Search

The European Union (EU) has consistently held a prominent global position in climate governance. This paper compiles 152 climate neutrality policies issued by the European Commission (EU Commission) and employs a systematic analytical framework including "Vertical Policy Hierarchy - Horizontal Policy Path – Systematic Policy instruments" to conduct an in-depth analysis of the EU's climate neutrality policy system. This study produces several findings as follows: First, the EU's climate neutrality policy hierarchy is characterized by a structure comprising "Long-Term Planning – Specific Measures - Financial Support". Second, the EU's policy formulation process for climate neutrality emphasizes the integration of a multi-party engagement mechanism involving "Nongovernmental Level - Regional Level - National Level - Transnational Level - Supranational Level", while extensively employing a "framework-content" policy-making methodology. Third, the EU's climate neutrality governance is guided by the dual objectives of achieving a "Cleaner Energy Structure" and "Recover Ecological Environment" pursuing a broad-ranging and multi-tiered policy pathway towards climate neutrality. Fourth, the EU leverages a combined approach of mandatory measures and guiding policies to propel the climate neutrality governance process, aspiring to achieve breakthroughs in new energy technology innovation through climate neutrality governance, thereby solidifying its international standing. Moreover, this study provides an outlook on the future of the EU's climate neutrality policy governance, positing that the EU's emphasis on climate neutrality governance will remain undiminished, with a heightened focus on guiding policies and an emphasis on the roles of enterprises and the public in advancing the realization of climate neutrality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The IPCC's 6th assessment report (AR6) has provided a wide range of variables and scenarios that meet climate targets of varying ambition. Many variables reported in the AR6 affect human welfare through climate change and mitigation, including but not limited to economic output, the natural environment, human health, and food and energy supply. In some of these dimensions, trade-offs exist between better performance in welfare-relevant dimensions and reaching more ambitious climate targets. Here, we apply recent advances in the theoretical multidimensional measurement of welfare, like the Human Development Index, to the AR6 database. The welfare metric is based on a welfare function approach, simple to apply, and intuitive. We apply a range of specifications of the welfare metric, aiming to derive robust rankings of climate policy targets that perform best in terms of the multidimensional welfare index. Across a large range of weights on welfare-relevant variables, we find that lower temperature is associated with higher welfare in 2100 unless there is a high weight on food supply. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As an important initiative of climate action, REDD+ has been increasingly discussed in global policy arena. But delay in wider scale yet full-fledged implementation and its poor performance have raised suspects and pushed REDD+ toward in a long line of "conservation fad". In this paper, we have discussed the following ten questions to REDD+: (1) Does REDD+ address major causes of deforestation? (2) Does REDD+ contribute to global emissions reduction? (3) Does REDD+ recognize the inherent capacity of local people to manage their forests? (4) Does REDD+ respect the rights of indigenous people and local communities? (5) Does REDD+ justify the local governance and countries' sovereignty? (6) Does REDD+ ensure the transparency in program design and architecture? (7) Does REDD+ give credits to the carbon sequestering communities? (8) Does REDD+ supply sufficient reasons to justify the current carbon price? (9) Does REDD+ achieve climate goals through the voluntary carbon markets? and (10) Does REDD+ ensure sustainability of the ongoing projects? While discussing the questions, we have referred to global environmental issues of deforestation, emissions, transparency, decentralized governance, indigenous and local communities, voluntary carbon market, price effect, and other various contemporary sustainability issues. We argue that REDD+ could be a low-hanging fruit and act as a complimentary action to achieve its climate goal if it can address the issues raised under those ten questions. • We have raised and discussed ten important issues for REDD+ to be successful • REDD+ is popularly discussed yet highly debated conservation initiative • Forest centric activities would be inadequate for achieve climate goals through REDD+ • Voluntary carbon market is a challenge for successful REDD+ institutions • REDD+ should secure resource ownership and management authorship of locals [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study explores how rising economic costs of climate mitigation policies differentially shape climate policy support among the political left and right. To this end, we randomly manipulate how much consumption costs increase as a result of four different climate mitigation policies and study how different cost scenarios influence policy support among a sample of 1,597 Swedish adults. We find that more costly climate policies induce greater climate policy polarization, since right-leaning participants display both lower baseline and more cost-sensitive climate policy support. In addition, we investigate how policy costs affect participants' concerns about the climatic consequences of consumption. While inconclusive, the results indicate that right-leaning participants, in some instances, display less concern about the climatic consequences of consumption when policy costs rise. This pattern can be understood through the lens of motivated disbelief, which holds that people adjust their beliefs in order to support their preferred actions. The present study provides novel insights as to how and when material conditions influence climate policy preferences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• A CGE model elaborately depicting six CCS technologies was developed. • Impacts of four CCS incentive scenarios on decarbonization pathways were simulated. • CCS can sequester 960 ∼ 1,604 MtCO 2 annually in China by 2060 with policy incentives. • CCS incentives can reduce China's future primary energy demand by 7.7 ∼ 17.4 %. • CCS incentives can increase GDP by 5.64 ∼ 6.59 % compared to no policy scenario. Carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology, considered as a pivotal tool in mitigating climate change within the fossil energy system, particularly in China, has experienced slower development than expected. The exploration of direct incentive policies to facilitate its growth remains relatively underdeveloped. This study developed a hybrid dynamic computable general equilibrium (CGE) model to simulate the substantial impacts of CCS incentive policies on China within the context of carbon neutrality target. Two potential incentive policies, carbon emission trading system (ETS) and 45Q tax credit, were simulated, with different sectoral coverage. The results indicate that CCS technologies can reduce carbon emissions by 960 ∼ 1,604 MtCO 2 annually by 2060 through the strategic implementation of these incentive policies. The 45Q tax credit demonstrates its effectiveness in promoting early-stage research and development (R&D) and demonstration of CCS, while the ETS policy facilitates the commercial development of CCS in the later stage of development. By 2060, the implementation of CCS incentive policies could potentially result in 7.7 ∼ 17.4 % reduction in China's primary energy consumption, 71.2 ∼ 82.7 % decrease in the carbon price of ETS and 5.64 ∼ 6.59 % increase in the GDP compared with the no-policy scenario. In addition, the sectoral output in various sectors and the welfare of urban and rural households also increase. This paper provides an important reference for the realization of China's carbon neutrality goal and the model framework can be applied to other countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Observing reactions and responses to climate change worldwide, we think climate policies cannot exert their impact sufficiently. Consequently, studying the climate policy paradigms (CPPs) shaped by the dominant environmental ideas and climate objectives is essential. This paper analyses the CPPs in the Visegrad Countries (Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia) (V4). We investigated the strategic background and implementation related to climate policies by studying the CPPs' different levels. Our research comprises two components: 1. Analysis of national climate strategies and plans (n = 9) to reveal documented policy goals. 2. In-depth interviews (n = 58) to explore the implementation of policy goals and strategic principles. According to our results, the V4's climate strategy documents (CSDs) align with global climate policy efforts and follow EU standards. However, we have found contradictions between the policy goals and their implementation. Our findings show that CSDs are only partial indicators of the CPPs, and all four countries have gaps between ideas and the realization of climate actions. One of the main reasons is that V4 prioritizes national economic interest and energy security. Consequently, the climate policy paradigm takes a back seat. The other inhibiting factors are the lack of social will and the shortcomings of climate governance. [Display omitted] • The V4 has taken significant steps in climate policy over the past decade. • Policy implementation does not fully match climate policy goals. • Obstacles are economic interest, lack of social will, and institutional failures. • Poland's coal reliance drives pronounced policy gaps. • Climate strategies serve as superficial indicators of climate policy paradigms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Energy efficiency measures are a key element in the fight against climate change. However, their effectiveness is threatened by so-called rebound effects—behavioral changes that lead to increased use and thus to lower-than-expected absolute savings. The moral licensing bias might cause rebound effects on the individual level: When people implement energy efficiency measures, they may feel that they have done something good for the climate and thus license themselves to less climate-friendly behavior later on. We test this prediction with three pre-registered experiments (total n = 2315). While our manipulated efficiency does increase the feeling of having done something good for the climate, no negative effects emerge on subsequent climate-friendly behavior—contrary to the predictions derived from the moral licensing literature. Climate-friendly behavior is thus not hampered by prior energy efficiency behavior; rather, demographics (women and older people act in a more climate-friendly manner) and environmental attitude determine it. Our results imply that the literature suggesting moral licensing is probably not transferable to the field of energy efficiency, and thus moral licensing may not lead to rebound effects in this context. We discuss possible explanations, implications for climate policy making, and needs for future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Extreme event experience links with greater willingness to pay for climate policy. • Wildfires and hurricanes have the strongest correlation with WTP. • WTP increases by $71-$106 for those who have experienced extreme events. • Extreme event experience could lead to $12 billion support/year for climate policy. We explore how extreme event experience relates to climate policy support in the U.S. We add three important yet uncommon elements to this field: we verify self-reports of extreme event experience with actual weather data; we use a willingness-to-pay measure to assess behavioral intention; and we analyze which types of extreme events have stronger impacts on WTP. People who self-report extreme weather events are willing to pay approximately $112/year more for climate mitigation policy than those who do not; people for whom those self-reports match recorded data are willing to pay $106 or $71 more (controlling for climate beliefs and political ideology and depending on how unverified reporters are treated). Wildfires have the strongest influence on WTP. Though our results show that political ideology correlates more strongly with policy support than does extreme event experience, extreme event experience exhibits a robust correlation with policy support, and could result in a minimum of billions of dollars of support annually for clean-energy policy alone. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is recognized as an important tool for addressing residual emissions and achieving net-zero emission targets. While some have cautioned that a focus on CDR in policy processes may lead to delayed efforts to mitigate emissions, others have argued that such concerns are unwarranted. Nevertheless, the circumstances under which CDR could help or delay emissions mitigation in given contexts remain unclear. This paper explores the emerging discourse on CDR in Switzerland. We examined how the CDR community legitimizes CDR and limits its scope, and what the implications are for emissions mitigation. Switzerland is home to growing businesses in CDR and has pioneered the implementation of international offsetting projects under Article 6.2 of the Paris Agreement. We found that numerous promises help legitimize and attract interest in CDR. Actors use discursive strategies and rules to limit CDR and avoid disappointment in its contribution to climate mitigation. The idea that emission reduction should prevail over removal is promoted accordingly, which ironically helps legitimize the CDR idea yet dodges the question of how much removal is possible and for balancing which emissions. Superficial engagement with the issue is reinforced by the normalization of inflated promises and the sentiment that the mitigation deterrence rhetoric erodes trust in CDR. We argue that this can contribute to mitigation delays by evading the debate on what it is possible to remove and taking resources from alternative measures. We recommend a thorough discussion to examine the risks and the implementation of rules that minimize them. • Mitigation deterrence discourse leads to efforts to avoid substitution dynamics. • "Reductions first" legitimizes CDR without coordinating emission residuals. • Inflated promises of CDR may reduce resources for more realistic measures. • Attention to CDR dynamics is required to help achieve comprehensive decarbonization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is argued that the political feasibility of climate mitigation policies depends heavily on their distributional effects. This paper therefore studies the distributional effects of the European Commission's Fit-for-55 package at the household level in seven EU countries, analyzing a carbon tax on transport and heating fuels as well as variations of a lump-sum refund. Based on the resulting income distributions, different inequality measures are computed. The paper aims to extend previous methodological approaches by including inequality measures such as the Theil index and Atkinson index and comparing the results of carbon taxes on transport and heating fuels for seven EU countries in a consistent manner. I find that a household-size specific lump-sum refund not only mitigates the negative distributional effects of a carbon tax but also reduces overall inequality compared to the baseline scenario without a tax. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]