Mitigation has clearly emerged as a North-South, or industrial countries-developing countries issue. Industrial countries are responsible for past CO₂ emissions, since we now know that the current episode of climate change is largely attributable to anthropogenic causes. But developing countries are doubly concerned. As suggested by current research, they will be primarily affected by the implications of climate change; and they are necessarily part of any solution, given their contribution to current and future CO₂ emissions.

Therefore, a true North-South collective action is required. But, the presence of well identified and documented co-benefits will not be enough to generate it. We need to contemplate on the conditions and incentives that will make collective action possible. This is not primarily a technical question; it hinges equally on politics, diplomacy and finance.

Multilateral and bilateral development institutions can act as potential "incentive changers" and contributors to the collective governance of globalization. They can promote North-South dialogue and cooperation to mainstream climate change in national policies, and to help identify, test and document joint initiatives to address the climate change issue.

Naturally, collective action will be facilitated if co-benefits are properly identified and emphasized. The two different kinds of co-benefits are - individual and short term, and collective and long-term.

Some mitigation actions will produce immediate co-benefits, because they will unleash cost savings that can be reaped today. Examples include improvements in energy efficiency, in production, in housing, in urban planning and organization.

They also include the search for new techniques. No-tillage agricultural techniques are not only a promising approach to current challenges faced by farmers in developing countries, but also protect the soils and save on carbon emissions.

The role of a development agency, there, is to provide seed money to introduce and test innovative approaches, to finance the R&D aspects that are indispensable to understand these new approaches, their impact, and their effective and efficient implementation.

Reforestation and the fight against forest degradation are both crucial components of mitigation strategies, and also bring co-benefits in terms of cheaper and sustainable access to wood, not only as a commodity used in the industry, but also as a source of energy. In many developing countries, protecting forests should be seen as not only a contribution to mitigation through carbon storage, but also safeguards crucial assets for development strategies in both the short and longer terms.

These diverse actions may require financial and technology transfers as well as capacity building. Some of them will need to be based on new technologies and ongoing R&D efforts at developing new techniques. Most, however, are likely to be based on existing technologies and will require more cost-conscious behaviours.

Other mitigation actions will produce longer-term co-benefits but will also entail short-term economic, social and political costs. They need to be driven by collective action, and require a shift of mindsets as well as new public policies that change incentives (through taxation, regulation and persuasion). This will require political vision and proper incentives from the global scene.

Some encouraging policy initiatives have been launched in a number of developing countries. India has, for example, adopted an ambitious climate change policy. Indonesia has also taken the lead in mainstreaming climate change as a crucial element of public policy. The French government has joined the Japanese Government in providing a substantial budget support to the Indonesian government to underwrite Indonesia's Climate Change Program.

Part of such climate change programs will deal with adaptation and with mitigation actions that deliver short-term co-benefits, notably energy efficiency, reforestation or the fight against illegal logging. A substantial component, however, will have to be grounded in a longer term vision - promoting new growth modalities, adapting the prices of energy to generate appropriate incentives, encouraging the use of renewable sources of energy. A major policy question will be the profitability of such renewable energies over time.

The role of development agencies, in that longer-term effort, will not be limited to providing more financial resources. It will be, rather, to learn how to maximize the catalytic impact of these resources, to promote technology development and dialogue, through renewed public/private partnerships, by supporting local policies through exchange, dialogue and peer pressure, and by promoting collaborative approaches in order to solve a problem that all of us face.

To conclude, it is important to discuss the co-benefits in terms of economics and welfare to be generated from mitigation actions. There is another perspective to it; while co-benefits may often seem uncertain, one can be sure that "non-mitigation" would clearly entail high "co-costs". Thus, we should choose to tailor dedicated mitigation actions so that they will generate high co-benefits.

Development institutions can and must play a new role, not only as providers of financial resources, but as potential architects of global collective action and North-South collaborative approaches and as "incentive changers". However, more financial aid is needed, and donor countries need to confirm their commitments to increase development assistance.

If global mitigation action is to take place, the North must also take the lead and demonstrate its willingness to engage, at home, in ambitious climate change policies. Through the adoption of its climate package, the European Union has recently demonstrated that such action could be collectively negotiated and put in place.