This article provides further detail on expected global GHG emission levels in 2020, based on the Emissions Gap Report (United Nations Environment Programme, December 2010), assuming the emission reduction proposals in the Copenhagen Accord and Cancun Agreements are met. Large differences are found in the results of individual groups owing to uncertainties in current and projected emission estimates and in the interpretation of the reduction proposals. Regardless of these uncertainties, the pledges for 2020 are expected to deliver emission levels above those that are consistent with a 2°C limit. This emissions gap could be narrowed through implementing the more stringent conditional pledges, minimizing the use of ‘lenient’ credits from forests and surplus emission units, avoiding double-counting of offsets and implementing measures beyond current pledges. Conversely, emission reduction gains from countries moving from their low to high ambition pledges could be more than offset by the use of ‘lenient’ land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF) credits and surplus emissions units, if these were used to the maximum. Laying the groundwork for faster emission reduction rates after 2020 appears to be crucial in any case. 相似文献
The energy sector is the main contributor to GHG emissions in Saudi Arabia. The tremendous growth of GHG emissions poses serious challenges for the Kingdom in terms of their reduction targets, and also the mitigation of the associated climate changes. The rising trend of population and urbanization affects the energy demand, which results in a faster rate of increase in GHG emissions. The major energy sector sources that contribute to GHG emissions include the electricity generation, road transport, desalination plants, petroleum refining, petrochemical, cement, iron and steel, and fertilizer industries. In recent years, the energy sector has become the major source, accounting for more than 90% of national CO2 emissions. Although a substantial amount of research has been conducted on renewable energy resources, a sustainable shift from petroleum resources is yet to be achieved. Public awareness, access to energy-efficient technology, and the development and implementation of a legislative framework, energy pricing policies, and renewable and alternative energy policies are not mature enough to ensure a significant reduction in GHG emissions from the energy sector. An innovative and integrated solution that best serves the Kingdom's long-term needs and exploits potential indigenous, renewable, and alternative energy resources while maintaining its sustainable development stride is essential.Policy relevanceThe main contributor to GHG emissions in Saudi Arabia is the energy sector that accounts for more than 90% of the national CO2 emissions. Tremendous growth of GHG emissions poses serious challenges for the Kingdom in their reduction and mitigating the associated climate changes. This study examines the changing patterns of different activities associated with energy sector, the pertinent challenges, and the opportunities that promise reduction of GHG emissions while providing national energy and economic security. The importance of achieving timely, sustained, and increasing reductions in GHG emissions means that a combination of policies may be needed. This study points to the long-term importance of making near- and medium-term policy choices on a well-informed, strategic basis. This analytical paper is expected to provide useful information to the national policy makers and other decision makers. It may also contribute to the GHG emission inventories and the climate change negotiations. 相似文献
In September 2018, leaders in climate action within and outside the U.S. will convene in San Francisco for the Global Climate Action Summit. They plan to demonstrate strong ongoing commitment to exceeding the goals set out in the Paris Agreement, despite U.S. federal opposition under President Trump, and to spur greater ambition among subnational governments and the private sector. Now that the Trump Administration is working to undo the progress made under President Obama, it is more important than ever that states and cities, as well as the private sector, redouble their efforts. Since the 2016 election, many U.S. states have demonstrated leadership by establishing ever-more ambitious clean energy and electric vehicle targets through legislation and executive action; by pushing back on the Trump Administration in public forums and in the courts; and by banding together to realise greater effectiveness through collective action. The commitment of leading states, cities, and businesses alone will not be enough to achieve the rapid reductions needed to keep planetary warming to 1.5 degrees C in the absence of U.S. federal efforts. But coming after a summer of extreme weather events, the Summit represents a critical opportunity to re-energise constituencies, highlight the need for urgent and ambitious action, and bring climate change to the forefront of policy conversations across the U.S. and beyond.
Key policy insights
The reversal of U.S. ambitious clean energy and transportation policy, including replacing the Clean Power Plan, freezing fuel standards, and withdrawing from the Paris Agreement, have created a gap at the federal level under President Trump that will be difficult – but perhaps not impossible – to fill with subnational action.
States, local governments, and the private sector have shown a strengthened commitment to combating climate change and to the goals set out in the Paris Agreement through more ambitious legislative and executive targets, and regional initiatives like RGGI and cross-jurisdictional zero emissions vehicle programmes.
The Global Climate Action Summit in September 2018 is a pivotal moment to energise a broader coalition within and outside the U.S. towards catalysing the level of ambition needed to exceed goals set out in the Paris Agreement.
The geography of foreign aid is in flux as a growing number of countries from the Global South are entering the field as donors. A principal barrier to understanding this trend is divergence in the definition of aid among emerging market donors and between emerging market donors and traditional donors, as well as transparency in reporting. This article contributes to analysts’ toolbox by developing a comparative analysis of aid definitions for China, the largest Global South donor in the world. Using a leading comprehensive database on Chinese aid flows, I construct a scale of definitional restrictiveness for two governmental and three proxy definitions developed by scholars to reconcile aid from non–Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) donors with OECD definitions. Based on this analysis, I find that the most inclusive definition of aid does not always translate into the highest aid total estimate. In addition, definitions of aid are moving targets rather than static measures, which can include different flows at different times depending on the state of the global foreign aid system and its major players. 相似文献
Considerable progress has been made in Europe towards cutting GHG emissions during the last decade, but this achievement is partly due to the delocalization of manufacturing industries to emerging countries. Under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the current emission accounting method is production-based and cannot fully capture this effect. The use of such a method is clearly unfavourable for emerging countries and could lead to difficulties in engaging them in climate policy negotiations. The consumption-based approach represents the other extreme in apportioning emission responsibilities. This article proposes the beneficiary-based shared responsibility approach, which outperforms previous methods in terms of scientific justification and political acceptability. Consumer countries benefit from enjoying the product itself, while producing countries benefit from the production process, which provides them with employment, government income, and company profit. Thus, emissions related to the material throughput used to produce exported products should be allocated to the final place of consumption. The income of production activities benefits the producer country, so emissions associated with these values should be allocated to them. The main reason for taking this accounting approach is that the responsibility for emissions and the benefits of enjoying a product should not be decoupled. 相似文献