Lithuania has made impressive headway in its clean energy transition in recent years but needs to take action in several key areas to accelerate progress towards its goal of climate neutrality in 2050, according to a new policy review by the International Energy Agency.
Lithuania is seeking membership of the IEA, which conducted the in-depth review of the country’s energy policies as part of the accession process. The review found that Lithuania has strengthened its energy policies over recent years. Electricity market reforms are underway and Lithuania – along with its Baltic neighbours Latvia and Estonia – is integrating its power system into Continental Europe’s.
Lithuania’s track record on its clean energy transition is impressive. The carbon intensity of electricity and heat generation has decreased over the past decade, and Lithuania is now comparable with leading IEA countries when it comes to the share of renewables in final energy consumption. The Ignalina nuclear power plant was shut down at the very end of 2009, forcing the country to boost electricity imports, but domestic clean power generation is rising fast. Biomass provides 80% of district heat, onshore wind is growing, and the country’s unique net metering system is driving fast growth in clean distributed energy.
Despite the decoupling of emissions from economic growth, Lithuania’s total energy-related CO2 emissions have increased 9% since 2000, notably from transport, which accounts for the lion’s share of the country’s emissions. To meet its targets, Lithuania needs to reverse that trend, but even stronger efforts will be needed for it to contribute to global efforts to reach climate neutrality. According to the IEA review, these should start with tighter integration of energy and climate decision making and with the engagement of society at large to implement the government’s plans. Progress must be monitored and targets continuously updated, in line with Lithuania’s commitment to climate neutrality and EU emissions reductions targets.
“Lithuania needs to boost investments in clean energy technologies to enhance both its energy security and the competitiveness of its industries,” said Fatih Birol, the IEA Executive Director, who is launching the report today with Lithuania’s Minister of Energy Dainius Kreivys. “Hydrogen, offshore wind and batteries can be real game-changers in the context of Lithuania’s clean energy transition. I welcome the efforts by the Ministry of Energy to facilitate these innovations and look forward to the country joining the IEA as a full member.”
Energy efficiency progress has slowed down in Lithuania, as in many IEA countries. Energy consumption is rising in contrast with the government’s aim of reducing it by 60% by 2050. The IEA review finds that energy efficiency must be made a top priority. More stringent energy performance standards and energy taxation reform can slow the increase in energy consumption and reduce emissions. The recently adopted long-term renovation strategy is a welcome step forwards, as is the promotion of e-mobility, electrification, biofuels and related infrastructure under the new Alternative Fuels Law.
Lithuania targets 100% of electricity from renewables by 2050, which will require electricity systems and markets to accommodate very high shares of variable renewable energy, notably onshore and offshore wind. In the policy review, the IEA urges the government to adopt a forward-looking renewable energy strategy with a focus on flexibility and sustainability in order to help attract investment. It also needs to define the opportunities that Lithuania’s vast forest resources provide as a carbon sink and as a driver of the region’s bio-economy and biomass trade.
As the Lithuanian economy recovers from the 2020 economic crisis, a rebound in emissions is anticipated, notably in buildings, industry and transport. Policies for these sectors will play a critical role in scaling up private and public investments and allowing the private sector to eventually take over. The IEA recommends an auctioning system for clean energy technologies such as renewables, hydrogen, and energy storage.
Lithuania has consistently emphasised energy security in its energy strategy and regional engagement. Lithuania’s future accession to the IEA can further strengthen the country’s energy security, including for oil, gas and electricity. A Baltic gas market is emerging, connecting infrastructures and countries in the region. The IEA review encourages Lithuania to swiftly complete the gas interconnection to Poland to join the wider regional gas market.
In 2010, Lithuania became a net importer of electricity. By 2030, the government aims to reverse import dependency and produce 70% of its electricity needs domestically. Regional supply security has become a top priority, as the Baltic states ceased electricity imports from Belarus in 2020 and are targeting the full synchronization of their power systems with that of Continental Europe by 2025. The IEA review offers insights into how to strengthen electricity security as the system becomes more exposed to extreme weather events and cyber security threats.
Capabilities fit is a winning formula for M&A: PwC’s “Doing the right deals” study
Ensuring there is a capabilities fit between buyer and target is key to delivering a high-performing deal, according to a new PwC study of 800 corporate acquisitions. . The study finds that capabilities-driven deals generated a significant annual total shareholder return (TSR) premium (equal to 14.2% points) over deals lacking a capabilities fit.
The “Doing the right deals” study looks at the 50 largest deals with publicly-listed buyers in each of 16 industries and evaluates the characteristics that delivered superior financial outcomes for the buyers, as measured by annual TSR.
A capability is defined as the specific combination of processes, tools, technologies, skills, and behaviours that allows the company to deliver unique value to its customers.
Two types of deals were found to outperform the market: capabilities enhancement deals – in which the buyer acquires a target for a capability it needs — and capabilities leverage deals – in which the buyer uses its capabilities to generate value from the target. These represent a true engine of value creation, delivering average annual TSR that was 3.3% points above local market indices. Deals without these characteristics – limited-fit deals – had an average annual TSR of -10.9% points compared to the local market indices.
While 73% of the largest 800 deals analysed sought to combine businesses that did fit from a capabilities perspective, 27% were limited-fit deals. The analysis shows that for every dollar spent on M&A, roughly 25 cents were spent on such limited-fit deals that in many cases destroyed shareholder value.
Alastair Rimmer, Global Deals Strategy Leader, PwC UK said: “Our analysis confirms that deals where the buyer is focused on enhancing its own capabilities or leveraging its capabilities to improve the target can result in a substantial TSR premium. Whether a deal creates value depends less on whether it is aimed at consolidation, diversification or entering new markets. What matters is whether there is a solid capabilities rationale between the buyer and the target.”
Capabilities fit delivers shareholder value across industries
The capabilities premium was found to be positive across all of the 16 industries studied. The share of capabilities-driven deals was highest in pharma & life sciences (92%), an industry where deals often combine one company’s innovation capabilities with another’s strength in distribution. Other leading industries in capabilities fit deals were health services and telecommunications (both with 90% capabilities-driven deals) and automotive (86%). Limited fit deals were found to be most prevalent in the oil & gas industry (62%), where asset acquisition can play an important role in addition to capabilities fit.
The analysis shows that the stated strategic intent of a deal, as defined in corporate announcements and regulatory filings, has little to no impact on value creation. Whether a deal fits or not depends less on stated goals of consolidation, diversification or entering new markets. What matters is whether there is a capabilities fit between the buyer and the target. Deals aiming for geographic expansion notably stood out as performing less well than others, largely because many of them (34%) were limited-fit deals.
The M&A playing field has shifted due to COVID-19
More than ever, companies must be clear in defining which capabilities they can leverage to succeed, and which capabilities gaps they need to fill.
Hein Marais, Global Value Creation Leader, PwC UK added: “Deal rationales have shifted in a COVID context, reflecting the heightened need for new and different capabilities if an enterprise is to generate value and create sustained outcomes. The need to move quickly increases the pressure to do deals at pace – and thereby the risk of failing to evaluate capabilities fit with enough care. Ensuring such capabilities fit, however, dramatically increases the chances of your deal creating value.”
Companies may be overlooking the riskiest cyber threats of all
A majority of companies don’t have a handle on their third-party cyber risks – risks obscured by the complexity of their business relationships and vendor/supplier networks. This is the finding of the PwC 2022 Global Digital Trust Insights Survey. The survey of 3,600 CEOs and other C-suite executives globally found that 60% have less than a thorough understanding of the risk of data breaches through third parties, while 20% have little or no understanding at all of these risks.
The findings are a red flag in an environment where 60% of the C-suite respondents anticipate an increase in cyber crime in 2022. They also reflect the challenges organizations face in building trust in their data — making sure it is accurate, verified and secure, so customers and other stakeholders can trust that their information will be protected.
Notably, 56% of respondents say their organizations expect a rise in breaches via their software supply chain, yet only 34% have formally assessed their enterprise’s exposure to this risk. Similarly, 58% expect a jump in attacks on their cloud services, but only 37% profess to have an understanding of cloud risks based on formal assessments.
Sean Joyce, Global & US Cybersecurity & Privacy Leader, PwC United States said: “Organizations can be vulnerable to an attack even when their own cyber defenses are good; a sophisticated attacker searches for the weakest link – sometimes through the organization’s suppliers. Gaining visibility and managing your organization’s web of third-party relationships and dependencies is a must. Yet, in our research, fewer than half of respondents say they have responded to the escalating threats that complex business ecosystems pose.”
Asked how their companies are minimizing third-party risks, the most common answers were auditing or verifying their suppliers’ compliance (46%), sharing information with third parties or helping them in some other way to improve their cyber stance (42%), and addressing cost- or time-related challenges to cyber resilience (40%). But a majority have not refined their third-party criteria (58%), not rewritten contracts (60%), nor increased the rigor of their due diligence (62%) to identify third-party threats.
Simplifying the way to cybersecurity
Nearly three quarters of respondents said the complexity of their organization poses “concerning” cyber and privacy risks. Data governance and data infrastructure (77% each) ranked highest among areas of unnecessary and avoidable complexity.
Simplification is a challenge, but there is ample evidence that it is worthwhile. While three in 10 respondents overall said their organizations had streamlined operations over the past two years, the “most improved” in our survey (the top 10% in cyber outcomes) were five times more likely to have streamlined operations enterprise-wide. These top 10% organizations are also 10 times more likely to have implemented formal data trust practices and 11 times more likely to have a high level of understanding of third party cyber and privacy risks.
CEO engagement can make a difference
Executive and CEO respondents differ on how much the support the CEO provides on cyber, with CEOs seeing themselves as more involved in, and supportive of, setting and achieving cyber goals than their teams do. But there is no disagreement that proactive CEO engagement in setting and achieving cyber goals makes a difference. Executives in the “most improved” group, reporting the most progress in cybersecurity outcomes, were 12x more likely to have broad and deep support on cyber from their CEOs. Most executives also believe that educating CEOs and boards so they can better fulfill their cyber responsibilities is the most important act for realizing a more secure digital society by 2030.
Sean Joyce concluded: “Our survey shows that the most advanced organizations see cybersecurity as more than defense and controls, but as a means to drive sustained business outcomes and build trust with their customers. As leaders of organizations, CEOs set the tone for focusing their cyber teams on bigger-picture, growth-related objectives rather than narrower, short-term expectations.”
Are we on track to meet the SDG9 industry-related targets by 2030?
A new report published by the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), Statistical Indicators of Inclusive and Sustainable Industrialization, looks at the progress made towards achieving the industry-related targets of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 9 of the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The report is primarily based on the SDG9 indicators related to inclusive and sustainable industrialization, for which UNIDO is designated as a custodian agency, showing the patterns of the recent changes in different country groups.
Six years after the adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and its 17 SDGs, there has been increasing demand for information on whether the SDG targets could be reached, and what actions should governments take to accelerate progress. The UNIDO report introduces two new tools developed by UNIDO to help countries measuring performance and progress towards SDG9 industry-related targets: the SDG9 Industry Index and SDG9 progress and outlook indicators. The SDG9 Industry Index benchmarks countries’ performance on SDG-9 targets over 2000-2018 for 131 economies. In addition, the report develops two measures to answer the main questions:
- Progress: how much progress has been made since 2000?
- Outlook: how likely is it that the target will be achieved by 2030?
The global COVID-19 pandemic has inevitably had a negative toll on the progress towards reaching the SDG9 indicators, but the extent of the long-term impact remains to be seen. Industrialized countries continue to dominate global manufacturing industry, but their relative share has gradually declined over the past decade. In 2010, industrialized economies made up 60.3% of global production, which has decreased to 50.5% in 2020. China has been the largest manufacturer, now accounting for 31.7% of global production. This is a trend that has been reinforced by the pandemic.
Progress for the least developed countries (LDCs), at the heart of the 2030 Agenda, is a different story. While economic theory and countries’ experiences across the world have established that industrialization is an engine of sustainable growth, progress among LDCs remains very diverse. Asian LDCs are poised to double their share of manufacturing in GDP and thus meet SDG target 9.2, but African LDCs have stagnated.
SDG9 Industry Index
The SDG-9 Industry Index, consisting of five dimensions, covers three targets and five indicators and assigns a final score to countries. In 2018, the top ten consisted of exclusively industrialized economies, with Taiwan, Province of China, Ireland, Switzerland, the Republic of Korea and Germany making up the top five. In general, industrialized economies perform best in all dimensions of the Index.
The countries at the bottom of the ranking are LDCs, in particular those located in sub-Saharan Africa. Although some African countries have been displaying impressive growth rates, growth has been driven by an extended commodity boom and foreign capital inflows, while industrialization and structural transformation have stagnated. Additionally, substantial data is lacking for a significant amount of the countries. In the SDG9 Industry Index, only 24 out of 54 African countries are included, from which only eight are LDCs. It is clear that national statistics offices need strengthening, as data availability helps countries formulate, review and evaluate their development plans and programmes.
Iran poll contains different messages for Biden and Raisi
“It’s the economy, stupid.” That is the message of a just-published survey of Iranian public opinion. However, the substance of...
The Blazing Revival of Bitcoin: BITO ETF Debuts as the Second-Highest Traded Fund
It seems like bitcoin is as resilient as a relentless pandemic: persistent and refusing to stay down. Not long ago,...
Credit Suisse to pay $475 million to U.S. and U.K. authorities
Credit Suisse Group AG has agreed to pay nearly $475 million to U.S. and U.K authorities, including nearly $100 million...
Gallup: World’s Approval of U.S. Govt. Restored to Obama’s Record High
On October 19th, Gallup issued their “2021 Rating World Leaders” report and finds that “Six months into the first year...
China beats the USA in Artificial Intelligence and international awards
The incoming US Secretary of the Air Force said that China was winning the battle of Artificial Intelligence over the...
Iraq: An Urgent Call for Education Reforms to Ensure Learning for All Children
Learning levels in Iraq are among the lowest in the Middle East & North Africa (MENA) region and are likely...
Breaking The Line of the Israel-Palestine Conflict
The conflict between Israel-Palestine is a prolonged conflict and has become a major problem, especially in the Middle East region....
Africa4 days ago
Analyzing The American Hybrid War on Ethiopia
Energy3 days ago
Gas doom hanging over Ukraine
Intelligence4 days ago
Women Maoists (Naxalbari)
Middle East4 days ago
Safar Barlek of the 21st Century: Erdogan the New Caliph
Middle East3 days ago
Iran unveils new negotiation strategy
Middle East3 days ago
Shaping US Middle East policy amidst failing states, failed democratization and increased activism
Science & Technology2 days ago
U.S. Sanctions Push Huawei to Re-Invent Itself and Look Far into the Future
Russia3 days ago
The 30th Anniversary of the Renewal of Diplomatic Relations Between Russia and Israel