Search

What can reasonably be expected from the UNFCCC process and the climate conference in Paris 2015? To achieve transformative change, prevailing unsustainable routines embedded in socio-economic systems have to be translated into new and sustainable ones. This article conceptualizes the UNFCCC and the associated policy processes as a catalyst for this translation by applying a structurational regime model. This model provides an analytical distinction of rules (norms and shared meaning) and resources (economic resources as well as authoritative and allocative power) and allows us to conceptualize agency on various levels, including beyond nation states. The analysis concludes that the UNFCCC's narrow focus on emission targets, which essentially is a focus on resources, has proven ineffective. In addition, the static division of industrialized and developing countries in the Convention's annexes and the consensus-based decision-making rules have impeded ambitious climate protection. The article concludes that the UNFCCC is much better equipped to provide rules for climate protection activities and should consciously expand this feature to improve its impact.

Measures to address climate change can result in human rights violations when the rights of affected populations are not taken into consideration. Climate change projects in so-called "developing" countries are often financed and/or also implemented by industrialised countries. The research project ClimAccount Human Rights Accountability of the EU and Austria for Climate Policies in Third Countries and their possible Effects on Migration focused on the accountability of the EU and its Member States with regard to negative impacts of climate change measures they are involved in on human rights in third countries - especially those associated with "migration effects". Based on three case studies - projects registered under the Kyoto Protocol's Clean Development Mechanism - the human rights dimension of climate change action was discussed, areas of human rights concerns that were discernible in all three case study projects were identified, the issue of extraterritorial human rights obligations was analysed and the subject of access to justice was scrutinized.

Article 6 of the Paris Agreement established three approaches for countries to cooperate with each other: cooperative approaches, a new mechanism to promote mitigation and sustainable development ("sustainable development mechanism"), and a framework for non-market approaches. However, while the "sustainable development mechanism" seems familiar as its principles strongly resemble the Kyoto Protocol's Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), the other two approaches have so far not been clearly defined conceptually. This JIKO Policy Paper summarizes the views by Parties and observes that were submitted at the end of September and reveals some sharp differences in opinions on how Art. 6 should work.

Limiting global warming to below 2 °C or even 1.5 °C requires a fundamental transformation of global socio-economic systems. This need for transformation has been taken up by international climate policy. This article synthesizes criteria of transformational change from transition research and climate finance agencies. On this basis, the article conducts a multi-criteria evaluation of the transformative potential of the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS), currently the world's largest market-based climate policy. From this case it can be inferred that emissions trading can "destabilize" incumbent high-emission practices, but its effectiveness in fostering innovation is limited. Furthermore, the analysis shows that details in the arrangements of the scheme such as allocation rules can have a strong detrimental impact on its outcome. If a global carbon market with a uniform price were introduced, this could lead to developing countries "buying in" with large amounts of freely allocated allowances. This, however, has been shown to thwart transformational effects and instead contribute to further carbon lock-in.

The Paris Agreement adopted in December 2015 provides the basis for future international cooperation on the field of climate change mitigation. While truly global in reach, the agreement will however result in an increasingly complex new climate regime: Instead of using a uniform formula, Parties are allowed to autonomously define their NDCs (nationally determined contributions), resulting in a large diversity of contributions. This poses significant challenges for emissions accounting and the transfer of emission units. This Policy Paper explores how these challenges can be addressed by analysing different types of NDCs and assessing their compatibility with the export and use of emission units. On that basis, the authors develop opt-in provisions for Parties willing to participate in unit transfers under the new climate regime and illustrate how potential risks to environmental integrity can be addressed.

There is general agreement that preventing dangerous climate change requires a fundamental transformation of the global economy. Regarding carbon markets, the EU, for example, has called for the new market-based mechanism (NMM) to be established under the UNFCCC to "facilitate transition towards low carbon economy and attract further international investment". This JIKO Policy Paper discusses the transformative potential of the NMM and how it should be structured to maximize transformative impact. The analysis shows that details in the arrangements of the scheme, such as allocation of allowances can significantly influence the incentive structure of the instrument and hence its potential to contribute to transformational change. The authors conclude that carbon pricing is necessary but is by itself not sufficient to redeem the various types of market failures that have led to the unsustainable global socio-economic system we are deemed to change. An NMM should therefore be tailored to complement other national policies.

At COP 17 Durban, parties decided to establish a centralised new market-based mechanism (NMM) and to consider establishing a "framework for various approaches" to govern decentralised initiatives. Parties have also discussed possible use and up-scaling of non market based approaches (NMA) in this context. This Policy Brief summarises the state-of-play regarding the submissions by parties and observers as of Jan 2015. It is an update on previous JIKO policy papers and therefore focuses on comparable aspects of the discussion.

Market mechanisms - the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), Joint Implementation (JI) and Art. 17 emission trading - have been a central feature of the Kyoto Protocol. The shape of the new climate change agreement to adopted at this year's UN climate change conference in Paris is emerging only slowly, including the role market mechanisms will play. In order to assess the potential scope of market mechanisms in the Paris agreement, this JIKO Policy Brief surveys the intended nationally determined contributions (INDCs) to the new agreement which countries have so far submitted. The paper is now available for download. The Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) intend to adopt a new comprehensive climate agreement at this year's Conference of the Parties (COP) in Paris. The shape of the new agreement is emerging only slowly, including the role market mechanisms will play. A new JIKO Policy Brief assesses the potential scope of market mechanisms in the Paris agreement by surveying the Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) so far.

Market mechanisms - the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), Joint Implementation (JI) and Art. 17 emission trading - have been a central feature of the Kyoto Protocol. The Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) intend to adopt a new comprehensive climate agreement at this year's Conference of the Parties (COP) in Paris. The shape of the new agreement is emerging only slowly, including the role market mechanisms will play. To gauge the potential scope of market mechanisms in the forthcoming Paris agreement, this paper surveys the submitted INDCs on the question to what extent they envisage the use of market mechanisms. In detail, the paper looks at five questions for each INDC: - Does the INDC make any mention of market mechanisms? - Does the Party plan to use market mechanisms to achieve its contribution to the Paris agreement? - If a Party intends to use market mechanisms, does the INDC specify which mechanisms or types of units the country intends to use? - Does the Party quantify the extent to which it intends to use market mechanisms? Under the Kyoto Protocol, use of mechanisms has been supposed to be supplemental to domestic action, though this principle has never been quantified. - Does the Party specify how the use of mechanisms will ensure environmental integrity and avoid double counting?

The 2010 UN climate conference in Cancún emphasized that "Parties should, in all climate change related actions, fully respect human rights". However, so far there is no further guidance. This article discusses the relevant legal human rights norms and two case studies from the Kyoto Protocol's Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). The first case (Bajo Aguán, Honduras) shows that the current absence of any international safeguards can lead to registration of highly problematic projects. The second case (Olkaria, Kenya) suggests that safeguards, introduced here as a side effect of World Bank involvement, can have a positive impact, but that it is necessary to have them based on human rights. It therefore seems recommendable that the UN climate regime develop mandatory human rights safeguards. In addition or alternatively, individual buyer countries or groups of countries, such as the European Union, could introduce their own additional requirements for CDM projects.

This report is a synthesis of the research and re-evaluates the options previously considered in this project (Vieweg et al (2014)) in the light of the negotiation process up to today. The mitigation-related design elements considered are: Participation and differentiation of countries; Types of commitments, including also the compulsory character of the commitments and time aspects; Guidance on ambition of the commitments to assure adequacy of global and individual countries' efforts; Transparency of commitments.

Integrated assessment models (IAMs) are commonly used by decision makers in order to derive climate policies. IAMs are currently based on climate‐economics interactions, whereas the role of social system has been highlighted to be of prime importance on the implementation of climate policies. Beyond existing IAMs, we argue that it is therefore urgent to increase efforts in the integration of social processes within IAMs. For achieving such a challenge, we present some promising avenues of research based on the social branches of economics. We finally present the potential implications yielded by such social IAMs.