Search

Copyright of OECD Environment Working Papers is the property of Organisation for Economic Cooperation & Development and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of OECD Environment Working Papers is the property of Organisation for Economic Cooperation & Development and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

We assess the impacts from physical hazards (or severe weather events) on economic activity in a panel of 98 countries using local projection methods. Proxying the strength of an event by the monetary damages it caused, we find severe weather events to reduce the level of GDP. For most events in the EM-DAT data set the effects are small. The largest events in our sample (above the 90th percentile of damages) bring down the level of GDP by 0.5 percent for several years without recovery to trend. Smaller events (below the 90th percentile) see a less immediate decrease in initial years (0.1 percent) that progressively widens to become similar to the effect of larger disasters after 10 years. Climatological hazards (droughts and forest fires) appear to have the largest effects. These findings are robust across country groupings by development and alternative measures of the strength of the physical hazard. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An important yet less studied factor in determining the extent of adaptation to climate change is information: are people adequately informed about their vulnerability to future climate-related risks, and does their willingness to adapt depend on this knowledge? Focusing on how communication about projected sea level rise (SLR) affects the willingness to migrate, we implemented a large randomized control survey experiment with a nationally representative sample of more than 7,000 respondents across all provinces in Vietnam. We randomly assign respondents to different information treatments. We find that providing a simple text-based information treatment about the general extent of Vietnam's exposure to projected SLR increases all respondents' willingness to migrate (including respondents living in areas not vulnerable to SLR). However, a more spatially precise map information treatment-providing the general text along with a map showing Vietnam's projected SLR exposure-leads to a more targeted effect: it only significantly increases the willingness to migrate of respondents currently residing in vulnerable areas. Finally, adding doubt to the information treatments-mentioning an official repudiation of the scientific projection of SLR-does not reduce the treatments' impact. Our findings are inconsistent with the commonly used perfect information benchmark, which assumes that people are fully informed about future climate-related risks. They also highlight the importance of providing spatially precise information in facilitating climate adaptation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the concept of the Anthropocene Epoch as an unofficial geological time unit that signifies the significant impact of human activities on the Earth's climate and ecosystems, providing evidence for its formalization. Topics include the criteria for defining geological time units, the role of the Anthropocene Working Group (AWG) in advocating for its recognition, and the potential location of the Global Boundary Stratotype Section and Point (GSSP) for the Anthropocene.

The article analyzes the impact of public financial institutions from OECD countries and regional banks on the domestic environments within which they operate, including the UK Green Investment Bank, the European Investment Bank, and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. Topics discussed include the role of the PFIs in investing in low-carbon infrastructure projects, priorities and mandates in the low-carbon economy, and how these institutions mainstream climate concerns.

The article discusses The Role of Agricultural Science and Technology in Climate 21 Project Implementation, which includes agriculture is central to climate mitigation and adaptation and is a net sequestration sink for carbon dioxide emissions from combustion of fossil fuels. Agriculture can provide 10–20% of the additional sequestration and emissions reductions needed to achieve net zero emissions by 2050.

This report examines Germany's implementation of the EU climate and energy policy package to attain 2020 goals: the extent to which and how these policies have been implemented to date. Germany has seen mixed implementation performance. Transposition was completed with delays for the CCS Directive and the adoption of national implementation measures under the ETS. The Renewable Energy Directive was transposed on time, but national policies and measures became contested, with repeated calls for reform. Rapid growth in renewable electricity means that Germany was on track to meet its main Renewable Energy Directive target, despite a halt in progress for renewable heat and a setback for renewable fuels in transport (not on track to meet the 10% renewables share for transport fuels). Germany was not on track as regards meeting its obligations for reducing GHG emissions, reflecting increased use of coal for electricity generation and implementation problems for policies targeting the major non-ETS sectors of transport and buildings. Our analysis shows that misfit in what Germany wanted and what was decided at the EU level does not provide a good explanation for implementation problems. The EU package design fitted well with Germany's policy preferences. Domestic politics has proved important. Implementation problems variously reflected horizontal and vertical fragmentation in the politico-administrative apparatus. State-level governments with co-decision powers were instrumental in curtailing measures proposed by the federal-level government, thus acting as a veto player. A consensual policymaking style with broad consultation dominated German energy and climate policy in the implementation period. This provided no guarantee for smooth implementation when underlying interests and opposition were strong. German implementation included a packaging approach aimed at levelling costs and benefits between the states and societal groups and thus reducing conflict. This facilitated implementation of parts of the package, but was insufficient to overcome opposition against other parts of the package. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]