhancing coordination between fiscal, financial, and energy policies. This coordinated approach ensures the coherent alignment of policies and incentives to catalyze more private resources toward BEE investments. We briefly describe two successful case studies from Japan and Germany.
The building sector is a significantly growing end-user of energy in Japan. Japan's basic Energy Conservation Law, which has been revised multiple times, forms the cornerstone of BEE. The Energy Conservation Law involves establishing progressive standards and targets as well as the introduction of market-based business models such as Energy Service Companies. Japan's experience demonstrates how regulations, information and labeling programs, and financial incentives have worked in conjunction with each other to achieve energy efficiency and climate goals. For example, the Japanese government provides financial assistance for the construction of zero-energy houses, low-interest rates for retrofitting energy-efficient housing, and tax deductions for new net-zero emission buildings. Assessment and tracking are also done through programs such as the Comprehensive Assessment System for Built Environment Efficiency, a rating system that includes environmental indicators for buildings.
Germany aims to reduce its energy use by 30% by 2020. Financial incentives form a vital part of the strategy to achieve this target. The Climate Action Program 2020 includes a number of detailed plans, such as the National Action Plan for Energy Efficiency and the Energy Efficiency Strategy for Buildings. Buildings have received particular attention as they account for up to 30% of Germany's greenhouse gas emissions. The German state-owned development bank (KfW) and the Federal Office for Economic Affairs and Export Control play a prominent role in providing finance and information, especially to households. During 2014–2019, the KfW financed over 75% of all new residential dwellings in Germany. The KfW also funds the initial purchase of an energy-efficient building, the retrofitting of existing buildings, and solar thermal installations and combined heat and power plants. The main instrument of the KfW is the provision of low-interest loans; however, in some instances, specific grants are also provided. The financial incentives are embedded in a broader legal and regulatory framework at the federal level. Voluntary actions, certificate programs, and campaigns to build awareness have also sought to change individual behavior and reinforce the financial incentives provided. The Climate Action Program 2030 further enhanced these incentives, including a tax break for energy-efficient buildings and upgrades.
As the EEH assumes the role of the IPEEC with a broader institutional scope, a similar body to the EEFTG of the IPEEC can be established under EEH. The new body can take a leadership role in close cooperation with other relevant international institutions, such as the United Nations Environment Programme Finance Initiative (UNEP FI), the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and the World Bank, in promoting the construction of a more systemic approach to mainstreaming green finance across the G20 member countries.
Proposal III
Policymakers can enhance liquidity in the market by providing clear guidance and incentives on the use of green bonds.
Liquidity needs for the required large-scale investment into BEE can be supported via private sources such as the green bond market. According to the recent IMF report (IMF 2019), there is growing appetite for these bonds among institutional investors (e.g., pension and sovereign wealth funds). While the global green bond market is currently small, it has been experiencing high growth rates in some countries. Many developed G20 member countries have already utilized some of these resources, albeit minimally. According to the most recent data on bond issuance, the share of total green bond issuance is less than one percent of the USD 100 trillion worth global bond market. At the global level, green bond issuance is dominated by a few G20 members. About half of the green bond global issuance is utilized by the US, China, and France.[3] Similarly, green bond holding is also highly concentrated among institutional investors (e.g., sovereign wealth funds, pension funds, and insurance companies), who hold more than three-quarters of green bonds globally.
Bond issuance is, however, a complicated process and can be costly for issuers. Government programs can target the reduction of some of these costs. According to Climate Bonds Initiative's recent data,[4] several local and central G20 governments provide various support programs. For instance, China and Japan offer subsidy schemes covering issuance and interest costs; the European Central Bank and the Central Bank of Brazil provide preferential risk weighting for banks' holdings of green bonds; the US government implements a bond guarantee scheme to enhance the risk profiles of green bonds.[5] While subsidy programs guide and incentivize potential issuers, bond guarantee programs can also significantly mitigate risks, especially for international investors who plan to invest in developing G20 countries. By providing appropriate incentives, government policy can address the liquidity needs of local financial institutions from international markets by issuing green bonds (i.e., mortgage-backed securities). However, for effective implementation, bond support programs should also be part of the systemic approaches discussed above. For instance, while fiscal policy supports the supply of green bonds, by lowering the cost of issuance and easing the process, monetary policy should incentivize green bond demand by providing the necessary incentives to the financial sector for the purchase of these green bonds.
Bridging local energy efficiency standards for buildings with global standards can significantly contribute to the development of a global taxonomy of green assets. The absence of local BEE standards or their sharp divergence from global standards hinders efforts to establish a global taxonomy. Creating a global taxonomy is a crucial step toward the development of green finance instruments, particularly for the classification, pricing, and securitization of financial instruments for BEE globally. The EEH should play a more active role in achieving these goals.
A systematic policy approach is needed among regulatory agencies both at the domestic and the global scale to lead the initiative to mainstream green finance. Active collaboration and coordination between local fiscal, financial, and regulatory agencies are essential to offer appropriate incentives and support for the development of green finance and to facilitate its access. In contrast, international cooperation can reinforce national policy responses by creating the necessary foundation to improve global capital allocation toward green assets. The EEFTG, under the EEH, should take on a more active role in mainstreaming green finance.
Providing policy guidance and incentives for green bond issuance can significantly contribute to the liquidity needs of the domestic financial sector. Given the increasing appetite for green assets among both international and local investors (e.g., pension and sovereign wealth funds), providing policy guidance and incentives for green bond issuance can significantly contribute to the liquidity needs of the local financial sector, especially for developing G20 members.
The proposals in our policy brief aim to contribute to the efforts in designing a global taxonomy of green assets and mainstreaming green finance. Achieving the former requires G20 members to reduce the sharp differences between national and global BEE standards. In tackling the latter, G20 countries should advance policy guidance by following a systemic approach in mainstreaming green finance to increase investment into BEE, and address the liquidity demands for the supply of green financial products. These actions will broaden the supply and improve the access to green financial instruments, enabling a larger population of households and firms to invest in BEE. This can bring about a significant reduction in carbon emissions.
This policy brief was developed and written by the authors and has undergone a peer review process. The views and opinions expressed in this policy brief are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the authors' organizations or the T20 Secretariat.
An, Xudong, and Gary Pivo. 2020. Green Buildings in Commercial Mortgage‐Backed Securities: The Effects of LEED and Energy Star Certification on Default Risk and Loan Terms. Real Estate Economics, 48 (1): 7–42.
Anbumozhi, Venkatachalam, Kaliappa Kalirajan, and Fukunari Kimura. 2018. Financing for Low-Carbon Energy Transition: Unlocking the Potential of Private Finance. Book, Springer, Singapore
Bak, Céline, Amar Bhattacharya, Ottmar Edenhofer, and Brigitte Knopf 2017. Towards a Comprehensive Approach to Climate Policy, Sustainable Infrastructure, and Finance. G20 Insights, Berlin.
Castro-Alvarez, Fernando, Shruti Vaidyanathan, Hannah Bastian, and Jen King. 2018. The 2018 International Energy Efficiency Scorecard. American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy. Climate Transparency. 2019. Brown to Green: The G20 Transition Towards a Net-zero Emissions Economy. Climate Transparency, Berlin.
Commonwealth of Australia and States and Territories. 2019. Energy Efficiency: NCC 2022 and Beyond Scoping Study. Report by Australia Building Codes Board.
EeMAP (Energy Efficient Mortgages Action Plan). 2018. Creating an Energy Efficient Mortgage for Europe: Towards a New Market Standard. EU Energy Efficient Mortgages Initiative.
Fannie Mae. 2018. Multi-family Green Bond Impact Report 2012–2018. Fannie Mae Report.
Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy. 2015. Energy Efficiency Strategy for Buildings: Methods for achieving a virtually climate-neutral building stock. Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy Germany.
Ge, Jing, Wei Feng, Nan Zhou, Mark Levine, and Carolyn Szum. 2017. Accelerating Energy Efficiency in China's Existing Commercial Buildings. Energy Analysis and Environmental Impacts Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
IEA (International Energy Agency). 2019. World Energy Outlook 2019. International Energy Agency, Paris.
IFC (International Finance Corporation). 2018. Creating Green Bond Markets—Insights, Innovations and Tools from Emerging Markets. Report by the IFC/ Sustainable Banking Network and the Climate Bonds Initiative.
IMF (International Monetary Fund). 2019. Global Financial Stability Report: Vulnerabilities in a Maturing Credit Cycle. International Monetary Fund, Washington, DC.
IMT (Institute for Market Transformation). 2013. Home Energy Efficiency and Mortgage Risks. Research Paper by the Institute for Market Transformation, Washington, DC.
IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). 2018. Global Warming of 1.5 ºC. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Report.
IRENA (International Renewable Energy Agency). 2020. Green Bonds. International Renewable Energy Agency, Report.
Ministry of Ecology, Sustainable Development and Energy. 2014. Energy efficiency action plan for France 2014. Directorate General for Energy and Climate, Ministry of Ecology, Sustainable Development and Energy.
Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism. 2016. Overview of the Act on the Improvement of Energy Consumption Performance of Buildings (Building Energy Efficiency Act). Report.
Ministry of Power. 2017. Energy Conservation Building Code 2017. Bureau of Energy Efficiency, Ministry of Power, Government of India.
Natural Resources Canada. 2018. Canada's Buildings Strategy Update. Energy and Mines Ministers' Conference.
Pelizzon, Loriana, and Max Riedel. 2017. Creating an Energy-Efficient Mortgage for Europe: Review of the Impact of Energy Efficiency on the Probability of Default. EeMAP project: Research Center SAFE, Goethe University, Frankfurt.
UNEP FI (United Nations Environment Programme Finance Initiative) and IPEEC (International Partnership on Energy Efficiency Cooperation). 2019. G20 Energy Efficiency Finance and Investment Stock Take Report. UNEP Finance Initiative and International Partnership for Energy Efficiency Cooperation.
UNECE (United Nations Economic Commission for Europe). 2018. Mapping of Existing Energy Efficiency Standards and Technologies in Buildings in the UNECE Region. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, Geneva.
[1] . For instance, according to World Energy Outlook 2019 (IEA 2019), Saudi Arabia, the US, and Australia have the highest building energy usage, and in turn, the highest emissions per capita.
[2] . Some recent studies (e.g., An and Pivo 2020; Pelizzon and Riedel 2017; IMT 2013) show that green assets (e.g., green mortgages and energy retrofit loans for more energy-efficient buildings) are usually less risky (i.e., they have relatively lower default rates) compared to their conventional alternatives.
[3] . Authors' calculations from Bloomberg and similar figures are also available in IRENA (2020).
[4] . The Climate Bonds Initiative is a private platform that focuses on enhancing the standards of the global green bond market by working with several private and public institutions. https://www.climatebonds. net/policy/data/download
[5] . Comprehensive policy design and different practices are presented in a recent joint report by the World Bank and the Climate Bonds Initiative (IFC 2018).
Fatih Yilmaz Nawaz Peerbocus Rishikesh Ram Bhandary Fang Zhang Kelly Sims Gallagher Venkatachalam Anbumozhi Kaliappa Kalirajan
Existing Initiatives & Analysis
Existing Agreements
Existing Policies and Monitoring
Suggest more existing initiatives and analyses!
Your suggestions will be sent to the authors.
Please leave this field empty. Please leave this field empty. Please leave this field empty.
*We will only use your contact informations to contact you concerning your request. For further informations on handling your private data you can check our Privacy Policy.
*necessary fields
Global Solutions Papers
The authors are solely responsible for the content and their views do not necessarily
represent the views or recommendations of their related institutions.
Dealing with interlinkages – A focused approach for implementing the SDGS and overcoming the Covid-19 crisis
In 2020 and beyond, the Group of Twenty (G20) must invigorate its implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and respond to the COVID-19 crisis. Both challenges are global in nature and require a universal, integrated, and transformative response. Thus, the G20 should: (1) reorient its political agenda following the 2019 Global Sustainable Development Report's proposal of six entry points for transformation, and focus on the "economy and finance" and "science and technology" levers; (2) reshape its working structures accordingly; (3) act collectively toward a science-based direction for sustainable development; and (4) ensure that the response and recovery measures regarding the COVID-19 crisis follow the spirit of the 2030 Agenda, and are conducive to achieving its sustainable development goals.
Imme Scholz (German Development Institute / Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE))
Adolf Kloke-Lesch (Sustainable Development Solutions Network Germany (SDSN Germany))
Robert Lepenies
Alex Godoy-Faúndez
Felix Moronta-Barrios
Anet Režek Jambrak
Armand Ketcha Malan Kablan
Tolu Oni
Moritz Riede
Yoko Shimpuku
Teresa Stoepler
Global Health and Covid-19
The Covid-19 crisis and tourism: Response and recovery measures to support the tourism sector in OECD countries
Countries have introduced significant measures to contain the coronavirus pandemic that has severely damaged the tourism economy. The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) estimates a potential decline of 60 – 80% in the international tourism economy in 2020, depending on the duration of the crisis. Countries are moving beyond immediate, often economy-wide, support measures to develop specific recovery measures for the tourism sector, including lifting travel restrictions, restoring traveler confidence, and rethinking the future of the tourism sector.
Peter Haxton
Jane Stacey
Top 20 Synthesis Recommendations: Expert brief highlights major policy proposals generated by G20 Engagement Groups
In advance of the G20 Leaders' Summit on November 21st and 22nd 2020, a recent brief published by the G20 Research Group in cooperation with the Global Solutions Initiative highlights the 20 major policy proposals by the formal G20 Engagement Groups. An […]
Revisiting Digital Governance
The digital sphere of today is associated with various problems that ultimately threaten our economic systems, democratic processes and cohesion of societies. Revisiting Digital Governance, a working paper first published in the Social Macroeconomics Working Paper Series of the Blavatnik School of […]
Global Solutions Journal G20/T20 Italy 2021 Edition
Out Now: The Global Solutions Journal G20/T20 Italy 2021 Edition focuses on Italy's G20 priorities, overcoming the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic, Digital Governance and New Measurement. Authors from various sectors – politics, research, academia, business, and civil society – have contributed to this multifaceted edition.
Be part of G20 Insights!
Contribute your expertise by sharing your Policy Brief.
contact@g20-insights.org
About G20 Insights
© Global Solutions Initiative Foundation gemeinnützige GmbH | Legal Notice | Privacy
We use cookies to help giving you the best experience on our website. By continuing to read our website, we assume you agree to this.Got it! |Privacy Policy