Additional indicators. Climate protection under the condition of limited financial resources has to use the available financial resources as efficiently as possible. Efficiency means here to achieve the highest possible greenhouse gas (GHG) emission savings with the lowest monetary expenditures necessary for that. CO2 avoidance costs are frequently used as indicator for this purpose. CO2 avoidance costs are defined as quotient of the differential costs for a CO2 reduction measure and the avoided CO2 emissions by this measure. In analogy to CO2 avoidance costs, similar additional efficiency indicators can be defined for other quantitative sustainability indicators. In this case, such indicators are available from the screening LCA like for example acidification (basis for SO2 avoidance costs) or resource de- pletion (basis for non-renewable energy savings costs). The same methods apply for those indicators as discussed in the following for the example of CO2 avoidance costs. CO2 avoidance costs are used for microeconomic decisions as well as for the decisions in energy policy. Microeconomic decisions are always based on business analyses. If political decisions like the implementation of support programmes are concerned, the valuation is often more difficult, as the macroeconomic dimension, possible external effects as well as second- and third-round effects have to be considered. For the determination of CO2 avoid- ance costs, different methodological characteristics have to be considered concerning: • the determination of a reference, which is e.g. for biofuels the use of fossil fuels. • the inclusion of different cost items (e.g. full costs vs. additional costs) • the inclusion of temporal dynamics of systems under consideration (e.g. developments of investment costs of systems, of prices for energy carriers, etc.) • the different perspectives – especially microeconomic and macroeconomic approaches However, the sole consideration of CO2 avoidance costs is often not sufficient to come to sustainable decisions. On the one hand, they do not contain any information about the amount of emissions that can be avoided and on the other hand, they do not take other envi- ronmental impacts into account. Therefore, CO2 avoidance costs do not represent a single combined indicator resulting from the sustainability assessment but only one additional xxxxx- xxxx. CO2 avoidance costs from a microeconomic perspective are calculated as follows: cos ts − cos ts (reference) CO2 avoidance cos ts = ...
Additional indicators. Outputs Units Project specific indicators Units Agriculture/aquaculture compliance with Best Available Technologies (BAT) No. of sub-projects Increased engagement by FIs in term lending to the agri-food sector lending No. of new products % increase lending own funds by FIs Manufacture of food and agricultural products compliance with Best Available Technologies (BAT) No. of sub-projects Public sector support infrastructure upgrades No. of sub-projects Outcomes Extension service capacity and outreach improved No. of farmers served No. of extension service upgrades Agriculture/aquaculture production t/yr Upgrades to agriculture/aquaculture production machinery and equipment No. of enterprises Agriculture/aquaculture exports of goods produced t/yr Upgraded logistics, storage and processing capacity installed No. of facilities, capacity Manufacture of food and agricultural products production t/yr Core result indicators Manufacture of food and agricultural products exports of goods produced t/yr Increased volume of lending to private agri/aqua-food sector EUR Agri-food SMEs benefiting from the scheme nr Extended average term of loans Months Agriculture/aquaculture yields t/ha Schedule B DEFINITIONS OF EURIBOR AND LIBOR
