scholarly journals Building equity in: strategies for integrating equity into modelling for a 1.5°C world

2018 ◽  
Vol 376 (2119) ◽  
pp. 20160461 ◽  
Author(s):  
Klinsky Sonja ◽  
Winkler Harald
Keyword(s):  
Climate Impacts ◽  
Policy Action ◽  
Social Challenges ◽  
Vulnerable Communities ◽  
Mitigation And Adaptation ◽  
Political Debates ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Loss And Damage ◽  
Warming World ◽  
Current Modelling

Emission pathways consistent with limiting temperature increase to 1.5°C raise pressing questions from an equity perspective. These pathways would limit impacts and benefit vulnerable communities but also present trade-offs that could increase inequality. Meanwhile, rapid mitigation could exacerbate political debates in which equity has played a central role. In this paper, we first develop a set of elements we suggest are essential for evaluating the equity implications of policy actions consistent with 1.5°C. These elements include (i) assess climate impacts, adaptation, loss and damage; (ii) be sensitive to context; (iii) compare costs of mitigation and adaptation policy action; (iv) incorporate human development and poverty; (v) integrate inequality dynamics; and (vi) be clear about normative assumptions and responsive to users. We then assess the ability of current modelling practices to address each element, focusing on global integrated assessment models augmented by national modelling and scenarios. We find current practices face serious limitations across all six dimensions although the severity of these varies. Finally, based on our assessment we identify strategies that may be best suited for enabling us to generate insights into each of the six elements in the context of assessing pathways for a 1.5°C world. This article is part of the theme issue ‘The Paris Agreement: understanding the physical and social challenges for a warming world of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels'.

scholarly journals Can ‘loss and damage’ carry the load?

2018 ◽  
Vol 376 (2119) ◽  
pp. 20170070 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert R. M. Verchick
Keyword(s):  
Paris Agreement ◽  
Climate Impacts ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Residual Risk ◽  
Social Challenges ◽  
Carbon Reduction ◽  
Global Consensus ◽  
Loss And Damage ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Warming World

Even assuming a heroic rush towards carbon reduction and adaptation, some regions of the world will be hammered hard by climate impacts. Thus, a global consensus now sees the need for a supplemental plan to deal with the kind of harms that cannot be avoided—what Parties call ‘loss and damage’. For a loss-and-damage plan to work, it must be capable of carrying the load, the load being whatever minimal standards that morality and political consensus require. But if residual risk climbs too high, it will fall short of even the most basic expectations. The Paris Agreement calls for holding the rise in global average temperature to ‘well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels’, while working to limit the increase to 1.5°C. How much difference is in that half-degree? From the point of view of residual risk, quite a lot. According to a 2016 study published by the European Geosciences Union, a jump from 1.5°C to 2°C could produce outsize impacts, particularly in tropical latitudes. That difference could mark the line between a plan that is politically and morally defensible and one that is not. At the very least, the difference is enough to inform the design and expectations of any future plan. This article is part of the theme issue ‘The Paris Agreement: understanding the physical and social challenges for a warming world of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels’.

scholarly journals Towards legitimacy of the solar geoengineering research enterprise

2018 ◽  
Vol 376 (2119) ◽  
pp. 20160459 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter C. Frumhoff ◽  
Jennie C. Stephens
Keyword(s):  
Global Climate ◽  
Lower Surface ◽  
Theme Issue ◽  
Social Challenges ◽  
Climate Risks ◽  
Vulnerable Communities ◽  
Policy Relevance ◽  
Solar Geoengineering ◽  
Warming World ◽  
Geopolitical Risks

Mounting evidence that even aggressive reductions in net emissions of greenhouse gases will be insufficient to limit global climate risks is increasing calls for atmospheric experiments to better understand the risks and implications of also deploying solar geoengineering technologies to reflect sunlight and rapidly lower surface temperatures. But solar geoengineering research itself poses significant environmental and geopolitical risks. Given limited societal awareness and public dialogue about this climate response option, conducting such experiments without meaningful societal engagement could galvanize opposition to solar geoengineering research from civil society, including the most climate vulnerable communities who are among its intended beneficiaries. Here, we explore whether and how a solar geoengineering research enterprise might be developed in a way that promotes legitimacy as well as scientific credibility and policy relevance. We highlight the distinctive responsibilities of researchers and research funders to ensure that solar geoengineering research proposals are subject to legitimate societal review and scrutiny, recommend steps they can take to strive towards legitimacy and call on them to be explicitly open to multiple potential outcomes, including the societal rejection or considerable alteration of the solar geoengineering research enterprise. This article is part of the theme issue ‘The Paris Agreement: understanding the physical and social challenges for a warming world of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels'.

scholarly journals Uncertain impacts on economic growth when stabilizing global temperatures at 1.5°C or 2°C warming

2018 ◽  
Vol 376 (2119) ◽  
pp. 20160460 ◽  
Author(s):  
Felix Pretis ◽  
Moritz Schwarz ◽  
Kevin Tang ◽  
Karsten Haustein ◽  
Myles R. Allen
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Economic Growth ◽  
National Income ◽  
Climate Impacts ◽  
Large Set ◽  
Climate Conditions ◽  
Social Challenges ◽  
Empirical Estimates ◽  
Per Capita ◽  
Warming World

Empirical evidence suggests that variations in climate affect economic growth across countries over time. However, little is known about the relative impacts of climate change on economic outcomes when global mean surface temperature (GMST) is stabilized at 1.5°C or 2°C warming relative to pre-industrial levels. Here we use a new set of climate simulations under 1.5°C and 2°C warming from the ‘Half a degree Additional warming, Prognosis and Projected Impacts' (HAPPI) project to assess changes in economic growth using empirical estimates of climate impacts in a global panel dataset. Panel estimation results that are robust to outliers and breaks suggest that within-year variability of monthly temperatures and precipitation has little effect on economic growth beyond global nonlinear temperature effects. While expected temperature changes under a GMST increase of 1.5°C lead to proportionally higher warming in the Northern Hemisphere, the projected impact on economic growth is larger in the Tropics and Southern Hemisphere. Accounting for econometric estimation and climate uncertainty, the projected impacts on economic growth of 1.5°C warming are close to indistinguishable from current climate conditions, while 2°C warming suggests statistically lower economic growth for a large set of countries (median projected annual growth up to 2% lower). Level projections of gross domestic product (GDP) per capita exhibit high uncertainties, with median projected global average GDP per capita approximately 5% lower at the end of the century under 2°C warming relative to 1.5°C. The correlation between climate-induced reductions in per capita GDP growth and national income levels is significant at the p  < 0.001 level, with lower-income countries experiencing greater losses, which may increase economic inequality between countries and is relevant to discussions of loss and damage under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. This article is part of the theme issue ‘The Paris Agreement: understanding the physical and social challenges for a warming world of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels'.

scholarly journals Climate and development: enhancing impact through stronger linkages in the implementation of the Paris Agreement and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

2018 ◽  
Vol 376 (2119) ◽  
pp. 20160444 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luis Gomez-Echeverri
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Sustainable Development Goals ◽  
Paris Agreement ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
The Sustainable Development ◽  
Social Challenges ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Development Goals ◽  
Warming World

One of the greatest achievements in the global negotiations of 2015 that delivered the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development or Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the Paris Agreement on climate change is that, for the first time, the linkages between climate and development were enshrined in each of the documents. This was done in recognition that climate change and development need to be addressed together in order not only to avoid harmful trade-offs and high costs, particularly for poorer countries, but also to exploit the benefits that come from strengthening these linkages. This review presents some of the latest data that argue for stronger linkages as well as the challenges of implementation which are not only politically and economically related but also include issues such as knowledge gaps, finance and governance. Finally, the review also presents a glimpse at the pathways that will be required to reach the ambitious global temperature targets of the Paris Agreement of less than 2°C above pre-industrial levels with efforts to limit temperature rise even further to 1.5°C. This provides the context for some conclusions and recommendations for policy-makers, including on methodologies for assessing linkages and leveraging them for greater benefit. This article is part of the theme issue ‘The Paris Agreement: understanding the physical and social challenges for a warming world of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels’.

scholarly journals Loss and damage from climate change and implicit assumptions of sustainable development

2021 ◽  
Vol 164 (1-2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Chad S. Boda ◽  
Turaj Faran ◽  
Murray Scown ◽  
Kelly Dorkenoo ◽  
Brian C. Chaffin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Policy Implications ◽  
Systematic Analysis ◽  
Integrative Framework ◽  
Mitigation And Adaptation ◽  
Policy Domain ◽  
Loss And Damage ◽  
Development Approach ◽  
Research And Policy

AbstractLoss and damage from climate change, recognized as a unique research and policy domain through the Warsaw International Mechanism (WIM) in 2013, has drawn increasing attention among climate scientists and policy makers. Labelled by some as the “third pillar” of the international climate regime—along with mitigation and adaptation—it has been suggested that loss and damage has the potential to catalyze important synergies with other international agendas, particularly sustainable development. However, the specific approaches to sustainable development that inform loss and damage research and how these approaches influence research outcomes and policy recommendations remain largely unexplored. We offer a systematic analysis of the assumptions of sustainable development that underpins loss and damage scholarship through a comprehensive review of peer-reviewed research on loss and damage. We demonstrate that the use of specific metrics, decision criteria, and policy prescriptions by loss and damage researchers and practitioners implies an unwitting adherence to different underlying theories of sustainable development, which in turn impact how loss and damage is conceptualized and applied. In addition to research and policy implications, our review suggests that assumptions about the aims of sustainable development determine how loss and damage is conceptualized, measured, and governed, and the human development approach currently represents the most advanced perspective on sustainable development and thus loss and damage. This review supports sustainable development as a coherent, comprehensive, and integrative framework for guiding further conceptual and empirical development of loss and damage scholarship.

HOW TO TRANSFORM AGRICULTURE UNDER THE CHALLENGES OF GLOBAL WARMING: A REVIEW OF KEY DEVELOPMENT AND TRADE ISSUES

2013 ◽  
Vol 04 (03) ◽  
pp. 1350013
Author(s):  
ULRICH HOFFMANN
Keyword(s):  
Global Warming ◽  
Environmental Sustainability ◽  
Gender Inequity ◽  
Production Methods ◽  
Mitigation And Adaptation ◽  
Health And Nutrition ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Development Approach ◽  
And Gender ◽  
Made In

The problems of climate change, hunger and poverty, economic, social and gender inequity, poor health and nutrition, and environmental sustainability are inter-related and need to be solved by leveraging agriculture's multi-functionality. Against this background, this paper analyzes various aspects of the fundamental transformation of agricultural production methods and systems required for dealing with the serious challenges that arise from global warming. It also discusses the trade-offs to be made in enhancing the mitigation and adaptation potential of agriculture as part and parcel of a pro-poor development approach in agriculture, which will also have to include a modification of international trade rules.

scholarly journals Warming world, changing ocean: mitigation and adaptation to support resilient marine systems

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rowan Trebilco ◽  
Aysha Fleming ◽  
Alistair J Hobday ◽  
Jess Melbourne Thomas ◽  
Amelie Meyer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Marine Systems ◽  
Mitigation And Adaptation ◽  
Warming World

scholarly journals Synergies in the Land Use Sector: What Is the Best Policy Approach When Co-benefits and Trade-offs Are Involved?

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (53) ◽  
pp. 53-69
Author(s):  
Martin Lopez
Keyword(s):  
Land Use ◽  
Integrated Approach ◽  
Integral Approach ◽  
Welfare Gains ◽  
Deep Uncertainty ◽  
Adaptation Measures ◽  
Address Climate Change ◽  
Mitigation And Adaptation ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Welfare Implications

AbstractMitigation and adaptation are the main strategies to address climate change. Both of them are interrelated instruments and key elements of an integral approach to tackle the phenomenon. This interrelation is particularly strong in the land use sector, an area in which practically any policy has a significant effect on the goals of both strategies. Yet, in practice, mitigation and adaptation are treated as two different instruments. A poor understanding about the interactions between the mentioned strategies remains as a barrier to implement the integrated approach. To contribute to fill-in this knowledge gap, a hypothetical ecologic-economic system simulated under deep uncertainty was used to test environmental and welfare implications of different policy configurations. Taking the unregulated economy as a benchmark, the outcomes of the mentioned interventions were classified as synergies or different forms of trade-offs. Results indicate that measures based on internalization of externalities overcame monetary compensation schemes. Moreover, when externalities were corrected, synergies were more frequent and associated to higher environmental and welfare gains. Furthermore, the policy configuration that exhibited best synergic properties was an intervention integrating mitigation and adaptation measures. This indicates that synergies may be more accessible than previously considered, however, current policy approach and incentives may not be the best tools to trigger them.

scholarly journals Challenges of Compensation and Reparation for Loss and Damage Related to the Adverse Effects of Climate Change

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 183
Author(s):  
Jorge Gabriel Arévalo García
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Financial Burden ◽  
Causal Link ◽  
Vulnerable Groups ◽  
Mitigation And Adaptation ◽  
Loss And Damage ◽  
Legal Model ◽  
Adaptation Policies

Anthropogenic climate change has and will have unavoidable adverse effects despite mitigation and adaptation policies. Therefore, the financial burden of the costs of loss and damage must be distributed fairly and proportionally. This implies that those responsible for climate change must take responsibility and compensate those who suffer losses and, if possible, repair the damages related to this phenomenon. However, climate justice has been limited by the lack of a causal link between a specific climate change effect and specific damages or losses. Accordingly, this article discusses the compensation and reparation of losses and damages related to the adverse effects of climate change, as a stream applicable after mitigation and adaptation policies. In addition, this article reviews the implications of the relevant findings that established the existence and development of climate change as a problem that affects the enjoyment of human rights, to argue how the theory of human rights can contribute to the current legal model for reparation and compensation for losses and damages associated with climate change. Also, due to the impossibility of obtaining a legally binding agreement as a structure for integration, and to adequately address the problem of causes, consequences, benefits and burdens, vulnerable groups ought to be the most affected.

scholarly journals Food security outcomes under a changing climate: impacts of mitigation and adaptation on vulnerability to food insecurity

2018 ◽  
Vol 147 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 327-341 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katy J. Richardson ◽  
Kirsty H. Lewis ◽  
P. Krishna Krishnamurthy ◽  
Chris Kent ◽  
Andrew J. Wiltshire ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Food Security ◽  
Food Insecurity ◽  
Climate Impacts ◽  
Changing Climate ◽  
Mitigation And Adaptation
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document