Search

Climate change has considerably dominated science-policy dialogue, public debate, and subsequently environmental policies since the three "Rio Conventions" were born. This has led to practically independent courses of action of climate change mitigation and biodiversity conservation actions, neglecting potential conflicts among outcomes and with missed opportunities for synergistic measures. Transformative governance principles have been proposed to overcome these limitations. Using a transformative governance lens, we use the case of the Norwegian "Climate Cure 2030" for the Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF) sector to, first, illustrate the mechanisms that have led to the choice of climate mitigation measures; second, to analyze the potential consequences of these measures on biodiversity and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions; and, third, to evaluate alternative measures with potential positive outcomes for biodiversity and GHG emissions/removals. We point to some mechanisms that could support the implementation of these positive actions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change quantified a cumulative remaining carbon budget beyond which there is a high likelihood global average temperatures will increase more than 2 °C above preindustrial temperature. While there is global participation in mitigation efforts, there is little global collaboration to cooperatively mitigate emissions. Instead, countries have been acting as individual agents with independent emission reduction objectives. However, such asymmetric unilateral climate policies create the opportunity for carbon leakage resulting from the shift in embodied carbon emissions within trade networks. In this analysis, we use an optimization-based model of the global crude trade as a case study to demonstrate the importance of a cooperative, system-level approach to climate policy in order to most effectively, efficiently, and equitably achieve carbon mitigation objectives. To do this, we first characterize the cost and life cycle greenhouse gas emissions associated with the 2014 crude production and consumption system by aggregating multiple data sources and developing a balanced trade matrix. We then optimize this network to demonstrate the potential for carbon mitigation through more efficient use of crude resources. Finally, we implement a global carbon cap on total annual crude emissions. We find that such a cap would require crude consumption to drop from 4.2 gigatons (Gt) to 1.1 Gt. However, if each country had an individual carbon allocation in addition to the global cap consistent with the nationally determined contribution limits resulting from the 2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference, allowable consumption would further decrease to approximately 770 million metric tonnes. Additionally, the carbon accounting method used to assign responsibility for embodied carbon emissions associated with the traded crude further influences allowable production and consumption for each country. The simplified model presented here highlights how global cooperation and a system-level cooperative approach could guide climate policy efforts to be more cost effective and equitable, while reducing the leakage potential resulting from shifting trade patterns of embodied carbon emissions. Additionally, it demonstrates how the spatial distribution of crude consumption and production patterns change under a global carbon cap given various carbon accounting strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The concept of climate compatible development (CCD) is increasingly employed by donors and policy makers seeking 'triple-wins' for development, adaptation and mitigation. While CCD rhetoric is becoming more widespread, analyses drawing on empirical cases that present triple-wins are sorely lacking. We address this knowledge gap. Drawing on examples in rural sub-Saharan Africa, we provide the first glimpse into how projects that demonstrate triple-win potential are framed and presented within the scientific literature. We identify that development projects are still commonly evaluated in terms of adaptation or mitigation benefits. Few are framed according to their benefits across all three dimensions. Consequently, where triple-wins are occurring, they are likely to be under-reported. This has important implications, which underestimates the co-benefits that projects can deliver. A more robust academic evidence base for the delivery of triple-wins is necessary to encourage continued donor investment in activities offering the potential to deliver CCD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper re-examines the formation of International Environmental Agreements (IEAs) modelled as a two-stage non-cooperative game when countries' strategies to control pollution are complementary. This new assumption relying on empirical and theoretical evidences means that reinforcement effects do exist between countries' strategies when polluting or abating. From a deliberately conventional model the results established analytically strongly contrast with those in the literature on IEAs. We find that the unique stable agreement can consist in half countries involved in the negotiation; we demonstrate that the environmental impact of such cooperation is almost total: it tends toward the one of the full cooperative solution. Even if the incentives to free-ride are less strong, we do not observe the formation of the 'grand' coalition: not all the countries sign the agreement. We also explain why the level of cooperation is decreasing with the perception countries have of the seriousness of the problem. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The literature on global climate change has largely ignored the small but positive steps that many public and private actors are taking to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. A global policy is frequently posited as the only strategy needed. It is important to balance the major attention on global solutions as the only strategy for coping with climate change. Positive actions are underway at multiple, smaller scales to start the process of climate change mitigation. Researchers need to understand the strength of polycentric systems where enterprises at multiple levels may complement each other. Building a global regime is a necessity, but encouraging the emergence of a polycentric system starts the process of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and acts as a spur to international regimes to do their part. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many developing countries, especially in Africa, contribute only very small amounts to the world total of greenhouse gas emissions. For them, the reduction of such emissions is not a priority, and the more important issue is to find ways to reduce their vulnerability to the projected climate change which is being imposed upon them largely as a result of emissions from developed countries. This priority does not accord with the ultimate objective of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, which is to achieve stabilization of greenhouse gas emissions. This paper reports upon studies in Uganda designed to help in the development of a national adaptation strategy, and addresses the need to reconcile such a strategy with the global priority accorded to mitigation and with national economic development priorities. Some features of a national climate change adaptation strategy are identified and questions are raised about the need for an international regime to facilitate and support adaptation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Land use and management activities have a substantial impact on carbon stocks and associated greenhouse gas emissions and removals. However, it is challenging to discriminate between anthropogenic and non-anthropogenic sources and sinks from land. To address this problem, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change developed a managed land proxy to determine which lands are contributing anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions and removals. Governments report all emissions and removals from managed land to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change based on this proxy, and policy interventions to reduce emissions from land use are expected to focus on managed lands. Our objective was to review the use of the managed land proxy, and summarize the criteria that governments have applied to classify land as managed and unmanaged. We found that the large majority of governments are not reporting on their application of the managed land proxy. Among the governments that do provide information, most have assigned all area in specific land uses as managed, while designating all remaining lands as unmanaged. This designation as managed land is intuitive for croplands and settlements, which would not exist without management interventions, but a portion of forest land, grassland, and wetlands may not be managed in a country. Consequently, Brazil, Canada and the United States have taken the concept further and delineated managed and unmanaged forest land, grassland and wetlands, using additional criteria such as functional use of the land and accessibility of the land to anthropogenic activity. The managed land proxy is imperfect because reported emissions from any area can include non-anthropogenic sources, such as natural disturbances. However, the managed land proxy does make reporting of GHG emissions and removals from land use more tractable and comparable by excluding fluxes from areas that are not directly influenced by anthropogenic activity. Moreover, application of the managed land proxy can be improved by incorporating additional criteria that allow for further discrimination between managed and unmanaged land. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article critically discusses the views expressed in the Nicholas Stern Report. The article questions the valuation methods to estimate the reduction of greenhouse gases by the year 2050. The article also present differing views from scientists on how the present generation should value the future generation's welfare. The article concludes with the comment by economist Ottmar Edinhofer at the Postsdam Institute of Climate Impact Research that the focus should be on reducing emissions.

The article focuses on the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that focuses on impacts of climate change and mentions that the report suggests for policy and technological changes for the stabilization of atmospheric greenhouse-gas concentrations. It mentions that climate experts and policy analysts find the report disappointing and presents views of several climate and climate-policy experts including Glen Peters, Steve Rayner and Robert Stavins.