The special climate change fund: origins and prioritisation assessment

The Special Climate Change (SCC) fund was established by the Marrakesh Accords under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. This fund will finance climate change activities in the areas of: adaptation, technology transfer, certain specific sectors, and activities to assist oil-exporting countries diversify their economies. These activities are to be complementary to those funded by the Global Environment Facility and by bilateral and multilateral funding. This paper describes the origins of the SCC fund and proposes a framework for the prioritisation of its activities. The fund has a complicated history that is intrinsically linked to numerous Convention issues, which explains the range of activities included in it. The framework proposed is based on certain principles: sound scientific knowledge, the ultimate objective of the Convention, “common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities” and the status of the climate negotiations. This appraisal suggests that the fund should prioritise adaptation, followed by mitigation and finally economic diversification.     

An emission intensity protocol for climate change: an application of FUND

Abstract

An emission intensity protocol to govern long-term international greenhouse gas emission reduction is proposed. The protocol may also be interpreted as a technology protocol. The protocol consists of three parameters: a graduation income, below which countries have no emission reduction obligations; a convergence rate, at which emission intensities should approach that of the most carbon-extensive countries; and an acceleration rate, at which the most carbon-extensive countries should improve their technology over and above the business-asusual scenario. Depending on the parameter values, emission reduction ranges from draconian to almost nil. The graduation income and acceleration rate have the expected effects. The effect of the convergence rate is strongly scenario-dependent; some scenarios, perhaps unrealistically, assume strong technological convergence in the nopolicy case; in other scenarios, adopting ‘best commercial technology in the whole world’ would lead to substantial emission reduction. Not surprisingly, different regions prefer different parameters in the emission intensity protocol. Adopting the opinion of the median voter, atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide in the year 2200 would be reduced from 1650 to 950 ppm. This reduction is relatively robust to changes in crucial model parameters. The costs of complying with the emission intensity protocol can be reduced substantially through international trade in emission permits and, in particular, by banking and borrowing.     

The use of scenarios as the basis for combined assessment of climate change mitigation and adaptation

Scenarios are used to explore the consequences of different adaptation and mitigation strategies under uncertainty. In this paper, two scenarios are used to explore developments with (1) no mitigation leading to an increase of global mean temperature of 4 °C by 2100 and (2) an ambitious mitigation strategy leading to 2 °C increase by 2100. For the second scenario, uncertainties in the climate system imply that a global mean temperature increase of 3 °C or more cannot be ruled out. Our analysis shows that, in many cases, adaptation and mitigation are not trade-offs but supplements. For example, the number of people exposed to increased water resource stress due to climate change can be substantially reduced in the mitigation scenario, but adaptation will still be required for the remaining large numbers of people exposed to increased stress. Another example is sea level rise, for which, from a global and purely monetary perspective, adaptation (up to 2100) seems more effective than mitigation. From the perspective of poorer and small island countries, however, stringent mitigation is necessary to keep risks at manageable levels. For agriculture, only a scenario based on a combination of adaptation and mitigation is able to avoid serious climate change impacts.     

气候变化综合评估模型的损失函数研究进展

该研究从综合评估模型(IAM)的模型耦合视角出发,介绍了当前损失函数的研究进展,主要从损失函数的构建方法、损失函数与IAM气候模块和经济模块的耦合以及IAM与气候模式的耦合角度分析了损失函数的耦合功能及其存在的科学问题,探讨了损失函数的改进方向。通过文献梳理发现,损失函数的构建方法上,主要采用专家判断法、元分析法和统计学方法,但各有优缺点;与气候模式的耦合功能上,损失函数多以温升为气候变化因素,降水等气候变化信息无法表达,且由全球尺度的年平均值进行标定,不能体现区域的差异和季节的变化,无法直接描述极端气候事件造成的巨大损失;与经济模块的耦合功能上,基于生产部门的损失函数缺乏间接损失评估功能,缺乏对经济增长的动态影响机制。针对上述IAM中气候变化对经济影响的反馈机制的不足,需重点从细化区域气候变化因素影响和细分经济产业部门两个方向重构损失函数,紧密连接气候模式与经济模块,全面评估气候变化经济损失,并需要从技术上解决损失函数在耦合经济模块与气候模式时出现的时空尺度不匹配问题,最终为IAM与气候模式甚至地球系统模式的耦合提供重要的解决方案。     

Resilience through interlinkage: the green climate fund and climate finance governance

The Green Climate Fund (GCF) is a significant and potentially innovative addition to UNFCCC frameworks for mobilizing increased finance for climate change mitigation and adaptation. Yet the GCF faces challenges of operationalization not only as a relatively new international fund but also as a result of US President Trump’s announcement that the United States would withdraw from the Paris Agreement. Consequently the GCF faces a major reduction in actual funding contributions and also governance challenges at the levels of its Board and the UNFCCC Conference of the Parties (COP), to which it is ultimately accountable. This article analyzes these challenges with reference to the GCF’s internal regulations and its agreements with third parties to demonstrate how exploiting design features of the GCF could strengthen its resilience in the face of such challenges. These features include linkages with UNFCCC constituted bodies, particularly the Technology Mechanism, and enhanced engagement with non-Party stakeholders, especially through its Private Sector Facility. The article posits that deepening GCF interlinkages would increase both the coherence of climate finance governance and the GCF’s ability to contribute to ambitious climate action in uncertain times.

Key policy insights

• The Trump Administration’s purported withdrawal from the Paris Agreement creates challenges for the GCF operating model in three key domains: capitalization, governance and guidance.

• Two emerging innovations could prove crucial in GCF resilience to fulfil its role in Paris Agreement implementation: (1) interlinkages with other UNFCCC bodies, especially the Technology Mechanism; and (2) engagement with non-Party stakeholders, especially private sector actors such as large US investors and financiers.

• There is also an emerging soft role for the GCF as interlocutor between policy-makers and non-Party actors to help bridge the communication divide that often plagues cross-sectoral interactions.

• This role could develop through: (a) the GCF tripartite interface between the Private Sector Facility, Accredited Entities and National Designated Authorities; and (b) strengthened collaborations between the UNFCCC Technical and Financial Mechanisms.

     

The contribution of future agricultural trends in the US Midwest to global climate change mitigation

Land use change is a complex response to changing environmental and socioeconomic systems. Historical drivers of land use change include changes in the natural resource availability of a region, changes in economic conditions for production of certain products and changing policies. Most recently, introduction of policy incentives for biofuel production have influenced land use change in the US Midwest, leading to concerns that bioenergy production systems may compete with food production and land conservation. Here we explore how land use may be impacted by future climate mitigation measures by nesting a high resolution agricultural model (EPIC – Environmental Policy Indicator Climate) for the US Midwest within a global integrated assessment model (GCAM – Global Change Assessment Model). This approach is designed to provide greater spatial resolution and detailed agricultural practice information by focusing on the climate mitigation potential of agriculture and land use in a specific region, while retaining the global economic context necessary to understand the far ranging effects of climate mitigation targets. We find that until the simulated carbon prices are very high, the US Midwest has a comparative advantage in producing traditional food and feed crops over bioenergy crops. Overall, the model responds to multiple pressures by adopting a mix of future responses. We also find that the GCAM model is capable of simulations at multiple spatial scales and agricultural technology resolution, which provides the capability to examine regional response to global policy and economic conditions in the context of climate mitigation.     

Interactions between European agricultural policy and climate change: a Slovenian case study

This article analyses the interactions between agricultural policy measures in the EU and the factors affecting GHG emissions from agriculture on the one hand, and the adaptation of agriculture to climate change on the other. To this end, the article uses Slovenia as a case study, assessing the extent to which Slovenian agricultural policy is responding to the challenges of climate change. All agricultural policy measures related to the 2007–2013 programming period were analysed according to a new methodological approach that is based on a qualitative (expert evaluation) and a quantitative (budgetary transfers validation) assessment. A panel of experts reached consensus on the key factors through which individual measures affect climate change, in which direction and how significantly. Data on budgetary funds for each measure were used as weights to assess their relative importance. The results show that there are not many measures in (Slovenian) agricultural policy that are directly aimed at reducing GHG emissions from agriculture or at adaptation to climate change. Nevertheless, most affect climate change, and their impact is far from negligible. Current measures have both positive and negative impacts, but overall the positive impacts prevail. Measures that involve many beneficiaries and more budgetary funds had the strongest impact on aggregate assessments. In light of climate change, agricultural policy should pay more attention to measures that are aimed at raising the efficiency of animal production, as it is the principal source of GHG emissions from agriculture.

Policy relevance

Agricultural policy must respond to climate challenges and climate change impact assessment must be included in the process of forming European agricultural policy. Agricultural policy measures that contribute to the reduction of emissions and adaptation, whilst acting in synergy with other environmental, economic and social goals, should be promoted. The approach used in this study combines qualitative and quantitative data, yielding an objective assessment of the climate impact of agricultural policy measures and providing policy makers with a tool for either ex ante or ex post evaluations of climate-relevant policy measures.     

Some economics of ‘dangerous’ climate change: Reflections on the Stern Review

The Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change concluded that there can be “no doubt” the economic risks of business-as-usual (BAU) climate change are “very severe” [Stern, 2006. The Economics of Climate Change. HM Treasury, London, p. 188]. The total cost of climate change was estimated to be equivalent to a one-off, permanent 5–20% loss in global mean per-capita consumption today. And the marginal damage cost of a tonne of carbon emitted today was estimated to be around $312 [p. 344]. Both of these estimates are higher than most reported in the previous literature. Subsequently, a number of critiques have appeared, arguing that discounting is the principal explanation for this discrepancy. Discounting is important, but in this paper we emphasise that how one approaches the economics of risk and uncertainty, and how one attempts to model the very closely related issue of low-probability/high-damage scenarios (which we connect to the recent discussion of ‘dangerous’ climate change), can matter just as much. We demonstrate these arguments empirically, using the same models applied in the Stern Review. Together, the issues of risk and uncertainty on the one hand, and ‘dangerous’ climate change on the other, raise very strongly questions about the limits of a welfare-economic approach, where the loss of natural capital might be irreversible and impossible to compensate. Thus we also critically reflect on the state-of-the-art in integrated assessment modelling. There will always be an imperative to carry out integrated assessment modelling, bringing together scientific ‘fact’ and value judgement systematically. But we agree with those cautioning against a literal interpretation of current estimates. Ironically, the Stern Review is one of those voices. A fixation with cost-benefit analysis misses the point that arguments for stabilisation should, and are, built on broader foundations.     

Racing climate change: Collaboration and conflict in California's global climate change policy arena

Media accounts routinely refer to California's Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32), the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, as “landmark” climate change legislation. On its surface, this label is an accurate reflection of the state's forward-thinking stance across many environmental issues including pesticides, toxic substances, solid waste, and air quality. For all its promise, however, AB 32 can also be considered a low point in the landscape of conflict between state environmental regulators and California's environmental justice movement. While the legislation included several provisions to address the procedural and distributive dimensions of environmental justice, the implementation of AB 32 has been marked by heated conflict. The most intense conflicts over AB 32 revolve around the primacy of market mechanisms such as “cap and trade.” This article examines the drivers and the manifestations of these dynamics of collaboration and conflict between environmental justice advocates and state regulators, and pays particular attention to the scalar and racialized quality of the neoliberal discourse. The contentiousness of climate change politics in California offers scholars and practitioners around the world a cautionary tale of how the best intentions for integrating environmental justice principles into climate change policy do not necessarily translate into implementation and how underlying racialized fractures can upend collaboration between state and social movement actors.     

US public opinion on climate change issues: implications for consensus-building and policymaking

While the Conference of the Parties wrangle at an international scale with climate policy, a quiet set of policies and measures is being implemented at a local scale by municipalities across the globe. This study examines the motivation municipalities have for undertaking policies to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions, when the theory of free-ridingwould predict that local administrations should find it difficult to unilaterally reduce their emissions for the benefit of the global climate. Through interviews with officials and/or staff in 23 municipalities in the United States enacting climate policy, data are gathered that suggest local government abatement policies are primarily a top—down decision based on what officials or staff members believe to be “good business” or rational policy choices. They are primarily driven by the potential for realised or perceived cost savings and co-benefits rather than by public pressure. Economic data from some dozen municipal projects are analyzed, finding, while municipalities lack sophisticated accounting techniques, some justification for the often-disputed claim that at least initial reductions in emissions can be made at cost savings. In the United States, with the lack of national abatement policies, it is municipalities that are leading the way in beginning to implement mitigation strategies, even if only for initial reductions.     

Pledges,politics and performance: an assessment of UK climate policy

Abstract

New Labour came to power in 1997 pledging to put environment concerns at the heart of policy-making. Shortly after being elected, the Labour Government signed the Kyoto Protocol and adopted a voluntary domestic target of a 20% cut in carbon dioxide emissions by 2010. This article looks at the development of UK climate policy since 1997 and the political drivers that have led to development of the climate policy mix. It assesses the Climate Change Programme adopted in 2000 and its delivery, and it also looks at the 5-year Climate Change Programme Review published in March 2006. It conducts a quantitative assessment of the UK's performance by looking at emissions data, and it also provides a qualitative analysis, by looking at the UK policies and measures within their political and institutional context. The article concludes that Labour has been actively promoting climate policy since coming to power and has played a strong leadership role internationally. The UK is on track to meet and surpass its Kyoto target, meeting its international commitments. Between 24.1 and 29.1 million tonnes of carbon savings per year are expected by 2010. Policies and measures in the industrial sector are delivering real emissions reductions, in addition to the reductions made through fuel switching. The Government has found it more difficult to make some of the tough choices necessary to deliver emissions reductions in the transport and the household sectors. The article seeks to explain why the Labour Government has found it uncomfortable, politically, to implement stronger measures in these parts of the economy. The article highlights the changing dynamics within UK politics and concludes that there are two possible avenues for taking more stringent measures in the future. The first involves the development of a cross-party consensus on climate change. The second is to change the way that climate change is framed, so that it is no longer seen as an ‘environment’ issue but one with which voters and decision-makers can immediately connect. Only then will it be possible to implement the necessary policies and measures across the whole economy.     

Global socio-economic and climate change mitigation scenarios through the lens of structural change

This paper analyses structural change in the economy as a key but largely unexplored aspect of global socio-economic and climate change mitigation scenarios. Structural change can actually drive energy and land use as much as economic growth and influence mitigation opportunities and barriers. Conversely, stringent climate policy is bound to induce specific structural and socio-economic transformations that are still insufficiently understood. We introduce Multi-Sectoral macroeconomic Integrated Assessment Models as tools to capture the key drivers of structural change and we conduct a multi-model study to assess main structural effects – changes of the sectoral composition and intensity of trade of global and regional economies – in a baseline and 2°C policy scenario by 2050. First, the range of baseline projections across models, for which we identify the main drivers, illustrates the uncertainty on future economic pathways – in emerging economies especially – and inform on plausible alternative futures with implications for energy use and emissions. Second, in all models, climate policy in the 2°C scenario imposes only a second-order impact on the economic structure at the macro-sectoral level – agriculture, manufacturing and services - compared to changes modelled in the baseline. However, this hides more radical changes for individual industries – within the energy sector especially. The study, which adopts a top-down framing of global structural change, represents a starting point to kick-start a conversation and propose a new research agenda seeking to improve understanding of the structural change effects in socio-economic and mitigation scenarios, and better inform policy assessments.     

Delivering the two degree global climate change target using a flexible ratchet framework

Global climate negotiations have been characterized by a divide between developed and developing nations – a split which has served as a persistent barrier to international agreement within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change process. Notable progress in bridging this division was achieved at the 21st Conference of the Parties meeting in Paris through the introduction of Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs). However, the collective ambition of submitted INDCs falls short of a global 2°C target, requiring an effective ratchet mechanism to review and increase national commitments. Inequitable distribution of additional responsibilities risks re-opening historic divisions between parties. This article presents a flexible ratchet framework which shares mitigation commitments on the basis of per capita equity in line with emerging requirements for a 2°C target. The framework has been designed through convergence between developed and developing nations; developed nation targets are based on an agreed standardized percentage reduction wherever emissions are above per capita equity; developing nations are required to peak emissions at or below per capita equity levels by an agreed convergence date. The proposed framework has the flexibility to be integrated with current INDCs and to evolve in line with shifting estimates of climate sensitivity.

Policy relevance

The outcome of the 21st Conference of the Parties (COP21) negotiations in Paris offered mixed results in terms of level of ambition and submitted national commitments. A global agreement to keep average global temperature rise below two degrees was maintained; however, current pledged Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) are projected to result in an average warming of close to three degrees. The implementation of a global ratchet mechanism to scale-up national commitments will remain key to closing this ambition gap to reach this two degree target. How this upscaling of responsibility is shared between parties will be a defining discussion point within future negotiations. This study presents a standardized, equity-based framework for how this ratchet mechanism can be implemented – a framework designed to be flexible for evolution in line with better understanding of climate sensitivity, and adaptable for integrations with current INDC proposals.     

The ocean and climate change policy

The ocean plays a major role in regulating Earth's climate system, and is highly vulnerable to climate change, but continues to receive little attention in the ongoing policymaking designed to mitigate and adapt to global climate change. There are numerous ways to consider the ocean more significantly when developing these policies, several of which offer the co-benefits of biodiversity protection and support of marine-dependent human communities. When developing forward-thinking climate change policy, it is important to understand the ways that the ocean contributes to global climate and to fully inventory the services that the ocean provides to humans. Without more inclusive consideration of the ocean in climate policy, at all levels of governance, policy makers risk weaker than necessary mitigation and adaptation strategies.     

Regional climate change experiments over southern South America. I: present climate

We present an analysis of a regional simulation of present-day climate (1981–1990) over southern South America. The regional model MM5 was nested within time-slice global atmospheric model experiments conducted by the HadAM3H model. We evaluate the capability of the model in simulating the observed climate with emphasis on low-level circulation patterns and surface variables, such as precipitation and surface air mean, maximum and minimum temperatures. The regional model performance was evaluated in terms of seasonal means, seasonal cycles, interannual variability and extreme events. Overall, the regional model is able to capture the main features of the observed mean surface climate over South America, its seasonal evolution and the regional detail due to topographic forcing. The observed regional patterns of surface air temperatures (mean, maxima and minima) are well reproduced. Biases are mostly within 3°C, temperature being overestimated over central Argentina and underestimated in mountainous regions during all seasons. Biases in northeastern Argentina and southeastern Brazil are positive during austral spring season and negative in other seasons. In general, maximum temperatures are better represented than minimum temperatures. Warm bias is larger during austral summer for maximum temperature and during austral winter for minimum temperature, mainly over central Argentina. The broad spatial pattern of precipitation and its seasonal evolution are well captured; however, the regional model overestimates the precipitation over the Andes region in all seasons and in southern Brazil during summer. Precipitation amounts are underestimated over the La Plata basin from fall to spring. Extremes of precipitation are better reproduced by the regional model compared with the driving model. Interannual variability is well reproduced too, but strongly regulated by boundary conditions, particularly during summer months. Overall, taking into account the quality of the simulation, we can conclude that the regional model is capable in reproducing the main regional patterns and seasonal cycle of surface variables. The present reference simulation constitutes the basis to examine the climate change simulations resulting from the A2 and B2 forcing scenarios which are being reported in a separate study.     

将适应气候变化纳入国土空间规划：进展、困境与思路

空间规划是适应气候变化的重要政策工具之一,将适应气候变化目标纳入空间规划已经成为国际主流政策。中国适应气候变化的空间规划仍面临诸多问题和挑战,包括气候适应目标和理念薄弱、气候变化风险评估与空间规划尺度不匹配、适应和减缓策略的协同机制欠缺、技术标准和法律法规不完善等。文章结合国家适应气候变化战略和国土空间规划体系重构的目标要求,研究提出适应气候变化导向的国土空间规划框架体系和技术思路,以及将适应气候变化纳入空间规划编制审批、技术标准、实施监督以及法规政策等各个环节的思路与建议,以期通过空间规划的编制与监督实施促进适应气候变化目标的实现。     

Economics of climate change: risk and responsibility by world region

The impacts of predicted climate change will not be distributed evenly around the world. As post-Kyoto negotiations unfold, relating the geographical distribution of projected impacts to responsibility for emissions among world regions is essential for achieving an equitable path forward. This article surveys the current knowledge of regional climate consequences, and delves into the regional predictions of economic assessment models to date, examining how the uncertainties, assumptions and ethical dimensions influence the portrayal of risk at this scale. The few studies that quantitatively compared regional risk and responsibility are reviewed, and the analytical framework from one such study is applied to the 2006 Stern Review's projections to give the first regional comparison to take purchasing power and welfare considerations into account. Synthesizing burden and blame in this way is informative for policy makers; the world's most vulnerable communities—in Africa, the Indian subcontinent, Latin America, and small island states—accounted for less than 33% of global greenhouse gas emissions over the period 1961–2000, but may experience more than 75% of the ensuing climate damages this century. This analysis reinforces the call for industrialized nations to lead mitigation efforts, and to do so decisively and swiftly.     

气候变化影响与风险评估方法的研究进展

气候变化影响是指气候变化背景下社会经济或资源环境的响应。气候变化风险是指由于气候变化所引起的社会经济或资源环境的可能损失。气候变化风险评估是对气候变化影响的定性和对风险的量化。针对气候变化风险评估方法的原理和技术体系,本文从风险指数、风险概率和脆弱性评估三个方面,对研究现状、热点问题和通常方法进行了评述,并对当前研究中存在的问题和未来需求进行了归纳和展望。     

The changing geopolitics of climate change finance

Funding for climate change efforts in developing countries is firmly established in the Articles of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Since the early days of the climate change negotiations, finance has been a key focus of attention and, often, a principal source of tension between developed and developing countries. Understandably, these tensions have led to numerous efforts to reform the financial mechanism of the UNFCCC. The history of reforms of the Global Environment Facility – for some time the only operating entity of the financial mechanism – and the recent establishment of the Green Climate Fund are good examples of such efforts. It is asked here whether these efforts have been sufficient to keep pace with a rapidly changing, more complex and radically different world from that of 1992 when the UNFCCC was signed by most countries in Rio de Janeiro. On the 21st anniversary of the signing of the UNFCCC, the effects that global transformations have had on climate change finance are here explored, and some of the new challenges, as well as emerging opportunities, resulting from the new landscape of climate finance that has emerged as a result are described.

Policy relevance

The climate change negotiations are entering a critical period. The issue of finance is one of the key pillars on which the success of a new deal on a binding agreement depends. A better understanding of the increasing complexity of the climate finance landscape is essential. The world of climate finance and the geopolitics in which it operates have been significantly transformed since the signing of the UNFCCC. A better understanding of this transformation would help policy makers and negotiators find more effective and realistic ways to help unleash the immense amount of financial resources that could potentially be made available for the great challenge that many countries face to address climate change. The need for up-front and significantly scaled-up investments requires effective mechanisms that can leverage and encourage investments into areas where they are most needed to face the challenge of climate change. The role of the Green Climate Fund will be critical in this regard.     

The implications of climate policy for the impacts of climate change on global water resources

This paper assesses the implications of climate policy for exposure to water resources stresses. It compares a Reference scenario which leads to an increase in global mean temperature of 4 °C by the end of the 21st century with a Mitigation scenario which stabilises greenhouse gas concentrations at around 450 ppm CO₂e and leads to a 2 °C increase in 2100. Associated changes in river runoff are simulated using a global hydrological model, for four spatial patterns of change in temperature and rainfall. There is a considerable difference in hydrological change between these four patterns, but the percentages of change avoided at the global scale are relatively robust. By the 2050s, the Mitigation scenario typically avoids between 16 and 30% of the change in runoff under the Reference scenario, and by 2100 it avoids between 43 and 65%. Two different measures of exposure to water resources stress are calculated, based on resources per capita and the ratio of withdrawals to resources. Using the first measure, the Mitigation scenario avoids 8-17% of the impact in 2050 and 20-31% in 2100; with the second measure, the avoided impacts are 5-21% and 15-47% respectively. However, at the same time, the Mitigation scenario also reduces the positive impacts of climate change on water scarcity in other areas. The absolute numbers and locations of people affected by climate change and climate policy vary considerably between the four climate model patterns.