Desertification,and climate change: the case for greater convergence

Poor knowledge of links between desertification and globalclimate change is limiting funding from the Global Environment Facility foranti-desertification projects and realization of synergies between theConvention to Combat Desertification (CCD) and the FrameworkConvention on Climate Change (FCCC). Greater convergence betweenresearch in the two fields could overcome these limitations, improve ourknowledge of desertification, and benefit four areas of global climate changestudies: mitigation assessment; accounting for land cover change in thecarbon budget; land surface-atmosphere interactions; and climate changeimpact forecasting. Convergence would be assisted if desertification weretreated more as a special case in dry areas of the global process of landdegradation, and stimulated by: (a) closer cooperation between the FCCCand CCD; (b) better informal networking between desertification and globalclimate change scientists, e.g. within the framework of theIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Both strategies wouldbe facilitated if the FCCC and CCD requested the IPCC to provide ascientific framework for realizing the synergies between them.     

Analysing countries’ contribution to climate change: scientific and policy-related choices

This paper evaluates the influence of different policy-related and scientific choices on the calculated regional contributions to global climate change (the “Brazilian Proposal”). Policy-related choices include the time period of emissions, the mix of greenhouse gases and different indicators of climate change impacts. The scientific choices include historical emissions and model representations of the climate system. We generated and compared results of several simple climate models. We find that the relative contributions of different nations to global climate change—from emissions of greenhouse gases alone—are quite robust, despite the varying model complexity and differences in calculated absolute changes. For the default calculations, the average calculated contributions to the global mean surface temperature increase in 2000 are about 40% from OECD, 14% from Eastern Europe and Former Soviet Union, 24% from Asia and 22% from Africa and Latin America. Policy-related choices, such as time period of emissions, climate change indicator and gas mix generally have larger influence on the results than scientific choices. More specifically, choosing a later attribution start date (1990 instead of 1890) for historical emissions, decreases the contributions of regions that started emitting early, such as the OECD countries by 6 percentage points, whereas it increases the contribution of late emitters such as Asia by 8 percentage points. However, only including the fossil CO₂ emissions instead of the emissions of all Kyoto gases (fossil and land use change), increases the OECD contributions by 21 percentage points and decreases the contribution of Asia by 14 percentage points.     

Pure science or policy involvement? Ambiguous boundary-work for Swedish carbon cycle science

In theory, the interaction between the worlds of environmental science and policy may seem straightforward. From a realm outside politics and power, scientists provide relevant knowledge about nature upon which informed policy decisions could be based. However, in reality this linear model tends to be replaced by a much more complex relationship where the distinction between facts and values, knowledge and interests is less clear cut. In this paper, I explore links between science, policy and power through an interview study conducted with Swedish carbon cycle scientists and government negotiators to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Drawing on a co-production model of science–policy interplay this paper addresses the implications of a mutually constitutive relationship between carbon cycle science and climate policy.     

Climate policy integration in the land use sector: Mitigation,adaptation and sustainable development linkages

This article re-conceptualizes Climate Policy Integration (CPI) in the land use sector to highlight the need to assess the level of integration of mitigation and adaptation objectives and policies to minimize trade-offs and to exploit synergies. It suggests that effective CPI in the land use sector requires i) internal climate policy coherence between mitigation and adaptation objectives and policies; ii) external climate policy coherence between climate change and development objectives; iii) vertical policy integration to mainstream climate change into sectoral policies and; iv) horizontal policy integration by overarching governance structures for cross-sectoral coordination. This framework is used to examine CPI in the land use sector of Indonesia. The findings indicate that adaptation actors and policies are the main advocates of internal policy coherence. External policy coherence between mitigation and development planning is called for, but remains to be operationalized. Bureaucratic politics has in turn undermined vertical and horizontal policy integration. Under these circumstances it is unlikely that the Indonesian bureaucracy can deliver strong coordinated action addressing climate change in the land use sector, unless sectoral ministries internalize a strong mandate on internal and external climate policy coherence and find ways to coordinate policy action effectively.     

CLIMATE CHANGE AND NATURAL HAZARDS IN NORTHERN CANADA: INTEGRATING INDIGENOUS PERSPECTIVES WITH GOVERNMENT POLICY

A study of the relationship between natural hazards and climate change in the international context provides the background for a discussion of the expected changes. In the context of this global discussion, this paper reviews the current perspectives of those natural hazards that are likely to be influenced by climate change, using northern Canada as a regional case study. The northern implications of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change are examined, including the status of climate change action by the northern territorial governments, the evolving role of indigenous people, and the responsibility for climate change impacts. The difficulties surrounding natural hazards research in remote locations, and the approaches of indigenous people to natural hazards are then presented. The paper concludes with a suggested policy approach for climate change and natural hazards in northern Canada, underscoring the need for more comprehensive adaptive strategies to complement the current tendency to focus on the mitigation of greenhouse gases produced in this region.     

Managing climate change risks in New York City’s water system: assessment and adaptation planning

Managing risk by adapting long-lived infrastructure to the effects of climate change must become a regular part of planning for water supply, sewer, wastewater treatment, and other urban infrastructure during this century. The New York City Department of Environmental Protection (NYCDEP), the agency responsible for managing New York City’s (NYC) water supply, sewer, and wastewater treatment systems, has developed a climate risk management framework through its Climate Change Task Force, a government-university collaborative effort. Its purpose is to ensure that NYCDEP’s strategic and capital planning take into account the potential risks of climate change—sea-level rise, higher temperature, increases in extreme events, changes in drought and flood frequency and intensity, and changing precipitation patterns—on NYC’s water systems. This approach will enable NYCDEP and other agencies to incorporate adaptations to the risks of climate change into their management, investment, and policy decisions over the long term as a regular part of their planning activities. The framework includes a 9-step Adaptation Assessment procedure. Potential climate change adaptations are divided into management, infrastructure, and policy categories, and are assessed by their relevance in terms of climate change time-frame (immediate, medium, and long term), the capital cycle, costs, and other risks. The approach focuses on the water supply, sewer, and wastewater treatment systems of NYC, but has wide application for other urban areas, especially those in coastal locations.     

Science as a “fixed point”? Quantification and boundary objects in international climate politics

Our understanding of climate change is dominated by quantified scientific knowledge, with science and politics usually seen as operating separately and autonomously from one another. By investigating a particular fact box in the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report (AR4), this paper challenges the assumption that science and policy can be clearly delineated. The so-called “Bali Box” gained a prominent role in negotiations leading up to the Copenhagen Conference in 2009, as it was widely seen as providing a “fixed point” – a quantified scientific answer to the question of equitable effort-sharing between North and South. This understanding of the Bali Box triggered a backlash, however, when the hybrid character of the box as an assemblage of science, political considerations and moral judgements became evident to actors in the negotiations. The paper employs the notion of boundary objects to analyse the history of the Bali Box, and argues that climate politics will benefit from a richer understanding of the interplay between science and policy. Moving beyond characterizations that place the Bali Box on either side of a clear boundary between the scientific and the political, we suggest focusing instead on what the Box as a hybrid product is doing, i.e. how it simplifies and quantifies, what it covers and what it leaves outside.     

New concepts in product use for sustainable consumption

The paper presents the main results of a recent study on sustainable use of products. It reveals that strategies of use intensification and useful life extension are environmentally beneficial. Moreover, analysis of household washing and winter sports illustrated that successful implementation of sustainable use patterns occurs as a shift of use regimes. Such regimes are the result of a complex interplay of supply and demand side factors, relationship among actors, technical trajectories, organisational structures etc. One decisive factor is the presence of strategic players, so called “change agents”. In addition, four user types have been identified in a representative survey (“ownership-oriented”, “open-minded”, “consumption-oriented”, “low interest”) to which use intensification and useful life extension can be targeted.     

Better regulation by new governance hybrids? Governance models and the reform of European chemicals policy

The EU is presently in a transition phase from environmental policy-making by law towards other governance approaches based upon networking, voluntary commitments, benchmarking and other forms of “soft law”. Those new governance approaches often claim to lead to “better regulation”, while adopting a more consensus-oriented and participatory style, taking economic aspects more seriously into account, allowing for more flexibility and autonomy for the private sector and Member States alike, mobilising a broader knowledge base or adopting more integrated and holistic approaches than previous sectoralised and compartmentalised policies.While the limitations of traditional regulatory approaches are widely accepted and cited, it is far from evident, that “new modes of governance” have greater capacity to solve problems than the old ones. There is an argument, that “better regulation” might by synonymous to a withdrawal and weakening of the regulatory state and hence effectively of the aspirations and objectives of environmental policies.An interesting case for an approach, combining the strengths of the old and the new approaches is the ongoing reform of chemicals policies. While some observers claim, that the proposed directive, “REACH” might belong to the outdated category of overcomplex and bureaucratic regulation, a closer look shows that there are many new forms of governance in REACH. This mixture or old and new may open a more realistic and promising perspective on the reform of European policy-making.In our paper we assess the effects and the interplay of the combination of different modes of governance using the example of REACH. We are particularly concerned with the question in how far the representation of interests may change when new modes of governance are introduced.     

西双版纳生物多样性廊道区气候变化脆弱性评价研究

以IPCC（政府间气候变化专业委员会）对生态系统气候脆弱性定义为理论基础,以西双版纳勐腊一尚勇保护区廊道为研究区域,通过建立生态系统气候脆弱性评价指标体系,对廊道从20世纪70年代到现在和未来变化做了评估,初步识别出不同历史时期研究区的生态系统对气候变化的脆弱性特征,并提出应对气候变化的对策建议。     

Reporting marine climate change impacts: Lessons from the science-policy interface

Climate change science can trace its origins back to the early 19th Century although interest really took off in the 1980s, when public interest and research activity proliferated as the potential negative effects of global warming became clear. The impacts of climate change on the marine environment was receiving little attention at this time, but in recent years has started to “catch up” both in terms of research activity and public and policy interest. In the UK, the Marine Climate Change Impacts Partnership (MCCIP) has played a key role in transferring the emerging evidence base on marine climate change impacts to decision makers through the development of climate change report cards. Since publishing its first card back in 2006, the MCCIP cards have become established as the principal source of marine climate change impacts evidence for policy makers in the UK, and similar approaches have been adopted elsewhere. Here we broadly describe how the climate change evidence base has evolved over time, with a focus on the marine evidence base, and the approach adopted in the UK by MCCIP to rapidly transfer this evidence to end users. The SIIRMS model developed by MCCIP to ensure integrity and independence in the scientific translation process is explored, along with wider lessons learnt along the way (e.g. about communicating uncertainty) and the impact MCCIP has had on informing decision making.     

Defining response capacity to enhance climate change policy

Climate change adaptation and mitigation decisions made by governments are usually taken in different policy domains. At the individual level however, adaptation and mitigation activities are undertaken together as part of the management of risk and resources. We propose that a useful starting point to develop a national climate policy is to understand what societal response might mean in practice. First we frame the set of responses at the national policy level as a trade off between investment in the development and diffusion of new technology, and investment in encouraging and enabling society to change its behaviour and or adopt the new technology. We argue that these are the pertinent trade-offs, rather than those usually posited between climate change mitigation and adaptation. The preference for a policy response that focuses more on technological innovation rather than one that focuses on changing social behaviour will be influenced by the capacity of different societies to change their greenhouse gas emissions; by perceived vulnerability to climate impacts; and by capacity to modify social behaviour and physical environment. Starting with this complete vision of response options should enable policy makers to re-evaluate the risk environment and the set of response options available to them. From here, policy makers should consider who is responsible for making climate response decisions and when actions should be taken. Institutional arrangements dictate social and political acceptability of different policies, they structure worldviews, and they determine the provision of resources for investment in technological innovation and social change. The importance of focussing on the timing of the response is emphasised to maximise the potential for adjustments through social learning and institutional change at different policy scales. We argue that the ability to respond to climate change is both enabled and constrained by social and technological conditions. The ability of society to respond to climate change and the need for technological change for both decarbonisation and for dealing with surprise in general, are central to concepts of sustainable development.     

Joint Implementation Under the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change: Technical and Institutional Challenges

The U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC) allows for the joint implementation (JI) of measures to mitigate the emissions of greenhouse gases. The concept of JI refers to the implementation of such measures in one country with partial or full financial and/or technical support from another country, potentially fulfilling some of the supporting country's emission-reduction commitment under the FCCC. At present, all JI transactions are voluntary, and no country has claimed JI credit against existing FCCC commitments. Nevertheless, JI could have important implications for both the economic efficiency and the international equity of the implementation of the FCCC. This paper discusses some of the information needs of JI projects and seeks to clarify some of the common assumptions and arguments about JI. Issues regarding JI are distinguished according to those that are specific to JI and those that apply to JI as well as other types of regimes and transactions. The focus is on the position of developing countries and their potential risks and benefits regarding JI.     

The carbon sequestration potential of tree crop plantations

Carbon (C) conservation and sequestration in many developing countries needs to be accompanied by socio-economic improvements. Tree crop plantations can be a potential path for coupling climate change mitigation and economic development by providing C sequestration and supplying wood and non-wood products to meet domestic and international market requirements at the same time. Financial compensation for such plantations could potentially be covered by the Clean Development Mechanism under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC) Kyoto Protocol, but its suitability has also been suggested for integration into REDD?+?(reducing emissions from deforestation, forest degradation and enhancement of forest C stocks) currently being negotiated under the United Nations FCCC. We assess the aboveground C sequestration potential of four major plantation crops – cocoa (Theobroma cacao), oil palm (Elaeis guineensis), rubber (Hevea brasiliensis), and orange (Citrus sinesis) – cultivated in the tropics. Measurements were conducted in Ghana and allometric equations were applied to estimate biomass. The largest C potential was found in the rubber plantations (214 tC/ha). Cocoa (65 tC/ha) and orange (76 tC/ha) plantations have a much lower C content, and oil palm (45 tC/ha) has the lowest C potential, assuming that the yield is not used as biofuel. There is considerable C sequestration potential in plantations if they are established on land with modest C content such as degraded forest or agricultural land, and not on land with old-growth forest. We also show that simple C assessment methods can give reliable results, which makes it easier for developing countries to partake in REDD?+ or other payment schemes.     

A Report on the International Conference on Climate Policy after Marrakech: Towards Global Participation

The East-West Center convened the international conference on climate policy in Honolulu, Hawaii, on September 4–6, 2003. Sponsored by the Dutch Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment, the Japanese Ministry of the Environment, Industrial Technology Research Institute (Taiwan), and Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (Japan), this major event covered almost every important issue and featured perspectives from the most important parties and stakeholders in formulating and implementing climate policies and taking international climate negotiations further. It brought together a remarkable cross-section of world opinion on climate policy after Kyoto. This report provides a summary of each presentation and highlights discussions organized under the following six session headings: Session 1: Climate Change in Focus – From Science to Policy; Session 2: U.S. Climate Policy and Perspectives; Session 3: European Union Climate Policy and Perspectives; Session 4: Challenges for other Major Industrialized Countries; Session 5: Issues Related to Developing Countries; and Session 6: Panel Discussions: Where Do We Go from Here?.     

Indicators for assessing Indonesia’s Javan rhino National Park vulnerability to climate change

Climate change is already affecting ecosystems in protected forest areas. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has predicted its impacts will accelerate rapidly over the coming decades. The components of vulnerability have been defined as exposure, sensitivity and the capacity to adapt to climate change. Vulnerability, however, is not an easy concept for policy makers, local communities and other affected stakeholders to understand. This paper illustrates the use of participatory processes in understanding climate change adaptation and defines indicators for assessing the vulnerability of the Javan rhino's national park habitat in Indonesia. The processes generated local vulnerability indicators, organised hierarchically as principles, criteria and indicators (PCIs). While vulnerability principles and criteria were pre-determined and globally defined, the indicators were designed to address the local context. We found the PCIs to be practical tools for communicating vulnerability and for multi-stakeholder dialogues on vulnerability to climate change.     

Industrial symbiosis: the case for market coordination

Despite the fact that all successful, documented cases of industrial symbiosis to this day have been self-organizing, some authors and development officials have suggested that increased public planning might deliver better results in this respect than spontaneously evolved market coordination. This paper takes an historical approach to suggest that comprehensive planning is unlikely to live up to the expectations of its proponents.The essay is structured as follows. The first section provides short case studies of industrial symbiosis in highly different economic and institutional settings, the essentially free-market regime of Victorian England and communist Hungary (1948–1989). The available evidence suggests that market coordination proved much more favorable to the emergence of industrial symbiosis, despite the elaboration of a comprehensive policy to that effect in Hungary. Insights derived from the so-called “Austrian” critique of central planning are then used to explain this paradox. The analysis presented suggests that the Hungarian planners’ failure was not so much the result of the bad implementation of sound policies, but the logical outcome of a top-down approach’s shortcomings. Policy implications for the public planning of industrial symbiosis in a mixed economy are then derived and the case for self-organization is found more compelling. The creation of more innovative institutions that will force firms to “internalize their externalities” while leaving them the necessary freedom to innovate is viewed as an urgently needed and promising path towards increased, sustainable reuse of industrial by-products.     

Why the IPCC should evolve in response to the UNFCCC bottom-up strategy adopted in Paris? An opinion from the French Association for Disaster Risk Reduction

The levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere keep increasing every year, and despite the adoption of the Paris agreement, one cannot expect any significant dip in the trend in the near future. We may therefore legitimately question the efficiency of the current governance system, notably concerning the interplay between science and policy. The strategy adopted by the UNFCCC in Paris contrasts with the strategy adopted in Kyoto, as it endorses a dynamic that is more bottom-up. Its success will depend greatly on the ability of the actors to mobilise on climate issues and to find ways to work together. Scientific expertise has a key role to play to this respect. This paper is a reflection led by the French Association for Disaster Risk Reduction on how the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change could evolve in order to usefully accompany that strategy. Introducing more reflexivity in the assessment process and widening aspects of the expertise to a more diverse and transdisciplinary range of actors could improve the treatment of uncertainties, multi-scale interactions and the appropriation of expertise, as well as the integration of adaptation and mitigation policies. In practical terms, this could involve more working groups, which could become more focused, drawing up shorter but more frequent reports, and taking account of the “grey” expert literature. The implementation of such an approach merits further investigation, because these improvements could help address the governance challenges in climate change.     

Surprising cooperation despite apparently irreconcilable differences: Agricultural water use efficiency and CALFED

Much has been said about the need and benefits of consensus building for resolving disagreements about water and environmental management. Less has been said about how to better convene and facilitate those processes. This paper focuses on the latter, examining the challenges and breakthroughs encountered when decision-makers convene consensus building processes that seek an agreement among stakeholders who believe they have “apparently irreconcilable differences.” The research described here analyzes two multi-stakeholder, collaborative processes convened by the CALFED Bay-Delta Program (CALFED) on the issue of agricultural water use efficiency in the Sacramento and San Joaquin river watersheds of California. The first process made very little progress; however, stakeholder representatives in the second were able to forge an agreement that included significant innovation and surprising risk taking by all sides. Analyzing the two processes, this paper shows that the stakeholders, conveners, and facilitators in these processes had to do much more than make the discrete trades across interests envisioned in consensus building theory or reframing as described in theories about conflict and frames. Looking at the data, this paper shows how several concepts from outside consensus building—including boundary objects and interlanguage—along with less well-known concepts and issues within the consensus building literature—bricolage and representation—can provide insights into how the Steering Committee accomplished what it did. This paper introduces these additional concepts, how they mattered in this CALFED process, and suggests a complex set of interrelated insights into how future collaborative and integrative environmental programs can approach the most difficult environmental policy and management conflicts.     

The impact of climate change mitigation on water demand for energy and food: An integrated analysis based on the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways

Climate change mitigation, in the context of growing population and ever increasing economic activity, will require a transformation of energy and agricultural systems, posing significant challenges to global water resources. We use an integrated modelling framework of the water-energy-land-climate systems to assess how changes in electricity and land use, induced by climate change mitigation, impact on water demand under alternative socioeconomic (Shared Socioeconomic Pathways) and water policy assumptions (irrigation of bioenergy crops, cooling technologies for electricity generation). The impacts of climate change mitigation on cumulated global water demand across the century are highly uncertain, and depending on socioeconomic and water policy conditions, they range from a reduction of 15,000 km³ to an increase of more than 160,000 km³. The impact of irrigation of bioenergy crops is the most prominent factor, leading to significantly higher water requirements under climate change mitigation if bioenergy crops are irrigated. Differences in socioeconomic drivers and fossil fuel availability result in significant differences in electricity and bioenergy demands, in the associated electricity and primary energy mixes, and consequently in water demand. Economic affluence and abundance of fossil fuels aggravate pressures on water resources due to higher energy demand and greater deployment of water intensive technologies such as bioenergy and nuclear power. The evolution of future cooling systems is also identified as an important determinant of electricity water demand. Climate policy can result in a reduction of water demand if combined with policies on irrigation of bioenergy, and the deployment of non-water-intensive electricity sources and cooling types.