Linkages between climate change and sustainable development

Abstract

Climate change does not yet feature prominently within the environmental or economic policy agendas of developing countries. Yet evidence shows that some of the most adverse effects of climate change will be in developing countries, where populations are most vulnerable and least likely to easily adapt to climate change, and that climate change will affect the potential for development in these countries. Some synergies already exist between climate change policies and the sustainable development agenda in developing countries, such as energy efficiency, renewable energy, transport and sustainable land-use policies. Despite limited attention from policy-makers to date, climate change policies could have significant ancillary benefits for the local environment. The reverse is also true as local and national policies to address congestion, air quality, access to energy services and energy diversity may also limit GHG emissions. Nevertheless there could be significant trade-offs associated with deeper levels of mitigation in some countries, for example where developing countries are dependent on indigenous coal and may be required to switch to cleaner yet more expensive fuels to limit emissions. The distributional impacts of such policies are an important determinant of their feasibility and need to be considered up-front. It follows that future agreements on mitigation and adaptation under the convention will need to recognise the diverse situations of developing countries with respect to their level of economic development, their vulnerability to climate change and their ability to adapt or mitigate. Recognition of how climate change is likely to influence other development priorities may be a first step toward building cost-effective strategies and integrated, institutional capacity in developing countries to respond to climate change. Opportunities may also exist in developing countries to use regional economic organisations to assist in the design of integrated responses and to exploit synergies between climate change and other policies such as those designed to combat desertification and preserve biodiversity.

© 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.     

Harmonising climate change adaptation and mitigation: The case of tourist resorts in Fiji

Tourism in island states is vulnerable to climate change because it may result in detrimental changes in relation to extreme events, sea level rise, transport and communication interruption. This study analyses adaptation to climate change by tourist resorts in Fiji, as well as their potential to reduce climate change through reductions in carbon dioxide emissions. Interviews, site visitations, and an accommodation survey were undertaken. Many operators already prepare for climate-related events and therefore adapt to potential impacts resulting from climate change. Reducing emissions is not important to operators; however, decreasing energy costs for economic reasons is practised. Recommendations for further initiatives are made and synergies between the adaptation and mitigation approaches are explored.     

Climate or development: is ODA diverted from its original purpose?

We analyze the interaction of climate and development policy that has taken place since the early 1990s. Increasing dissatisfaction about the results of traditional development cooperation and the appeal of climate policy as a new policy field led to a rapid reorientation of aid flows. At the turn of the century, over 7% of aid flows were spent on greenhouse gas emissions mitigation. However, the contribution of emissions mitigation projects to the central development objective of poverty reduction as specified in the Millennium Development Goals is limited and other project types are likely to be much more effective. Adaptation to climate change can be expected to have higher synergies with poverty alleviation than mitigation, primarily through its impact on health, the conservation of arable land and the protection against natural disasters. An analysis of the Clean Development Mechanism shows that projects addressing the poor directly are very rare; even small renewable energy projects in rural areas tend to benefit rich farmers and the urban population. Use of development aid for CDM projects and / or their preparation via capacity building is thus clearly not warranted. We further analyze whether the use of development aid for climate policy could be justified as a countermeasure against the emission increase related to successful development itself. However, countries that are achieving an improvement of human development from a low level are unlikely to increase their energy consumption substantially. Only at a level where the middle class expands rapidly, energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions soar. Thus targeting middle class energy consumption by appliance efficiency standards and public transport-friendly urban planning are the most effective measures to address developing country emissions. Rural renewable energy provision in poor countries has a much higher impact on poverty, but a much lower impact on greenhouse gas emissions. We conclude that while there are valid reasons for long-term collaboration with emerging economies on greenhouse gas mitigation, there should be a separate budget line for such activities to avoid “obfuscation” of a decline of resources aimed at poverty alleviation. Nevertheless, mitigation will remain attractive for donors because it ensures quick disbursements and relatively simple measures of success. Moreover, mitigation activities in developing countries provide politicians in industrialized countries with a welcome strategy to divert the attention of their constituencies from the lack of success in reducing greenhouse gas emissions domestically.     

Regional cooperation in widening energy access and also mitigating climate change: Current programs and future potential

Access to energy can significantly contribute to the development of the living standards of the energy poor. Also if the provision of access to energy is sustainable, i.e. via renewable energy sources, there is an added benefit of contributing to mitigation of climate change. Currently, the percentage of population with access to energy varies significantly between countries and across regions. This is due to the nature of national socio-economic situations and energy resource availability in differing settings. This article addresses issues and hindrances to energy access in regional contexts and also examines, in particular, the prospects of how regional cooperation initiatives linked with climate change mitigation objectives could assist in widening energy access. Existing relevant regional cooperation initiatives that may be upscaled or used as models to widen access to modern energy services are evaluated. Findings are that regional cooperation initiatives linked with climate change mitigation can potentially facilitate widening energy access. However, in order to realise such potential, synergies from regional cooperation that are indirectly linked to energy and wider climate change mitigation programs should be harnessed. Recommendations are made for development of sustainable energy programs in energy deprived regions that will also mitigate climate change impacts.     

Considering the options: climate targets for all countries

This paper assesses five options for targets that could be taken by all countries to meet the ultimate objective of the climate change convention: fixed, binding targets; dynamic targets; non-binding targets; sectoral targets; policies and measures. Each is evaluated according to criteria of environmental effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, contribution to economic growth and sustainable development, and equity. While fixed, binding targets continue to be viable for industrialised countries, they do not seem suitable for many developing countries in the near future. Dynamic targets could alleviate developing countries’ concerns about constraining their development as well as broader concerns about possible introduction of “hot air” in a world trading regime; they could also be considered for some or all industrialised countries. Non-binding targets could be politically appealing to developing countries, alleviate fears about development and/or hot air, but might only allow conditional participation in emissions trading by developing countries. Sectoral targets could offer a pragmatic first step — although their cost-effectiveness might be questioned. Finally, targets based on commitments to implement specific policies and measures might drive mitigation action and be part of negotiated packages including financial and technological co-operation. All these options may coexist in the future.     

气候政策核心要素的演化及多目标的协同

分析了气候政策中减缓和适应的差异性和协同性,回顾了气候政策的核心要素（减缓和适应）的演化及其与可持续发展政策的密切关系,指出目前气候政策中多要素协同的重要性。强调应该特别关注气候政策的实施性,应将其纳入国家和部门的规划和政策中。最后提出了气候政策中多目标协同需关注的三方面问题：如何确定气候政策的各目标;为保证多目标协同的实施,如何提升相应的能力;现有的资金管理机制如何更好地与部门投资结合。     

Interpretation of IPCC AR6 on buildings北大核心CSCD

IPCC于2022年4月正式发布了第六次评估报告(AR6)第三工作组(WGⅢ)报告《气候变化2022:减缓气候变化》,该报告以已发布的第一和第二工作组报告作为基础,评估了各领域减缓气候变化的进展。报告的第九章建筑章节系统全面地评估了全球建筑领域的温室气体排放现状、趋势和驱动因素,综述并评估了建筑减缓气候变化的措施、潜力、成本和政策。报告主要结论认为,全球建筑领域有可能在2050年实现温室气体净零排放,但如果政策措施执行不力,将有可能在建筑领域形成长达几十年的高碳锁定效应。报告的主要结论将成为全球建筑领域应对气候变化行动的重要参考,对于我国建筑领域实现碳达峰、碳中和目标也有非常重要的借鉴意义。     

Considering the options: climate targets for all countries

Abstract

This paper assesses five options for targets that could be taken by all countries to meet the ultimate objective of the climate change convention: fixed, binding targets; dynamic targets; non-binding targets; sectoral targets; policies and measures. Each is evaluated according to criteria of environmental effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, contribution to economic growth and sustainable development, and equity. While fixed, binding targets continue to be viable for industrialised countries, they do not seem suitable for many developing countries in the near future. Dynamic targets could alleviate developing countries' concerns about constraining their development as well as broader concerns about possible introduction of “hot air” in a world trading regime; they could also be considered for some or all industrialised countries. Non-binding targets could be politically appealing to developing countries, alleviate fears about development and/or hot air, but might only allow conditional participation in emissions trading by developing countries. Sectoral targets could offer a pragmatic first step—although their cost-effectiveness might be questioned. Finally, targets based on commitments to implement specific policies and measures might drive mitigation action and be part of negotiated packages including financial and technological co-operation. All these options may coexist in the future.     

Proposal for a poverty-adaptation-mitigation window within the Green Climate Fund

The stakes for alleviating poverty and avoiding unbridled climate change are inextricably linked. Climate change impacts will slow down and may even reverse trends in poverty reduction. The pathways consistent with global warming of no more than 2?°C require strategies for poverty alleviation to make allowance for the constraint of low-carbon development. Existing climate funds have failed to target poverty alleviation as a high-priority strategy for adaptation or as a component of low-carbon development. This article proposes a funding window as part of the Green Climate Fund in order to foster synergies targeting greater satisfaction of basic needs, while making allowance for adaptation and mitigation. This financial mechanism is based on indicators of the satisfaction of basic needs and could respond to the claims of the developing countries, which see alleviating poverty as the first priority in climate negotiations. It defines a country continuum, given that there are poor people everywhere; all developing countries are therefore eligible with a mechanism of this sort.

Policy relevance

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) calls for substantial emissions reductions and adaptation strategies over the next decades to reduce the high risks of severe impacts of climate change over the 21st century. Industrialized countries and developing countries alike recognize the need to mitigate climate change and to adapt to it. But they face many challenges that lead to an ‘emissions gap’ between an emissions level consistent with the 2?°C increase limit and the voluntary pledges that they have made thus far in the climate negotiations (United Nations Environment Programme. (2014). The Emissions Gap Report 2014. A UNEP synthesis report). In this arena, many developing countries underline that their first domestic priority is the satisfaction of basic needs. In the run-up to the next climate negotiations at the 21st Conference of the Parties (COP 21) in Paris, the proposed poverty-adaptation-mitigation funding window could contribute to alleviate the conflict between development and climate goals in developing countries. In this sense, it could spur developing countries to integrate more ambitious emissions limitations pledges into their Intended Nationally Determined Contributions. This could in turn entice industrialized countries to act similarly. In the end, it could pave the way to an ambitious climate agreement in Paris at COP 21.     

Mitigation initiatives: Korea’s experiences

Korea, straddled between developing and developed country status, is facing challenges and opportunities in energy use and climate change mitigation potential. Unlike other OECD countries, Korea’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are expected to continue to grow for the next two decades. The responses Korea could take to lower emissions without hampering economic development have an important bearing on the global response to climate change. This paper summarizes and evaluates mitigation strategies and major options for Korea in the energy sector, a major contributor to GHG emissions.     

Mitigation initiatives: Korea's experiences

Abstract

Korea, straddled between developing and developed country status, is facing challenges and opportunities in energy use and climate change mitigation potential. Unlike other OECD countries, Korea's greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are expected to continue to grow for the next two decades. The responses Korea could take to lower emissions without hampering economic development have an important bearing on the global response to climate change. This paper summarizes and evaluates mitigation strategies and major options for Korea in the energy sector, a major contributor to GHG emissions.     

全球长期减排目标与碳排放权分配原则

全球长期减排目标将对世界未来的碳排放形成严重制约,减排义务的分担原则涉及各国的发展空间,事关根本利益。部分发达国家倡导人均排放趋同原则,回避发达国家的历史责任,中国等发展中国家提出人均累积排放趋同原则,强调公平性。按人均累积排放量计算,发达国家自工业革命以来的CO₂排放量已远超出其到2050年前应有的限额,其当前和今后相当长时期的高人均排放都将继续挤占发展中国家的排放空间。因此,发达国家在哥本哈根会议的中近期减排承诺中必须深度减排,以实现全球长期减排目标下的排放轨迹,并为发展中国家留有必要的发展空间。同时必须对发展中国家给予充足的资金和技术支持,作为对其过度挤占发展中国家发展空间的补偿,使发展中国家能够在可持续发展框架下,提高应对气候变化的能力。我国在对外坚持公平原则,努力争取合理的排放空间的同时,对内要加强向低碳经济转型,努力实现保护全球气候和国内可持续发展的双赢。     

Sustainable development policies and measures: institutional issues and electrical efficiency in South Africa

An innovative approach is introduced for helping developing countries to make their development more sustainable, and also to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions as a co-benefit. Such an approach is proposed as part of the multilateral framework on climate change. The concept of sustainable development policies and measures (SD-PAMs) is outlined, making clear that it is distinct from many other approaches in starting from development rather than explicit climate targets. The potential of SD-PAMs is illustrated with a case-study of energy efficiency in South Africa, drawing on energy modelling for the use of electricity in industry. The results show multiple benefits both for local sustainable development and for mitigating global climate change. The benefits of industrial energy efficiency in South Africa include significant reductions in local air pollutants; improved environmental health; creation of additional jobs; reduced electricity demand; and delays in new investments in electricity generation. The co-benefit of reducing GHG emissions could result in a reduction of as much as 5% of SA's total projected energy CO₂ emissions by 2020. Institutional support and policy guidance is needed at both the international and national level to realize the potential of SD-PAMs. This analysis demonstrates that if countries begin to act early to move towards greater sustainability, they will also start to bend the curve of their emissions path.     

Health co-benefits and the development of climate change mitigation policies in the European Union

The 2015 Paris Agreement requires increasingly ambitious emissions reduction efforts from its member countries. Accounting for ancillary positive health outcomes (health co-benefits) that result from implementing climate change mitigation policies can provide Parties to the Paris Agreement with a sound rationale for introducing stronger mitigation strategies. Despite this recognition, a knowledge gap exists on the role of health co-benefits in the development of climate change mitigation policies. To address this gap, the case study presented here investigates the role of health co-benefits in the development of European Union (EU) climate change mitigation policies through analysis and consideration of semi-structured interview data, government documents, journal articles and media releases. We find that while health co-benefits are an explicit consideration in the development of EU climate change mitigation policies, their influence on final policy outcomes has been limited. Our analysis suggests that whilst health co-benefits are a key driver of air pollution mitigation policies, climate mitigation policies are primarily driven by other factors, including economic costs and energy implications.

Key policy insights

• Health co-benefits are quantified and monetized as part of the development of EU climate change mitigation policies but their influence on the final policies agreed upon is limited.

• Barriers, such as the immediate economic costs associated with climate action, inhibit the influence of health co-benefits on the development of mitigation policies.

• Health co-benefits primarily drive the development of EU air pollution mitigation policies.

• The separation of responsibility for GHG and non-GHG emissions across Directorate Generals has decoupled climate change and air pollution mitigation policies, with consequences for the integration of health co-benefits in climate policy.

     

国际碳排放特征演进及中国应对建议

通过系统地比较各主要国家CO₂排放总量、人均排放量及排放强度等,总结发达国家碳排放特点,分析中国碳排放历程及各阶段出现的原因。比较分析发达国家和发展中国家应对气候变化的相关政策,结合中外碳排放特征,总结中国碳排放及应对气候变化面临的主要问题。提出中国新常态下应对气候变化的建议,包括在国际层面上,积极参与气候谈判,推动国际社会低碳化发展,在中国层面上,切实改变经济增长方式,引领经济低碳发展等。     

气候变化国家评估报告（Ⅲ）：中国应对气候变化对策的综合评价

 回顾了国际社会应对气候变化的进程，对国内外的碳排放状况、中国减缓碳排放的技术潜力、中国减缓碳排放的宏观影响、全球减缓气候变化的公平性与国际合作行动等问题进行了分析与评估。提出了中国减缓气候变化的思路与对策，指出在全球应对气候变化的形势下，中国要积极适应国际政治、经济及贸易格局变动的趋势，将减缓气候变化对策纳入国家经济与社会发展战略与规划之中，促进国家经济和社会的全面、协调和可持续发展。     

Global implications of joint fossil fuel subsidy reform and nuclear phase-out: an economic analysis

This paper uses the OECD’s global recursive-dynamic general equilibrium model ENVLinkages to examine the mid-term economic consequences and the optimal energy supply mix adjustments of a simultaneous implementation of i) a progressive fossil fuel subsidy reform in emerging and developing economies and ii) a progressive phase out of nuclear energy, mostly affecting OECD countries, China and Russia. The analysis is then transposed in the context of climate change mitigation to depict the corresponding implications for CO2 emissions, to assess the interactions between the two energy policies, and to derive how the associated costs are affected by the different policies. The phase-out scenario projects a nuclear capacity halved by 2035 as compared to the Baseline, corresponding to $120 billion losses in value-added of the nuclear industry for that year. The nuclear phase-out leaves GDP and real household consumption marginally affected in energy importing countries. A multilateral subsidy reform is more likely to affect international fossil fuel prices and alter patterns of global energy use. The fossil fuel subsidy reform, when implemented together with nuclear phase-out, more than offsets negative consequences on household consumption but still leads to a decrease in global CO2 emissions. The combined policies help save the equivalent of current energy consumption in the Middle East. Combining a climate policy, an effective fossil fuel subsidy reform, even with a lower nuclear share in the power mix, brings about multiple benefits to OECD countries which reduce their energy bill and achieve large climate change mitigation at lower cost.     

Brazil beyond 2020: from deforestation to the energy challenge

The main assumptions and findings are presented on a comparative analysis of three GHG long-term emissions scenarios for Brazil. Since 1990, land-use change has been the most important source of GHG emissions in the country. The voluntary goals to limit Brazilian GHG emissions pledged a reduction in between 36.1% and 38.9% of GHG emissions projected to 2020, to be 6–10% lower than in 2005. Brazil is in a good position to meet the voluntary mitigation goals pledged to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) up to 2020: recent efforts to reduce deforestation have been successful and avoided deforestation will form the bulk of the emissions reduction commitment. In 2020, if governmental mitigation goals are met, then GHG emissions from the energy system would become the largest in the country. After 2020, if no additional mitigation actions are implemented, GHG emissions will increase again in the period 2020–2030, due to population and economic growth driving energy demand, supply and GHG emissions. However, Brazil is in a strong position to take a lead in low-carbon economic and social development due to its huge endowment of renewable energy resources allowing for additional mitigation actions to be adopted after 2020.

Policy relevance

The period beyond 2020 is now relevant in climate policy due to the Durban Platform agreeing a ‘protocol, legal instrument or agreed outcome with legal force’ that will have effect from 2020. After 2020, Brazil will be in a situation more similar to other industrialized countries, faced with a new challenge of economic development with low GHG energy-related emissions, requiring the adoption of mitigation policies and measures targeted at the energy system. Unlike the mitigation actions in the land-use change sector, where most of the funding will come from the national budgets due to sovereignty concerns, the huge financial resources needed to develop low-carbon transport and energy infrastructure could benefit from soft loans channelled to the country through nationally appropriate mitigation actions (NAMAs).     

Shared Socio-Economic Pathways of the Energy Sector – Quantifying the Narratives

Energy is crucial for supporting basic human needs, development and well-being. The future evolution of the scale and character of the energy system will be fundamentally shaped by socioeconomic conditions and drivers, available energy resources, technologies of energy supply and transformation, and end-use energy demand. However, because energy-related activities are significant sources of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and other environmental and social externalities, energy system development will also be influenced by social acceptance and strategic policy choices. All of these uncertainties have important implications for many aspects of economic and environmental sustainability, and climate change in particular. In the Shared-Socioeconomic Pathway (SSP) framework these uncertainties are structured into five narratives, arranged according to the challenges to climate change mitigation and adaptation. In this study we explore future energy sector developments across the five SSPs using Integrated Assessment Models (IAMs), and we also provide summary output and analysis for selected scenarios of global emissions mitigation policies. The mitigation challenge strongly corresponds with global baseline energy sector growth over the 21st century, which varies between 40% and 230% depending on final energy consumer behavior, technological improvements, resource availability and policies. The future baseline CO₂-emission range is even larger, as the most energy-intensive SSP also incorporates a comparatively high share of carbon-intensive fossil fuels, and vice versa. Inter-regional disparities in the SSPs are consistent with the underlying socioeconomic assumptions; these differences are particularly strong in the SSPs with large adaptation challenges, which have little inter-regional convergence in long-term income and final energy demand levels. The scenarios presented do not include feedbacks of climate change on energy sector development. The energy sector SSPs with and without emissions mitigation policies are introduced and analyzed here in order to contribute to future research in climate sciences, mitigation analysis, and studies on impacts, adaptation and vulnerability.     

Implications of global emission policy scenarios for domestic agriculture: a New Zealand case study

Agricultural GHG mitigation policies are important if ambitious climate change goals are to be achieved, and have the potential to significantly lower global mitigation costs [Reisinger, A., Havlik, P., Riahi, K., van Vliet, O., Obersteiner, M., & Herrero, M. (2013). Implications of alternative metrics for global mitigation costs and greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture. Climatic Change, 117, 677–690]. In the post-Paris world of ‘nationally determined contributions’ to mitigation, the prospects for agricultural mitigation policies may rest on whether they are in the national economic interest of large agricultural producers. New Zealand is a major exporter of livestock products; this article uses New Zealand as a case study to consider the policy implications of three global policy scenarios at the global, national and farm levels. Building on global modelling, a model dairy farm and a model sheep and beef farm are used to estimate the changes in profit when agricultural emissions are priced and mitigated globally or not, and priced domestically or not, in 2020. Related to these scenarios is the metric or GHG exchange rate. Most livestock emissions are non-CO₂, with methane being particularly sensitive to the choice of metric. The results provide evidence that farm profitability is more sensitive to differing international policy scenarios than national economic welfare. The impact of the choice of metric is not as great as the impact of whether other countries mitigate agricultural emissions or not. Livestock farmers do best when agricultural emissions are not priced, as livestock commodity prices rise significantly due to competition for land from forestry. However, efficient farmers may still see a rise in profitability when agricultural emissions are fully priced worldwide.

Policy relevance

Exempting agricultural emissions from mitigation significantly increases the costs of limiting warming to 2 °C, placing the burden on other sectors. However, there may be a large impact on farmers if agricultural emissions are priced domestically when other countries are not doing the same. The impacts of global and national climate policies on farmers need to be better understood in order for climate policies to be politically sustainable. Transitional assistance that is not linked to emission levels could help, as long as the incentives to mitigate are maintained. In the long run, efficient farmers may benefit from climate policy; international efforts should focus on mitigation options and effective domestic policy development, rather than on metrics.