COP28全球盘点成果解读及全球气候治理形势展望

《联合国气候变化框架公约》第28次缔约方会议（COP28）完成了《巴黎协定》下首次全球盘点,就多项议题达成一揽子名为“阿联酋共识”的成果。全球盘点成果的达成在机制上维护了《巴黎协定》的有效性,成果文件凸显了全球以1.5℃为温控目标强化减排行动力度的紧迫性,构建了全球适应目标框架,建立了损失与损害基金,高度关注气候资金支持缺口问题,并澄清了气候资金的概念关系。中国在元首外交、气候治理理念、谈判磋商方案等方面为全球盘点成果的达成作出了重要贡献。展望首次全球盘点后的全球气候多边形势,全球气候治理格局的多渠道化、多领域化、目标细化趋势显现,地缘政治加剧绿色贸易壁垒,发展中国家立场日渐碎片化,各国将在《巴黎协定》下以“自主贡献+”的模式开展气候行动,并不断按照新的要求更新和提高自主贡献。建议中国强化统筹国际国内两个大局,顺应全球绿色发展大势,积极完成各项履约任务并强化气候变化相关研究支撑和能力建设,提前统筹谋划COP29工作方案。     

基于国家自主决定贡献的发展中国家应对气候变化资金需求研究

2015年年底召开的巴黎气候大会开启了全球联合应对气候变化的崭新时代,构建了“各国提交国家自主决定贡献-全球行动盘点-提高行动力度-各国再次提交国家自主决定贡献-最终实现应对气候变化长期目标”的全球气候治理新模式。本研究以目前《联合国气候变化框架公约》秘书处收到的160份国家自主决定贡献（涵盖188个缔约方）为对象,对各缔约方的减缓目标进行了分类汇总,并重点对发展中国家资金需求、减排成本和优先投资领域进行了系统梳理。研究结果表明：160份国家自主决定贡献中,有122份明确纳入了资金内容;64份对执行贡献预案提出了具体的资金需求数额;31份对2030年国内温室气体减排量和减排资金需求进行了预估,并基于此测算出发展中国家2030年平均减排成本为22.3美元/t CO2;28个缔约方对国内减缓和适应领域资金需求进行了再分类,减缓和适应总体资金需求比值为1.4。如以目前发达国家缔约方减缓承诺为基准,2030年发展中国家应对气候变化资金需求总量将达到4740亿美元。     

基于发展中国家自主贡献文件的资金需求评估

国家自主贡献文件是《巴黎协定》后发展中国家气候资金需求信息的重要载体。发展中国家的气候资金需求日益增长,而发达国家提供的气候资金存在的不平衡与不充分等问题,已成为当前气候资金议题的主要矛盾。因此,本文依据最新的151份发展中国家的国家自主贡献文件,深入分析发展中国家自主提出的未来气候资金需求,并评估了各国自主贡献资金需求的合理性。研究发现,151个发展中国家中有84个国家提出具体的国家自主贡献资金需求,其国家自主贡献时间框架内的资金需求总值达4.4万亿美元;分析48个同时提出减缓与适应资金需求以及21个同时提出国内与国外资金需求国家的国家自主贡献文件得到,发展中国家资金需求类别中用于减缓与适应的资金需求比例约为6?4,国外资金需求与国内资金需求比值约为7?3;基于国家自主贡献文件估算的发展中国家累积减排量到2030年约119 Gt CO₂-eq,自主贡献减排成本平均值为50美元/ t CO₂-eq;发展中国家2015—2030年国家自主贡献资金需求预期为1万亿~4万亿美元,年均700亿~2600亿美元,其中国际资金需求为0.7万亿~2.8万亿美元,年均500亿~1900亿美元。     

美国退出《巴黎协定》的原因、影响及中国的对策

综合应用定性与定量分析方法,分析美国宣布退出《巴黎协定》的原因,评估美国退出《巴黎协定》对《巴黎协定》履约前景的影响并提出中国的应对策略。美国宣布退出《巴黎协定》是全球气候治理的重大事件,将对《巴黎协定》的履约产生多重影响,包括将对《巴黎协定》的普遍性构成严重伤害,动摇以《巴黎协定》为核心的国际气候治理体制的基础;将导致《巴黎协定》履约中的领导力赤字问题显著恶化;可能引发不良示范效应,降低国际气候合作信心;将会对其他地区碳排放空间形成不可忽视的挤压,进而推高其他地区碳减排成本;美国大幅削减国际气候援助资金将削弱发展中国家减缓和适应气候变化的能力;美国延迟采取气候行动可能导致全球减排错失最佳时间窗口;美国大幅削减气候变化基础研究经费将对未来全球气候科学研究产生不利影响,进而影响《巴黎协定》履约谈判的权威性等,最后显著加大实现温控目标的难度,甚至导致目标无法实现。就全球气候治理的全局而言,全球气候治理的框架不会坍塌,但确实会受到动摇;全球气候治理的进程不会逆转,但确实会迟滞。美国宣布退出《巴黎协定》使中国面临多重挑战,其中之一是中国面临急剧上升的期望中国承担全球气候治理领导的国际压力。为此,中国对内应实现国家自主贡献的上限目标,对外应积极重建全球气候治理集体领导体制,即用C5取代G2,同时继续努力改变美国对气候变化的消极立场。     

国际航空碳排放权分配公平性研究

以人均国际航空CO₂历史累计排放为基础,借用收入分配公平的研究思路,构造了碳洛伦兹曲线和碳基尼系数,以此来测度各国历史上国际航空碳排放权的不公平使用。对碳基尼系数计算分析表明,历史上国际航空碳排放存在巨大的不公平性,但随累计起始年的延后,不公平性被部分掩盖。国际航空碳排放权公平分配是构建国际航空全球减排机制的关键问题,本文提出的以责任-能力指数为基础构建的国际航空碳排放权分配方案,体现了公平原则。以实现“2020年碳中性”目标为例,运用本文构建的分配方案,计算出了各国2021年分配的碳减排量。     

巴黎气候会议对全球长期目标的新发展

巴黎气候会议（COP21）达成了包括《巴黎协定》在内的重要成果,丰富和深化了应对气候变化的一揽子长期目标。1.5℃温升控制目标意味着全球管控气候风险的政治意愿得到强化,减缓温室气体排放的路径得到初步勾勒。在未来的科学评估和政治谈判中,全球各区域甚至是各个排放大国的排放空间、排放路径和减缓需求将会进一步清晰化和定量化,还会丰富和深化自上而下的国际气候合作规则,结合当前以国家自主决定贡献（INDC）为特征的、主要以自下而上方式推进全球气候治理的新模式,将对发展中国家、尤其是发展中排放大国的排放配额与发展空间产生重要影响,并进一步影响各国制定其国家贡献目标与行动的自主性。     

《巴黎协定》适应和损失损害内容的解读和对策

《巴黎协定》基本照顾了各缔约方的核心关切,坚持了《联合国气候变化框架公约》（以下简称《公约》）的原则,基本体现了发达国家和发展中国家的区分。在适应部分,《巴黎协定》设立了与全球温升目标相联系的全球适应目标,明确了对发展中国家的适应支持,并确定了具有一定法律约束力的全球适应信息通报和5年周期的全球盘点。在损失损害部分,《巴黎协定》锁定了《公约》下的华沙损失损害国际机制,并基本确定了一个各国通过可持续发展和国际合作共同解决损失损害问题的框架。但是,《巴黎协定》仍然没有解决很多技术性问题和缔约方之间关键性和实质性的分歧。中国作为发展中大国将继续在适应和损失损害问题中面临着出资压力,应通过增强国内适应行动、强化适应和损失损害相关研究和高效利用气候变化南南合作基金3个方面,为谈判争取主动并为推动全球适应气候变化减少损失损害做出贡献。     

巴黎协定——全球气候治理的新起点

巴黎气候变化大会完成了历时4年的德班平台谈判进程,达成了以《巴黎协定》（简称《协定》）为核心的一系列决定。《协定》确立了一种全缔约方参与,以“自主贡献+审评”为中心,全面涉及减缓、适应及其支持的全球应对气候变化新模式。这一模式在继承《公约》原则的基础上,明确了发达国家和发展中国家各自的责任,通过国家自主贡献的方式充分动员所有缔约方采取应对气候变化行动,促进可持续发展。《协定》还鼓励除缔约方外的其他主体积极参与应对气候变化进程,鼓励市场和非市场机制的加入,动员资金流向绿色低碳领域。在制度安排上,《协定》体现了激励、透明、非对抗、非惩罚性的特点。《协定》的达成标志着全球气候治理进入了新的发展阶段,传递出全球推动实现绿色低碳、气候适应型和可持续发展的强有力信号。然而由于《协定》全面平衡了各方的利益,在未来的遵约细节和实施落实方面将会有更多的难题,如果处理不当,将可能会损害发展中国家的利益,尤其是发展中大国。     

国家自主决定贡献的特征研究

国家自主贡献（NDC）机制于2015年巴黎气候变化大会确立,要求各缔约方参考各国国情以“自下而上”的方式提出应对气候变化目标。汇总梳理了作为国家自主贡献前身的国家自主决定贡献（INDC）164份,总结提出了各国文件的共性框架,重点对减缓和适应目标、实施条件和公平性等4类特征进行了统计分析。研究发现,各缔约方国家自主决定贡献文本差异显著,虽然具有共性框架,但是在具体目标阐述方式、覆盖经济行业及温室气体范围、实施条件和公平性阐述等方面选择迥异,此外,气候变化谈判立场对缔约方国家自主决定贡献承诺内容和形式的选择具有较大影响。     

实现国家自主贡献目标背景下我国碳交易机制研究

以实现国家自主贡献目标为背景,运用电力行业细分的递推动态可计算一般均衡（CGE）模型,模拟我国统一碳市场下不同碳交易机制的实施效果及其经济影响。研究表明,全国统一碳市场有助于我国实现国家自主贡献目标,并且可以缓解碳减排对经济增长造成的负面影响;相比基于碳排放量免费分配初始碳配额的“祖父法则”,基于碳强度基准免费分配初始碳配额的“标杆法则”可以降低碳交易价格、增加碳配额交易量并扩大碳市场规模;采取拍卖方式有偿分配初始碳配额时碳市场中各行业面临更大的减排成本,但有利于增加政府收入;对碳市场未覆盖的行业和居民户征收碳税能有效控制其碳排放、增加政府财政收入、降低碳交易价格并促进我国国家自主贡献目标的实现;全国统一碳市场在抑制火电行业发展的同时将不同程度地促进清洁能源发电部门的发展。     

A decision aid tool for equity issues analysis in emission permit allocations

Abstract

In the long term, the Kyoto Protocol will be insufficient to stabilize the greenhouse gas (GHG) concentrations in the atmosphere; quantified commitments will also be essential for major developing countries (and the US). International cooperation mechanisms, such as permit trading systems, can help achieve global economic efficiency. However, the initial allocation of emission permits raises many debates on equity. The main objective is to propose a decision aid tool for decision makers, which is capable of providing relevant information on various equitable permit allocation schemes and burden sharing. A dynamic multicriteria model is proposed to share the global quantity of permits among 15 regions, taking into account multiple definitions of equity and regional interests. The World-MARKAL energy model is used to compute the gross reduction cost (before permit exchanges) for each region. Afterward, it is possible to calculate their net reduction costs (after permit exchanges) according to different allocation schemes. A realistic simulation of the tool provides examples of results, i.e. ranges of permit allocations and net costs for each region. Finally, some recommendations are proposed to policy makers to design a decision process adapted to the global context of negotiations.     

Assessing the ambition of post-2020 climate targets: a comprehensive framework

One of the most fundamental questions surrounding the new Paris Agreement is whether countries’ proposals to reduce GHG emissions after 2020 are equally ambitious, considering differences in circumstances between countries. We review a variety of approaches to assess the ambition of the GHG emission reduction proposals by countries. The approaches are applied illustratively to the mitigation part of the post-2020 climate proposals (nationally determined contributions, or NDCs) by China, the EU, and the US. The analysis reveals several clear trends, even though the results differ per individual assessment approach. We recommend that such a comprehensive ambition assessment framework, employing a large variety of approaches, is used in the future to capture a wide spectrum of perspectives on ambition.

POLICY RELEVANCE

Assessing the ambition of the national climate proposals is particularly important as the Paris Agreement asks for regular reviews of national contributions, keeping in mind that countries raise their ambition over time. Such an assessment will be an important part of the regular global stocktake that will take place every five years, starting with a ‘light’ version in 2018. However, comprehensive methods to assess the proposals are lacking. This article provides such a comprehensive assessment framework.     

《巴黎协定》特设工作组适应信息通报谈判的最新进展和展望

适应信息通报作为《巴黎协定》下联结国家个体适应行动、全球适应目标以及全球集体适应努力的纽带,是目前《巴黎协定》特设工作组（APA）下唯一的适应议题,会对未来全球适应气候变化的政策和行动产生较大影响。本文总结了APA适应信息通报的谈判进程和最新进展,梳理了不同缔约方和谈判集团对适应信息通报目的、内容、报告渠道、指南和灵活性的立场和观点,展望了适应信息通报未来的谈判走势。中国与大多数发展中国家相比,开展适应行动及提供信息报告的能力较强,在适应信息通报谈判中立场相对灵活,但未来在有关适应的资金支持谈判等方面仍面临着压力,建议推动和深化适应气候变化领域南南合作以团结更多发展中国家,促进全球适应行动,回应发展中国家的关切。     

《巴黎协定》强化透明度体系的建立与实施展望

以信息报告和审评为主要内容的透明度体系是《巴黎协定》有效实施的重要保障。《巴黎协定》建立了“强化的透明度框架”,并在2018年底达成了实施细则,形成了强化的透明度体系。这一体系建立在既往透明度履约实践基础上,针对缔约方在《巴黎协定》下所承担“共同但有区别”的义务,在为发展中国家提供履约灵活性和支持的情况下,遵循通用的模式、程序和指南。该规则体系有利于提高缔约方履约报告质量和可比性,督促各方履行条约义务,增进全球气候治理多边机制互信。然而这一体系相比既往实践,给发展中国家提出强化要求的同时尚未落实强化的支持,且体系本身的运行效率还有待观察。为此,各国应当做好充分的国内体制机制建设准备,国际社会应当落实对发展中国家履约的支持,强化相应能力建设。     

Accounting for impacts due to climate change in GHG mitigation burden sharing

This study focusing on the climate equity debate in the context of GHG mitigation explores design of a framework that is based on the ‘common but differentiated responsibilities’ principle of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Besides incorporating the widely recognized differences among countries such as current and historic GHG emissions and capabilities, the framework also accounts for their relative vulnerabilities to climate change. The study argues that since climate change impacts are akin to global public bad, compensation, especially for the poorer nations who are also the worst victims of the climate change impacts, could be conceived in the form of greater share in the GHG emission rights. This, it is argued, would provide the much needed space to grow for the poorer countries and facilitate enhancement of their adaptive capacity to face climate and other threats. It is also argued that the framework results accord with one of the welfare principles, the Weak Equity Axiom (WEA) (Sen, A. K. (1973). On economic inequality. Delhi: Oxford University Press), and yield an equitable distribution of burden.

Policy relevance

The present study attempts to inform the equity debate in the international climate negotiations. The multi-criteria framework of the study suggests a means to incorporate various national attributes which could result in an equitable sharing of the GHG mitigation burden among countries. The study results highlight that impacts due to climate change could provide an important and equitable basis for burden sharing in the present and in future. The study also highlights the significance of scientific literature on climate change impact assessments in informing the future policy dialogue in the climate negotiations.     

联合国气候变化框架公约下发展中国家的能力建设谈判回顾

增强发展中国家能力建设是全球应对气候变化的重要前提条件,而在联合国气候变化框架公约(UNFCCC)的谈判进程中,能力建设部分一直进展缓慢。自缔约方第7次会(COP7)上确定了发展中国家能力建设框架后,能力建设的机制建设一直没有取得实质性进展。在巴黎气候变化大会(COP21)上,缔约方一致通过了《巴黎协定》。《巴黎协定》首次授权通过执行附属机构(SBI)建立巴黎能力建设委员会(PCCB)。该委员会将全面协调对发展中国家能力建设的支持,同时监管2016-2020年的能力建设工作计划,全面系统地促进和增强发展中国家应对气候变化的能力建设活动。另外,《巴黎协定》还同意建立透明度能力建设倡议(CBIT)用以增强2020年前后的机制和技术能力。随后,全球环境基金(GEF)为该倡议成立了CBIT信托基金。至此,公约下能力建设议题已经建立了相对完整的国际机制。未来议题的谈判将走向务实与细节。随着全球应对气候变化迈向一个新阶段,中国在能力建设议题的谈判上也应做相应的调整。     

Fairness critically conditions the carbon budget allocation across countries

Countries’ nationally determined contributions to mitigate global warming translate to claims of country specific shares of the remaining carbon budget. The remaining global budget is limited by the aim of staying well below 2 °C, however. Here we show how fairness concerns quantitatively condition the allocation of this global carbon budget across countries. Minimal fairness requirements include securing basic needs, attributing historical responsibility for past emissions, accounting for benefits from past emissions, and not exceeding countries’ societally feasible emission reduction rate. The argument in favor of taking into account these fairness concerns reflects a critique of both simple equality- and sovereignty-principled reduction approaches, the former modelled here as the equal-per-capita distribution from now on, the latter as prolonging the inequality of the status-quo levels of emissions into the transformation period (considered a form of “grandfathering”). We find the option most in line with fairness concerns to be a four-fold qualified version of the equal-per-capita approach that incorporates a limited form of grandfathering.     

巴黎协定背景下全球减排博弈模拟研究

构建了具有7个国家集团的全球多国家集团气候博弈集成评估模拟系统,针对《巴黎协定》背景下各国至2050年以及2100年的减排目标,分别对减排博弈的纳什均衡、博弈不确定性以及外部政策对减排博弈的影响展开了模拟分析。研究发现：在基准情景下,全球各国将在2030年后均选择不减排策略,全球至2100年升温达到2.62℃;而模型参数的不确定性也未能突破全球零减排的纳什均衡;而仅当在全球范围内对不减排采取惩罚措施时,全球零减排的纳什均衡点被打破。但在当前《巴黎协定》减排承诺下,为达到2℃的温控目标,加大2030—2050年的减排幅度至关重要,否则全球将在2040年左右突破2℃阈值。     

The challenges of monitoring national climate policy: learning lessons from the EU

One of the most central and novel features of the new climate governance architecture emerging from the 2015 Paris Agreement is the transparency framework committing countries to provide, inter alia, regular progress reports on national pledges to address climate change. Many countries will rely on public policies to turn their pledges into action. This article focuses on the EU’s experience with monitoring national climate policies in order to understand the challenges that are likely to arise as the Paris Agreement is implemented around the world. To do so, the research employs – for the first time – comparative empirical data submitted by states to the EU’s monitoring system. Our findings reveal how the EU’s predominantly technical interpretation of four international reporting quality criteria – an approach borrowed from reporting on GHG fluxes – has constrained knowledge production and stymied debate on the performance of individual climate policies. Key obstacles to more in-depth reporting include not only political concerns over reporting burdens and costs, but also struggles over who determines the nature of climate policy monitoring, the perceived usefulness of reporting information, and the political control that policy knowledge inevitably generates. Given the post-Paris drive to achieve greater transparency, the EU’s experience offers a sobering reminder of the political and technical challenges associated with climate policy monitoring, challenges that are likely to bedevil the Paris Agreement for decades to come.

Policy relevance

The 2009 Copenhagen summit ushered in a more bottom-up system of international climate governance. Such systems typically depend on strong monitoring approaches to assess past performance and estimate future national contributions over time. This article shows why decision makers at multiple governance levels should pay serious attention to empirical data on the experiences and challenges that have emerged around monitoring in the EU, a self-proclaimed climate leader. The analysis highlights key political and administrative challenges that policy makers will likely encounter in implementing climate policy monitoring and ensuring transparency in the spirit of the Paris Agreement.