Evaluating sustainability transitions pathways: Bridging analytical approaches to address governance challenges

The paper sets out a proposal for bridging and linking three approaches to the analysis of transitions to sustainable and low-carbon societies: quantitative systems modelling; socio-technical transition analysis; and initiative-based learning. We argue that each of these approaches presents a partial and incomplete picture, which has implications for the quality and usefulness of the insights they can deliver for policy and practice. A framework for bridging these different approaches promises to enrich each of the approaches, while providing the basis for a more robust and complete analysis of sustainable transitions pathways that serves better to address questions and dilemmas faced by decision-makers and practitioners. We elaborate five key challenges for the analysis and governance of transitions pathways, and compare the three approaches in relation to each of these. We suggest an integration strategy based on alignment, bridging, and iteration, arguing that a structured dialogue between practitioners of different approaches is needed. In practical terms, such a dialogue would be organised around three areas of joint knowledge production: defining common analytical or governance problems to be tackled through integration; establishing shared concepts (boundary objects); and establishing operational bridging devices (data and metrics, pathways evaluation and their delivery). Such processes could include experts and societal partners. We draw conclusions about future research perspectives and the role of analysis in transitions governance.     

Global climate policy and deep decarbonization of energy-intensive industries

If we are to limit global warming to 2 °C, all sectors in all countries must reduce their emissions of GHGs to zero not later than 2060–2080. Zero-emission options have been less explored and are less developed in the energy-intensive basic materials industries than in other sectors. Current climate policies have not yet motivated major efforts to decarbonize this sector, and it has been largely protected from climate policy due to the perceived risks of carbon leakage and a focus on short-term reduction targets to 2020. We argue that the future global climate policy regime must develop along three interlinked and strategic lines to facilitate a deep decarbonization of energy-intensive industries. First, the principle of common but differentiated responsibility must be reinterpreted to allow for a dialogue on fairness and the right to development in relation to industry. Second, a greater focus on the development, deployment and transfer of technology in this sector is called for. Third, the potential conflicts between current free trade regimes and motivated industrial policies for deep decarbonization must be resolved. One way forward is to revisit the idea of sectoral approaches with a broader scope, including not only emission reductions, but recognizing the full complexity of low-carbon transitions in energy-intensive industries. A new approach could engage industrial stakeholders, support technology research, development and demonstration and facilitate deployment through reducing the risk for investors. The Paris Agreement allows the idea of sectoral approaches to be revisited in the interests of reaching our common climate goals.

Policy relevance

Deep decarbonization of energy-intensive industries will be necessary to meet the 2 °C target. This requires major innovation efforts over a long period. Energy-intensive industries face unique challenges from both innovation and technical perspectives due to the large scale of facilities, the character of their global markets and the potentially high mitigation costs. This article addresses these challenges and discusses ways in which the global climate policy framework should be developed after the Paris Agreement to better support transformative change in the energy-intensive industries.     

Conceptualizing and achieving industrial system transition for a dematerialized and decarbonized world

The concept of industrial system transition introduced in the IPCC special report on Global Warming of 1.5 °C remains poorly conceptualized. In this paper, we deepen the conceptualization of the industrial system transition to decarbonization, dematerialization, and sustainable industrial production. Aided by fuzzy cognitive maps that use perception-based data from stakeholders to model complex and difficult-to-model systems, we chart the pathways for industrial system transition. The industrial system transition entails interactions between dematerialization and decarbonization goals while enabling governance and systemic corporate strategies. The respondents of the fuzzy cognitive maps-based surveys comprised practitioners from companies, authors, and the policymaking community. Fuzzy cognitive map-based simulations reveal that resorting to technical measures of dematerialization and decarbonization is insufficient to accomplish industrial system transition. The efficient industrial system transition to dematerialization and decarbonization requires the combined measures of (i) dematerialization and decarbonization, (ii) governance, policies, and regulations (effective governance including transnational governance, technology push, market-pull, technology transfer and financial flows, carbon price and carbon market; and (iii) enabling corporate strategies (regenerative and conscious capitalism, a new conception of transparency, and collaborative and constructive lobbying). Large companies are mostly transnational entities, necessitating the adoption of effective transnational governance strategies for achieving the objectives of dematerialization and decarbonization. Several transnational governance networks have partnered under the public–private co-governance mechanism in the decarbonization space dominated by mainly larger players. The advent of polycentric governance provides new opportunities for trans-local governance where large numbers of small and medium enterprises can participate in the advancement of at least decarbonization objectives; however, such networks require support from national governments. Besides implications for governance, policy and regulations, the findings of this research could also have implications for corporate behavior in terms of promoting conscious and transparent organizational culture.     

A practitioner's guide to a low-carbon economy: lessons from the UK

Drawing primarily on the UK experience, five practical lessons are identified for policy makers who seek to decarbonize their economies. First, decarbonization needs a solid legal basis to give it credibility and overcome time inconsistency problems. Second, putting a price on carbon is essential, but low-carbon policies also have to address wider market, investment, and behavioural failures. This in turn raises issues of policy complexity and coordination. Third, the low-carbon economy is likely to be highly electrified. Clean electricity could be a cost-effective way of decarbonizing many parts of the economy, including transport, heating, and parts of industry. Decarbonization therefore starts in the power sector. Fourth, the low-carbon transition is primarily a revolution of production and not consumption. Both supply-side innovation and demand-side adjustments in lifestyle and behaviour are needed, though the former should dominate. Fifth, the transition to a low-carbon economy is economically and technologically feasible. Achieving it is a question of policy competence and having the political will to drive economic and social change.

Policy relevance

Practically all major GHG emitters now have climate change legislation on their statute books. Given what is at stake, and the complexity of the task at hand, it is important that policy makers learn from each other and establish a code of good low-carbon practice. The main lessons from the UK are distilled and presented. Carbon policy is considered for key sectors, such as electricity, buildings, and transport, and possible decarbonization paths are also outlined. It is shown that the transition to a low-carbon economy is economically and technologically feasible. Achieving it is primarily a question of policy competence and political will. This in turn means that climate change action needs a strong legislative basis to give the reforms statutory legitimacy. Low-carbon policies will have to address a wide range of market, investment and behavioural failures. Putting a price on carbon is an essential starting point, but only one of many policy reforms.     

Beyond climate,culture and comfort in European preferences for low-carbon heat

It is imperative that climate, energy, and sustainability policy researchers and practitioners grapple with the difficulty of decarbonizing heat, which remains the largest single end-use energy service worldwide. In this study, based on a comparative assessment of five original and representative national surveys in Germany, Italy, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom (N = 10,109), we explore public attitudes of household heat decarbonization in Europe. We explore how people conceive of the purposes of low-carbon heat, their preferences for particular forms of heat supply, and their (at times odd) practices of heat consumption and temperature settings. The data reveal four significant challenges to heat decarbonization that are consistent across geographies: 1) High satisfaction with existing, often fossil fuel based, heating systems; 2) Varying and divergent preferences and expectations for thermal comfort; 3) Householders unlikely to change their heating system in the near-term, in part driven by low familiarity and knowledge of alternative systems; and 4) heat satisfaction appears lower as the fuel mix is decarbonized. The paper concludes by connecting these findings with policy and research implications.     

Landscape for change? International climate policy and energy transitions: evidence from sub-Saharan Africa

What is the role of the climate regime in facilitating rapid decarbonization of the world’s energy systems? We examine how core assumptions concerning the roles of the nation state, carbon markets and finance and technology in international climate policy are being challenged by the realities of how transitions in the energy systems are unfolding. Drawing on the critical region of sub-Saharan Africa, we examine the potential for international climate policy to foster new trajectories towards decarbonization.

Policy relevance

The international regime for climate policy has been in place for some twenty years. Despite significant changes in the landscape of energy systems and drivers of global GHG emissions over this time, the core principles and tools remain relatively stable – national governments, carbon markets, project-based climate finance and the transfer of technological hardware. Given the diversity of actors and drivers and the limited direct reach and influence of international climate policy, however, there is an urgent need to consider how the climate regime can best support the embryonic transitions that are slowly taking form around the world. To do this effectively requires a more nuanced understanding of the role of the state in governing these transitions beyond the notion of a cohesive state serving as rule-enforcer and transition manager. It also requires a broader view of technology, not just as hardware that is transferred, but as a set of practices and networks of expertise and enabling actors. Likewise, though markets have an important role to play as vehicles for achieving broader ends, they are not an end in themselves. Finally on finance, while acknowledging the important role of climate aid, often as a multiplier or facilitator of more ambitious private flows, it is critical to differentiate between the types of finance required for different transitions, many of which will not be counted under, or directed by, the climate regime. In sum, the (low-) carbon economy is being built in ways and in numerous sites that the climate regime needs to be cognizant of and engage with productively, and this may require fundamental reconsideration of the building blocks of the international climate regime.     

Processes of elite power and low-carbon pathways: Experimentation,financialisation, and dispossession

What is a low-carbon pathway? To many, it is a way of mitigating climate change. To others, it is about addressing market failure or capturing the co-benefits attached to low-carbon systems, such as jobs or improved health. To still others, it represents building adaptive capacity and resilience in the face of climate change. However, these interpretations can fail to acknowledge how pathways of low-carbon transitions can also become intertwined with processes and structures of inequality, exclusion and injustice. Using a critical lens that draws from a variety of disciplines, this article explores three ways through which responses to climate change can entrench, exacerbate or reconfigure the power of elites. As society attempts to create a low-carbon society, including for example via coastal protection efforts, disaster recovery, or climate change mitigation and renewable energy, these efforts intersect with at least three processes of elite power: experimentation, financialisation, and dispossession. Experimentation is when elites use the world as a laboratory to test or pilot low-carbon technologies or policy models, transferring risks yet not always sharing benefits. Financialisation refers to the expansion and proliferation of finance, capital, and financial markets in the global economy and many national economies, processes of which have recently extended to renewable energy. Dispossession is when elites use decarbonisation as a process through which to appropriate land, wealth, or other assets (and in the process make society more majoritarian and/or unequal). We explore these three themes using a variety of evidence across illustrative case studies, including hard and soft coastal protection measures (Bangladesh, Netherlands), climate risk insurance (Malawi), and renewable energy auctions and associated mechanisms of finance and investment (South Africa and Mexico).     

Being green or being nice? People are more likely to share nicer but potentially less impactful green messages

As the world’s largest fossil fuels exporter, Russia is one of the key countries for addressing global climate change. However, it has never demonstrated any significant ambitions to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This paper applies ideational research methodology to identify the structural differences in economic, political, and social normative contexts between industrialized fossil fuel importing economies and Russia that lead to the fundamental gap in motivations driving decarbonization efforts. Russia is unlikely to replicate the approach to the green transition and climate policy instruments of energy-importing countries. In order to launch decarbonization in Russia, interested stakeholders need to frame climate policies in Russia differently. Specifically, the framing must address the priority of diversification as a means to adapting the national economy to a new green landscape, the combination of diverse channels for decarbonization, the promotion of energy-efficiency, closer attention to climate-related forest projects, and linkage of climate change with other environmental problems. Moreover, considering Russia’s emissions as a part of the global economic system and shifting from a simplistic national focus on GHG emissions reduction would help coordinate policies through dialogue between exporters and importers of fossil fuel energy-intensive goods, which is essential for the global movement towards a net-zero future.

     

Low-carbon societies: a challenging transition for an attractive future

The Low-Carbon Society (LCS) research project (Strachan et al., 2008a) is examined for its insights about the scale, nature and timing of the deployment of low-carbon technologies. In addition to ‘carbon price only’ policies, other incentives and demand-side efforts are needed in order to embed climate policies into broader development approaches. The question of what constitutes transition pathways is considered. Fundamental institutional, individual and social changes are needed to accompany economic and technological change as energy is embedded in overall development patterns. The cost assessment of decarbonization policies may be too optimistic if it is only considered as the final outcome of a LCS, and if the inevitable hindrances and setbacks along the transition pathway are disregarded. The significance of transition costs is highlighted, together with their causes: social and short- and medium-term economic costs and adjustments in macroeconomic dynamics. Although the overall welfare costs of LCS are likely to be smaller than the benefits (including the co-benefits), a clear and realistic understanding of potential transition difficulties is necessary in order to define the robust policy mix needed to underpin it.     

Decarbonization and regulation of Germany's electricity system after Fukushima

Germany's current efforts to decarbonize its electricity system are analysed. As nuclear power and fossil power plants equipped with carbon capture and storage were ruled out in 2011, renewable electricity generation (RES) together with electricity savings are the primary focus for achieving decarbonization. Germany aims to have RES account for at least 80% of its electricity by 2050. Achieving renewable generation needs strong political support and regulatory provisions for its market integration. Four main technical and regulatory challenges are the maintenance of a steady and efficient expansion of RES, the provision of balancing capacities, the realization of the targeted electricity savings, and the smart adaptation of the transport and distribution grid. An overview of the existing and planned regulatory provisions for decarbonization are described, and some gaps identified, particularly with regard to the overall management of the process, the inclusion of electricity savings and the interference of Germany's decarbonization strategies with neighbouring countries. Policies that both accelerate grid expansion and direct RES expansion should immediately be put in place and can be supported by a targeted mobilization of balancing capacities. Electricity savings are a significant and cost-efficient strategy for low-carbon electricity.

Policy relevance

Germany is actively converting its national electricity system towards a fully renewable one. As renewable electricity has reached about a quarter of total consumption, a number of technical and regulatory challenges arise. Current discussions and plans are described for the four main challenges: maintaining and optimizing high investment rates into RES generation technologies, providing balancing capacities, reducing demand, and adapting the grid to the changing needs. Policy recommendations for these four tasks highlight the need to intensify electricity demand reduction and also consider the potential interactions between the German electricity system and its neighbouring countries.     

Uncertainty management and the dynamic adjustment of deep decarbonization pathways

Contrary to ‘static’ pathways that are defined once for all, this article deals with the need for policy makers to adopt a dynamic adaptive policy pathway for managing decarbonization over the period of implementation. When choosing a pathway as the most desirable option, it is important to keep in mind that each decarbonization option relies on the implementation of specific policies and instruments. Given structural, effectiveness, and timing uncertainties specific to each policy option, they may fail in delivering the expected outcomes in time. The possibility of diverging from an initial decarbonization trajectory to another one without incurring excessive costs should therefore be a strategic element in the design of an appropriate decarbonization strategy. The article relies on initial experiences in France and Germany on decarbonization planning and implementation to define elements for managing dynamic adjustment issues. Such an adaptive pathway strategy should combine long-lived incentives, like a pre-announced escalating carbon price, to form consistent expectations, as well as adaptive policies to improve overall robustness and resilience. We sketch key elements of a monitoring process based on an ex ante definition of leading indicators that should be assessed regularly and combined with signposts and trigger values at the subsector level.

Policy relevance

These research questions are of special interest and urgency following the Paris Agreement in 2015. It calls on all countries to monitor the implementation of their national contributions and review their ambition regularly. The regular revision of decarbonization pathways constitute a great research opportunity to gather experiences on decarbonization pathway implementation and on dynamic management issues to progress towards an operational dynamic adaptive policy pathway mechanism.     

Incorporating blue carbon sequestration benefits into sub-national climate policies

The emissions reduction pledges made by individual countries through the 2015 Paris Agreement represent the current global commitment to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions in the face of the enduring climate crisis. Natural lands carbon sequestration and storage are critical for successful pathways to global decarbonization (i.e., as a negative emissions technology). Coastal vegetated habitats maintain carbon sequestration rates exceeding forest sequestration rates on a per unit area basis by nearly two orders of magnitude. These blue carbon habitats and their associated carbon sequestration benefits are vulnerable to losses from land-use change and sea-level rise. Incorporation of blue carbon habitats in climate change policy is one strategy for both maintaining these habitats and conserving significant carbon sequestration capabilities. Previous policy assessments have found the potential for incorporation of coastal carbon sequestration in national-level policies, yet there has – to date – been little inclusion of blue carbon in the national-scale implementation of Paris commitments. Recently, sub-national jurisdictions have gained attention as models for pathways to decarbonization. However, few previous studies have examined sub-national level policy opportunities for operationalizing blue carbon into climate decision-making. California is uniquely poised to integrate benefits from blue carbon into its coastal planning and management and its suite of climate mitigation policies. Here, we evaluated legal authorities and policy contexts addressing sequestration specifically from blue carbon habitats. We synthesized the progressive action in California’s approaches to mitigate carbon emissions including statutory, regulatory, and non-regulatory opportunities to incorporate blue carbon ecosystem service information into state- and local-level management decisions. To illustrate how actionable blue carbon information can be produced for use in decision-making, we conducted a spatial analysis of blue carbon sequestration in several locations in California across multiple agencies and management contexts. We found that the average market values of carbon sequestration services in 2100 ranged from $7,730 to $44,000 per hectare and that the social cost of carbon sequestration value was 1.3 to 2.7 times the market value. We also demonstrated that restoration of small areas with high sequestration rates can be comparable to the sequestration of existing marshes. Our results illustrate how accessible information about carbon sequestration in coastal habitats can be directly incorporated into existing policy frameworks at the sub-national scale. The incorporation of blue carbon sequestration benefits into sub-national climate policies can serve as a model for the development of future policy approaches for negative emissions technologies, with consequences for the success of the Paris Agreement and science-based decarbonization by mid-century.     

The framing of climate change and development: A comparative analysis of the Human Development Report 2007/8 and the World Development Report 2010

The Human Development Report 2007/8 (HDR) and the World Development Report 2010 (WDR) are both devoted to the connections between climate change and development. The reports provide very different perspectives on where the key challenges reside. Their policy proposals are also different, but much less so. Using a combination of frame and content analysis complemented with attention to how these institutions and their knowledge production processes operate, the paper develops a structured comparison of the problem-framing and solution-framing in the Overviews of the two reports. It compares the reports’ conceptions of development; their normative content and the roles given to human rights; the pathways and solutions the agencies defend, and how protective they are of the poor; the status given to proposed market solutions; what types of information and expert perspective are prioritized and why, and which issues are neglected. Following its stress on human rights and ethical principles, the HDR does not unsettle the market driven solutions to climate change that dominate the global policy arena. Different policy instruments and a fuller institutionalization of its human rights concerns is required, in organizations, processes, methodologies and knowledge networks that could move the ideas forward and continually press for their use. This may require a different model of report preparation.     

Co-designing global target-seeking scenarios: A cross-scale participatory process for capturing multiple perspectives on pathways to sustainability

The United Nations 2030 Agenda catalysed the development of global target-seeking sustainability-oriented scenarios representing alternative pathways to reach the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Implementing the SDGs requires connected actions across local, national, regional, and global levels; thus, target-seeking scenarios need to reflect alternative options and tensions across those scales. We argue that the design of global sustainability-oriented target-seeking scenarios requires a consistent process for capturing multiple and contrasting perspectives on how to reach the goals, including the perspectives from multiple scales (e.g. local, national, regional) and geographic regions (e.g. the Global South). Here we propose a novel approach to co-design global target-seeking scenarios, consisting of (a) capturing global perspectives on pathways to the SDGs through a review of existing global scenarios; (b) a multi-stakeholder process to obtain multiple sub-global perspectives on pathways to sustainability; (c) an analysis of convergences, and crucially, divergences between global and regional perspectives on pathways to reach the SDGs, feeding into the design of new target-seeking scenario narratives. As a case study, we use the results of the 2018 African Dialogue on The World in 2050, discussing the future of agriculture and food systems. The identified divergent themes emerging from our analysis included urbanization, population growth, agricultural practices, and the roles of different actors in the future of agriculture. The results challenge some of the existing underlying assumptions of the current sustainability-oriented global scenarios (e.g. population growth, urbanisation, agricultural practices), indicating the relevance and timeliness of the proposed approach. We suggest that similar approaches can be replicated in other contexts to better inform the process of sustainability-oriented scenario co-design across scales, regions and cultures. In addition, we highlight the implications of the approach for scenario quantification and the evolution of modeling tools.     

Co-productive agility and four collaborative pathways to sustainability transformations

Co-production, the collaborative weaving of research and practice by diverse societal actors, is argued to play an important role in sustainability transformations. Yet, there is still poor understanding of how to navigate the tensions that emerge in these processes. Through analyzing 32 initiatives worldwide that co-produced knowledge and action to foster sustainable social-ecological relations, we conceptualize ‘co-productive agility’ as an emergent feature vital for turning tensions into transformations. Co-productive agility refers to the willingness and ability of diverse actors to iteratively engage in reflexive dialogues to grow shared ideas and actions that would not have been possible from the outset. It relies on embedding knowledge production within processes of change to constantly recognize, reposition, and navigate tensions and opportunities. Co-productive agility opens up multiple pathways to transformation through: (1) elevating marginalized agendas in ways that maintain their integrity and broaden struggles for justice; (2) questioning dominant agendas by engaging with power in ways that challenge assumptions, (3) navigating conflicting agendas to actively transform interlinked paradigms, practices, and structures; (4) exploring diverse agendas to foster learning and mutual respect for a plurality of perspectives. We explore six process considerations that vary by these four pathways and provide a framework to enable agility in sustainability transformations. We argue that research and practice spend too much time closing down debate over different agendas for change – thereby avoiding, suppressing, or polarizing tensions, and call for more efforts to facilitate better interactions among different agendas.     

Rethinking Net-Zero systems,spaces, and societies: “Hard” versus “soft” alternatives for nature-based and engineered carbon removal

Carbon removal – also known as negative emissions technologies, or greenhouse gas removal – represents a core pillar of post-Paris climate policy, signaling for enhancing and constructing carbon sinks to balance emissions sources on route to ambitious temperature targets. We build on Amory Lovins’ “hard” and “soft” alternatives for energy pathways to illuminate how foundational experts, technologists, and policy entrepreneurs think about different modes of resource inputs, infrastructure and livelihoods, and decision-making, regarding ten nature-based and engineered carbon removal approaches. Based on 90 original interviews, we show that hard and soft paths reflect different conceptions of systems, spaces, and societal involvement. We highlight that pathways depend on diverging concepts of economies-of-scale (capturing carbon at the largest possible scale, versus catalyzing systemic co-benefits) and carbon management (a waste product within conventional climate governance, versus diverse end-uses and values to be diversely governed). Our analysis further emphasizes two key uncertainties: whether renewables can be upscaled to allow synergies rather than tradeoffs between carbon removal and more widespread energy demands, and whether carbon certification can expand spatially to navigate long supply chains, and conceptually to incentivize diverse co-benefits. Experts remain motivated by antecedent concerns over land-use management and extractive industries, and that exploitative systems will – without guardrails – be replicated by inertia.     

Battle over the sun: Resistance,tension, and divergence in enabling rooftop solar adoption in Indonesia

This article examines sustainability transitions in the Global South, focusing on the adoption of rooftop photovoltaic (PV) systems in Indonesia as a case study. Based on 55 in-depth interviews and a secondary data review, we develop an alternative analytical framework that draws insights from geographical political economy and political ecology. This alternative lens allows us to better inform the socio-technical transition literature by uncovering both the spatial implications of renewable energy transitions and the power differentials underpinning them. We find that the emergence of rooftop PV technology in Indonesia has provoked resistance, as it challenges the incumbent power company’s monopoly over urban space, the Java-Bali grid system’s dependency on coal-based electricity, and state-led practices that prioritise the implementation of small-scale solar in rural and remote areas. We argue that paying attention to the asymmetric power relations among institutions and actors across multiple scales offers a more-fine grained approach to analysing the dynamics of sustainability transitions. Our findings also call for greater attention to diverse and divergent perspectives among niche actors, emphasising the need to genuinely embrace local voices and knowledge that might otherwise be marginalised by the dominant globally and nationally driven narratives of renewable transition.     

Insights into the composition of household vulnerability from multicriteria decision analysis

Vulnerability is a multidimensional concept associated with high uncertainty in measurement and classification. Developing a vulnerability index from the diverse and often incommensurate data that form the basis of vulnerability assessments is often a core challenge of vulnerability research. Problematically, many vulnerability indices are based on the implicit or explicit assumption that each indicator of vulnerability is of equal importance. In this paper we propose a procedure to engage constructively with the inherent subjectivity and uncertainty of assigning weights to disparate indicators used in vulnerability assessments, using common tools of multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) and fuzzy logic. To illustrate our proposed methodology, we present a case study of rural livelihood vulnerability in the state of Tamaulipas, México. In our case study, we combine a livelihoods framework with MCDA to weigh household attributes according to their relative importance in driving household vulnerability. This approach requires the explicit articulation of the relationship of each indicator to the umbrella concept (vulnerability) as well as of each indicator to every other indicator. In recognition of the inherent uncertainties involved in assigning any particular unit of analysis to a specific vulnerability class, we use fuzzy logic to create the final categories of household livelihood vulnerability to climatic risk. Our analysis reveals how different structures of livelihood assets and activities contributes to household sensitivity and capacities in a region characterized by variable climatic conditions, stagnant incomes, increasing market stress and declining farm productivity.     

Getting from here to there – energy technology transformation pathways in the EMF27 scenarios

Based on a large number of energy-economic and integrated assessment models, the Energy Modeling Forum (EMF) 27 study systematically explores the implications of technology cost and availability for feasibility and macroeconomic costs of energy system transformations toward climate stabilization. At the highest level, the technology strategy articulated in all the scenarios in EMF27 includes three elements: decarbonization of energy supply, increasing the use of low-carbon energy carriers in end-use, and reduction of energy use. The way that the scenarios differ is in the degree to which these different elements of strategy are implemented, the timing of those implementations, and the associated macroeconomic costs. The study also discusses the value of individual technologies for achieving climate stabilization. A robust finding is that the unavailability of carbon capture and storage and limited availability of bioenergy have the largest impact on feasibility and macroeconomic costs for stabilizing atmospheric concentrations at low levels, mostly because of their combined ability to remove carbon from the atmosphere. Constraining options in the electric sector such as nuclear power, wind and solar energy in contrast has a much smaller impact on the cost of mitigation.     

The need for national deep decarbonization pathways for effective climate policy

Constraining global average temperatures to 2 °C above pre-industrial levels will probably require global energy system emissions to be halved by 2050 and complete decarbonization by 2100. In the nationally orientated climate policy framework codified under the Paris Agreement, each nation must decide the scale and method of their emissions reduction contribution while remaining consistent with the global carbon budget. This policy process will require engagement amongst a wide range of stakeholders who have very different visions for the physical implementation of deep decarbonization. The Deep Decarbonization Pathways Project (DDPP) has developed a methodology, building on the energy, climate and economics literature, to structure these debates based on the following principles: country-scale analysis to capture specific physical, economic and political circumstances to maximize policy relevance, a long-term perspective to harmonize short-term decisions with the long-term objective and detailed sectoral analysis with transparent representation of emissions drivers through a common accounting framework or ‘dashboard’. These principles are operationalized in the creation of deep decarbonization pathways (DDPs), which involve technically detailed, sector-by-sector maps of each country’s decarbonization transition, backcasting feasible pathways from 2050 end points. This article shows how the sixteen DDPP country teams, covering 74% of global energy system emissions, used this method to collectively restrain emissions to a level consistent with the 2 °C target while maintaining development aspirations and reflecting national circumstances, mainly through efficiency, decarbonization of energy carriers (e.g. electricity, hydrogen, biofuels and synthetic gas) and switching to these carriers. The cross-cutting analysis of country scenarios reveals important enabling conditions for the transformation, pertaining to technology research and development, investment, trade and global and national policies.

Policy relevance

In the nation-focused global climate policy framework codified in the Paris Agreement, the purpose of the DDPP and DDPs is to provide a common method by which global and national governments, business, civil society and researchers in each country can communicate, compare and debate differing concrete visions for deep decarbonization in order to underpin the necessary societal and political consensus to design and implement short-term policy packages that are consistent with long-term global decarbonization.