Environment at a Glance in Latin America and the Caribbean

Climate change mitigation

Key messages

• LAC countries lag on formal commitments to reduce GHG emissions in line with the Paris Agreement, but levels of ambition are rising. By the end of 2022, all 33 countries had submitted their Nationally Determined Contributions to the UNFCCC. However, only 20 of these contributions are clear enough to infer targets for 2030 and beyond; only six cover all GHGs. 16 countries committed to net zero by 2050 or earlier.

• In 2019, the LAC region contributed about 6.7% of global gross GHG emissions.1 Since1990 gross emissions have grown by 61%, driven by increased transport activities and electricity and heat production. From 2014, emissions grew at a slower pace than GDP and even decreased, suggesting a relative decoupling from economic growth.

• Transport is a major emission source due to the large size of many LAC countries, high motorisation rates and fossil fuel driven motor vehicle fleets. In 2020, an inhabitant of LAC emitted on average 2 tonnes of energy-related CO₂, much less than the OECD average of 7.5 tonnes. This partly reflects lower income and consumption levels and a less carbon intensive energy mix.

• A more nuanced picture emerges when considering emissions from agriculture, forestry and land use change. These sources play an important role in the region, accounting for 26% and 20% of net emissions, respectively. They are driven by cattle raising, extensive agriculture and deforestation.

• Energy supply remains dominated by fossil fuels (69% in 2020), although renewables account for a much larger share (30%) than in the OECD (12%) and the rest of the world (15%). More than two-thirds (69%) of electricity is produced from renewables, mostly hydropower (78%).

• GHGs are often released from the same sources as air pollutants such as fine particulate matter (PM_2.5) that includes black carbon and affects human health. Mean population exposure to PM_2.5 has been slowly decreasing since 1990 across the LAC region. However, annual exposure levels (18 µg/m³ in 2019) remain significantly above the WHO guideline (5 µg/m³). Exposure is particularly high in large urban areas where economic activity is concentrated and demand for mobility highest.

• In 2019, an average of 260 premature deaths per million inhabitants was attributed to exposure to PM_2.5. The associated welfare costs were estimated at 2.8% of LAC GDP. The Caribbean is the most affected due to high exposure to the pollutant, fragile healthcare systems and a high marginal cost of enhancing safety.

Context

Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from human activities disturb the radiative energy balance of the earth‑atmosphere system. They exacerbate the natural greenhouse effect, leading to temperature changes and other disruptions of the earth's climate. Carbon dioxide (CO₂) from the combustion of fossil fuels is the main contributor to greenhouse gases and a key factor in countries’ ability to mitigate climate change. Short-lived climate forcers (SLCFs), such as methane, ozone and black carbon, have shorter atmospheric residence times, but a stronger warming impact in the short run. Reducing their emissions can have immediate effects on atmospheric warming. Changes in land use and land cover also play a role by altering the GHGs captured or released by carbon sinks.

GHGs are often released from the same sources as air pollutants such as fine particulate matter (PM_2.5), which includes black carbon, a SLCF that results from the incomplete combustion of fuels and biomass, including through forest fires and agricultural burning. These pollutants have severe public health impacts Hence, reducing their emissions helps mitigate GHG emissions, while at the same time improving air quality with benefits for human health, agricultural production and ecosystems. (Sun et al., 2022[17]) (IPCC, 2023[18]).

Policy challenges

The main challenge is to reduce GHG emissions to both mitigate climate change and reduce local air pollution in an economically efficient and socially acceptable manner. This implies a range of low-carbon strategies to decouple GHG emissions from economic growth and which may involve different specific policies depending on local conditions. Relevant policies include increasing the share of renewable energy sources in the supply mix, reducing energy intensity by adopting energy-efficient production processes, increasing the energy efficiency of consumer goods and services, particularly in the transport sector, and protecting and expanding carbon sinks such as forest areas and wetlands.

Domestic mitigation efforts must be streamlined across other policy areas. Given the connection between GHG emissions and local air pollution, implementing measures that reduce emissions of GHG and air pollutants together at minimum cost represents “win-win” solutions for both climate and health policy objectives. Effective pollution prevention and control measures are especially important, these need to be tailored to local circumstances as both the sources of air pollution and severity of exposure vary across and within countries.

Measures should be prioritised in terms of their health benefit, for example more stringent measures are required in densely populated areas or for emission sources located upwind from urban areas. Other relevant policies include mainstreaming sustainable construction and transport in urban and rural planning and moving from linear to circular economy business models. Finally, behavioural and lifestyle changes may ultimately be the key for long-term mitigation objectives, particularly with respect to urban mobility.

Ensuring a proper mix of policy instruments - such as carbon pricing, investing in new technologies and removing government subsidies and other support for fossil fuels - plays an important role in mitigation efforts. It also implies considering agriculture and land-use in national mitigation policies and strengthening the capacity of the environment to store carbon by protecting ecosystems, an especially important challenge in the LAC region. Moreover, given that climate change is a global phenomenon, mitigation efforts must be placed in the context of carbon emissions associated with international trade.

Measuring progress and performance

Progress and performance can be assessed against domestic objectives and international goals and commitments to reduce GHG and the associated air pollutant emissions.

The main international agreement is the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (Box 2). LAC countries have established their climate mitigation objectives to 2030 and 2050 through their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and Long-Term Strategies (LTS) (Table 1). Several countries have gone further, committing to carbon neutrality. Climate change mitigation is also part of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development under Goal 13 “Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts” with targets related to the integration of climate change measures into national policies, strategies and planning, and to education, awareness-raising and human and institutional capacity on climate change mitigation.

Reducing negative impacts from air pollution is part of the 2030 Agenda under Goal 3 “Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages” and under Goal 11 “Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable”.

Box 2. The UNFCCC and the Paris Agreement

The centrepiece of international climate governance is the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) opened for signature at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 and in force since 21 March 1994. The objective of the Convention is to stabilise GHG concentrations "at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic (human induced) interference with the climate system." The Convention established a broad set of principles, including the “common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities”. The Convention was first operationalised through the Kyoto Protocol that set binding emission reduction targets for industrialized countries and economies in transition compared to 1990 levels over the five-year period 2008–2012 (the first commitment period). A second commitment period, started in 2013 and lasted until 2020.

At the 21^st session of the Conference of Parties (COP21) in Paris, on 12 December 2015, Parties to the UNFCCC reached a landmark agreement to combat climate change and to accelerate and intensify the actions and investments needed for a sustainable low-carbon future. The Paris Agreement (PA) sets out the goal of limiting average global warming to 2ºC above pre-industrial levels and identifies a need for further efforts to confine the increase to 1.5ºC.

The basis of the PA is a voluntary, “bottom-up” approach. Countries submit their post-2020 climate actions reflecting their highest possible ambition through successive Nationally Determined Contributions that they intend to achieve. NDCs embody targets and efforts by each country to reduce national emissions and adapt to the impacts of climate change, together with information necessary for clarity, transparency and understanding.

The PA is instrumental in increasing climate mitigation ambitions. Its implementation would lead to considerably lower global GHG emissions than previously projected. New estimates considering current PA commitments suggest that global GHG emissions will peak before 2030 (UNFCCC, 2022). The Glasgow Climate Pact and the Sharm El-Sheik Implementation Plan adopted at COP26 and COP27 respectively, made a further contribution to strengthening countries’ implementation capacity by completing the Paris Agreement’s rulebook and increasing the financial commitments to address more ambitious and complex targets.

However, the pace of emission reductions is too slow. Estimates suggest that current commitments and targets will not suffice to achieve the goals set out by the PA (UNFCCC, 2022). To address the climate emergency, countries must both significantly raise their level of ambition and ensure that their targets are met through effective climate action.

Indicators

The indicators presented in this section describe:

• GHG emission trends;

• Share of GHG emissions in LAC by sub-region;

• GHG emissions by sector;

• CO₂ productivity and intensity;

• Energy supply mix and share of renewables in electricity generation;

• Mean population exposure to PM_2.5 concentrations;

• Premature mortality attributed to exposure to PM_2.5 and associated welfare costs.

Climate objectives in the LAC region

Under the Paris Agreement, all 33 LAC countries have submitted GHG emission reduction commitments to the UNFCCC through their NDCs, to be achieved by 2030. However, the commitments vary across countries in terms of clarity and information details, sectors and gases covered, baseline scenarios and reference years (Table 1). Measuring progress is hampered by the lack of official GHG emission data for the LAC region. Most LAC countries do not produce regular, up-to-date and comprehensive GHG emission inventories. Therefore, research estimates and data on energy-related CO₂ emissions are used here as proxies.

By 2022, 29 LAC countries had updated their NDCs, since their first submission,2 many of which presented an increase in ambition. Sixteen countries have committed to net zero targets by 2050 or earlier (Table 1).3 The legal status of the commitments varies. Only Chile and Colombia have their targets enshrined in a climate law, while Jamaica and Paraguay have declared a net zero pledge. Twelve countries (Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Barbados, Brazil, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Grenada, Guyana, Panama, Peru, Suriname, and Uruguay) have included their objectives in a policy or planning document.

The scope of gases covered in national targets varies across countries. Chile, Colombia and Costa Rica provide detailed and separate emission reduction and removal targets by sector, with transparent pathways for the land use, land use change and forestry (LULUCF) sector. This is not the case for other LAC countries, most of which do not specify the target’s emission coverage or sectoral breakdown, do not have separate reduction and removal targets, transparent assumptions on removals, or information on the anticipated pathway towards net zero. Only seven countries cover all GHGs in their pledges (Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Panama and Peru), leaving a majority of countries with either unspecified pledges or, in the case of countries such as Uruguay, pledges limited to CO₂. A focus solely on CO₂ is of concern in a region where emissions from methane-intensive sectors such as agriculture contribute to over a quarter of total emissions and represents a missed opportunity to achieve net zero. Eight countries, namely Bolivia, Chile, Costa Rica, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Mexico, and Paraguay, include black carbon in their NDCs.

Table 1 shows the targets and commitments presented by LAC countries. Some countries have targets that allow an increase in GHG emissions (e.g. the Bahamas, the Dominican Republic, Honduras, Haiti, Saint Lucia, Mexico, and Peru). Thirteen LAC countries do not have a clear target covering all sectors and all gases. Therefore, GHG emissions in the region are expected to increase further.

Countries have set out a range of policy approaches to comply with their commitments. These vary from direct regulations, carbon pricing, measures to reduce deforestation, among other approaches and efforts (see Climate actions and policies).

Table 1. Nationally Determined Contributions in LAC countries

Country	NDC update (yes/no), Year of publication	GHG emission reduction target as stated	Net zero target
Antigua and Barbuda	Yes, 2021	Sector specific targets for electricity generation and transport	2040
Argentina	Yes, 2021	Not exceeding 349 MtCO2e of net emission by 2030.	2050
Bahamas (the)	Yes, 2022	30% GHG emissions reduction relative to BAU scenario by 2030.	N/A
Barbados	Yes, 2021	35% GHG emissions reduction relative to BAU scenario by 2030.	2030
Belize	Yes, 2021	Reduction of 1.0 MtCO2e in annual emissions by 2030.	N/A
Bolivia (Plurinational State of)	Yes, 2022	Targets for specific sectors and gases. The overall goal will be calculated when preparing the First Biennial Transparency Report.	N/A
Brazil	Yes, 2022	Reduction of emissions by 50%, in 2030 compared to 2005.	2050
Chile	Yes, 2020	A GHG emissions budget of no more than 1 100 MtCO2e in the period 2020-2030.	2050
Colombia	Yes, 2020	Limit GHG emissions to a maximum of 169.44 MtCO2e in 2030.	2050
Costa Rica	Yes, 2020	Limit net GHG emissions to an absolute maximum of 9.11 MtCO2e by 2030.	2050
Cuba	Yes, 2020	No clear overall target.	N/A
Dominica	Yes, 2022	Overall emissions reduction targets of 39% by 2025 and 45% by 2030.	N/A
Dominican Republic (the)	Yes, 2020	27% GHG emissions reduction relative to BAU scenario by 2030.	2050
Ecuador	No, 2019	No clear target.	N/A
El Salvador	Yes, 2022	No clear target.	N/A
Grenada	Yes, 2020	40% GHG emissions reduction relative to 2010 levels by 2030.	2050
Guatemala	Yes, 2022	No clear target.	N/A
Guyana	No, 2016	No clear overall target.	Achieved
Honduras	Yes, 2021	Sector specific target for 2030.	N/A
Haiti	Yes, 2022	Reduction of emissions from 18.970 MtCO2e in the reference scenario to 17.774 MtCO2e in the unconditional scenario.	N/A
Jamaica	Yes, 2021	25.4% reduction relative to BAU scenario by 2030.	2050
Mexico	Yes, 2022	22% GHG emissions reduction relative to BAU scenario by 2030.	N/A
Nicaragua	Yes, 2020	No clear target.	N/A
Panama	Yes, 2020	No clear target.	Achieved
Peru	Yes, 2020	Limit GHG emissions to a maximum of 208.8 MtCO2e by 2030.	2050
Paraguay	Yes, 2021	Conditional 20% reduction from 2030 BAU emission level.	2050
Saint Kitts and Nevis	Yes, 2021	Conditional on international support, reduction of CO2 emissions by 61% by 2030 relative to 2010.	N/A
Saint Lucia	Yes, 2021	7% GHG emissions reduction in the energy sector relative to 2010 by 2030.	N/A
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines	No, 2016	22% GHG emissions reduction relative to BAU scenario by 2025.	N/A
Suriname	Yes, 2019	No clear target.	Achieved
Trinidad and Tobago	No, 2018	Sector specific targets for 2030.	N/A
Uruguay	Yes, 2022	Gas specific targets for 2030.	2050
Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of)	Yes, 2021	20% GHG emissions reduction relative to BAU scenario by 2030.	N/A

Note: BAU refers to “Business as usual” GHG emission projections. Countries report targets that are unconditional and conditional on international support. In this table, unless specified, only unconditional targets are presented. In addition, countries report overall targets and sector specific targets. When overall target is available, only the overall target is presented. When an overall target is not available, sector specific targets are presented.

Source: OECD Secretariat compilation from NDC and LTS.

Table 2. Estimated GHG emissions and targets

Selected Latin American countries

	National GHG emissions, latest available year				Estimated distance to NDC 2030 target (latest available year – 2030) in % (d)
Country	Year (a)	Total emissions excl. LULUCF in MTCO2e	Stated and estimated NDC 2030 target in MTCO2e (b)	Estimated emissions in line with the scope of the NDC 2030 target in MTCO2e (c)
Argentina	2014	322.6	349.0	368.3	-5.2%
Brazil	2016	1014.7	1176.3	1305.6	-9.9%
Chile	2018	112.3	95.0	112.3	-15.4%
Colombia	2018	180.7	169.4	279.2	-39.3%
Costa Rica	2017	14.5	9.1	11.5	-20.8%
Mexico	2019	736.6	644.2	534.7	12.5%
Peru	2016	96.3	208.8	205.3	1.7%

Notes: This table builds on both national data from official documents and provisional estimates by the IPAC Secretariat. It provides rough indications on progress made and to be made, but can in no way be taken to reflect the official position of countries covered in the table.

(a) Latest year for which national GHG emissions data are available, considering data officially submitted to UNFCCC, national emission inventories and data available in other official documents such as NDCs and National Communications to the UNFCCC.

(b) Countries’ targets estimated by the OECD using information provided in NDCs. For further information on the methodology used, see (OECD, forthcoming[19]).

(c) Total emissions for the latest year available covering sectors and gases that are specified in the NDC 2030 target. When detailed sector and gas level data are not available, the closest disaggregated official data available have been used (i.e. for Chile, Colombia and Costa Rica). For further information on the methodology used, see (OECD, forthcoming[19]).

(d) A negative distance to target shows the percentage of emissions a country needs to reduce to reach the target. A positive distance to target shows that a country’s target allows an increase of emissions.

Source: OECD (2023), "Air and climate: Greenhouse gas emissions by source", OECD Environment Statistics (database), https://doi.org/10.1787/data-00594-en; UNFCCC (2022) “Greenhouse Gas Inventory Data”, http://di.unfccc.int/;

UNFCCC (2022), “NDC Registry”, http://www4.unfccc.int/ndcregistry/Pages/All.aspx; IPAC Secretariat calculations.

Greenhouse gas emissions

Recent trends and developments

Total greenhouse gas emissions

Available estimates suggest that gross emissions (i.e. excluding LULUCF) in the region have grown by 61% since 1990, reaching about 3.2 Gt of CO₂e in 2019 (Climate Watch, 2022[20]). This represented approximately 6.7% of global GHG emissions, about the same share as in 1990. This is proportional to the region’s share in global GDP (7.1%) and slightly lower than its share in global population (8.4%). Nevertheless, despite being a relatively small contributor to climate change, LAC countries have a significant role to play in global mitigation efforts due to their potential for natural carbon capture, particularly around the Amazon River basin.

Emissions grew in line with GDP until 2014, then stabilised and even decreased, suggesting a relative decoupling enhanced by the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. There are, however, significant differences between sub-regions, reflecting their size and level of economic activity. South America generates most of LAC GHG emissions (71%), followed by Central America (24%) and the Caribbean (4%) (Figure 4). Brazil contributed almost a third (32%) of LAC’s total gross GHG emissions in 2019, the top five emitters (Brazil, Mexico, Argentina, Venezuela, and Colombia) contributed about 78% and the top ten emitters, 90%.4 The overall trend is driven by South America, where emissions increased by 61% between 1990 and 2019, followed by Central America (+68%) and the Caribbean (+26%) (Figure 5).5

Compare

Compare

Compare

The profile of emissions in LAC differs from that of OECD and EU countries. In LAC, fuel combustion (including for electricity and heat generation, transportation and manufacturing) generates most (43.4%) of the region’s net emissions. This share is much lower than in the OECD area (83.6%) and partly reflects a cleaner energy mix (i.e. a higher share of renewables in electricity generation) (see Energy mix). LAC also stands out for its large share of emissions from agriculture that amounts to 25.3% of net emissions (compared to 8.5% in the OECD area). The LULUCF sector acts as a net sink in the OECD, whereas it generates about 20% of net emissions in LAC (Climate Watch, 2022[20]) (Figure 7).

These patterns are heavily influenced by the emission profile of South America where agriculture and LULUCF account for almost a third and a fourth of the sub-region’s net emissions, respectively. This reflects the importance of agriculture in the economy as well as the massive deforestation occurring in the region. Forest loss is a major concern, mainly caused by the conversion of land for agriculture, timber production and, to a lesser extent, the expansion of urban areas. Deforestation in Brazil has accelerated in the past ten years. Nicaragua and Paraguay experienced high loss rates in the last 20 years, although the areas lost are smaller. On the other hand, Costa Rica and Chile managed to increase their forest cover thanks to national afforestation policies (OECD et al., 2022[5]).

Central America has an emission profile closer to OECD countries, with energy generation being the main source, followed by transport. In the Caribbean, energy generation is also the main source of GHGs, but because of the relatively small size of Caribbean islands, transport comes only fourth after agriculture and LULUCF (Figure 7).

Since 1990, emissions from almost all sources have grown continuously, particularly emissions from fuel combustion. This was due to increased emissions from transport, and from electricity and heat production. Agricultural emissions increased by about 32% due to the rise in livestock breeding in South and Central America between 1990 and 2010. Emissions from industrial processes and waste management are lower, but have significantly increased since 1990. They tripled and doubled respectively (OECD et al., 2022[5]).

Transport is a major source of GHG emissions, mainly due to the large size of many LAC countries and the reliance on internal combustion engine vehicles. In LAC countries, the urban layout and the poor quality and availability of public transport further favour the use of private vehicles. In 2020, the motorisation rate reached 311 vehicles (passenger cars and commercial vehicles) per inhabitant in Argentina, 246 and 214 in Chile and Brazil, respectively (OICA, 2023[21]).

Compare

CO₂ emission intensity

CO₂ emissions from energy use increased by 84% between 1990 and 2019 in the region, with some countries increasing their emissions by 219% (Dominican Republic) and others reducing them by 30% (Cuba) (IEA, 2022[22]). In 2020 emissions dropped by 12% from the previous year due to the COVID-19 pandemic and associated restrictions in activities and mobilities.

In 2020, the per capita level of energy-related CO₂ emissions was significantly lower in LAC countries (2 tonnes per capita) than the OECD average (7.5 tonnes per capita). This reflects lower income and consumption levels and a less carbon intensive energy mix (Figure 8). A more nuanced picture emerges when accounting for emissions from agriculture, forestry and land use change. Net GHG emission intensities are estimated to be higher (6.4 tonnes of CO₂e per capita in 2019), but still below the OECD average (10.3 tonnes of CO₂e per capita) (Cárdenas and Orozco, 2022[23]).

LAC countries also have higher levels of CO₂ productivity than OECD countries. LAC countries generated on average 6.6 USD of GDP per kg of CO₂ emitted in 2020 (an increase compared to 5.8 UDS/kg in 1990), and above the OECD average of 5.5 USD/kg (Figure 9). While CO₂ productivity in Central America has consistently remained under the LAC average since 1990, and South America above average, the Caribbean has experienced the greatest shift over the past three decades, increasing from 4.3 USD/kg of CO₂ emissions in 1990 to 7.8 USD/kg in 2020.

Compare

Compare

Comparability, interpretation and data availability

GHG emissions

Official GHG emission (inventory) data are not regularly compiled and updated in LAC countries. Data and times series available through the UNFCCC and OECD show many gaps, including for large emitters. Only eight countries regularly publish and update time series back to 1990. This is a major impediment to assess trends and progress in mitigation efforts.

In this report, data from the World Resource Institute (WRI) have been used to derive aggregated (global and regional) trends and to provide rough estimates of emissions from key sectors and sources. However, for individual countries, only emission data available from official sources (UNFCCC, NDCs) and the OECD and IEA databases have been used.

The Climate Watch6 data, compiled by WRI,7 use a combination of official sources and research estimates. The data cover all parties to the UNFCCC, all gases and the main Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) sectors. The methodology used follows IPCC’s guidelines to compile sectoral emissions drawing on sources that have been widely adopted including in the IEA’s GHG Emissions from Fossil Fuel Combustion, the FAO’s agriculture and land use emission data, US Environmental Protection Agency’s non-CO₂ gases emission data, and fossil related CO₂ emissions from the Global Carbon Project. Differences with existing official data are not explicitly provided in the documentation and are difficult to explain (Climate Watch, 2022[20]).

CO₂ emissions from energy use

The CO₂ emission estimates are affected by the quality of the underlying energy data, but in general the comparability across countries is quite good. Carbon productivity is defined as the economic value, in terms of GDP, generated per unit of CO₂ emitted in production. It provides information on the level of decoupling between economic activity and carbon emissions and insights into the environmental and economic efficiency with which production processes use energy resources and ecosystem services. Its interpretation should take into account the structure of countries’ energy supply, trade patterns and climate factors. Reductions in national emissions can also be achieved by offshoring domestic production and, thus, the related domestic emissions. Evidence of decoupling and productivity growth based on domestic emissions, therefore, may reveal only part of the story.

GHG mitigation and air pollution

Climate mitigation and local air pollution policies have multiple co-benefits and synergies. They are especially important in LAC where air pollution is the leading environmental health risk, particularly for vulnerable groups such as the very young and the very old, and a major cause of environmental degradation (PAHO, 2023[24]).

Exposure to fine particulate matter (PM_2.5) is a good indicator of local air pollution and the associated human health effects. PM_2.5 is predominantly emitted by motor vehicles, the use of wood as fuel and wildfires. Chronic exposure, even to moderate levels, substantially increases the risk of heart disease and stroke and is an important cause of premature death in LAC countries (Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, 2019[25]). It also increases the risk of respiratory diseases, including lung cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and respiratory infections.

Fine particulates also embody black carbon, a short-lived climate forcer that results from the incomplete combustion of fuels and biomass, including through forest fires and agricultural burning. Black carbon accelerates the melting of snow and ice increasing climate change by reducing the albedo effect and affecting agricultural yields and food security (OECD, 2021[26]). Earlier research drawing on earth observation data showed that air pollution and smoke generated during the biomass burning season affect precipitation patterns in the Amazon basin that may enhance climate-related hazards (Koren et al., 2004[27]). They have also been associated with the melting of Andean glaciers (Rabatel et al., 2013[28]). Such effects in turn impact the livelihoods of Andean inhabitants who depend on the glaciers for drinking water, farming and the generation of hydropower, an important energy source in the region providing 8% of total energy supply, and 54% of electricity production in 2020 (IEA, 2023[29]) (IEA, 2022[10]).

Urban planning and policies that incentivise public transportation can significantly reduce air pollution levels and contribute to curbing GHG emissions. Understanding the relationship between pollution levels and the urban environment is particularly useful for policymakers when air quality data are limited. Policy‑amenable features of cities with a proven association with pollution levels can be targeted to protect population health and the environment. These characteristics include city density, fragmentation, congestion, quality of public transport and number of green spaces (Gouveia et al., 2021[30]). Relevant policies include spatial planning and street redesign, the development of sustainable transport networks, carbon pricing and incentives for vehicle electrification, all of which are central to climate strategies. Associated with high effectiveness and increasing public acceptability, these policies can bring the transformational change needed to meet net-zero goals, while improving people’s lives (OECD, 2021[31]).

Recent trends and developments

In Central and South America accelerated urban development and industrialisation, and increased energy production and consumption, are the main contributors to air pollution. In the Caribbean, population exposure to PM_2.5 reflects a high population density combined with a dense road network. Socio-economic inequality also plays a role, with disadvantaged sociodemographic groups exposed to higher levels of air pollution (Libertun de Duren et al., 2022[32]).

Exposure to air pollution is particularly high in big urban areas where economic activity is concentrated and where demand for mobility is highest. Cities most affected by air pollution include Monterrey, Guadalajara, Mexico City, Cochabamba, Santiago, Lima, Bogotá, Medellín, Montevideo and San Salvador, where concentration levels exceed the values recommended by the World Health Organisation (WHO) (WHO, 2022[33]). Furthermore, there are large differences between income groups. The highest exposure to outdoor air pollution affects households living near roads and industrial sites. In some cases, differences in exposure are linked to inequalities in the development, implementation of and compliance with environmental law, policy and regulation (PAHO, 2023[24]).

Although air quality standards have been established in some LAC countries, these are frequently exceeded or not consistently enforced. Many countries and cities in the region do not have standards for fuel efficiency, vehicle exhaust emissions, or fuel quality, which are generally considered to be the basic standards for a cleaner transport. With growing vehicle stocks and road traffic, this entails increased risks of air pollution and health issues (Maxwell, 2019[34]).

Mean population exposure to PM_2.5

The average level of pollution from fine particulate matter to which a LAC inhabitant is exposed, has slowly decreased from an average of 23 micrograms of PM_2.5 per cubic metre (µg/m³) in 1990 to 18 µg/m³ in 2019. However, this level remains above the OECD average of 14 µg/m³ and the WHO guideline of not exceeding an annual mean PM_2.5 concentration of 5 µg/m³, which is the lowest range over which adverse health effects can be observed. About 92.5% of the LAC population is exposed to PM_2.5 concentrations above 10 µg/m³, significantly more than the OECD average of 61.7%. The countries most affected are Peru, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago, Belize, Grenada and Chile (Figure 10).

Compare

Mortality attributed to exposure to PM_2.5

Local air pollution is a major health risk in the region. In 2019, chronic respiratory diseases caused over 180 000 deaths in the LAC region, most of which were due to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Brazil represented 43% of chronic respiratory diseases, followed by Mexico, Colombia, Venezuela, Peru, Cuba, Ecuador and Bolivia. In 2019, an average of 260 premature deaths per million inhabitants can be attributed to PM_2.5 across the region (Figure 11), an increase from 231 deaths in 1990.

Compare

Welfare cost of mortality from exposure to PM_2.5

Mortality and morbidity from exposure to air pollution generate considerable economic costs. In 2019, the welfare cost associated with premature mortality alone accounted for 2.8% of GDP in LAC (Figure 12), compared to an OECD average of 2.4%. Accounting for the cost of morbidity for example from losses in labour productivity and in agricultural productivity, or medical treatment would further increase these costs.

Losses are particularly high in the Caribbean. Barbados experienced the highest welfare losses, about 7% of GDP in 2019. Dominica, Grenada, Dominican Republic, Jamaica, and Antigua and Barbuda had costs above 3% of GDP. This is due to the compounding effects of high exposure to the pollutant, fragile healthcare systems with a high proportion of premature deaths, and high marginal costs of enhancing health safety. The high marginal cost of enhancing safety could be due to the health financing systems, the cost of healthcare and the cost of sick leave, all influencing the willingness to pay for reducing the risks posed by air pollution. In South America, the countries most impacted are Bolivia, with an estimated welfare cost from mortality of 4% of GDP in 2019, as well as Chile, Peru, Argentina, and Colombia, all of which have cost above the LAC average.

Compare

Comparability, interpretation and data availability

International data on emissions of PM_2.5 are available for many but not all LAC countries. For example, data on mortality attributed to air pollution exposure and the associated welfare cost are not available for 25 LAC territories, including many Caribbean islands, as well as Uruguay, Venezuela, Suriname and Guatemala. The estimation methods for emissions, the scope of sources and particles included in estimations differ between countries. PM_2.5 is the pollutant that poses the greatest health to human health globally, others include carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides (NO_x), sulphur oxides (SO_x), lead, and ozone.

Exposure indicators provide only a partial view of air pollution severity and consequences aggregated across the entire population. Importantly, there is generally no “safe level” of exposure for many pollutants. Even where guideline or target exposures are met, substantial public health and economic benefits can be realised through further improvements in air quality. Better estimates are needed for exposure to both outdoor and indoor air pollution. The accuracy of exposure estimates varies considerably by location. Accuracy is poorer in areas with few monitoring stations and in areas with very high concentrations. Particular attention should be paid to exposure of sensitive groups and the impact on human health (and associated distributional and equity issues). Although many important gaps remain, available data are improving.

Welfare costs only account for mortality, while impacts stemming from air pollution and their associated costs are more widespread, including morbidity, and costs associated to non-human health impacts. Exposure and cost indicators can be usefully complemented with indicators of subjective well-being related to perceived air quality.

Energy mix

Recent trends and developments

Total energy supply (TES) in the LAC region remains dominated by fossil fuels (69% of TES in 2020), although renewables account for a much larger share (30%) than in the OECD area (12%) and the world (15%) (IEA, 2023[29]). The share of coal in the energy mix has been decreasing across the region, but many LAC countries still depend on coal for their energy supply; examples include Chile (18% in 2021), Brazil (8%), Colombia (6%) and Mexico (4%). Nuclear energy is hardly used in the region (IEA, 2023[29]).

The use of renewables varies across the region. In some countries, such as Brazil, Costa Rica, Haiti, Honduras, Nicaragua, Paraguay and Uruguay, their share in the energy mix is over 40% while it is below 10% in Argentina, Guyana, Mexico and Trinidad and Tobago (Figure 14). The main sources of renewable energy are hydroelectric power and biofuels, such as firewood and bagasse (OECD et al., 2022[5]) (IEA, 2021[35]). In 2020, hydroelectricity accounted for 26% of total renewable energy supply across LAC. It played a larger role in South America (30%) and Central America (13%), than in the Caribbean (1%) due to islands’ hydrological conditions and the relatively high cost of the infrastructure required.

In 2020, renewable energy accounted for 69% of electricity generation in the region, an increase of 9 percentage points since 2015. This is more than twice the OECD average of 30%. Most renewable electricity comes from hydroelectricity (78%) (IEA, 2022[10]). The remaining 22% come from solar, wind, biomass and geothermal (IEA, 2022[10]). Central America has shown the greatest increases in the share of renewables in electricity generation, from 65% to 77% between 2000 and 2020. However, significant variations exist across the region. While Brazil generates 84% of its electric power from renewables, Jamaica relies on imported oil derivatives for 87% of its electricity generation (OECD et al., 2022[5]).

Since hydroelectricity plays a major role in the region, there is a significant risk that changing rainfall patterns and increasing droughts affect the capacity of energy systems to adapt. In Chile extended droughts have already affected the country’s hydropower capacity.

Compare

Compare

Comparability and interpretation

Data quality is not homogeneous for all countries. In some countries, data are based on secondary sources, and where incomplete estimates were made by the International Energy Agency (IEA). In general, data are likely to be more accurate for production and trade than for international bunkers or stock changes; and statistics for biofuels and waste are less accurate than those for traditional commercial energy data. The supply structure, which may vary considerably across countries is dependent on final demands by industry, transport and the household sectors, and is highly influenced by national energy policies and endowments in energy resources.

Notes

← 1.  Excluding land use, land use change and forestry.

← 2.  These include Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominica, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Grenada, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Suriname, Uruguay, and Venezuela.

← 3.  These include Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Barbados, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Grenada, Guyana, Jamaica, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Suriname, and Uruguay. Data gathered from countries NDCs, Long-Term Climate Strategies, Laws, Presidential declarations, and other policy documents.

← 4.  Brazil, Mexico, Argentina, Venezuela, Colombia, Chile, Peru, Ecuador, Bolivia, Paraguay

← 5.  Percentage changes calculated by IPAC based on data from Climate Watch (2022).

← 6.  Climate Watch is an open data platform gathering data from multiple datasets, managed by the World Resources Institute. The Climate Watch platform is a contribution to the NDC Partnership, which serves to accelerate the implementation of NDCs through, among others, data resources and expertise.

← 7.  WRI is a global research organisation focused on global challenges including climate change, energy, food, forests, water, sustainable cities, and the ocean. Its work includes data collection, analysis and engagement governments, businesses, multilateral institutions and civil society groups.