Search

Begin New Search Topic Climate Change Political Geography Global Focus

221. Global Governance 2.0: The Collective Choreography of Cooperation

Author:
Poorti Sapatnekar
Publication Date:
06-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for International and Security Studies at Maryland (CISSM)
Abstract:
Multi-stakeholder partnerships among states and non-state actors have become increasingly prevalent models for the delivery of global public goods. Various international organizations—particularly the United Nations entities—are pouring resources into large-scale efforts such as conferences and summits to promote partnerships. Are such efforts effective? If so, what is the causal mechanism at work? Analyzing all major UN conferences and summits on climate change in the 2000-2015 period, this study finds that contrary to conventional wisdom, only two were successful in driving the growth of climate partnerships. Six organizational attributes acted as conditions of success for these efforts, enabling a mechanism this study labels the collective choreography of cooperation. They are: (1) strategic timing; (2) leaders’ level convening; (3) emphasis on ambitious, cooperative commitments; (4) sectoral orientation; (5) subsidiarity; and (6) leadership with centralized decision-making. Effective collective choreography requires high level convening power and autonomy of the summit host. Among international organizations, only the UN Secretary-General has both these two attributes. Gaining sufficient autonomy on climate change without alienating key member states took decades, during which successive Secretaries-General engaged in ‘conference activism’ and expanded the range and breadth of their good offices to help overcome intergovernmental gridlock and steer towards constructive outcomes. Achieving the Paris Agreement goals is a global policy priority that requires exponential acceleration of climate partnerships across economic sectors during the first half of this century. A five-year choreography cycle led by the Secretary-General over the next thirty years, and coinciding with the Global Stocktake of the Paris Agreement, could serve to achieve this policy priority. Four features of the climate problem have made it conducive to collective choreography that are more or less characteristic of many other global governance challenges. (1) There is dispersed control over causes of the problem and over possible solutions. (2) Economic and social benefits to non-state actors for engaging in voluntary cooperation on climate change exist or can be made to exist. (3) Barriers to cooperation exist in the form of high transaction costs, risks, and limited trust. (4) The problem is mature enough that multilateral solutions had already been attempted, without success thus far. As such, this paper provides a basis for further investigation into the potential to apply collective choreography to other global public goods.
Topic:
Climate Change, International Cooperation, United Nations, Multilateralism, and Paris Agreement
Political Geography:
Global Focus

222. Guide on incentives for responsible investment in agriculture and food systems

Author:
Anna Bulman, Kaitlin Y. Cordes, and Ladan Mehranvar
Publication Date:
05-2021
Content Type:
Research Paper
Institution:
Columbia Center on Sustainable Investment
Abstract:
Increased investment in agriculture and food systems—from both the private and public sectors—is critical to enhance food security and nutrition, reduce poverty, and adapt to climate change. To generate sustainable benefits, this investment must be responsible. What role should investment incentives play in encouraging such investment? This guide helps to answer that question. Specifically, the guide provides policymakers and government technical staff with guidance on how investment incentives can be used (and how they should not be used) to enhance responsible investment in agriculture and food systems. The guide provides an overview of responsible investment in agriculture and food systems; examines common types of incentives; offers general considerations on how incentives can be used; and discusses how to plan for, design, monitor, and evaluate investment incentives for responsible investment in agriculture and food systems.
Topic:
Agriculture, Climate Change, Environment, Food, Food Security, and Sustainability
Political Geography:
Global Focus

223. Five Years After the Adoption of the Paris Agreement, Are Climate Change Considerations Reflected in Mining Contracts?

Author:
Tehtena Mebratu-Tsegaye, Perrine Toledano, Martin Dietrich Brauch, and Mara Greenberg
Publication Date:
07-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Columbia Center on Sustainable Investment
Abstract:
At the 2015 Paris Climate Change Conference, the world’s governments set an ambitious goal of limiting global temperature rise to 1.5 °C over pre-industrial levels. To meet this goal, global anthropogenic CO2 emissions must decline steadily and reach net zero by about 2050.2 The pathway to a low-carbon future requires a fundamental shift away from fossil fuels and toward clean energy technologies. This transition will be mineral-intensive: the World Bank estimates that the production of minerals could increase by more than 450% by 2050 to meet the growing demand for clean energy technologies.3 How these minerals are produced will have a lasting effect on the clean energy transition. The mining and metal sector contributes 4–7% of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions globally.4 Without adequate regulation to incentivize climate- friendly sustainable operations, increases in mineral extraction risk increasing the sector’s carbon footprint.5 In addition, climate change acts as a risk multiplier by increasing the risk of flooding, drought, and landslides and, as such, exacerbates the negative externalities caused by poor mining practices. First and foremost, climate change considerations should be incorporated into the climate, environmental, water, forestry, energy, or mining laws of mineral-rich countries. For example, in 2016, Kenya passed a climate law that requires climate mainstreaming in all sectors.6 Guinea’s 2019 Environmental Code encourages the use of renewable energy wherever possible and mandates the environment minister to implement the National Strategy for Climate Change Adaptation.7 But the pace of legislative processes is often slow—and in countries where the legislation does not include climate change mitigation and adaptation requirements,8 countries may turn to contractual provi- sions to compel the mining sector to shift to climate- sensitive practices. This paper assesses the extent to which this is being done through an analysis of all publicly available mining contracts signed by fragile states in Africa9 after the adoption of the Paris Agreement in December 2015 that appear on ResourceContracts.org (21 contracts).10 Though the magnitude of African fragile states’ contri- bution to global GHG emissions is minimal, these states have a comparatively high degree of vulnerability to the impacts of climate change.11 In this context, governments can and should mobilize the mining sector to play a meaningful role in meeting their climate mitigation and adaptation needs and those of project-affected communities. In addition, the increased demand for critical minerals to produce renewable energy and battery solutions tends to increase investment flows into the mining sector of several of those fragile states,12 making it all the more crucial for their governments to ensure that new mining investments support each country’s sustainable development goals. Doing so, with respect to climate action, furthers both a country’s competitiveness in international markets13 and minimize the mining sector’s footprint on the country’s environment and communities. Though our analysis focuses on contracts concluded by fragile states in Africa, the policy recommendations that we draw from their analysis apply to all host governments that do not already have robust laws that operationalize mitigation and adaptation goals and are eager to leverage and strengthen the role of their mining sectors in achieving sustainable development. Our recommendations envision generating long-term savings over the life of the mines, even if some of those recommendations may in practice represent higher upfront costs for mining companies. For example, adopting renewable energy sources, though possibly more expensive at the outset, is more cost-effective than fossil fuels considering the life of a mine.14 Avoiding deforestation early on also generates savings for mining companies when the time comes to fulfill their mine closure and rehabilitation obligations. Furthermore, by supporting community efforts to build resilience to climate change, mining companies have the opportunity to meaningfully contribute to project-affected communities. Attention to climate change considerations that entail higher expenditures by mining investors at the initial stages of the operation of a mine also tend to reduce the tax revenues from mining for host governments in the short term. However, for governments, too, the long-term benefits outweigh the initial revenue reductions. As long as governments put strong progressive fiscal regimes in place,15 they will be able to reap the upside from a climate- aware, low-carbon mining sector that will be more profitable than a business-as-usual, carbon-intensive mining sector in the medium to long term.
Topic:
Climate Change, Environment, International Cooperation, and Carbon Emissions
Political Geography:
Global Focus

224. Comparison Between the IPCC Reporting Framework and Country Practice

Author:
Jiarui Chen and Martin Dietrich Brauch
Publication Date:
07-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Columbia Center on Sustainable Investment
Abstract:
The 2006 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Guidelines (IPCC 2008) for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories (IPCC Guidelines) provide a recommend- ed (but not mandatory) methodology for preparing Na- tional Inventory Reports (NIR), which all Annex I Parties2 to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) must submit every year (Romijn et al. 2019). In practice, however, many countries apply modi- fied methodologies in their NIRs to reflect country-specif- ic situations better. While helpful in addressing country specificities, those modified methodologies may result in emission data that is less standardized and therefore harder to compare and consolidate. Also, the IPCC recom- mends that countries adopt higher tier methods and use more granular data. Since different emissions categorized by the IPCC3 can be calculated by multiple methods, and the granularity and quality of country emissions databas- es vary, different countries adopt different granularity lev- els and tier methods (IPCC 2008). The 160 Non-Annex I Parties to the UNFCCC (most of them developing countries) are not required to submit NIRs every year, but must submit Biennial Update Re- ports (BURs), including a national inventory report and information on mitigation actions, needs, and support re- ceived (Kainou 2016). Following the same IPCC Guidelines as NIRs, BURs are different from NIRs mainly in terms of reporting scope. The IPCC Guidelines require countries to report greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in NIRs from 1980 to the latest reporting period, while for BURs they merely encourage countries to submit summary informa- tion tables of inventories for previous submission years.4 Besides the required BURs, more Non-Annex I Parties have been submitting NIRs and Technical Annexes on REDD+ in recent years (Romijn et al. 2019). In 2020, 23 Non-Annex I Parties submitted NIRs (UNFCCC 2020). We recommend that the IPCC adopt, based on a man- date from the Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC, a consolidated framework to indicate best practice for each emissions category. A consolidated framework would help unify the granularity levels and standards across all coun- tries’ NIRs. It could also be extended to countries that have not adopted the IPCC Guidelines or published NIRs. Since an increasing number of Non-Annex I Parties are submit- ting NIRs to the UNFCCC, it is crucial to have a widely appli- cable framework that developing countries can also use. A consolidated framework would also make it easier for countries to communicate their emissions reductions goals in their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) under the Paris Agreement on Climate Change. With the Paris Agreement, countries established an enhanced transparency framework (ETF): starting in 2024, countries will report transparently on actions taken and progress in climate change mitigation, adaptation measures, and support provided or received. It also provides for interna- tional procedures for the review of the submitted NIRs. A standardized reporting framework for NIRs would comply with the requirement of transparency framework under Paris Agreement (Winkler et al. 2017). To exemplify how a consolidated framework would work, after a background note on scopes and approaches in greenhouse gas reporting (section 1), we present the re- sults of our empirical research on the NIRs of Australia, Germany, Japan, and the United States, focusing on the differences in the choice of methodology (section 2) and emission factors (section 3). Then we conduct a case study on the German iron and steel industry, exploring the dif- ferences in emission reporting under different methods (section 4). Finally, we study the case of China, which has submitted BURs but not yet published annual NIRs, to understand how the IPCC Guidelines could be applied to more countries (section 5). We outline our findings and recommendations in section 6.
Topic:
Climate Change, Development, Environment, and International Cooperation
Political Geography:
Global Focus

225. Adapting humanitarian action to the effects of climate change

Author:
ALNAP, Véronique de Geoffroy, Paul Knox Clarke, Mihir Bhatt, François Grunewald, and Jennifer Doherty
Publication Date:
10-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
ALNAP: Active Learning Network for Accountability and Performance
Abstract:
Humanitarian agencies need to reflect on the past, learn from the present and actively imagine the near and increasingly threatening future. From excessive consumption to the over-exploitation of natural resources, polluting activities to large-scale deforestation, humans have already dramatically changed the Earth’s climate and environment. As a result, we are experiencing more frequent and more intense weather events, the humanitarian consequences of which are major. Droughts, flooding and tropical storms cause death, disease, destruction and large-scale population displacement. Public health emergencies are already increasing because of these changes. Conflicts and conflict situations may increase, as may the resulting human migration and displacement. Humanitarian actors working on the ground with climate-related disasters are well placed to observe the intensification of climate-related effects and the increasing complexity of extreme weather events in all regions of the world, including regions where such events were previously rare or unknown.
Topic:
Climate Change, Humanitarian Aid, Natural Disasters, Conflict, and Public Health
Political Geography:
Global Focus

226. Sustainable carbon removal

Author:
David R. Morrow and Simon Nicholson
Publication Date:
10-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Institute for Carbon Removal Law and Policy, American University
Abstract:
Carbon removal, which involves capturing carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere and sequestering it, can help us meet the goals of the Paris Agreement. The key question is not just how to make large-scale carbon removal operational, but how to make it sustainable. Sustainable practices balance environmental, social, and economic goals. Sustainable carbon removal balances those goals in order to meet the needs of the future without compromising the ability of current generations to meet their own needs. To operationalize this idea, we need to ask two questions: How should we measure the environmental, social, and economic impacts of carbon? How should we decide when carbon removal strikes the right balance between future and present needs? Analyzing carbon removal at different levels can illuminate environmental, social, and economic risks and opportunities. Levels of analysis range from broad technological categories, like reforestation, to specific projects, like Climeworks’ Orca direct air capture project in Iceland. Most analyses have focused on broad technological categories, but more fine-grained analyses are crucial for delivering actionable advice. Finding metrics for environmental, social, and economic impacts is vital for quantifying positive and negative impacts and comparing approaches. One possibility is to use the indicators for the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals, which are politically negotiated, internationally accepted metrics of environmental, social, and economic sustainability. Determining which approaches are most sustainable requires balancing different positive and negative impacts that may not be easily comparable. There are several ways to do this, ranging from intuitive judgments to multicriteria decision analysis, although any decisions about which approaches are most sustainable are ultimately political decisions. In summary, to develop sustainable carbon removal, we need to identify sustainability metrics, such as the indicators behind the Sustainable Development Goals; apply those metrics at different levels of analysis; and develop strategies for determining which approaches strike the right balance between environmental, social, and economic goals.
Topic:
Climate Change, Environment, Sustainable Development Goals, and Carbon Emissions
Political Geography:
Global Focus

227. The U.N. Climate Summit and Its Aftermath

Author:
Nabil Fahmy
Publication Date:
10-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Cairo Review of Global Affairs
Institution:
School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, American University in Cairo
Abstract:
Developing countries see the call for equal actions with their richer counterparts as serving the interests of the latter.
Topic:
Climate Change, Development, Environment, International Cooperation, and United Nations
Political Geography:
Global Focus

228. Who Feels Climate Anxiety?

Author:
Sarah Jaquette Ray
Publication Date:
10-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Cairo Review of Global Affairs
Institution:
School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, American University in Cairo
Abstract:
In the simplest terms, the answer is: it depends on who perceives it as a threat, and what “anxiety” means to them.
Topic:
Security, Climate Change, Environment, and Natural Disasters
Political Geography:
Global Focus

229. Locked-in Emissions: The Climate Change Arms Trade

Author:
Wendela de Vries
Publication Date:
10-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Cairo Review of Global Affairs
Institution:
School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, American University in Cairo
Abstract:
With militaries’ locked-in fossil fuel systems and looming climate chaos, the arms industry continues to take advantage of nefarious profit opportunities.
Topic:
Climate Change, Energy Policy, Environment, Military Strategy, Natural Resources, Fossil Fuels, Private Sector, and Defense Industry
Political Geography:
Global Focus

230. The Slow Violence of Climate Change

Author:
Garret Barnwell and Savo Heleta
Publication Date:
10-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Cairo Review of Global Affairs
Institution:
School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, American University in Cairo
Abstract:
A warming planet places the heaviest burden on the countries and people least responsible for climate destruction. Survival necessitates justice, redress, and structural change.
Topic:
Climate Change, Environment, Infrastructure, Conflict, and Violence
Political Geography:
Global Focus