Search

Background: The decarbonization of the mobility sector is one of the main challenges in the context of climate mitigation. In Germany, as in many other countries, policy measures aiming to make the mobility system greener frequently fail to produce substantial results, not least due to a lack of support by large sections of the general public. Policy measures directed at reducing car traffic in particular are often met with indifference and resistance. The question thus arises: what basis do citizens use to form their (often negative) opinions about sustainable mobility policies? As a conceptual starting point for our empirical analysis, we draw on the frame concept and focus on people's frames of the politics of mobility. With "politics of mobility" we refer to everything people could consider as political with regard to mobility. We understand frames as culturally mediated patterns of interpretation that ultimately motivate and guide actions. Results: Based on interviews and focus group data gathered in the region of the city of Stuttgart (Germany), we identify two dominant frames as well as combinations of these frames by which people make sense of the activities of political actors in the field of mobility. In one frame, which we labeled "politics-as-actor", mobility politics are interpreted with reference to politics as some kind of monolithic abstract actor. In the other, which we labeled as "politics-as-staged-process", mobility politics are portrayed as an interest-driven, opaque process that only purport to being democratic. Conclusions: In terms of policy recommendations, we use our findings to derive suggestions for how to increase support for green mobility policies: transparent implementation of policy measures, pragmatic policy styles and the involvement of intermediaries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Biodiversity loss and climate change are deeply intertwined and constitute a complex and interdependent crisis. These interlinked sustainability issues need to be addressed through an integrated approach. However, governments have been slow to integrate the need to protect both climate and biodiversity into environmental governance. NGOs, as non-profit organisations promoting public good, are seen as having the potential to recognise and advocate for this much-needed holistic protection of climate and biodiversity. But to what extent and in what ways do NGOs recognise this climate-biodiversity nexus? This article addresses these questions through an analysis of 107 German climate NGOs, examining their 190 annual reports from two time periods, 2016/2017 and 2021/2022. We found that, while German climate NGOs have made significant progress in recognising the climate-biodiversity nexus, they lack recognition of the role of biodiversity in stabilising the climate and the unintended negative consequences of climate policies and measures for biodiversity, highlighting that NGOs are still far from being holistic environmental stewards. Climate NGOs need to integrate the interplay between climate and biodiversity objectives into their organisational activities and align their mandates to promote synergies and minimise trade-offs between climate and biodiversity actions. We suggest that one way forward is to increase collaboration between NGOs. NGOs could then complement each other's expertise and be better placed to jointly contribute to finding integrated solutions for climate and biodiversity protection and mainstreaming biodiversity into climate policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Germany, emissions from drained organic soils contributed approximately 53.7 Mio. t of carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2-eq) to the total national greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in 2021. In addition to restoration measures, shifting management practices, rewetting, or using peatlands for paludiculture is expected to significantly reduce GHG emissions. The effects of climate change on these mitigation measures remains to be tested. In a 2017 experimental field study on agriculturally used grassland on organic soil, we assessed the effects of rewetting and of predicted climate warming on intensive grassland and on extensively managed sedge grassland (transplanted Carex acutiformis monoliths). The testing conditions of the two grassland types included drained versus rewetted conditions (annual mean water table of − 0.13 m below soil surface), ambient versus warming conditions (annual mean air temperature increase of + 0.8 to 1.3 °C; use of open top chambers), and the combination of rewetting and warming. We measured net ecosystem exchange of CO2, methane and nitrous oxide using the closed dynamic and static chamber method. Here, we report the results on the initial year of GHG measurements after transplanting adult Carex soil monoliths, including the controlled increase in water level and temperature. We observed higher N2O emissions than anticipated in all treatments. This was especially unexpected for the rewetted intensive grasslands and the Carex treatments, but largely attributable to the onset of rewetting coinciding with freeze–thaw cycles. However, this does not affect the overall outcomes on mitigation and adaptation trends. We found that warmer conditions increased total GHG emissions of the drained intensive grassland system from 48.4 to 66.9 t CO2-eq ha−1 year−1. The shift in grassland management towards Carex paludiculture resulted in the largest GHG reduction, producing a net cooling effect with an uptake of 11.1 t CO2-eq ha−1 year−1. Surprisingly, we found that this strong sink could be maintained under the simulated warming conditions ensuing an emission reduction potential of − 80 t CO2-eq ha−1 year−1. We emphasize that the results reflect a single initial measurement year and do not imply the permanence of the observed GHG sink function over time. Our findings affirm that rewetted peatlands with adapted plant species could sustain GHG mitigation and potentially promote ecosystem resilience, even under climate warming. In a warmer world, adaptation measures for organic soils should therefore include a change in management towards paludiculture. Multi-year studies are needed to support the findings of our one-year experiment. In general, the timing of rewetting should be considered carefully in mitigation measures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Using longitudinal data from two household surveys in 2017 and 2019, we analyze attitudes toward climate change and climate policy in Germany. We find that nearly 20% of respondents state that they do not believe in climate change, and more than 30% are doubtful that climate change is mainly caused by human action. Moreover, we detect that political orientation is strongly correlated with these attitudes, as respondents inclined to Germany's right-wing populist party AfD are substantially more climate-skeptical and object to climate policies more frequently. Even though our results show that climate change skepticism increased between 2017 and 2019, coinciding with the rise of the Fridays for Future movement, AfD voters did not move further away from the average respondent during this period. Moreover, fixed-effects estimations show that the climate attitudes of voters who switch to AfD during the study period hardly change, indicating that the orientation towards the AfD does not change climate attitudes. Instead, AfD might attract people who were already climate skeptical. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores the advantages of applying the concept of social-ecological resilience (SER) and the related thinking in transdisciplinary research. The theoretical reflections are exemplified by transdisciplinary research experiences using the concept of SER as a bridging concept in the field of climate-change adaptation instead of developing a new and very context-specific conceptual bridge. The findings are based on ontological reflections concerning the complex and hybrid phenomenon of climate change and the need for transdisciplinary research as well as on reflections on the performed interdisciplinary research and the exploratory transdisciplinary research approach with practitioners from the German administration. The experiences so far have shown that it was more focused on the general ideas of social-ecological resilience thinking instead of using the concept of SER as an analytical tool. We conclude that the use of a common conceptual framework in general and of social-ecological resilience thinking in particular offers tangible advantages in transdisciplinary research dealing with climate change and adaptation to the impacts of climate change. In our case, social-ecological resilience thinking helped-after translation into practical terms-to open the field for further consideration from the very beginning as well as to open the space for common creative work; to define the problem; and to choose the relevant variables to look at. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]