Search

Copyright of OECD Environment Working Papers is the property of Organisation for Economic Cooperation & Development and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of OECD Environment Working Papers is the property of Organisation for Economic Cooperation & Development and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Targeted financing of transition to a "net zero" global economy entails climate transition risk. We propose a measure of transition risk at the country-sector dyad level composed of five tiers of transition risk based on two factors: i) the gap between a dyad's existing emission factor (EF) - a measure of the greenhouse gas intensity of output - and the global 'frontier' sectoral EF, and ii) a dyad's recent convergence towards the frontier EF. Dyads that are either close to the frontier or converging towards the frontier carry lower transition risk. Our measure, using 45 sectors across 66 countries, accounts for both direct greenhouse gas emissions as well as those that enter into production through complex supply chains as captured by intercountry, input-output tables, and can be applied at different levels of stringency to high, middle, and low income economies. Our measure thus accounts for, and sheds light on, EF reductions through investment in lower emissions production techniques in own facilities as well as sourcing intermediate inputs with lower embodied emissions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of OECD Environment Working Papers is the property of Organisation for Economic Cooperation & Development and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) requires that biofuels such as ethanol and biodiesel be blended into the transportation fuel supply. The main potential public benefits of the RFS stem from greenhouse gas emissions reduction due to substitution from fossil fuels to biofuels. Additional effects of the program are to reduce oil imports and raise farm commodity prices. The RFS is at a crossroads. Most greenhouse gas emissions reductions under the RFS were touted to come from cellulosic biofuel, which can be produced from the inedible parts of plants, but the technology has not developed sufficiently to make it cost effective. Instead, most biofuels are produced from corn or soybeans. Moreover, the RFS now requires more biofuel than the fuel industry can easily absorb. Congress and the Environmental Protection Agency, which administers the program, face important decisions about the future path of the RFS. This paper draws three lessons from the RFS that are relevant to government policymaking in this and other areas: 1. Incorporate uncertainty when making, implementing, and analyzing policy; 2. Don't give the regulator too much discretion because it enables political forces and legal challenges to undermine policy; and 3. Don't mandate things that don't exist. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses proposed changes to the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTI) rules regarding Scope 3 emissions and carbon credits. The SBTI plans to allow companies to use carbon credits to offset emissions from their supply chains, which has been met with controversy from climate charity WWE, retailer H&M Group, and even SBTI staff. Critics argue that allowing companies to offset Scope 3 emissions with carbon credits could undermine efforts to address the root causes of climate change. The SBTI plans to publish a discussion paper on the proposed changes and welcomes feedback from stakeholders. [Extracted from the article]

Diageo, the owner of brands like Guinness and Johnnie Walker, is driving its innovation strategies through sustainability, digital technology, "neo-hedonism," and moderation and wellness trends. The company has implemented initiatives such as a paper-packaging trial for its Baileys liqueur and a global pilot with Ecospirits for reusable packaging. Diageo is also investing in non-alcoholic products and using artificial intelligence to identify consumer trends and personalize drink choices. The company aims to achieve distinctive growth through its innovation efforts while staying true to its brands and differentiating its products. [Extracted from the article]

The Science Based Targets Initiative (SBTi), a climate-certification organization, has faced backlash from its own staff over its proposal to allow companies to use environmental attribute certificates to offset emissions from their supply chains. Some employees called for the withdrawal of the offsetting plan and the resignation of SBTi CEO Luiz Amaral and board members who supported the initiative. Amaral responded to the complaints, stating that the SBTi's dedication to science-based decarbonization and standard-setting governance remains unchanged. He acknowledged the concerns but confirmed that the offsetting plan will proceed, with a draft paper to be published in July 2024. The inclusion of carbon offsets in a company's ranking raised concerns about 'greenwashing', but Amaral emphasized that companies cannot buy their way out of taking action and that voluntary standards are important for decarbonization efforts. [Extracted from the article]

Copyright of OECD Environment Working Papers is the property of Organisation for Economic Cooperation & Development and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of OECD Environment Working Papers is the property of Organisation for Economic Cooperation & Development and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of OECD Environment Working Papers is the property of Organisation for Economic Cooperation & Development and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of OECD Environment Working Papers is the property of Organisation for Economic Cooperation & Development and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of OECD Environment Working Papers is the property of Organisation for Economic Cooperation & Development and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of OECD Environment Working Papers is the property of Organisation for Economic Cooperation & Development and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of OECD Environment Working Papers is the property of Organisation for Economic Cooperation & Development and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The need for a domestic U.S. policy that seriously addresses climate change is increasingly apparent. A cap-and-trade system is the best approach in the short to medium term. Besides providing certainty about emissions levels, cap-and-trade offers an easy means of compensating for the inevitably unequal burdens imposed by climate policy; it is straightforward to harmonize with other countries' climate policies; it avoids the current political aversion in the United States to taxes; and it has a history of successful adoption in this country. The paper proposes a specific cap-and-trade system with several key features including: an upstream cap on CO2 emissions with gradual inclusion of other greenhouse gases; a gradual downward trajectory of emissions ceilings over time to minimize disruption and allow firms and households time to adapt; and mechanisms to reduce cost uncertainty. Initially, half of the program's allowances would be allocated through auctioning and half through free distribution, primarily to those entities most burdened by the policy. This should help limit potential inequities while bolstering political support. The share distributed for free would phase out over twenty-five years. The auctioned allowances would generate revenue that could be used for a variety of worthwhile public purposes. The system would provide for linkage with international emissions reduction credit arrangements, harmonization over time with effective cap-and-trade systems in other countries, and appropriate linkage with other actions taken abroad that maintains a level playing field between imports and import-competing domestic products. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of OECD Environment Working Papers is the property of Organisation for Economic Cooperation & Development and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs) could play a pivotal role in the pursuit of climate objectives. SMEs have a significant carbon footprint on aggregate, but they can also contribute to reaching net zero through their innovations and commitment to the use of environmentally friendly practices. This study develops a novel metric to identify environmental engagement, also referred to as "greening". The study harnesses the power of machine-learning and analyses the content of over one million websites of firms from 15 OECD countries encompassing about 10 billion words. Greening is identified based on firms' self-declared information about products or processes on their websites. The resulting indicator is then evaluated considering firms' characteristics. The results show that: (1) About one-third of SMEs are environmentally engaged, albeit with considerable variations across countries; (2) Greening SMEs are more productive, pay higher wages and their sales grow faster than nongreening SMEs; (3) Solar energy is the most cited action among greening SMEs, followed by recycling and energy efficiency, (4) Sectors with higher greenhouse gas emission reduction over the past decade also display higher levels of environmental engagement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the challenges facing urban authorities in mitigating green house gas emissions as of 2010. It states that cities house about 50% of the world's population who consume 67% of the world's energy, a figure expected to reach 60% with 71% consumption by 2030, resulting in an increase in carbon products. It states that government and city authorities may lack the resources to mitigate such output, and presents suggestions on profiting through carbon trading practices.

The article argues that a cap-and-trade system is the better approach to reduce carbon dioxide and greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S. It cites the advantages of the cap-and-trade system, such as that it is an easy means of compensating for the unequal burdens imposed by climate policy and it avoids the political aversion to taxes. It explains how the proposed system could generate substantial revenue for the government. It stresses the importance of establishing international credibility and leading other nations to address climate change.

Copyright of OECD Environment Working Papers is the property of Organisation for Economic Cooperation & Development and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of OECD Environment Working Papers is the property of Organisation for Economic Cooperation & Development and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

An abstract of the paper "Costs, Revenues, and Effectiveness of the Copenhagen Accord Emission Pledges for 2020," by Rob Dellink, Gregory Briner and Christa Clapp is presented.

An abstract of the paper "Voluntary Carbon Markets: How Can They Serve Climate Change Policies," by Pierre Guigon is presented.

Indeed, if COP26 is anything to go by, it would seem the UN climate conference framework may be good at bringing countries together on paper, but it is not so good at ensuring implementation. Keywords: Environment; ESG; Comment; Corporate responsibility EN Environment ESG Comment Corporate responsibility N.PAG N.PAG 1 11/18/22 20221114 NES 221114 There is a long list of unfulfilled COP26 promises. [Extracted from the article]

Forests are major carbon sinks (storehouses), and activities that alter forests can release or sequester carbon dioxide (CO2), the most common greenhouse gas (GHG). Some carbon markets have been formed under mandatory GHG reduction regimes, such as the Kyoto Protocol and various regional and state initiatives in the United States. Other markets have formed for voluntary efforts to reduce GHG emissions. Offsets, or credits for sequestering carbon or reducing emissions in unregulated sectors, are typically allowed in both mandatory and voluntary markets. Forestry activities are among the largest-volume and lowest-cost opportunities for generating offsets. Various forestry activities may be feasible for carbon offsets. Afforestation (planting trees on open sites) and reforestation (planting trees on recently cleared sites) are the activities most commonly included for offsets. Some propose that the carbon stored in long-term wood products, such as lumber and plywood, could be credited as carbon offsets, and mill wastes often substitute for fossil fuels to produce energy; however, short-term products (e.g., paper) and the biomass left in the woods after timber harvesting release carbon, making the net carbon effects uncertain. Some forest management practices also might qualify for carbon offsets; certified sustainable forest practices provide a system of assured, long-term forests, while activities to increase tree growth face many of the same concerns as long-term wood products. Finally, deforestation is a major source of GHG emissions, accounting for as much as 20% of anthropogenic emissions. Thus, avoided deforestation, especially in the tropics, potentially provides an enormous opportunity to reduce GHG emissions. However, avoided deforestation is particularly prone to leakage (see below), as well as many of the concerns about forest carbon offsets generally. Forestry projects may offer considerable market opportunities for carbon offsets, but several issues have generated concerns and controversy. One concern, especially for compliance markets, is whether the project is additional to business as usual. An activity that is common practice or industry standard, or a project that is required under current federal, state, or local laws, cannot be used as an offset. Functional carbon markets also require cost-effective practices to verify carbon sequestration. Current measurement and monitoring practices are costly and have several implementation challenges. Another concern is that, compared to other types of offsets, forestry projects present the greatest risk of leakage. Emission leakage can occur if carbon sequestered in one location (e.g., by avoided deforestation) leads to carbon release (e.g., from increased harvesting) in another location. Product leakage could occur if forest carbon sequestration encourages use of more carbon-intensive substitutes (e.g., cement or steel). Forest carbon projects are expected to generate offsets for decades. Some are concerned that the sequestration will subsequently be negated by human activity (e.g., change in land use) or a natural occurrence (e.g., forest fire or disease). Although there are legal and accounting mechanisms that can address this concern, implementing these options may present challenges, particularly for projects in developing nations. Finally, forward crediting to allow early credits for expected sequestration faces many of the same concerns about not fulfilling expectations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents an abstract on 10 papers regarding environmental initiatives by urban areas in accordance with the Kyoto Protocol's Joint Implementation (JI) and Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) as of November 2010.

A list of references for the paper "Costs, Revenues, and Effectiveness of the Copenhagen Accord Emission Pledges for 2020," by Rob Dellink, Gregory Briner and Christa Clapp is presented, including "A Multi-Gas Assessment of The Kyoto Protocol," "An Overview of the OECD ENV-Linkages Model and "Word Energy Outlook."

A list of references for the paper "Costs, Revenues, and Effectiveness of the Copenhagen Accord Emission Pledges for 2020," by Rob Dellink, Gregory Briner and Christa Clapp is presented.

Confectionery, Pet Food, ESG, News, Mars Keywords: Confectionery; ESG; Pet Food; News; Mars EN Confectionery ESG Pet Food News Mars N.PAG N.PAG 1 09/19/23 20230914 NES 230914 US confectionery and pet-food giant Mars has issued new net-zero pledges, including setting a 2030 target for the first time. [Extracted from the article]

References for the report "Buying and Cancelling Allowances as an Alternative to Offsets for the Voluntary Market: A Preliminary Review of Issues" are presented.

The enforcement of the EU's Regulation on Deforestation-free Products (EUDR) is expected to proceed as planned at the end of this year, despite calls for a delay. Concerns have been raised about the impact of the regulation on certain sectors globally, including the US government's concerns about the impact on sustainable production practices. However, it is unlikely that the EU will delay enforcement, although there is flexibility in how enforcement is achieved. Compliance with the regulation is expected to result in price increases for consumers, particularly in the food, drink, and personal care industries. The EUDR is part of the EU's broader sustainability initiatives as it aims to achieve climate neutrality by 2050. [Extracted from the article]

The EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and biodiversity loss by targeting commodities linked to deforestation. Companies trading in certain commodities such as wood and leather will need to prove that their products and value chains are deforestation-free. The regulation covers products made from cattle, cocoa, coffee, oil palm, rubber, soya, and wood if they are sold in the EU. Compliance with the EUDR is expected to increase costs for farmers and companies, and companies will be required to implement GPS tracking and ensure unprecedented levels of traceability and transparency. The apparel sector may not be directly impacted, but disruptions in the supply chain are likely. Compliance premiums for companies operating in the supply chain for oil palm products, rubber, and other targeted commodities could exceed $1.5 billion. The regulation may lead to price increases for consumers, a phenomenon known as "greenflation." However, the EUDR presents an opportunity for brands and retailers to shift towards lower-risk and lower-impact alternatives for rubber, leather, and packaging. The regulation is seen as a catalyst for meaningful change and encourages businesses to invest in transparent, traceable, and low-carbon sourcing. Compliance with the EUDR can improve a brand's competitive edge and contribute to the preservation of forests and biodiversity. [Extracted from the article]

Archroma, a global provider of specialty chemicals, has won awards in the Innovation and Social categories at the 2024 Just Style Excellence Awards. The Innovation award recognizes Archroma's groundbreaking AVICUERO® and SUPER SYSTEMS+ technologies, which address environmental issues in the leather and textile industries. AVICUERO® offers a chrome and metal-free tanning method that reduces CO2 emissions and energy consumption, while SUPER SYSTEMS+ provides end-to-end solutions for sustainable textile manufacturing. Archroma is also recognized for its community engagement initiatives, including the establishment of an Anganwadi Centre and support for local farmers, rural women, and students. [Extracted from the article]

The Science-based Targets Initiative (SBTi) is a corporate climate action organization that helps businesses set greenhouse gas emission reduction targets in line with the Paris Agreement. However, the SBTi recently faced controversy when it appeared to endorse the use of carbon offsets for emissions reduction. This led to calls for the CEO to resign and raised concerns about the credibility of the organization. Additionally, some food and drink companies have struggled to meet the SBTi's deadlines for setting science-based targets. The article highlights the challenges faced by the food and drinks sector in decarbonization efforts and emphasizes the need for companies to focus on reducing emissions now. [Extracted from the article]

The Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi), a climate-certification organization, is facing backlash from its own staff after announcing a carbon-offsetting plan. Employees are calling for the withdrawal of the statement and the resignation of the CEO and board members who supported the initiative. The controversy stems from the SBTi's decision to permit companies to use environmental attribute certificates to offset emissions from their supply chains, which some employees argue could lead to "greenwashing" and undermine efforts to actually reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The response to the initiative has been mixed, with some welcoming the use of carbon credits to address Scope 3 emissions, while others criticize offsetting projects as inefficient and lacking credibility. [Extracted from the article]

The article focuses on the modelling assessment that address the competitiveness and carbon leakage issues from carbon markets in countries. It mentions that climate change is the main global challenge in the economy. It mentions that the emission-intensive, trade exposed (EIT) sectors are encountering trade and competitiveness impacts due to high emission intensity. It mentions that the climate change mitigation policy can encourage the alternate towards low-carbon products and processes.

An executive summary of the report "Mobilising Private Investment in Sustainable Transport: The Case of Land-Based Passenger Transport Infrastructure" by Géraldine Ang and Virgine Marchal" is presented. It cites the significant contribution of transport to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions worldwide. It mentions several strategies towards sustainable transport. It also discloses the insufficiency of investment flows to meet transport infrastructure needs.

A foreword to the report "Buying and Cancelling Allowances as an Alternative to Offsets for the Voluntary Market: A Preliminary Review of Issues," prepared by Anja Kollmuss and Michael Lazarus is presented.

An abstract of the paper "Voluntary Carbon Markets: How Can They Serve Climate Change Policies," by Pierre Guigon is presented.