scholarly journals Linking service provision to material cycles: A new framework for studying the resource efficiency–climate change (RECC) nexus

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Pauliuk ◽  
Tomer Fishman ◽  
Niko Heeren ◽  
Peter Berrill ◽  
Qingshi Tu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Service Provision ◽  
Resource Efficiency ◽  
Material Cycles ◽  
New Framework

scholarly journals Linking Service Provision to Material Cycles – A New Framework for Studying the Resource Efficiency-Climate Change Nexus (RECC)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Pauliuk ◽  
Tomer Fishman ◽  
Niko Heeren ◽  
Peter Berrill ◽  
Qingshi Tu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Service Provision ◽  
Climate Change Mitigation ◽  
Residential Buildings ◽  
Resource Efficiency ◽  
Climate Impacts ◽  
Material Cycle ◽  
Material Efficiency ◽  
Material Cycles ◽  
Change Mitigation

Material production accounts for 23% of all greenhouse gas emissions. More efficient use of materials – through decoupling of services that support human wellbeing from material use – is imperative as other emissions mitigation options are expensive. An interdisciplinary scientific assessment of material efficiency and its links to service provision, material cycle management, and climate policy is needed to identify effective strategies and help design the policy framework required for their implementation. We present RECC, the Resource Efficiency-Climate Change mitigation framework, a first step towards such a comprehensive assessment. RECC is based on dynamic material flow analysis and links the services provided (individual motorized transport and dwelling) to the operation of in-use stocks (passenger vehicles and residential buildings), to the expansion and maintenance of these stocks to their material cycles (major materials like steel and cement), and to energy use and climate impacts. A key innovation of RECC is the up-scaling of detailed descriptions of future product archetypes with different degrees of material and energy efficiency, which are simulated with engineering tools.We utilize RECC with augmented storylines of the shared socioeconomic pathways (SSP) to describe future service demand and associated material requirements. Ten material efficiency strategies at different stages of the material cycle can be assessed by ramping up their implementation rates to the identified technical potentials. RECC provides scenario results for the life cycle impacts of ambitious service-material decoupling concurrent with energy system decarbonization, giving detailed insights on the resource efficiency-climate change mitigation nexus to policy makers worldwide.

Designing farmer-acceptable rotations that assure ecosystem service provision in the face of climate change

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
David A. Bohan ◽  
Reto Schmucki ◽  
Abrha T. Abay ◽  
Mette Termansen ◽  
Miranda Bane ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Ecosystem Service ◽  
Service Provision ◽  
The Face

Resource efficiency for UK cars from 1960 to 2015: From stocks and flows to service provision

2021 ◽  
pp. 100676
Author(s):  
Bárbara Rodrigues ◽  
Luis Gabriel Carmona ◽  
Kai Whiting ◽  
Tânia Sousa
Keyword(s):  
Service Provision ◽  
Resource Efficiency ◽  
Stocks And Flows

The Elusive Governance of Climate Change: Nationally Determined Contributions as Commitments and Negotiating Positions

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-26
Author(s):  
Justin Leinaweaver ◽  
Robert Thomson
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Paris Agreement ◽  
The Political ◽  
Review System ◽  
Main Approach ◽  
National Policies ◽  
Key Characteristics ◽  
Nationally Determined Contributions ◽  
International Interactions ◽  
New Framework

Since the Paris Agreement of 2016, the international community’s main approach to addressing climate change is for states to determine their own commitments in a pledge and review system. Parties to the Paris Agreement formulate Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), which are documents that give details of their national policies and plans. They are free to formulate and present national policies as they choose, and as a result, there is substantial variation in the content and form of NDCs. This study presents a new framework for assessing and comparing the political meanings of these documents. The framework builds on two distinct ways in which NDCs can be understood. NDCs may be commitments to the international community and domestic actors. Alternatively, they may embody states’ negotiating positions in an ongoing process of national and international interactions. The framework consists of a set of thematic categories to which each sentence of these documents can be allocated. The application of this framework enables us to compare the political content of states’ NDCs systematically. The study demonstrates the validity of the framework by correlating its results with key characteristics of states. The findings also provide evidence for the two distinct perspectives on these documents.

scholarly journals Mind the gap: Coping with delay in environmental governance

AMBIO ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 49 (5) ◽  
pp. 1067-1075 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mikael Karlsson ◽  
Michael Gilek
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Environmental Governance ◽  
Biodiversity Loss ◽  
Goal Achievement ◽  
Science And Policy ◽  
Policy Review ◽  
Policy Goals ◽  
State Of The Environment ◽  
New Framework

Abstract Gaps between public policy goals and the state of the environment are often significant. However, while goal failures in environmental governance are studied in a number of disciplines, the knowledge on the various causes behind delayed goal achievement is still incomplete. In this article we propose a new framework for analysis of delay mechanisms in science and policy, with the intention to provide a complementary lens for describing, analysing and counteracting delay in environmental governance. The framework is based on case-study findings from recent research focusing on goal-failures in policies for climate change, hazardous chemicals, biodiversity loss and eutrophication. It is also related to previous research on science and policy processes and their interactions. We exemplify the framework with two delay mechanisms that we consider particularly important to highlight—denial of science and decision thresholds. We call for further research in the field, for development of the framework, and not least for increased attention to delay mechanisms in environmental policy review and development on national as well as international levels.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document