Search

Knowledge about how implemented policy instruments have performed is important for designing effective and efficient policy instruments that contribute to reductions of greenhouse gas emissions. This paper carries out a meta-evaluation of ex-post evaluations of climate policy instruments in the freight transport sector. By analysing the outcomes and quality of evaluations, the aim is to identify whether estimated effects of policy instruments can be compared between evaluations and if the results are appropriate to use for evidence-based decision making. To analyse these aspects, commonly applied evaluation criteria are assessed and classified according to an assessment scale. We confirm that few ex-post evaluations are carried out and that there is a gap between evaluation theory and how ex-post policy evaluations are performed in practice, where evaluation criteria recommended in policy evaluation guidelines are found to often be neglected in evaluations. The result is a lack of systematic climate policy evaluation which hinders reliable conclusions about the effect of policy instruments. There is a need for more systematic monitoring and evaluation of implemented policy instruments and we suggest that evidence-based decision making can be improved by adjusting current policy evaluation guidelines and by introducing an evaluation obligation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The German Federal Climate Change Act includes binding annual greenhouse gas (GHG) emission targets for the economic sectors energy, industry, buildings, transport, agriculture and waste. For sectors that fail to meet their targets, climate policy measures have to be implemented immediately. However, some sectors may only have achieved their targets thanks to the COVID-19 pandemic, while others may have missed their targets because of COVID-19. For policy making, it is therefore important to disentangle the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic from the effects of policy and other drivers on emissions. In this paper, the effects of the pandemic on GHG emissions in Germany in 2020 are estimated at the national level and at the levels of the economic sectors. Counterfactual emissions are estimated here based on autoregressive econometric models, thereby distinguishing between different factors of emissions based on decomposition analysis. The findings at the national level suggest that the COVID-19 pandemic lowered GHG emissions in 2020 in Germany by about 41 Mt CO2-eq (5.15%) compared to counterfactual emissions. Accordingly, about 58% of the reduction in emissions between 2019 and 2020 in Germany may be attributed to the pandemic. The findings at the sectoral level imply that without the COVID-19 pandemic, all sectors with the exception of the transport sector, would have met their emissions target in 2020 as set in the Federal Climate Change Act. The transport sector would have missed its emission target in 2020 without COVID-19, suggesting that existing policies were not strong enough to bend the curve of emissions trends sufficiently down. In contrast, the buildings sector failed to meet its target in 2020 because of COVID-19, prompting immediate climate policy measures in this sector. The COVID-19 pandemic lowered greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in Germany in 2020 by 5.5% compared to counterfactual emissions and accounted for about 58% of total estimated reductions between 2019 and 2020. Without COVID-19, all sectors but the transport sector would have met their emissions targets. Climate policy response should take into account the effects of extraordinary events like COVID-19 suppressing GHG emissions based on counterfactual emissions because failure to implement measures early on may turn out to be costly in the medium term once the transitory emissions reductions no longer occur. Counterfactual emissions should be considered prior to crediting emissions surplus or deficit to subsequent years. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Climate change has proved to be one of the greatest threats to human survival on Earth. Its mitigation requires that the greatest Greenhouse Gases (GHG) emitters adopt low carbon development, reducing emissions substantially. Brazil is among them. Although deforestation is still the main source of Brazilian emissions, since 1990 emissions from energy systems and industrial processes have increased and their shares in total Brazilian emissions have been consistently larger. It is the objective of the article to analyse Brazilian energy-climate policy and politics from 1990 to 2014 in order to clarify Brazilian progress towards low carbon development and Brazilian positions in the international climate change regime. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]