Search Climate Insights Directory

The ADP 2-11 session in Bonn was characterized by a loss of consensus and a reversal of previous progress due to dissatisfaction with the Co-Chairs' proposed negotiating text. Instead of advancing toward a final agreement for COP 21, parties spent the session re-compiling a more comprehensive but fragmented text, reverting to positions held earlier in 2015. The meeting was further hampered by procedural disputes over the use of closed spin-off groups and a lack of progress on the accompanying decision text, leaving the Paris negotiations with a complex and unrefined basis for agreement.

The document argues that production-based emissions accounting allows the EU to outsource manufacturing and claim emissions reductions while domestic consumption drives emissions elsewhere. It introduces the Carbon-CAP project, which evaluates over 30 policy instruments across sectors like transport and food to complement existing production-focused policies. These instruments are assessed based on effectiveness, scope, economic equity, and political/legal acceptance to avoid rebound effects and emissions shifting within the global economy.

The document outlines three primary models for initiating sectoral integration of climate adaptation: sector-driven, national-driven, and mixed approaches. It emphasizes that while paths vary by national context, a strong coordination function is essential across all models to ensure coherence and avoid duplication of efforts.

The document outlines a spectrum of approaches for integrating climate adaptation into sectoral planning, ranging from sector-driven initiatives to nationally-led strategies, using examples from several developing countries to illustrate how these paths lead to the common goal of sectoral integration.

The October 2015 survey indicates that 67% of Americans believe global warming is occurring, with 53% attributing it primarily to human activity. While worry about global warming increased between spring and fall 2015, pessimism regarding the ability to successfully reduce it is growing, with only 4% believing humans can and will succeed. A majority of Americans believe corporations, citizens, and the U.S. government should do more to address the issue. Additionally, the report identifies 'The Francis Effect,' noting that Pope Francis's teachings have specifically influenced the views and concerns of Catholic Americans.

The Energy Policy Simulator is a real-time, open-source tool that measures the cost and emissions impacts of over 50 climate and energy policies across all greenhouse gas emitting sectors in the U.S. The model, which is peer-reviewed by several national laboratories and universities, allows users to create custom policy scenarios using publicly available data and visualize results via a web application.

The review finds that the relationship between climate change mitigation and adaptation varies by scale and perspective. At the global level, economic literature often views them as substitutes, while scientific literature sees them as complementary; however, implementing a global mix is considered highly contentious. At national and local scales, there is greater potential for complementarity, though institutional and governance barriers prevent such actions from occurring autonomously.

Research indicates that Pope Francis is generally viewed as a trusted source of information on global warming among Americans, with a majority (55%) believing it is appropriate for him to take a public position on the issue. Among American Christians, Catholics show higher levels of belief in human-caused global warming (57%) and higher levels of worry (57%) compared to other major Christian groups. While awareness of the papal encyclical on climate change remains low (31%), there is strong cross-denominational support for climate policies, including renewable energy research and carbon dioxide regulation.

Environmental groups argue that a proposed provision in the Customs Act (H.R. 644) would 'handcuff' U.S. negotiators by ensuring trade agreements do not require changes to U.S. laws regarding global warming, thereby undermining future climate action and international commitments.

The research addresses the 'activity gap' in international carbon markets by proposing bilateral agreements as a way to pilot sectoral carbon market approaches. The study developed a country prioritization methodology based on climate policy ambition and tested benchmarking concepts for defining credited baselines in Chile's electricity sector and South Africa's building sector.

The document outlines five key conclusions for developing countries creating INDCs: treating them as political statements, establishing clear structures, leveraging existing policies, conducting broad consultations, and planning for implementation. It emphasizes the need to balance ambition with feasibility, often through a combination of unilateral and conditional contributions, while aligning climate actions with national development priorities and Sustainable Development Goals.

The report presents seven 'deception dossiers' containing approximately 85 internal documents that reveal how fossil fuel companies and trade associations intentionally spread climate misinformation. It details tactics such as the secret funding of contrarian scientists, the creation of 'astroturf' grassroots groups, and the use of forged letters to Congress to undermine climate science and delay the transition to clean energy.

The document outlines the criteria for a 'strong' INDC, emphasizing that it must be equitable, ambitious, science-based, and transparent. It provides a detailed evaluation framework based on six questions: clarity of intent, alignment with science, equity and ambition, robustness of the design process, feasibility of implementation, and transparency. The guide distinguishes between 'results-based' and 'action-based' mitigation commitments and encourages the inclusion of adaptation plans based on evidence of climate risks.

The document finds that Catholic Republicans are more likely than non-Catholic Republicans to believe global warming is happening, attribute it to human activities, and support climate policies, a trend that persists even among conservative Republicans.

The document finds that Catholic Republicans in the U.S. are more likely than non-Catholic Republicans to believe global warming is happening and human-caused, to express worry about it, and to support climate policies. These differences persist even among conservative Republicans, whereas similar gaps are not observed among Democrats or Independents.

We Mean Business welcomes the call for carbon pricing from CEOs of BG, BP, ENI, Royal Dutch Shell, Statoil, and Total, but argues that real leadership requires specific investment commitments and transparency.

The document provides a comprehensive introduction to Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs), distinguishing them from carbon offsetting mechanisms like the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). It details the NAMA lifecycle—from concept to implementation—and examines the financial landscape, including the role of the NAMA Facility and the Green Climate Fund. The guide highlights the current state of NAMA deployment, noting that while many are in the design phase, few have reached implementation. It emphasizes the critical role of civil society in ensuring sustainable development and accountability through stakeholder engagement and Monitoring, Reporting, and Verification (MRV) processes.

The report analyzes GHG emission trajectories for Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Japan, Mexico, and the United States up to 2030. It evaluates the effectiveness of current and planned policies alongside enhanced mitigation actions aligned with national priorities to estimate the potential reduction in the emissions gap relative to a 2°C target for 2025 and 2030.

The policy brief examines the implications of linking the EU ETS with external carbon markets, noting that while it may increase cost-efficiency, it risks undermining the EU's 2030 domestic emissions reduction target of 40%. It highlights the lack of transparency and European Parliament involvement in current negotiations and recommends that any linking be accompanied by higher emission targets and robust safeguards, such as the exclusion of international offsets.

The document examines the challenges of governing climate change with fixed rules given the evolving nature of scientific insights and socio-economic conditions. It evaluates the UNFCCC's current flexibility mechanisms, critiques proposals for a more pluralist approach to law, and seeks a balance between flexibility and the need for predictability and stability.