Senegal Country Climate and Development Report

Climate action offers an opportunity to safeguard development gains and accompany the ambitious transformation Senegal is embarking on to achieve its objective of reaching middle income status in the next decade. While the country was among the fastest growing economies in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), poverty reduction was slow, vulnerabilities persisted, and inequalities increased. In addition, overall productivity remained low, with lagging structural transformation, high informality, and low job creation. To attain its middle-income goal, Senegal must initiate a series of reforms for a productive, sustainable, and inclusive growth model, with climate considerations at the center given the country’s high vulnerability. Senegal’s high climate vulnerability is caused by the country’s coastal exposure and reliance on natural resources for food, jobs, and growth (partly a consequence of its slow structural transformation). With temperatures soaring, precipitation expected to decrease, and erosion threatening 75 percent of the coastline at term, Senegal’s population and assets are under high risk. The poorest are particularly vulnerable, with 55 percent of total households teetering on the edge of poverty because of recurrent shocks. Without action, annual economic losses could reach 3-4 percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) as soon as 2030 and further increase to 9.4 percent by 2050, wiping years of per capita income growth and eroding any potential human capital accumulation. Overall, climate change could push two more million Senegalese in poverty by mid-century. Building resilience and leveraging the low-carbon economy will help Senegal realizing its growth ambitions, contributing to a more productive, sustainable, and inclusive development pathway. The macro-economic analysis for this CCDR finds that adaptation measures in selected sectors could bring GDP gains of about 2 percent by 2030, and between 0.5 and 1 percent afterwards (for climate financing needs of about 0.9 percent of GDP in the period to 2030 and 0.1 percent afterwards). Adaptation could also reduce poverty headcount, with 40 percent less people pushed into poverty by climate change compared to no adaptation action. In addition, emission reductions could reach 20MtCO2e per year over the period to 2050, from interventions in forestry, improved cooking services, urban transport, waste management, and energy production. The energy transition provides an opportunity to meet both development and climate objectives, exceeding NDC targets and putting the country well on track for net zero by 2050, but significant downside risks remain, linked to delays in the deployment and financing availability for renewable generation and domestic gas. Senegal’s formidable renewable energy potential (chiefly around solar) offers the lowest cost generation option to meet rising energy demand while accelerating decarbonization. At term, the country could play a leading role in decarbonizing the region though export opportunities and bolster resilience across the regional grid. In the short term, given constraints to the fast deployment of renewables, the transitional use of domestic gas will help phase out expensive and high-emitting coal and Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO) generation, while balancing the electricity system and lowering the cost of electricity. Climate action will require a financing of US$8.2 billion over 2025-30 (in present value, at 6 percent per year), or 4.5 percent of discounted cumulative GDP over the same period, and US$10.6 billion over 2031-50 (in present value terms), or 2.0 percent of discounted cumulative GDP over the same period. Water security, sustainable (urban) transport, and the energy transition account for the largest share. Importantly, climate action is expected to bring significant benefits over time, beyond climate adaptation and mitigation – including health or jobs, (as in the primary sector, with 155,000 jobs created, of which 80 percent in agriculture). Many benefits could not be properly estimated, implying that the returns from climate action might well be underestimated.