对斯特恩新报告的要点评述和解读

2006年10月,英国推出的由著名经济学家斯特恩爵士领导编写的《斯特恩回顾：气候变化经济学》,从经济学的角度着重论述了全球应对气候变化的紧迫性,强调只有尽快大幅度减少温室气体排放,才能避免全球升温超过2℃可能造成的巨大经济损失,且减排成本并不高。2008年4月,斯特恩爵士再次推出一份报告,提出为实现上述目标构建2012年后国际气候制度的基本要素,这对后续国际谈判可能会产生一定的影响。通过比较分析两份报告的关系和不同特点,对新报告中国际气候制度设计和评价的基本原则,全球减排的长期目标和减排义务的分担,通过资金、技术、市场、适应等国际政策措施吸引发展中国家参与,减少毁林排放,以及政策执行和制度建设等问题进行了评述和解读,其中内涵对深入开展国际气候制度的研究和我国参与国际气候谈判有重要启发。     

对斯特恩新报告的要点评述和解读

 2006年10月,英国推出的由著名经济学家斯特恩爵士领导编写的《斯特恩回顾：气候变化经济学》,从经济学的角度着重论述了全球应对气候变化的紧迫性,强调只有尽快大幅度减少温室气体排放,才能避免全球升温超过2℃可能造成的巨大经济损失,且减排成本并不高。2008年4月,斯特恩爵士再次推出一份报告,提出为实现上述目标构建2012年后国际气候制度的基本要素,这对后续国际谈判可能会产生一定的影响。通过比较分析两份报告的关系和不同特点,对新报告中国际气候制度设计和评价的基本原则,全球减排的长期目标和减排义务的分担,通过资金、技术、市场、适应等国际政策措施吸引发展中国家参与,减少毁林排放,以及政策执行和制度建设等问题进行了评述和解读,其中内涵对深入开展国际气候制度的研究和我国参与国际气候谈判有重要启发。     

IPCC第五次评估报告第一工作组主要结论对《联合国气候变化框架公约》进程的影响分析

IPCC评估报告对国际气候变化谈判进程有重要影响,目前正在陆续发布的第五次评估报告已明确作为气候变化新协议谈判的重要信息来源,对讨论2020年后应对气候变化国际合作机制的影响不容忽视。最先发布的第一工作组评估报告基于新的科学观测事实、更为完善的归因分析和气候系统模式模拟结果,进一步确认了气候变暖的事实,发现了人类活动与全球温升之间因果关系的新证据,以及温室气体累积排放与温升响应之间的定量联系。本文通过分析其中一些关键结论可能的政策含义,探讨了这些关键结论对目前国际气候变化谈判进程和新协议等相关问题的可能影响,探讨了科学信息在气候变化决策过程中的作用,以及如何更为科学地理解和利用这些重要结论。     

《美国清洁能源与安全法案》的影响及意义

美国众议院于2009年6月26日通过了《美国清洁能源与安全法案》。该法案是继2008年Liberman-Wanner法案在参议院被否决后,美国国内最重要的气候法案。法案内容可能对美国参与2012年后气候制度谈判产生深刻影响而备受国际社会关注。对法案中减排目标、资金机制及适应、技术转让等问题进行了概括并简要归纳其特点,就法案可能影响如国际合作、碳市场、碳关税等问题进行了分析,同时,该法案作为从新能源、能效提高出发多目标综合应对气候变化的法案对中国实行低碳发展规划也具有借鉴意义。最后就当前如何认识和对待法案提出了建议。     

美国退出《巴黎协定》对全球气候治理的影响

自特朗普就任美国总统,美国退出《巴黎协定》已在意料中,但当特朗普正式宣布退出仍引发了国际社会的广泛关注。究其宣布退出的考虑不难看出,尽管美国政治信誉、国际合作和长远经济均受影响,但借此特朗普既可以提高其政治影响力、同时又可向国际社会重新要价。从国际应对气候变化的大形势看,美国的退出不会根本逆转全球气候治理的大方向。但美国削减国内气候变化研究、多边环境基金的资金支持和援助等政策将影响气候变化的基础研究和国际应对气候变化多边机制,以及未来应对气候变化的国际合作和长期目标的实现。《联合国气候变化框架公约》的"共同但有区别"的责任原则将受到冲击。就未来而言,全球应对气候变化的正向发展仍旧是主旋律,气候治理正进入多元主体发挥作用的时代,地方和民间组织层面将开展更多的技术创新务实合作,提高气候变化科学及认知的能力建设仍将是长期的任务。     

土壤固碳与温室气体农业减排国际研讨会将在南京召开

应对气候变化对我国经济可持续发展提出严峻挑战,已受到中共中央政治局的高度关注。大力发挥科技进步和创新的作用,加快减缓和适应气候变化领域重大技术的研发和示范,加强应对气候变化基础研究,加强气候变化领域国际科技合作,已经被列为我国应对气候变化的重大战略行动。目前,IPCCAR5正在筹划中,围绕后京都减排的国际努力正在沿巴厘路线圈紧锣密鼓地进行;由秦大河院士主持的《中国气候与环境演变：2012》也正在组织编写中。     

气候变化与中国水资源

该书总结了国内外近年关于气候变化及其对水资源影响的若干研究成果,系统分析了中国近现代的基本水文气候特征,以及主要水文气候要素的时间变化规律,包括地面气温、降水、蒸发以及极端天气气候事件的年代和长期趋势变化特点,评价了气候变化对全国和各主要流域水循环和水资源的影响,初步预估了未来可能的气候变化趋势及其对水资源的影响,提出了我国水资源管理领域应对气候变化影响的战略和对策建议。     

国外应对气候变化的立法进展与启示

国外应对气候变化立法进程与国际社会对气候变化问题的关注度呈正相关性。目前,欧盟、英国、德国、法国、芬兰、丹麦、瑞士、韩国、日本、菲律宾、新西兰、墨西哥和南非均正式颁布或完成起草了应对气候变化或低碳发展相关法律。文中通过系统研究发现,国外已开展应对气候变化立法的国家和地区均通过立法明确了其应对气候变化管理机构的法律地位和职责,将温室气体减排目标和配套制度纳入法律,确定了应对气候变化的宗旨和原则,成为其高水平履行国际气候条约的重要保障。中国启动国家应对气候变化立法工作已有10年,可借鉴国外立法在减排目标、管理体制、减排措施、应对气候变化的法律原则等方面的立法经验,尽快推进国内立法进程。     

《巴黎协定》下的国际碳市场机制：基本形式和前景展望

《巴黎协定》第6条建立的两种国际碳市场机制受到广泛关注,将在2020年后的气候制度中发挥至关重要的作用。文中识别了覆盖范围、交易指标类型和管理模式等3个构成国际碳市场机制的关键要素及其不同设计选项,并以此为基础阐明国际碳市场机制的基本形式。梳理并识别谈判中有关国际碳市场机制的焦点问题及其不同规则设计,并在此基础上分析中国参与国际碳市场机制的机遇和挑战。结合中国气候融资、提升减排力度、推动绿色“一带一路”和气候变化南南合作的内在需求以及国内有关市场机制的现有能力,分析提出两种国际碳市场机制在中国近期、中期和远期的发展前景及其所需的能力建设。     

利马气候大会成果分析与展望

利马气候大会达成的《利马气候行动号令》明确了《联合国气候变化框架公约》所有原则,尤其是共同但有区别的责任原则适用于拟于2015年巴黎会议达成的新协议。会议还就“国家自主决定的贡献”等做出了决定。利马大会成果对2015年巴黎气候大会达成气候变化新协议具有重要推动作用。面对2020年后的新挑战,中国需尽快制定应对气候变化法,建立碳排放交易机制,促进对应对气候变化先进技术投资,以及加大参与治理国际气候变化事务力度。     

Corporate responses to the CDM: the Indian pulp and paper industry

The key outcomes of the 2006 Nairobi Conference on Climate Change are described, with a particular emphasis on adaptation, the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and the future of the United Nations climate change regime beyond 2012. Based on an analysis of the key issues being negotiated, the Nairobi Conference can be understood as an important step in the larger process towards a future climate change regime. Its significance is in establishing the confidence and trust between the key players that will be necessary for the successful completion of the current phase of negotiations and agreement on the post-2012 climate change regime.     

Post-2012 climate policy dilemmas: a review of proposals

This article assesses a wide range of alternative proposals for post-2012 international climate policy regimes. We believe that these proposals will serve as a basis for debates about how to configure post-2012 climate policy. The article characterizes and assesses the policy proposals along the lines of five key policy dilemmas. We argue that (1) many proposals have ideas on how to reduce emissions, but fewer have a solution on how to stimulate technical innovation; (2) many proposals formulate climate policy in isolation, while there are fewer proposals that try to mainstream climate policies in other policy areas; (3) many proposals advocate market-based solutions, while fewer realize that there are certain drawbacks to this solution especially at the international level; (4) most proposals have a preference for a UN-based regime, while a more fragmented regime, based on regional and sectoral arrangements may be emerging; and (5) most proposals have ideas about mitigation, but not many have creative ideas on how to integrate mitigation with adaptation.     

Building bridges to 2020 and beyond: the road from Bali

What would the shape of a realistic, yet ambitious, package for the climate regime after 2012 look like? How do we obtain a package deal starting in Bali but building bridges to a post-2020 climate regime? A fair, effective, flexible and inclusive package deal has to strike a core balance between development and climate imperatives (mitigation, adaptation, dealing with the impacts of response measures, technology transfer, investment and finance) to create bargaining space and establish a conceptual contract zone. Within a continuum of possible packages, two packages in the contract zone are identified: ‘multi-stage’ and ‘ambitious transitional’. The latter is ambitious, combining domestic cap-and-trade for the USA, deeper cuts for Annex B countries, and quantifiable mitigation actions by developing countries. It is transitional as a possible bridge to a more inclusive regime beyond 2020. Multi-stage is defined around mechanisms by which countries move through increasingly stringent levels of participation, and must be based upon agreed triggers. Our assessment of political dynamics is that multi-stage is not yet in the political contract zone. Key to this is the absence of a ‘trigger from the North’, in that the largest historical emitter must act earlier and most decisively. But progress will also depend on continued leadership from Annex B countries, as well as more proactive, incentivized leadership in the South. Agreeing on the transitional stage is the critical next step in the evolution of the climate regime. Negotiating any package will require an institutional space for bargaining, political leadership and trust, and a clear time-frame.     

Climate change technology transfer: a new paradigm and policy agenda

This article proposes a shift to a paradigm that is more extensive than the current narrow focus on North—South climate change technology transfers, towards a more inclusive ‘global’ paradigm. An implication of the paradigm shift is that there should be a concomitant expansion of the policy agendas of the international climate and trade regimes. The traditional North—South paradigm of technology transfer ignores the increasing importance of developing countries as sources of advanced climate-friendly technologies, and therefore ignores South—North and South—South transfers. Further, whereas the North—South paradigm has emphasized developing countries' intellectual property rights policies as barriers to technology transfers, the ‘global’ paradigm focuses attention on trade and investment policy barriers, including developed countries' policies that inhibit technology transfer from developing countries. The analysis is relevant to international negotiations in the post-2012 climate regime, and is also relevant to the future development of the trade regime—not only at the multilateral level in the WTO, but also at the regional and bilateral levels.     

Process matters: building a future climate regime with multi-processes

How do current processes in international climate-related institutions affect the architecture of a future climate regime, particularly various international negotiating processes related to climate change? A plausible image of future climate regime is developed to address this question. Three plausible scenarios are described for the next decade using the scenario-planning approach. Based on this, the scope for an internationally acceptable climate regime beyond 2012 is developed. The current processes under the UNFCCC, the Kyoto Protocol, and those outside the UN arena are encapsulated into three scenarios. Each scenario has a set of relatively preferable types of commitments, which differ from each other. Each process is likely to result in the establishment of one particular institution. Linkages are developed between the three institutions so that the climate regime as a whole will be environmentally effective. The three institutions are likely to converge in the long run, as countries' views on both climate change and a future climate regime converge.     

Sector-based approach to the post-2012 climate change policy architecture

A sectoral approach to GHG emissions reductions in developing countries is proposed as a key component of the post-2012 climate change mitigation framework. In this approach, the ten highest-emitting developing countries in the electricity and other major industrial sectors pledge to meet voluntary, ‘no-lose’ GHG emissions targets in these sectors. No penalties are incurred for failing to meet a target, but emissions reductions achieved beyond the target level earn emissions reduction credits (ERCs) that can be sold to industrialized nations. Participating developing countries establish initial ‘no-lose’ emissions targets, based upon their national circumstances, from sector-specific energyintensity benchmarks that have been developed by independent experts. Industrialized nations then offer incentives for the developing countries to adopt more stringent emissions targets through a ‘Technology Finance and Assistance Package’, which helps to overcome financial and other barriers to technology transfer and deployment. These sectorspecific energy-intensity benchmarks could also serve as a means for establishing national economy-wide targets in developed countries in the post-2012 regime. Preliminary modelling of a hybrid scenario, in which Annex I countries adopt economy-wide absolute GHG emissions targets and high-emitting developing countries adopt ‘no-lose’ sectoral targets, indicates that such an approach significantly improves the likelihood that atmospheric concentrations of CO₂ can be stabilized at 450 ppmv by the end of the century.     

From burden-sharing to opportunity-sharing: unlocking the climate negotiations

In conventional thinking on climate negotiations, traditional fossil fuel-based economic growth is coupled with carbon emissions, thus mitigation has been regarded as a burden on economic growth. The scarcity within the global emission budget and the interpretation of climate change as ‘global public goods’ have led climate change negotiations into a burden-sharing deadlock. However, some recent economics studies suggest that mitigation could actually promote local economic growth opportunities; consequently increasing the incentives for unilateral mitigation actions. This article highlights the implications for the strategies of unlocking the climate negotiations deadlock. Following an explanation of how climate change negotiations have led to a burden-sharing game and have become a deadlock, some new ways of thinking (based on the emerging literature) are used to suggest how mitigation could promote local economic growth.Policy relevanceOne policy implication is the need to change the current mindset in global climate change negotiations. The current framing of burden-sharing can be abandoned in favour of opportunity-sharing. This more positive approach will stimulate progress on climate action. Therefore, green growth should be situated at the heart of post-2020 climate change regime. A new two-track architecture is proposed for achieving the transformation as a combined top-down and bottom-up approach. A lower legally binding target based on equity principles of common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR) could form a more politically realistic and inclusive basis for participation. To complement this, a green growth club would promote a higher voluntary global ambition and accelerate mitigation.     

An equity first, risk-based framework for managing global climate change

This paper presents an alternative framework to the approach currently embodied in the Kyoto Protocol for managing global climate change post-2012. The framework has two key provisions. The first is that each person in the world would be ‘allowed’ an equal amount of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This is labeled the equity-first provision. The second provision focuses on incorporating risk concepts into the setting of GHG emission reductions. It is proposed that the global climate be managed as to avoid three categories of risks: (I) Substantial regional economic, political, and/or biological impacts; (II) Severe global economic, political, and/or biological impacts; and (III) Extinction of humans. Acceptable risk thresholds are suggested to be one-in-a-million, one-in-one-hundred-million, and one-in-ten-billion, respectively. This equity-first, risk-based framework overcomes many criticisms of the current Kyoto Protocol: it explicitly involves all countries on earth; it avoids several administrative issues that are anticipated to plague a global carbon emissions trading market; and it avoids several contentious issues associated with pegging carbon emission reductions to 1990 levels. Because the framework is risk-based and emissions are tied to population and not historic emission levels, the basic framework would not have to be frequently renegotiated, as will be needed for the Kyoto-style approach to take the world past that agreement's 2012 endpoint.