Integrating agriculture and energy to assess GHG emissions reduction: a methodological approach

Agriculture is responsible for approximately 25% of anthropogenic global GHG emissions. This significant share highlights the fundamental importance of the agricultural sector in the global GHG emissions reduction challenge. This article develops and tests a methodology for the integration of agricultural and energy systems modelling. The goal of the research is to extend an energy systems modelling approach to agriculture in order to provide richer insights into the dynamics and interactions between the two (e.g. in competition for land-use). We build Agri-TIMES, an agricultural systems module using the TIMES energy systems modelling framework, to model the effect of livestock emissions and explore emissions reduction options. The research focuses on Ireland, which is an interesting test case for two reasons: first, agriculture currently accounts for about 30% of Ireland's GHG emissions, significantly higher than other industrialized countries yet comparable with global levels (here including emissions associated with other land-use change and forestation); second, Ireland is both a complete and reasonably sized agricultural system to act as a test case for this new approach. This article describes the methodology used, the data requirements, and technical assumptions made to facilitate the modelling. It also presents results to illustrate the approach and provide associated initial insights.

Policy relevance

Most of the policy focus with regard to climate mitigation targets has been on reducing energy-related CO₂ emissions, which is understandable as they represent by far the largest source of emissions. Non-energy-related GHG emissions – largely from agriculture, industrial processes, and waste – have received significantly less attention in policy discourse. Going forward, however, if significant cuts are made in energy-related CO₂ emissions, the role of non-energy-related GHG emissions will grow in importance. It is therefore crucial that climate mitigation analyses and strategies are not limited to the energy system. This article shows the value of using integrated energy and agriculture techno-economic modelling techniques to draw evidence for new comprehensive climate policy strategies able to discern between the full range of technical solutions available. It enables the production of economy-wide least-cost climate mitigation pathways.     

The impact of shale gas on the costs of climate policy

The use of shale gas is commonly considered as a low-cost option for meeting ambitious climate policy targets. This article explores global and country-specific effects of increasing global shale gas exploitation on the energy markets, on greenhouse gas emissions, and on mitigation costs. The global techno-economic partial equilibrium model POLES (Prospective Outlook on Long-term Energy Systems) is employed to compare policies which limit global warming to 2°C and baseline scenarios when the availability of shale gas is either high or low. According to the simulation results, a high availability of shale gas has rather small effects on the costs of meeting climate targets in the medium and long term. In the long term, a higher availability of shale gas increases baseline emissions of greenhouse gases for most countries and for the world, and leads to higher compliance costs for most, but not all, countries. Allowing for global trading of emission certificates does not alter these general results. In sum, these findings cast doubt on shale gas’s potential as a low-cost option for meeting ambitious global climate targets.

POLICY RELEVANCE

Many countries with a large shale gas resource base consider the expansion of local shale gas extraction as an option to reduce their GHG emissions. The findings in this article imply that a higher availability of shale gas in these countries might actually increase emissions and mitigation costs for these countries and also for the world. An increase in shale gas extraction may spur a switch from coal to gas electricity generation, thus lowering emissions. At the global level and for many countries, though, this effect is more than offset by a crowding out of renewable and nuclear energy carriers, and by lower energy prices, leading to higher emissions and higher mitigation costs in turn. These findings would warrant a re-evaluation of the climate strategy in most countries relying on the exploitation of shale gas to meet their climate targets.     

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.

     

Health and environmental co-benefits and conflicts of actions to meet UK carbon targets

Many actions to reduce GHG emissions have wider impacts on health, the economy, and the environment, beyond their role in mitigating climate change. These ancillary impacts can be positive (co-benefits) or negative (conflicts). This article presents the first quantitative review of the wider impacts on health and the environment likely to arise from action to meet the UK's legally-binding carbon budgets. Impacts were assessed for climate measures directed at power generation, energy use in buildings, and industry, transport, and agriculture. The study considered a wide range of health and environmental impacts including air pollution, noise, the upstream impacts of fuel extraction, and the lifestyle benefits of active travel. It was not possible to quantify all impacts, but for those that were monetized the co-benefits of climate action (i.e. excluding climate benefits) significantly outweigh the negative impacts, with a net present value of more than £85 billion from 2008 to 2030. Substantial benefits arise from reduced congestion, pollution, noise, and road accidents as a result of avoided journeys. There is also a large health benefit as a result of increased exercise from walking and cycling instead of driving. Awareness of these benefits could strengthen the case for more ambitious climate mitigation action.

Policy relevance

This article demonstrates that actions to mitigate GHG emissions have significant wider benefits for health and the environment. Including these impacts in cost–benefit analysis would strengthen the case for the UK (and similar countries) to set ambitious emissions reduction targets. Understanding co-benefits and trade-offs will also improve coordination across policy areas and cut costs. In addition, co-benefits such as air quality improvements are often immediate and local, whereas climate benefits may occur on a longer timescale and mainly in a distant region, as well as being harder to demonstrate. Dissemination of the benefits, along with better anticipation of trade-offs, could therefore boost public support for climate action.     

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.     

GDP and employment effects of policies to close the 2020 emissions gap

Four policies might close the gap between the global GHG emissions expected for 2020 on the basis of current (2013) policies and the reduced emissions that will be needed if the long-term global temperature increase can be kept below the 2 °C internationally agreed limit. The four policies are (1) specific energy efficiency measures, (2) closure of the least-efficient coal-fired power plants, (3) minimizing methane emissions from upstream oil and gas production, and (4) accelerating the (partial) phase-out of subsidies to fossil-fuel consumption. In this article we test the hypothesis of the International Energy Agency (IEA) that these policies will not result in a loss of gross domestic product (GDP) and we estimate their employment effects using the E3MG global macro-econometric model. Using a set of scenarios we assess each policy individually and then consider the outcomes if all four policies were implemented simultaneously. We find that the policies are insufficient to close the emissions gap, with an overall emission reduction that is 30% less than that found by the IEA. World GDP is 0.5% higher in 2020, with about 6 million net jobs created by 2020 and unemployment reduced.

Policy relevance

The gap between GHG emissions expected under the Copenhagen and Cancun Agreements and that needed for emissions trajectories to have a reasonable chance of reaching the 2 °C target requires additional policies if it is to be closed. This article uses a global simulation model E3MG to analyse a set of policies proposed by the IEA to close the gap and assesses their macroeconomic effects as well as their feasibility in closing the gap. It complements the IEA assessment by estimating the GDP and employment implications separately by the different policies year by year to 2020, by major industries, and by 21 world regions.     

Climate policy strength compared: China,the US,the EU,India, Russia,and Japan

The few systematic international comparisons of climate policy strength made so far have serious weaknesses, particularly those that assign arbitrary weightings to different policy instrument types in order to calculate an aggregate score for policy strength. This article avoids these problems by ranking the six biggest emitters by far – China, the US, the EU, India, Russia, and Japan – on a set of six key policy instruments that are individually potent and together representative of climate policy as a whole: carbon taxes, emissions trading, feed-in tariffs, renewable energy quotas, fossil fuel power plant bans, and vehicle emissions standards. The results cast strong doubt on any idea that there is a clear hierarchy on climate policy with Europe at the top: the EU does lead on a number of policies but so does Japan. China, the US, and India each lead on one area. Russia is inactive on all fronts. At the same time climate policy everywhere remains weak compared to what it could be.

Policy relevance

This study enables climate policy strength, defined as the extent to which the statutory provisions of climate policies are likely to restrict GHG emissions if implemented as intended, to be assessed and compared more realistically across space and time. As such its availability for the six biggest emitters, which together account for over 70% of global CO₂ emissions, should facilitate international negotiations (1) by giving participants a better idea of where major emitters stand relative to each other as far as climate policy stringency is concerned, and (2) by identifying areas of weakness that need action.     

The levelized cost of carbon: a practical,if imperfect,method to compare CO2 abatement projects*

Calculating the cost effectiveness of projects and policies with respect to reducing carbon emissions provides a simple way for local government agencies to consider the climate impacts of their actions. Yet, defining a metric for cost-effectiveness in relation to climate change is not straightforward for several reasons. In this paper, we focus primarily on dynamics, reflecting the time value of money and how the benefits of reducing carbon emissions may change over time. We define a cost-effectiveness metric called Levelized Cost of Carbon (LCC) that carefully accounts for these dynamics. We also investigate the theoretical and practical implications and limitations of using a cost-effectiveness metric as an approach to rank projects. We apply our metric to a set of transportation projects to illustrate the insights that can be gained by such a process.

Key policy insights:

• Levelized Cost of Carbon (LCC) provides a simple way for local governments to consider climate change mitigation in decision making.

• LCC is a cost-effectiveness metric that carefully accounts for the time value of money and possible changes in the value of reducing emissions through time, thus helping local governments to make better decisions.

• LCC can be used to rank projects, with some caveats, even in the absence of a specific value for the benefits of reducing GHG emissions, thus providing flexibility in the face of uncertainty and political constraints.

     

Four intermediate goals: a methodology for evaluation of climate mitigation policy packages

This study aimed to evaluate climate mitigation policy packages in various countries’ nationally determined contributions by introducing four intermediate policy goals: decarbonizing energy, improving energy efficiency, reducing demand for energy services, and enhancing carbon sinks and reducing emissions of non-CO₂ gases. The methodology was examined by using data of China, Germany, Japan, the UK, and the US. Climate mitigation policies introduced between 1990 and 2015 in the five countries were categorized into four intermediate policy goals. Six indicators were introduced to measure actual outcomes, each representing one of the four intermediate policy goals. A comparison between the policy categorizations and the indicator outputs led to the conclusion that the number of policies implemented partially reflects the countries’ efforts to achieve specific policy goals, even though the stringency of each policy was not taken into account. This comparison was also useful in identifying key policies that were effective in achieving policy goals, even if there was a relatively small number of policies. The methodology was useful in generating policy recommendations to fulfil all the four intermediate goals in a balanced manner.

POLICY RELEVANCE

The Paris Agreement, adopted at the 21st Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP21) in December 2015, calls for all countries to prepare, communicate, and maintain successive nationally determined contributions (NDCs) and pursue domestic mitigation measures with the aim of achieving the objectives of such contributions (Article 4.2). Under this new regime, methodologies to assess policy implementation have become increasingly important, especially for the post-2020 period. The methodology developed in this study is simple enough for any country to use and was effective in grasping the overall characteristics of the climate mitigation policy package in each country or region studied. The study recommends that the UNFCCC create a rule requesting countries to submit estimates of population, GDP, total energy demand, share of renewables, and other relevant factors for the target year when they submit their successive intended NDCs.     

Green growth and climate change: conceptual and empirical considerations

The feasibility of green growth is studied in the context of climate change. As carbon emissions are easier to quantify than many other types of environmental pressure, it will be possible to reach a more definite conclusion about the likelihood of green growth than has been possible in the long-standing historical debate on growth versus the environment. We calculate the rate of decoupling between gross domestic product (GDP) and GHG emissions needed to achieve internationally agreed climate targets. Next, eight arguments are considered that together suggest that fast decoupling will be very difficult. Subsequently, we examine the main lines of research used by proponents of green growth to support their viewpoint, including theoretical arguments, exercises with integrated assessment models, and studies of the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis. It will be concluded that decoupling as a main or single strategy to combine economic and environmental aims should be judged as taking a very large risk with our common future. To minimize this risk we need to seriously consider reducing our dependence on growth. This requires a fundamental change of focus in both economic research and policy.

Policy relevance

Currently, green growth is the only strategy of mainstream economists and policy makers to address climate change. This article demonstrates that such an exclusive focus is very risky due to the scale of the challenge and the existence of various barriers to the fast decoupling of GHG emissions from economic output. It seems that the only option to combine environmental and economic objectives is reducing the dependence of our economies on growth. Finding strategies in line with this requires a fundamental change of focus in both economic research and policy.     

Linkage of greenhouse gas emissions trading systems: learning from experience

The last ten years have seen the growth of linkages between many of the world's cap-and-trade systems for GHGs, both directly between systems, and indirectly via connections to credit systems such as the Clean Development Mechanism. If nations have tried to act in their own self-interest, this proliferation of linkages implies that for many nations, the expected benefits of linkage outweighed expected costs. In this article, we draw on the past decade of experience with carbon markets to examine why systems have demonstrated this revealed preference for linking. Linkage is a multi-faceted policy decision that can be used by political jurisdictions to achieve a variety of objectives, and we find qualitative evidence that many economic, political, and strategic factors – ranging from geographic proximity to integrity of emissions reductions – influence the decision to link. We also identify some potentially important effects of linkage, such as loss of control over domestic carbon policies, which do not appear to have deterred real-world decisions to link.

Policy relevance

These findings have implications for the future role that decentralized linkages may play in international climate policy architecture. The Kyoto Protocol has entered what is probably its final commitment period, covering only a small fraction of global GHG emissions. Under the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action, negotiators may now gravitate toward a hybrid system, combining top-down elements for establishing targets with bottom-up elements of pledge-and-review tied to national policies and actions. The incentives for linking these national policies are likely to continue to produce direct connections among regional, national, and sub-national cap-and-trade systems. The growing network of decentralized, direct linkages among these systems may turn out to be a key part of a future hybrid climate policy architecture.     

Power,coalitions and institutional change in South African climate policy

This paper examines power relations, coalitions and conflicts that drive and hinder institutional change in South African climate policy. The analysis finds that the most contested climate policies are those that create distributional conflicts where powerful, non-poor actors will potentially experience real losses to their fossil fuel-based operations. This finding opposes the assumption of competing objectives between emissions and poverty reduction. Yet, actors use discourse that relates to potentially competing objectives between emissions reductions, jobs, poverty reduction and economic welfare.

The analysis relates to the broader questions on how to address public policy problems that affect the two objectives of mitigating climate change and simultaneously boosting socio-economic development. South Africa is a middle-income country that represents the challenge of accommodating simultaneous efforts for emissions and poverty reduction.

Institutional change has been constrained especially in the process towards establishing climate budgets and a carbon tax. The opposing coalitions have succeeded in delaying the implementation of these processes, as a result of unequal power relations. Institutional change in South African climate policy can be predominantly characterized as layering with elements of policy innovation. New policies build on existing regulations in all three cases of climate policy examined: the climate change response white paper, the carbon tax and the renewable energy programme. Unbalanced power relations between coalitions of support in government and civil society and opposition mainly from the affected industry result in very fragile institutional change.

Key policy insights

• The South African government has managed to drive institutional change in climate policy significantly over the past 7 years.

• Powerful coalitions of coal-related industries and their lobbies have constrained institutional change and managed to delay the implementation of carbon pricing measures.

• A successfully managed renewable energy programme has started to transform a coal- and nuclear-powered electricity sector towards integrating sustainable energy technologies. The programme is vulnerable to intergovernmental opposition and requires management at the highest political levels.

• Potential conflict with poverty reduction measures is not a major concern that actively hinders institutional change towards climate objectives. Predominantly non-poor actors frequently use poverty-related discourse to elevate their interests to issues of public concern.

     

Could Cohesion Policy push EU climate efforts?

The main purpose of this article is to evaluate the extent to which the Cohesion Policy of the EU contributes to its climate change mitigation effort. While climate change mitigation and the EU Cohesion Policy have been both thoroughly studied theoretically, the novelty of the present article lies in an analysis of their mutual relationship. Also, a unique feature of this research is an analysis of the contribution of the Cohesion Policy to climate change mitigation over a period of 20 years, including a comparison of the three last programming periods (2000–2006, 2007–2013 and 2014–2020). The results of this research suggest that, while the beginning of the new millennium saw the Cohesion Policy neglecting the issue of climate change mitigation, the current programming period (2014–2020) placed it among its key priorities. This conclusion is supported by a comprehensive set of data on five selected indicators. This article also displays the results against the perspective of the overall climate change mitigation objectives of the EU.

POLICY RELEVANCE

The present article shows how a policy, which used to be considered rather distant from climate change, progressively adopted climate change mitigation as one of its principal objectives. As such, it provides a practical guidance on the integration of climate change mitigation in other policy areas, which may be applied not only in a supranational organisation but also on a national, regional or local level.     

Who determines transformational change in development and climate finance?

The language of transformational change is increasingly applied to climate policy, and particularly in climate finance. Transformational change in this context is used with respect to low-carbon development futures, with the emphasis on mitigation and GHG metrics. But, for many developing countries, climate policy is embedded in a larger context of sustainable development objectives, defined through a national process. Viewed thus, there is a potential tension between mitigation-focused transformation and nationally driven sustainable development. We explore this tension in the context of operationalizing the Green Climate Fund (GCF), which has to deal with the fundamental tension between country ownership and transformational change. In relation to climate finance, acceptance of diverse interpretations of transformation are essential conditions for avoiding risk of transformational change becoming a conditionality on development. We further draw lessons from climate governance and the development aid literature. The article examines how in the case of both the Clean Development Mechanism and Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions, there has been limited success in achieving both development objectives and ‘nationally appropriate’ mitigation. The development aid literature points to process-based approaches as a possible alternative, but there are limitations to this approach.

Policy relevance

The concept of transformational change has gained prominence in climate finance. The conundrum facing the GCF is that it seeks to support transformational change in the climate realm, in a context where countries may have competing priorities. Balancing or even transcending this tension is a fundamental design challenge for the GCF. A primary focus on mitigation, particularly if metrics of performance are tied exclusively to GHG reduction, raise concerns about diluting ownership by recipient countries and evokes concerns of conditionality or worse. The literature on development assistance has explored options notably conditions on process and adequate capacity, and suggests that there are no short cuts to building domestic ownership. Actors on climate change need to avoid the risk that transformational change is perceived as, and becomes, an imposed condition. The risk that transformation change, operationalized in the context of unequal power relations, becomes an imposition on development, needs to be avoided.     

The accountability imperative for quantifying the uncertainty of emission forecasts: evidence from Mexico

Governmental climate change mitigation targets are typically developed with the aid of forecasts of greenhouse-gas (GHG) emissions. The robustness and credibility of such forecasts depends, among other issues, on the extent to which forecasting approaches can reflect prevailing uncertainties. We apply a transparent and replicable method to quantify the uncertainty associated with projections of gross domestic product growth rates for Mexico, a key driver of GHG emissions in the country. We use those projections to produce probabilistic forecasts of GHG emissions for Mexico. We contrast our probabilistic forecasts with Mexico’s governmental deterministic forecasts. We show that, because they fail to reflect such key uncertainty, deterministic forecasts are ill-suited for use in target-setting processes. We argue that (i) guidelines should be agreed upon, to ensure that governmental forecasts meet certain minimum transparency and quality standards, and (ii) governments should be held accountable for the appropriateness of the forecasting approach applied to prepare governmental forecasts, especially when those forecasts are used to derive climate change mitigation targets.

POLICY INSIGHTS

• No minimum transparency and quality standards exist to guide the development of GHG emission scenario forecasts, not even when these forecasts are used to set national climate change mitigation targets.

• No accountability mechanisms appear to be in place at the national level to ensure that national governments rely on scientifically sound processes to develop GHG emission scenarios.

• Using probabilistic forecasts to underpin emission reduction targets represents a scientifically sound option for reflecting in the target the uncertainty to which those forecasts are subject, thus increasing the validity of the target.

• Setting up minimum transparency and quality standards, and holding governments accountable for their choice of forecasting methods could lead to more robust emission reduction targets nationally and, by extension, internationally.

     

Reducing global GHG emissions by replicating successful sector examples: the ‘good practice policies’ scenario

This article shows the potential impact on global GHG emissions in 2030, if all countries were to implement sectoral climate policies similar to successful examples already implemented elsewhere. This assessment was represented in the IMAGE and GLOBIOM/G4M models by replicating the impact of successful national policies at the sector level in all world regions. The first step was to select successful policies in nine policy areas. In the second step, the impact on the energy and land-use systems or GHG emissions was identified and translated into model parameters, assuming that it would be possible to translate the impacts of the policies to other countries. As a result, projected annual GHG emission levels would be about 50 GtCO₂e by 2030 (2% above 2010 levels), compared to the 60 GtCO₂e in the ‘current policies’ scenario. Most reductions are achieved in the electricity sector through expanding renewable energy, followed by the reduction of fluorinated gases, reducing venting and flaring in oil and gas production, and improving industry efficiency. Materializing the calculated mitigation potential might not be as straightforward given different country priorities, policy preferences and circumstances.

Key policy insights

• Considerable emissions reductions globally would be possible, if a selection of successful policies were replicated and implemented in all countries worldwide.

• This would significantly reduce, but not close, the emissions gap with a 2°C pathway.

• From the selection of successful policies evaluated in this study, those implemented in the sector ‘electricity supply’ have the highest impact on global emissions compared to the ‘current policies’ scenario.

• Replicating the impact of these policies worldwide could lead to emission and energy trends in the renewable electricity, passenger transport, industry (including fluorinated gases) and buildings sector, that are close to those in a 2°C scenario.

• Using successful policies and translating these to policy impact per sector is a more reality-based alternative to most mitigation pathways, which need to make theoretical assumptions on policy cost-effectiveness.

     

Bookkeeping rather than climate policy making: national mitigation strategies in Western Europe

Climate change mitigation is a wicked problem that cuts horizontally across sectors and vertically across levels of government. To address it effectively, governments around the world, in particular in the EU, have developed several generations of multi-sectoral national mitigation strategies (NMS) since the early 1990s. Although NMS became the main effort to systematically coordinate mitigation policies, few works have studied them comparatively so far. The present article fills this gap by analysing how the EU-15 group of countries operationalized climate protection through NMS. First, we introduce the three roles policy strategies usually aim to fulfil: besides being policy documents they also represent governance processes (supposed to coordinate sectoral implementation), and capacity-building efforts. Empirically, we then explore the rationale, origins and prevalence of NMS. Subsequently, we characterize them as policy documents (with regards to their contents and structures) and as governance processes that address capacity building only implicitly. Based on existing assessments we finally review some performance indications of NMS. We find that in particular second- and third-generation NMS aimed to take their governance function seriously but resembled ‘lacklustre bookkeeping' of emissions, targets and mitigation options. Instead of approximating NMS towards their obviously overcharging governance function, we suggest to recalibrate them towards their communication and capacity-building function in a way that goes beyond bookkeeping.

Policy relevance

The present article shows that NMS fail to effectively govern climate change mitigation across a broad range of sectoral policy domains. Since most European countries have adopted not one but up to three generations of NMS since the 1990s, this finding is highly relevant for them – and for all others aiming to adopt similarly broad strategies. Instead of piling one strategy on top of another irrespective of their implementation, and instead of abolishing mitigation strategies altogether, we recommend recalibrating them towards what they can realistically accomplish: effective communication and capacity building so that NMS can advance from lacklustre bookkeeping to actively promoting a government-wide climate change mitigation vision. The article can help governments to realise that renewing integrated strategies such as NMS without overhauling them comes close to flogging a dead horse.     

Controlling GHG emissions from the transportation sector through an ETS: institutional arrangements in Shenzhen,China

Many different approaches are needed to achieve reductions in GHG emissions from the transportation sector. Carbon emissions trading schemes (ETSs) are widely used in industry and are effective in reducing the overall social cost of emissions abatement. This article reports the development of a downstream ETS for the transportation sector and its application in Shenzhen, China. The ETS was devised as a mandatory cap-and-trade scheme and, as a first step, was applied to public transportation. An integrated cap was set on the total emissions from buses and taxis: an absolute cap for existing vehicles and a relative increment for new entrants. Allowances were allocated by grandfathering or benchmarking and a ‘reverse mechanism’ was established to encourage the transformation of urban transportation to a low-carbon system. Online fuel consumption monitoring was used to quantify the emissions from vehicles, and the operators were required to surrender enough allowances or credits to account for their verified annual emissions. The mechanisms for allowance trading and carbon offsets provided sufficient flexibility to make emissions abatement and the use of new-energy vehicles and environmentally friendly travel within Shenzhen's urban transportation system economically attractive.

Policy relevance

The transportation sector is becoming a major contributor to the growth in China's GHG emissions. Achieving large reductions in GHG emissions from the transportation sector is a great challenge and requires both technology and policy innovation. The tradable carbon permit is a popular concept in mitigating climate change, but the introduction of a cap-and-trade ETS into the transportation sector is a relatively innovative concept. Shenzhen has launched the first cap-and-trade ETS in a developing country and is currently exploring ways to mitigate carbon emissions by a downstream cap-and-trade ETS for the transportation sector. This article considers the main institutional arrangements and regulatory framework of Shenzhen's transportation carbon ETS. It not only refreshes the theoretical analysis and practical application of downstream cap-and-trade carbon emissions trading in urban transportation, but also provides developing countries with a cost-effective instrument to mitigate their rapid growth in traffic carbon emissions during urbanization.     

Climate change and the agricultural sector in Ireland: examining farmer awareness and willingness to adopt new advisory mitigation tools

Agriculture is responsible for the bulk of Ireland’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. However, the potential to mitigate some of these emissions through the adoption of more efficient farm management practices may be hampered by farmers’ awareness and attitude towards climate change and agriculture’s role in contributing to GHG emissions. This paper presents results from a survey of 746 Irish farmers in 2014, with a view to understanding farmers’ awareness of, and attitudes to, climate change and GHG emissions. Survey results show that there was a general uncertainty towards a number of questions related to agricultural GHG emissions, e.g. if tilling of land causes GHG emissions, and that farmers were reluctant to take action to reduce GHG emissions on their farm. To further explore farmers’ attitudes towards climate change, a multinomial logit model was used to examine the socio-economic factors that affect farmers’ willingness to adopt an advisory tool that would show the potential reduction in GHG emissions from the adoption of new technologies. Results show that farmers’ awareness of human-induced global climate change was positively related to the tool’s adoption.

Key policy insights

• Irish farmers are generally not sufficiently aware of the impact of their activities on climate change.

• A quarter of farmers believed that climate change will only impact on their business in the long-term; such an attitude may lead to a reluctance amongst these farmers to adopt management practices that reduce GHG emissions.

• Awareness of climate change affects positively the adoption of new tools to reduce GHG emissions on farmers’ farms.

• IT literacy affects willingness to adopt new tools to address GHG emissions.

• Reception of agri-environmental advice can have a positive influence on farmers’ willingness to adopt new GHG emission abatement tools.

• Farmers in receipt of environmental subsidies are more likely to adopt new abatement tools, either because they are more environmentally conscious or because the subsidy raised their environmentally consciousness.

• Willingness to adopt differs between different farm enterprises; operating dairy enterprise increases the willingness to adopt new advisory mitigation tools.

     

Learning from CDM SD tool experience for Article 6.4 of the Paris Agreement

The Paris Agreement (PA) emphasizes the intrinsic relationship between climate change and sustainable development (SD) and welcomes the 2030 agenda for the global Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Yet, there is a lack of assessment approaches to ensure that climate and development goals are achieved in an integrated fashion and trade-offs avoided. Article 6.4 of the PA introduces a new Sustainable Mitigation Mechanism (SMM) with the dual aim to contribute to the mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions and foster SD. The Kyoto Protocol’s Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) has a similar objective and in 2014, the CDM SD tool was launched by the Executive Board of the CDM to highlight the SD benefits of CDM activities. This article analyses the usefulness of the CDM SD tool for stakeholders and compares the SD tool’s SD reporting requirements against other flexible mechanisms and multilateral standards to provide recommendations for improvement. A key conclusion is that the Paris Agreement’s SMM has a stronger political mandate than the CDM to measure that SD impacts are ‘real, measurable and long-term’. Recommendations for an improved CDM SD tool are a relevant starting point to develop rules, modalities, and procedures for SD assessment in Article 6.4 as well as for other cooperative mitigation approaches.

POLICY RELEVANCE

Research findings are relevant for developing the rulebook of modalities and procedures for Article 6.4 of the Paris Agreement, which introduces a new mechanism for mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions and sustainable development. Lessons learnt from the CDM SD tool and recommendations for enhanced SD assessment are discussed in context of Article 6 cooperative approaches, and make a timely contribution to inform negotiations on the rulebook agreed by the Conference of the Parties serving as the Meeting of the Parties to the Paris Agreement.