DOCSLIB.ORG

A Systematic Global Stocktake of Evidence on Human Adaptation to Climate Change Analysis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Systematic Global Stocktake of Evidence on Human Adaptation to Climate Change Analysis Mapping evidence of human adaptation to climate change Lea Berrang-Ford ( [email protected] ) University of Leeds https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9216-8035 A.R. Siders University of Delaware https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6788-8313 Alexandra Lesnikowski Department of Geography, Planning & Environment, Concordia University, 1455 boul. de Maisonneuve O, Montreal, Canada H3G 1M8 Alexandra Paige Fischer University of Michigan Max Callaghan Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change https://orcid.org/0000-0001- 8292-8758 Neal Haddaway Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change https://orcid.org/0000-0003- 3902-2234 Katharine Mach University of Miami https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5591-8148 Malcolm Araos New York University Mohammad Aminur Rahman Shah University of Glasgow, UK Mia Wannewitz Ludwig-Maximilians University Munich, Department of Geography Deepal Doshi Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9606-2809 Timo Leiter London School of Economics and Political Science https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4982-8063 Custodio Matavel Leibniz-Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research (ZALF), Sustainable Land Use in Developing Countries (SUS-Land) https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3800-7887 Justice Issah Musah-Surugu United Nations University Gabrielle Wong-Parodi Stanford University Philip Antwi-Agyei Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology Idowu Ajibade Portland State University Neha Chauhan School fo Environmental Sciences, JNU, New Delhi William Kakenmaster University of Notre Dame Caitlin Grady Penn State University Vasiliki I. Chalastani Laboratory of Harbor Works, Department of Water Resources and Environmental Engineering, School of Civil Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, Zografou, Greece https://orcid.org/0000- 0002-1404-0682 Kripa Jagannathan Lawrence Berkeley Lab https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4584-8358 Eranga Galappaththi Department of Geography, McGill University, Montreal, Canada Asha Sitati United Nations Oce for Disaster Risk Reduction Giulia Scarpa University of Leeds, UK Edmond Totin Universite Nationale d'Agriculture du Benin Katy Davis Priestley International Centre for Climate, University of Leeds Nikita Charles Hamilton NCH Strategy Group / Department of Environmental Planning and Protection (DEPP) Christine Kirchhoff UCONN https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2686-6764 Praveen Kumar School of Environmental Sciences, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi Brian Pentz University of Toronto Scarborough Nicholas Simpson University of Cape Town https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9041-982X Emily Theokritoff Climate Analytics gGmbH Delphine Deryng Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6214-7241 Diana Reckien University of Twente https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1145-9509 Carol Zavaleta-Cortijo School of Public Health and Administration, Cayetano Heredia University, Lima, Peru Nicola Ulibarri University of California, Irvine https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6238-9056 Alcade Segnon University of Abomey-Calavi https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9751-120X Vhalinavho Khavhagali Universuty of Twente, NL Yuanyuan Shang Australian National Centre for the Public Awareness of Science, The Australian National University https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8405-1352 Luckson Zvobgo University of Cape Town Zinta Zommers United Nations Oce for Disaster Risk Reduction Jiren Xu School of Interdisciplinary Studies, University of Glasgow, UK Portia Adade Williams CSIR-Science and Technology Policy Research Institute, Ghana Ivan Villaverde Canosa n/a Nicole van Maanen Climate Analytics and Humboldt University of Berlin Bianca van Bavel Priestley International Centre for Climate, University of Leeds Maarten van Aalst University of Twente, Red Cross Red Crescent Climate Centre https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0319-5627 Lynée L. Turek-Hankins Environmental Science and Policy Graduate Program, Leonard and Jayne Abess Center for Ecosystem Science and Policy, University of Miami, Coral Gables, FL, USA Hasti Trivedi Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, Gujarat, India Christopher Trisos University of Cape Town https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5854-1489 Adelle Thomas University of The Bahamas, Climate Analytics Shinny Thakur G.B. Pant National Institute of Himalayan Environment, Kosi-Katarma, Almora, Uttarakhand, India Sienna Templeman USA, Columbia University Lindsay C. Stringer University of York Garry Sotnik School for Environment and Sustainability, University of Michigan Kathryn Dana Sjostrom Memphis-Shelby County Division of Planning and Development, Sustainability and Resilience Chandni Singh Indian Institute for Human Settlements https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6842-6735 Mariella Z Siña School of Public Health and Administration, Cayetano Heredia University, Peru Roopam Shukla Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research Jordi Sardans 1 CSIC, Global Ecology Unit CREAF-CEAB-UAB, Bellaterra, 08193 Catalonia, Spain. 2 CREAF, Cerdanyola del Vallès, 08193 Catalonia, Spain. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2478-0219 Eunice A Salubi University of Waterloo, Ontario https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3257-5311 Lolita Shaila Safaee Chalkasra University of Ottawa (Canada) Raquel Ruiz-Díaz Future Oceans Lab, CIM-Universidade de Vigo, Spain Carys Richards University of St Andrews and University College London, UK Pratik Pokharel University of Sheeld, UK and EHESP School of Public Health, France https://orcid.org/0000-0001- 5815-5927 Jan Petzold Center for Earth System Research and Sustainability (CEN), University of Hamburg, Germany Josep Penuelas CSIC, Global Ecology Unit CREAF-CSIC-UAB, Cerdanyola del Vallès 08193, Catalonia, Spain https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7215-0150 Julia Pelaez Avila University of Cape Town Julia B. Pazmino Murillo Eberswalde university for sustainable development Souha Ouni Columbia University Jennifer Niemann Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science, University of Miami https://orcid.org/0000- 0002-4531-9846 Miriam Nielsen Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, Columbia University https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0037-294X Mark New University of Cape Town https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6082-8879 Patricia Nayna Schwerdtle Heidelberg Institute of Global Health Gabriela Nagle Alverio 1) Nicholas School of the Environment, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA 2) Sanford School of Public Policy, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA 3) School of Law, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA Cristina A. Mullin University of Connecticut Joshua Mullenite Wagner College https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8477-4190 Anuszka Mosurska Univerisity of Leeds Mike Morecroft Natural England https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7978-5554 Jan Minx Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change https://orcid.org/0000-0002- 2862-0178 Gina Maskell Potsdam Institute for Climate Impacts https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7903-2512 Abraham Marshall Nunbogu University of Waterloo, Canada Alexandre Magnan Institute for Sustainable Development and International Relations https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7421- 5184 Shuaib Lwasa Makerere University https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4312-2836 Megan Lukas-Sithole Africa Climate and Development Initiative, University of Cape Town, South Africa Tabea Lissner Climate Analytics Oliver Lilford Australian National University Steven Koller University of Miami, Leonard and Jayne Abess Center for Ecosystem Science and Policy Matthew Jurjonas The Nature Conservancy, Michigan Chapter and the Cooperative Institute for Great Lakes Research Elphin Tom Joe World Resources Institute, New Delhi Lam T.M Huynh University of Tokyo, Japan Avery Hill Stanford University https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7476-0107 Rebecca Hernandez University of California, Davis https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8031-2949 Greeshma Hedge n/a Tom Hawxwell HafenCity University, Hamburg Sherilee Harper University of Alberta https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7298-8765 Alexandra Harden University of Connecticut Marjolijn Haasnoot Deltares https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9062-4698 Elisabeth Gilmore Clark University Leah Gichuki International Livestock Research Institute Alyssa Gatt Wilfrid Laurier University Matthias Garschagen Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9492-4463 James Ford Priestley International Centre for Climate Andrew Forbes University of Ottawa https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8991-8800 Aidan Farrell The University of the West Indies- St Augustine Campus, Trinidad & Tobago Carolyn Enquist U.S. Geological Survey, Southwest Climate Adaptation Science Center Susan Elliott University of Waterloo (Canada) Emily Duncan University of Gueph Erin Coughlan de Perez Red Cross Red Crescent Climate Centre Shaugn Coggins School of Public Health, University of Alberta https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0335-6259 Tara Chen E-DA Hospital Donovan Campbell University of West Indies Katherine E. Browne University of Michigan (USA) Kathryn Bowen National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health Robbert Biesbroek Wageningen University https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2906-1419 Indra Bhatt G.B. Pant National Institute of Himalayan Environment Rachel Bezner Kerr Cornell University, USA Stephanie L Barr University of Waterloo (Canada) Emily Baker Cornell University Stephanie E. Austin Ostbayerische Technische Hochschule (OTH) Amberg-Weiden Ingrid Arotoma-Rojas Priestley International Centre for Climate, University of Leeds https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7602-0014 Christa Anderson WWF Warda Ajaz USPCAS-E, National University of Sciences and Technology Tanvi Agrawal Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment Thelma Zulfawu Abu University of
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Tackling the Challenges of Assessing Collective Progress for an Effective Global Stocktake Executive Summary
    CLIMATE CHANGE 41 /2019 Tackling the Challenges of Assessing Collective Progress for an Effective Global Stocktake Executive Summary CLIMATE CHANGE 41/2019 Environmental Research of the Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety Project No. (FKZ) 3717181030 Report No. EB012380/ZUS,ENG Tackling the Challenges of Assessing Collective Progress for an Effective Global Stocktake Executive Summary By Louise Jeffery NewClimate Institute previously at Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research Anne Siemons, Hannah Förster Öko-Institut, Darmstadt/Berlin Lukas Hermwille Wuppertal Institut für Klima, Umwelt, Energie On behalf of the German Environment Agency Imprint Publisher: Umweltbundesamt Wörlitzer Platz 1 06844 Dessau-Roßlau Tel: +49 340-2103-0 Fax: +49 340-2103-2285 [email protected] Internet: www.umweltbundesamt.de /umweltbundesamt.de /umweltbundesamt Study performed by: Potsdam Institut für Klimafolgenforschung (PIK) e.V. Telegraphenberg A 31 14473 Potsdam Wuppertal Institut für Klima, Umwelt, Energie gGmbH Döppersberg 19 42103 Wuppertal Öko-Institut e.V. Rheinstraße 95 64295 Darmstadt NewClimate Institute Am Hof 20 – 26 50667 Köln Study completed in: November 2019 Edited by: Section V 1.1 Climate Protection Juliane Berger Publication as pdf: http://www.umweltbundesamt.de/publikationen ISSN 1862-4359 Dessau-Roßlau, November 2019 DISCLAIMER: This Executive Summary is based on the comprehensive final report of a research project (project number FKZ 3717181030) financed by the Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety and supervised by the German Environment Agency. The responsibility for the content of this publication lies with the authors. The content of this publication does not necessarily reflect the views of the German Government.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding Finance in the Global Stocktake.” Overseas Development Institute
    Designing a Robust Stocktake Discussion Series Understanding finance in the Global Stocktake Charlene Watson and Leo Roberts 1 Understanding finance in the Global Stocktake Charlene Watson and Leo Roberts December 2019 © Overseas Development Institute 2019 Cite as: Watson, C, Roberts, L. (2019) “Understanding finance in the Global Stocktake.” Overseas Development Institute. Part of the iGST Designing a Robust Stocktake Discussion Series. Download the report https://www.climateworks.org/independentglobalstocktake/ About the iGST initiative and this report series The Independent Global Stocktake (iGST) is an umbrella data and advocacy initiative that brings together climate modelers, analysts, campaigners, and advocates to support the Paris Agreement. https://www.climateworks.org/independentglobalstocktake/ The Designing a Robust Stocktake Discussion Series envisions the contours of an ideal Global Stocktake and suggests ways in which the independent community can help to achieve that vision. These papers were produced by iGST partner organizations in consultation with the broader community, but the views expressed are the authors’ own and don't necessarily reflect those of the iGST initiative or associated partner organizations. Acknowledgements The authors are grateful for support and advice from Neil Bird and Orla Martin of the Overseas Development Institute (ODI); Casey Cronin of ClimateWorks Foundation; Alex Dolginow of Dolginow Consulting; Joe Thwaites of the World Resources Institute (WRI); Padraig Oliver of the UNFCCC; Niklas Höhne of New Climate Institute (NCI); Wolfgang Obergassel of the Wuppertal Institute; and Christian Holz of the Climate Equity Reference Project (CERP). The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support of ClimateWorks that made this report possible. All opinions expressed in this paper remain the authors’ own.
    [Show full text]
  • Article 6 and the Global Stocktake
    POLICY Article 6 and the Global Stocktake Lukas Hermwille and Nicolas Kreibich Disclaimer The positions expressed in this paper are strictly those of the authors and represent neither the opinion of the Wuppertal Institute nor of the German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety. The Wuppertal Institute is carrying out the “JIKO”-project on behalf of the German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety. Internet www.carbon-mechanisms.de/en/ https://wupperinst.org/en/p/wi/p/s/pd/592/ Contact Lukas Hermwille Email: [email protected] Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy Döppersberg 19 • 42103 Wuppertal • Germany www.wupperinst.org This work is published under Creative Commons Attribution – NonCommercial –NoDerivatives 4.0 International license | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ October 2018 Cover Photo: 2017 technical expert meeting on adaptation by UN Climate Change / Flickr / CC BY-NC-SA 2.0 Article 6 and the Global Stocktake Lukas Hermwille and Nicolas Kreibich Article 6 and the Global Stocktake Contents Abstract ............................................................................................................................... II 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 3 2 The Global Stocktake and Article 6 in Context........................................................... 4 2.1 The Global Stocktake – Article
    [Show full text]
  • Equity in the Global Stocktake and Independent Global Stocktake
    Designing a Robust Stocktake Discussion Series Equity in the Global Stocktake and Independent Global Stocktake Christian Holz, Tom Athanasiou, and Sivan Kartha 1 Equity in the Global Stocktake and Independent Global Stocktake Christian Holz*, Tom Athanasiou, and Sivan Kartha December 2019 © Climate Equity Reference Project 2019 Cite as: Holz, Christian, Tom Athanasiou, and Sivan Kartha (2019) “Equity in the Global Stocktake and Independent Global Stocktake,” iGST Designing a Robust Stocktake Discussion Series. Berkeley, Boston, Ottawa: Climate Equity Reference Project. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2595493 * Corresponding Author: [email protected] Download the report https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2595493 About the iGST initiative and this report series The Independent Global Stocktake (iGST) is an umbrella data and advocacy initiative that brings together climate modelers, analysts, campaigners and advocates to support the Paris Agreement. https://www.climateworks.org/independentglobalstocktake/ The Designing a Robust Stocktake Discussion Series envisions the contours of an ideal Global Stocktake and suggests ways in which the independent community can help to achieve that vision. These papers were produced by iGST partner organizations in consultation with the broader community, but the views expressed are the authors’ own and don't necessarily reflect those of the iGST initiative or associated partner organizations. Acknowledgements The authors are grateful to Jason Anderson (ClimateWorks Foundation), Guy Cunliffe (African Climate & Development Initiative, University of Cape Town (UCT)), Kennedy Mbeva (Australian- German Energy and Climate College, University of Melbourne), Pieter Pauw (Frankfurt School of Finance and Management), Wolfgang Obergassel (Wuppertal Institut), Joe Thwaites and David Waskow (World Resources Institute), Harald Winkler (Energy Research Centre, UCT), and Vincente Yu for providing feedback on an earlier version of this paper.
    [Show full text]
  • REALIZING the AMBITION of the Paris Agreement
    REALIZING THE AMBITION of the Paris Agreement UNPRECEDENTED CATALYSTS FOR CLIMATE ACTION The We Mean Business coalition works with thousands of the world’s largest businesses to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, build climate resilience and unlock climate finance. We have formed a common platform to catalyze bold climate action and to support policies which put us on a well below 2°C trajectory by 2020. The Paris Agreement on climate We look to governments to: change is unprecedented in its scope, will define the global economy of the 21st century, and has immediate impact on businesses and investors around Scale up enabling policies through Connect non-state action to an the world. the Global Climate Action Agenda increase in ambition with every The agreement has and the Technical Examination five-year NDC cycle, starting Processes in 2018 entered into force with unprecedented speed. Over 80 Parties representing 60% of global emissions have now Fully implement NDCs through Mobilize climate finance formally joined the agreement, domestic at scale from public and including the largest emitters legislation and regulation private sources China, the US, the EU, and India. In total, 191 Parties representing 98% of global emissions have signed it and can be expected to join the agreement. Drive towards net zero emissions by Enact meaningful pricing of carbon The private sector is ready to communicating long-term low GHG be a partner in ambition with development strategies governments across the globe. At COP22 we need to move from Build climate-resilient adoption of the Paris Agreement to its speedy implementation. economies and communities We also celebrate a new amendment to the Montreal Protocol, which will phase down highly warming hydrofluorocarbons, and a global sectoral agreement to control aviation emissions at ICAO.
    [Show full text]
  • Loss and Damage in the Paris Agreement's Global Stocktake
    Climate change; Policy and planning Keywords: Least Developed Countries (LDCs), climate change negotiations, UNFCCC, Briefing Paris Agreement, loss and damage Issue date November 2018 Policy Loss and damage in the Paris pointers Agreement’s global stocktake Negotiators must ensure Loss and damage from climate change is a reality for many poor and the global stocktake (GST) systematically vulnerable countries, and will worsen as global temperatures rise. It is considers ‘loss and essential that it be considered systematically within the global stocktake, damage’ (L&D) to effectively take stock of which is to take stock of the implementation of the UNFCCC’s Paris the Paris Agreement’s implementation. Agreement. This briefing sets out the reasons for ensuring loss and damage is specifically and adequately addressed and how this can be Negotiators should push done. Giving due attention to loss and damage is a fundamental test of for the GST’s ‘sources of input’ to explicitly include countries’ commitment to achieving the aims and purpose of the Paris information on L&D experienced, as well as Agreement and will be a crucial outcome for the upcoming Conference of actions taken and support the Parties (COP24, December 2018). needed, provided and received to address L&D. Negotiators should push Under the UNFCCC’s1 Paris Agreement, the vulnerable countries, a key priority will be ensuring for L&D to be a distinct international community set an aim of limiting that the issue of ‘loss and damage’ is specifically workstream of the GST the global average temperature increase to and adequately addressed within the GST.
    [Show full text]
  • Guiding Questions for the Global Stocktake Under the Paris Agreement
    Designing a Robust Stocktake Discussion Series Guiding questions for the Global Stocktake under the Paris Agreement What we know and what we don‘t Niklas Höhne, Louise Jeffery, Anna Nilsson and Hanna Fekete Guiding questions for the Global Stocktake under the Paris Agreement What we know and what we don’t Niklas Höhne, Louise Jeffery, Anna Nilsson and Hanna Fekete November 2019 © NewClimate Institute 2019 Cite as: Höhne, N., L. Jeffery, A. Nilsson, H. Fekete (2019) “Guiding questions for the Global Stocktake under the Paris Agreement.” NewClimate Institute. Part of the iGST Designing a Robust Stocktake Discussion Series. Download the report www.newclimate.org/publications/ About the iGST initiative and this report series The Independent Global Stocktake (iGST) is an umbrella data and advocacy initiative that brings together climate modelers, analysts, campaigners and advocates to support the Paris Agreement. https://www.climateworks.org/independentglobalstocktake/ The Designing a Robust Stocktake Discussion Series envisions the contours of an ideal Global Stocktake and suggests ways in which the independent community can help to achieve that vision. These papers were produced by iGST partner organizations in consultation with the broader community, but the views expressed are the authors’ own and don't necessarily reflect those of the iGST initiative or associated partner organizations. Acknowledgements The compilation of this report was supported by discussion and inputs from the experts participating in the iGST. We would like to give special thanks to Leon Clarke and Nate Hultman (University of Maryland), Anne Olhoff (UNEP -DTU), Charlene Watson (ODI), Wolfgang Obergassel (Wuppertal Institute) and Joe Thwaites (WRI) for providing valuable feedback.
    [Show full text]
  • Business Engagement in Implementing National Climate Pledges & the Paris Agreement
    Business Engagement in Implementing National Climate Pledges & The Paris Agreement in partnership with CONTENTS Executive Summary . 4 Introduction & Scene Set . 5 Background Starting Assumptions Increasing Ambition Through Voluntary Actions by Business: A First Step The Report’s Survey of Business & Government Interviews . 11 The Portfolio of NDCs: Achieving the Long-Term Goals Business & the Full Portfolio of NDCs Information Needs in the Paris Agreement: A Public-Private Sector Intersection of Interest & Expertise . 29 5-Year Cycles, Transparency & the Global Stocktake: Where Does Business Fit? . 30 Opportunities & Challenges to Accelerate Long-Term, Global, Transformational Change Across Multiple Sectors . 34 Conclusions . 36 Annex I: Proposal for a Business Platform to Address Opportunities & Barriers to Achieve the Long-Term Goals of the Paris Agreement: From Just Transition to Transformation (JTT) . 37 Annex II: Implementing the Paris Agreement: Opportunities & Barriers to Accelerate Transformational Change: Highlights of Business Workshop on October 10 in Paris . 39 1 The Major Economies Business Forum on Energy Security and Climate Change (BizMEF) is a partnership of leading multi-sectoral business organizations from major economies, and leading international business sectoral associations. Modeled after the government-to-government Major Economies Forum, BizMEF is a platform for these groups to: • promote dialogue, exchange views and highlight areas of agreement on climate change and energy security across a broad spectrum of business interests including major developed, emerging, and developing economies; • promote dialogue on climate change, technology cooperation and investment; and • share these views with governments, international bodies, other business organizations, the press, and the public. BizMEF provides responsible business views and practical input to inform deliberations in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
    [Show full text]
  • A CEOS AFOLU Initiative for the UNFCCC Global Stocktake Process a Discussion Paper for CEOS Plenary to Explore the Development of a CEOS AFOLU Roadmap
    A CEOS AFOLU Initiative for the UNFCCC Global Stocktake Process A Discussion Paper for CEOS Plenary to explore the development of a CEOS AFOLU Roadmap Version 1-0, 12 October 2020 Issues for Plenary Discussion and Decision 1. CEOS Plenary is asked to recognise the magnitude of the opportunity for satellite Earth observations in support of the Global Stocktake (GST) process - noting it as a new and significant dimension to the nature of space agencies support of climate policy processes. 2. CEOS agencies involved in the operation and data processing for missions identified as relevant to the proposed GST1 inputs are asked to support the preparation of those inputs in 2021, in parallel to and in coordination with the equivalent efforts of the GHG Roadmap aimed at GST1. These agencies include EC, ESA, JAXA, NASA, and USGS amongst others. 3. These same key agencies are asked to decide at Plenary whether they are willing to provide representation and resources going forward to support the development of a full CEOS AFOLU (Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Uses) Roadmap in support of the GST process. Representation and resources to proceed will be paramount regardless of the institutional way forward agreed by CEOS. The effort in 2020 has been made possible through the contributions of the LSI-VC Forest and Biomass subgroup with a number of volunteer experts, many of whom are not CEOS agency personnel, and the LSI-VC GEOGLAM subgroup. We envision that increased participation of CEOS agency personnel will be needed given the nature of the task ahead. 4. The CEOS-CGMS GHG Roadmap already envisions a number of deliverables targeting support to the GST1.
    [Show full text]
  • The Paris Agreement
    THE PARIS AGREEMENT WHAT IT MEANS FOR BUSINESS A We Mean Business report, produced in partnership with BSR, with legal analysis from DLA Piper and quantitative analysis from NewClimate Institute. BSR is a global nonprofit organization that works with its network of more than 250 member companies and other partners to build a just and sustainable world. From its offices in Asia, Europe, and North America, BSR develops sustainable business strategies and solutions through consulting, research, and cross-sector collaboration. Visit www.bsr.org for more information about BSR’s 25 years of leadership in sustainability. www.bsr.org | [email protected] | +1 212 370 7707 DLA Piper is one of the world’s largest and leading global law firms, with lawyers located in more than 30 countries. On climate change, our experiences are truly global. We have worked not only to advise clients at international United Nations negotiations, but also have deep expertise and deal flow in key sectors impacted by climate change in domestic jurisdictions. We strive to be the leading global business law firm by delivering practical and innovative legal solutions to help our clients succeed. www.dlapiper.com | [email protected] | +61 7 3246 4208 NewClimate Institute is an independent research institute founded in 2014. It supports research and implementation of action against climate change around the globe. It generates and shares knowledge on international climate negotiations, tracking climate action, climate and development, climate finance, carbon market mechanisms and sustainable energy policy. It connects up-to-date research with real world decision making processes, making it possible to increase ambition in acting against climate change and contribute to finding sustainable and equitable solutions.
    [Show full text]
  • What Can the Paris Agreement's Global Stocktake Learn from The
    218 CCLR 3|2018 What Can the Paris Agreement’s Global Stocktake Learn from the Sustainable Development Goals? Jennifer Huang* In December 2018, countries will adopt the rules and guidelines that will bring the elements of the Paris Agreement to life. One key element is the global stocktake, a unique multilater- al review mechanism focusing on collective action and achievement. Parties to the Paris Agreement may want to look to the United Nations (UN) Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and its High-level Political Forum on Sustainable Development (HLPF), which offer parallels to both the Agreement’s enhanced transparency framework and the global stock- take. A review of the potential similarities and differences in their review and reporting cy- cles, their high-level events and outcomes, measuring progress, managing technical expert input, sharing knowledge, information and experience, as well as including non-state actors could provide some relevant lessons for the upcoming international climate negotiations. In some ways, the SDGs process is structurally and politically too dissimilar to offer a template but its approach to adaptation offers insight into how adaptation could be addressed in the global stocktake. Both processes also highlight the need to build the capacity of governmen- tal processes to continuously improve the reporting of key information over time. Because these processes are complementary and meant to evolve, countries could begin to look to the long-term integration of aspects of both regimes to enhance coherence and reduce re- dundancies. At the climate conference in Katowice, Poland, Parties will need to narrow the broad outlines of the global stocktake down to specifics.
    [Show full text]
  • The Paris Agreement's Novel Mechanisms
    THE PARIS AGREEMENT’S NOVEL MECHANISMS AND THEIR CAPACITY TO ADVANCE AMBITIOUS AND EQUITABLE CLIMATE ACTION An analysis of the Transparency Framework, the Global Stocktake and the Talanoa Dialogue 1 Jacopo Pasquero THE PARIS AGREEMENT’S NOVEL MECHANISMS AND THEIR CAPACITY TO ADVANCE AMBITIOUS AND EQUITABLE CLIMATE ACTION An analysis of the Transparency Framework, the Global Stocktake and the Talanoa Dialogue Written by: Jacopo Pasquero Registration No: 950516642010 Contact: [email protected] Written for: Wageningen University & Research MSc. Environmental Sciences Chair Group: Environmental Policy (ENP) Course code: ENP-80436 Supervisor: Dr. Aarti Gupta Second reader: Dr. Mattijs Smits June 2019 2 Abstract The 2015 Paris Agreement is an important milestone in the United Nations climate regime: its bottom-up approach solves old conflicts between countries over equity and ambition, by introducing novel mechanisms that are intended to collectively guide the international community towards long-term climate action. However, as these mechanisms are novel and not fully scrutinized by academia, it is unclear how they will advance equitable and ambitious climate action, if at all. This study investigates how the Paris Agreement’s Enhanced Transparency Framework, Global Stocktake and Talanoa Dialogue seek to advance equity and ambition in the United Nations climate regime and the transformative potential of novel procedural mechanisms in global governance. To that end, a discourse analysis of written submissions, reason-giving sessions, and official policy documents is conducted. Several discourses are thus identified to understand if countries reach a shared understanding on how equity and ambition can be advanced over time. The results show that (1) Transparency checks and does not advance climate action (2) the Global Stocktake moves equity and ambition from substantive to self-determined, procedural, and information-centered and (3) the Talanoa Dialogue facilitates the exchange of best practices, but does not consistently move climate action forward.
    [Show full text]