The Political Dimension of Vulnerability: Implications for the Green Climate Fund

As the availability of adaptation finance for developing countries increases, so does the need for a transparent way of prioritising countries for the allocation of money. It is intuitive that some countries are more vulnerable to climate change than others, and that countries that are particularly vulnerable should be given priority for adaptation finance. However, research has shown that science cannot be relied upon for a single objective ranking of vulnerability. This article analyses how the Global Climate Change Alliance (GCCA), the Pilot Program for Climate Resilience (PPCR) and the Adaptation Fund currently make decisions on adaptation finance allocations. It finds that each of the funds uses vulnerability to prioritise among countries, but the criteria applied vary and other criteria also play a role. Thus, vulnerability is politically, as well as scientifically, ambiguous. The Cancun Agreements have not resolved this, leaving a challenge for the Green Climate Fund

Climate justice and the international regime: before, during and after Paris

With a focus on key themes and debates, this article aims to illustrate and assess how the interaction between justice and politics has shaped the international regime and defined the nature of the international agreement that was signed in COP21 Paris. The work demonstrates that despite the rise of neo-conservatism and self-interested power politics, questions of global distributive justice remain a central aspect of the international politics of climate change. However, while it is relatively easy to demonstrate that international climate politics is not beyond the reach of moral contestations, the assessment of exactly how much impact justice has on climate policies and the broader normative structures of the climate governance regime remains a very difficult task. As the world digests the Paris Agreement, it is vital that the current state of justice issues within the international climate change regime is comprehensively understood by scholars of climate justice and by academics and practitioners, not least because how these intractable issues of justice are dealt with (or not) will be a crucial factor in determining the effectiveness of the emerging climate regime

A comparison of baseline methodologies for 'Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation'

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>A mechanism for emission reductions from deforestation and degradation (REDD) is very likely to be included in a future climate agreement. The choice of REDD baseline methodologies will crucially influence the environmental and economic effectiveness of the climate regime. We compare three different historical baseline methods and one innovative dynamic model baseline approach to appraise their applicability under a future REDD policy framework using a weighted multi-criteria analysis.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The results show that each baseline method has its specific strengths and weaknesses. Although the dynamic model allows for the best environmental and for comparatively good economic performance, its high demand for data and technical capacity limit the current applicability in many developing countries.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The adoption of a multi-tier approach will allow countries to select the baseline method best suiting their specific capabilities and data availability while simultaneously ensuring scientific transparency, environmental effectiveness and broad political support.</p

Synergy Solutions for a World in Crisis: Tackling Climate and SDG Action Together

We must change course. Without synergies, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and climate objectives remain out of reach. The evidence is clear: addressing climate change and achieving the SDGs are inextricably intertwined. Co-benefits far outweigh trade-offs. By maximizing these synergies, we can also bridge investment gaps worth trillions of dollars. Synergistic action should be a required component of national commitments, reporting and financing for climate and development goals. We must act on the climate emergency and sustainable development together now, or we risk not solving them at all. In May 2023 UNDESA and UNFCCC Secretariat co-convened the Expert Group on Climate and SDG Synergy. The Group consists of 14 renowned experts from diverse thematic and geographic backgrounds who were given the task of developing the First Global Report on Climate and SDG Synergies. This report demonstrates that aggressively acting on climate and development in an integrated and synergistic way is an important opportunity to achieve the course correction the UN Secretary- General has called for. It highlights some of the challenges but also the opportunities if the international community is seriously committed to enhancing these synergies and thereby addressing these challenges. The report is designed to provide a broad overview of available data and evidence, insights from experts on the frontlines, and recommendations for enhancing synergistic action across the 2030 Agenda and the SDGs. This first edition will form the basis for future iterations, which will entail a wider scope of sectors, and thematic areas and deep dives on specific issues pertaining to strengthening and operationalizing synergic climate and SDG actions at all levels

Assessing data availability for the development of REDD-plus national reference levels

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Data availability in developing countries is known to be extremely varied and is one of the constraints for setting the national reference levels (RLs) for the REDD-plus (i.e. 'Policy approaches and positive incentives on issues relating to reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries; and the role of conservation, sustainable management of forests and enhancement of forest carbon stocks in developing countries') under the UNFCCC. Taking Thailand as a case study country, this paper compares three types of RLs, which require different levels of datasets, including a simple historic RL, a projected forest-trend RL, and a business-as-usual (BAU) RL.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Other than the finding that different RLs yielded different estimations on future deforestation areas, the analysis also identified the characteristics of each RL. The historical RL demanded simple data, but can be varied in accordance with a reference year or period. The forest-trend RL can be more reliable than the historical RL, if the country's deforestation trend curve is formed smoothly. The complicated BAU RL is useful as it can demonstrate the additionality of REDD-plus activities and distinguish the country's unintentional efforts.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>With the REDD-plus that involves widespread participation, there should be steps from which countries choose the appropriate RL; ranging from simpler to more complex measures, in accordance with data availability in each country. Once registered with REDD-plus, the countries with weak capacity and capability should be supported to enhance the data collection system in that country.</p

Sectoral and regional expansion of emissions trading

We consider an international emissions trading scheme with partial sectoral and regional coverage. Sectoral and regional expansion of the trading scheme is beneficial in aggregate, but not necessarily for individual countries. We simulate international CO2 emission quota markets using marginal abatement cost functions and the Copenhagen 2020 climate policy targets for selected countries that strategically allocate emissions in a bid to manipulate the quota price. Quota exporters and importers generally have conflicting interests about admitting more countries to the trading coalition, and our results indicate that some countries may lose substantially when the coalition expands in terms of new countries. For a given coalition, expanding sectoral coverage makes most countries better off, but some countries (notably the USA and Russia) may lose out due to loss of strategic advantages. In general, exporters tend to have stronger strategic power than importers

The changing faces of soil organic matter research

This work contributes to the projects N-Circle (BB/N013484/1), DEVIL NE/M021327/1) and U-GRASS (NE/M017125/1). MST and WJR were supported by U.S. Department of Energy funding under contract DE-AC02-05CH11231. We are grateful to Dr John M. Kimble for providing the idea for this paper through a remembered conversation in around 1996.Peer reviewedPostprin

Reduced emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD): a climate change mitigation strategy on a critical track

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Following recent discussions, there is hope that a mechanism for reduction of emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD) will be agreed by the Parties of the UNFCCC at their 15th meeting in Copenhagen in 2009 as an eligible action to prevent climate changes and global warming in post-2012 commitment periods. Countries introducing a REDD-regime in order to generate benefits need to implement sound monitoring and reporting systems and specify the associated uncertainties. The principle of conservativeness addresses the problem of estimation errors and requests the reporting of reliable minimum estimates (RME). Here the potential to generate benefits from applying a REDD-regime is proposed with reference to sampling and non-sampling errors that influence the reliability of estimated activity data and emission factors.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A framework for calculating carbon benefits by including assessment errors is developed. Theoretical, sample based considerations as well as a simulation study for five selected countries with low to high deforestation and degradation rates show that even small assessment errors (5% and less) may outweigh successful efforts to reduce deforestation and degradation.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The generation of benefits from REDD is possible only in situations where assessment errors are carefully controlled.</p

Chinese energy and climate policies after Durban: save the Kyoto Protocol

Nowadays, one of the urgent issues regarding global climate change is to discuss the future of the second period of the Kyoto Protocol. However, the divergence of views and opinions among parties in the last Conference of the Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, held in Durban in December 2011, is still large. One of the bones of contention is whether the emerging developing countries, like China, should make commitments and legally bind themselves to a Green House Gas (GHG) reduction target in near future. As the largest GHG emitting country, China and its energy and climate policies will play an important role in global climate change and will also significantly influence the other countries? policies and the global climate negotiation. In this paper, we review the current differences among parties in the Durban Conference, and we analyze the recent situation, barriers, and future policies in China. Finally we highlight the impact and potential effect of Clean Development Mechanisms in avoiding China?s barriers regarding climate change. Results show that China is making a great effort to mitigate climate change by establishing and reforming its energy and climate policies in order to achieve a low-carbon development. At the same time, more innovation and international collaboration is needed in China to achieve this goal