Exploring climate change uncertainties to support adaptive management of changing flood-risk
In: Environmental science & policy, Band 33, S. 133-142
ISSN: 1462-9011
8 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Environmental science & policy, Band 33, S. 133-142
ISSN: 1462-9011
"This report summarizes the findings of the three Working Group reports and provides a synthesis that specifically addresses the issues of concern to policymakers in the domain of climate change."
BASE
Le présent rapport donne un aperçu des pratiques actuelles, des dé s et des opportunités liés à la Mesure, la Déclaration et la Véri cation (MDV) des émissions de gaz à effet de serre (GES), ainsi que de la réduction des émissions par les pays en développement dans le cadre de la Convention-cadre des Nations Unies sur les changements climatiques. La MDV des émissions de GES de l'élevage est pertinente pour les raisons suivantes : i) la production animale contribue de manière signi cative aux émissions mondiales de GES ; ii) la part des émissions de GES de l'élevage dans les émissions agricoles a crû au l du temps ; et iii) une meilleure caractérisation des émissions de GES de l'élevage peut aider les décideurs à cibler et concevoir des efforts en vue de réduire ces émissions. Etant donné que les politiques nationales d'atténuation de l'impact des changements climatiques mettent de plus en plus l'accent sur les cibles de la réduction des GES dans les Contributions Déterminées au niveau National, ce rapport évalue la mesure dans laquelle les pratiques actuelles en matière de MDV peuvent répondre aux besoins stratégiques évolutifs. Le rapport décrit les obligations liées à la MDV au titre de la CCNUCC (Chapitre 2), les pratiques actuelles en matière de collecte de données et de déclaration des émissions de GES de l'élevage dans le cadre des inventaires nationaux de GES (Chapitre 3) et la MDV des mesures d'atténuation (Chapitre 4). En outre, il présente les possibilités d'amélioration (Chapitre 5). ; This report is also available in: ; English: http://hdl.handle.net/10568/89335 ; Spanish : http://hdl.handle.net/10568/93127 ; A summary brief is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10568/80890
BASE
100-year Global Warming Potentials (GWPs) are used almost universally to compare emissions of greenhouse gases in national inventories and reduction targets. GWPs have been criticised on several grounds, but little work has been done to determine global mitigation costs under alternative physics-based metrics . We used the integrated assessment model MESSAGE to compare emission pathways and abatement costs for fixed and time-dependent variants of the Global Temperature Change Potential (GTP) with those based on GWPs, for a policy goal of limiting the radiative forcing to a specified level in the year 2100. We find that fixed 100-year GTPs would increase global abatement costs (discounted and aggregated over the 21st century) under this policy goal by 5 20 % relative to 100-year GWPs, whereas time-varying GTPs would reduce costs by about 5 %. These cost differences are smaller than differences arising from alternative assumptions regarding agricultural mitigation potential and much smaller than those arising from alternative radiative forcing targets. Using the land-use model GLOBIOM, we show that alternative metrics affect food production differently in different world regions depending on regional characteristics of future land-use change to meet growing food demand. We conclude that under scenarios of complete participation, the choice of metric has a limited impact on global abatement costs but could be important for the political economy of regional and sectoral participation in collective mitigation efforts, in particular changing costs and gains over time for agriculture and energy-intensive sectors.
BASE
Since the adoption of the Paris Agreement in 2015, spurred by the 2018 IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C, net zero emission targets have emerged as a new organizing principle of climate policy. In this context, climate policymakers and stakeholders have been shifting their attention to carbon dioxide removal (CDR) as an inevitable component of net zero targets. The importance of CDR would increase further if countries and other entities set net-negative emissions targets. The scientific literature on CDR governance and policy is still rather scarce, with empirical case studies and comparisons largely missing. Based on an analytical framework that draws on the multi-level perspective of sociotechnical transitions as well as existing work on CDR governance, we gathered and assessed empirical material until early 2021 from 9 Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) cases: the European Union and three of its Member States (Ireland, Germany, and Sweden), Norway, the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, and the United States. Based on a synthesis of differences and commonalities, we propose a tripartite conceptual typology of the varieties of CDR policymaking: (1) incremental modification of existing national policy mixes, (2) early integration of CDR policy that treats emission reductions and removals as fungible, and (3) proactive CDR policy entrepreneurship with support for niche development. Although these types do not necessarily cover all dimensions relevant for CDR policy and are based on a limited set of cases, the conceptual typology might spur future comparative work as well as more fine-grained case-studies on established and emerging CDR policies. ; publishedVersion
BASE
Since the adoption of the Paris Agreement in 2015, spurred by the 2018 IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C, net zero emission targets have emerged as a new organizing principle of climate policy. In this context, climate policymakers and stakeholders have been shifting their attention to carbon dioxide removal (CDR) as an inevitable component of net zero targets. The importance of CDR would increase further if countries and other entities set net-negative emissions targets. The scientific literature on CDR governance and policy is still rather scarce, with empirical case studies and comparisons largely missing. Based on an analytical framework that draws on the multi-level perspective of sociotechnical transitions as well as existing work on CDR governance, we gathered and assessed empirical material until early 2021 from 9 Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) cases: the European Union and three of its Member States (Ireland, Germany, and Sweden), Norway, the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, and the United States. Based on a synthesis of differences and commonalities, we propose a tripartite conceptual typology of the varieties of CDR policymaking: (1) incremental modification of existing national policy mixes, (2) early integration of CDR policy that treats emission reductions and removals as fungible, and (3) proactive CDR policy entrepreneurship with support for niche development. Although these types do not necessarily cover all dimensions relevant for CDR policy and are based on a limited set of cases, the conceptual typology might spur future comparative work as well as more fine-grained case-studies on established and emerging CDR policies.
BASE
In: Environmental science & policy, Band 64, S. 129-140
ISSN: 1462-9011
SSRN
Working paper