Análisis de la posición de Estados Unidos y China como bloque frente a la Negociación sobre políticas ambientales en el marco del Protocolo de Kioto

Estados Unidos y China son dos países que participan en el escenario internacional como polos opuestos en los temas más importantes de la agenda internacional. En la participación de las negociaciones del Protocolo de Kioto entorpecen el destino de este acuerdo. Con diferentes posturas y sin ponerse de acuerdo, son el bloque frente a estas negociaciones que pretenden mejorar las condiciones ambientales en todo el mundo.

La alianza de estados insulares pequeños y la securitización del cambio climático en la convención marco de Naciones Unidas sobre cambio climático (1992-2012)

La presente monografía busca explicar el proceso de securitización realizado por la AOSIS del cambio climático en las COP de la CMNUCC. Esta investigación defiende que la AOSIS sí ha hecho dicho proceso a través de estrategias como el liderazgo moral y los nexos con actores no-estatales; pero dicho proceso no ha sido exitoso, dado el predominio del discurso del desarrollo sostenible en las negociaciones, el debilitamiento de la AOSIS como actor securitizador y el poco apoyo formal de las potencias emergentes y el bloque UMBRELLA. Para sustentar lo anterior, se realizará una revisión de informes científicos que demuestran que el cambio climático es una amenaza a la seguridad, y un estudio desde de la teoría de securitización de Thierry Balzacq, de los discursos dados por los estados AOSIS, de las COP y de las posiciones de algunos bloques de negociación sobre el cambio climático.

La cooperación internacional para el desarrollo como herramienta de política exterior japonesa en África Subsahariana

El presente caso de estudio tiene como objetivo explicar el rol de la cooperación internacional para el desarrollo en Tanzania, Mozambique, Nigeria para la consolidación del liderazgo político internacional de Japón. El interés de realizar esta investigación es la ampliación del conocimiento sobre el uso del poder blando, para alcanzar los objetivos de política exterior japonesa. Por eso, se llevara a cabo una revisión bibliográfica para el análisis de documentos oficiales y artículos académicos para la consolidación de información. A partir de ello, se pretende demostrar que la cooperación al desarrollo es una herramienta de política exterior japonesa para consolidarse como líder, en la medida en que el uso de herramientas propias de la cooperación y el presupuesto destinada a la ejecución de éstas tienen incidencia en los votos de estos Estados africanos para las iniciativas japonesas en las Naciones Unidas.

The Future of the Clean Development Mechanism. Note on the report “A Call to Action” of the High-Level Panel on CDM Policy Dialogue. CEPS Special Report No. 71, 20 November 2012

The clean development mechanism (CDM) has been through a long and complex growing process since it was approved as part of the Kyoto Protocol. It was designed within the framework of the UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol, and reflected the political and economic realities of that time. To ensure its continued effectiveness in contributing to future global climate action and to reflect on how best to position the CDM to respond to future challenges, a high-level panel (HLP) was formed at the Durban climate change conference in 2011. Following extensive consultations, the panel published its report in September 2012. Through this Special Report, the CEPS Carbon Market Forum offers its reflections on findings and recommendations of the HLP, as well as, by extension, its own views on the future of the CDM. In the context of the latter, it explores the following questions: Is there a need for an instrument such as the CDM in the future? What ‘demand’ can it fill? In the roles identified under the first question, what can be done to adapt it and also continue to increase its efficacy?

Predicted soil organic carbon stocks and changes in Kenya between 1990 and 2030

Under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), Non-Annex 1 countries such as Kenya are obliged to report green house gas (GHG) emissions from all sources where possible, including those from soils as a result of changes in land use or land management. At present, the convention encourages countries to estimate emissions using the most advanced methods possible, given the country circumstances and resources. Estimates of soil organic carbon (SOC) stocks and changes were made for Kenya using the Global Environment Facility Soil Organic Carbon (GEFSOC) Modelling System. The tool conducts analysis using three methods: (1) the Century general ecosystem model; (2) the RothC soil C decomposition model; and (3) the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) method for assessing soil C at regional scales. The required datasets included: land use history, monthly mean precipitation, monthly mean minimum and maximum temperatures for all the agro-climatic zones of Kenya and historical vegetation cover. Soil C stocks of 1.4-2.0 Pg (0-20 cm), compared well with a Soil and Terrain (SOTER) based approach that estimated similar to .8-2.0 Pg (0-30 cm). In 1990 48% of the country had SOC stocks of < 18 t C ha(-1) and 20% of the country had SOC stocks of 18-30 t C ha(-1), whereas in 2000 56% of the country had SOC stocks of < 18 t C ha(-1) and 31% of the country had SOC stocks of 18-30 t C ha(-1). Conversion of natural vegetation to annual crops led to the greatest soil C losses. Simulations suggest that soil C losses remain substantial throughout the modelling period of 1990-2030. All three methods involved in the GEFSOC System estimated that there would be a net loss of soil C between 2000 and 2030 in Kenya. The decline was more marked with RothC than with Century or the IPCC method. In non-hydric soils the SOC change rates were more pronounced in high sandy soils compared to high clay soils in most land use systems. (C) 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

A unifying framework for metrics for aggregating the climate effect of different emissions

Multi-gas approaches to climate change policies require a metric establishing ‘equivalences’ among emissions of various species. Climate scientists and economists have proposed four kinds of such metrics and debated their relative merits. We present a unifying framework that clarifies the relationships among them. We show, as have previous authors, that the global warming potential (GWP), used in international law to compare emissions of greenhouse gases, is a special case of the global damage potential (GDP), assuming (1) a finite time horizon, (2) a zero discount rate, (3) constant atmospheric concentrations, and (4) impacts that are proportional to radiative forcing. Both the GWP and GDP follow naturally from a cost–benefit framing of the climate change issue. We show that the global temperature change potential (GTP) is a special case of the global cost potential (GCP), assuming a (slight) fall in the global temperature after the target is reached. We show how the four metrics should be generalized if there are intertemporal spillovers in abatement costs, distinguishing between private (e.g., capital stock turnover) and public (e.g., induced technological change) spillovers. Both the GTP and GCP follow naturally from a cost-effectiveness framing of the climate change issue. We also argue that if (1) damages are zero below a threshold and (2) infinitely large above a threshold, then cost-effectiveness analysis and cost–benefit analysis lead to identical results. Therefore, the GCP is a special case of the GDP. The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change uses the GWP, a simplified cost–benefit concept. The UNFCCC is framed around the ultimate goal of stabilizing greenhouse gas concentrations. Once a stabilization target has been agreed under the convention, implementation is clearly a cost-effectiveness problem. It would therefore be more consistent to use the GCP or its simplification, the GTP.

Progress report on longitudinal and cross-sectional study of carbon disclosure strategies: evidence from UK listed companies

Global warming has attracted attention from all over the world and led to the concern about carbon emission. Kyoto Protocol, as the first major international regulatory emission trading scheme, was introduced in 1997 and outlined the strategies for reducing carbon emission (Ratnatunga et al., 2011). As the increased interest in carbon reduction the Protocol came into force in 2005, currently there are already 191 nations ratifying the Protocol(UNFCCC, 2012). Under the cap-and-trade schemes, each company has its carbon emission target. When company’s carbon emission exceeds the target the company will either face fines or buy emission allowance from other companies. Thus unlike most of the other social and environmental issues carbon emission could trigger cost for companies in introducing low-emission equipment and systems and also emission allowance cost when they emit more than their targets. Despite the importance of carbon emission to companies, carbon emission reporting is still operating under unregulated environment and companies are only required to disclose when it is material either in value or in substances (Miller, 2005, Deegan and Rankin, 1997). Even though there is still an increase in the volume of carbon emission disclosures in company’s financial reports and stand-alone social and environmental reports to show their concern of the environment and also their social responsibility (Peters and Romi, 2009), the motivations behind corporate carbon emission disclosures and whether carbon disclosures have impact on corporate environmental reputation and financial performance have not yet to explore. The problems with carbon emission lie on both the financial side and non-financial side of corporate governance. On one hand corporate needs to spend money in reducing carbon emission or paying penalties when they emit more than allowed. On the other hand as the public are more interested in environmental issues than before carbon emission could also impact on the image of corporate regarding to its environmental performance. The importance of carbon emission issue are beginning to be recognized by companies from different industries as one of the critical issues in supply chain management (Lee, 2011) and 80% of companies analysed are facing carbon risks resulting from emissions in the companies’ supply chain as shown in a study conducted by the Investor Responsibility Research Centre Institute for Corporate Responsibility (IRRCI) and over 80% of the companies analysed found that the majority of greenhouse gas (GHG) emission are from electricity and other direct suppliers (Trucost, 2009). The review of extant literature shows the increased importance of carbon emission issues and the gap in the study of carbon reporting and disclosures and also the study which links corporate environmental reputation and corporate financial performance with carbon reporting (Lohmann, 2009a, Ratnatunga and Balachandran, 2009, Bebbington and Larrinaga-Gonzalez, 2008). This study would focus on investigating the current status of UK carbon emission disclosures, the determinant factors of corporate carbon disclosure, and the relationship between carbon emission disclosures and corporate environmental reputation and financial performance of UK listed companies from 2004-2012 and explore the explanatory power of classical disclosure theories.

Characterising loss and damage from climate change

Policy-makers are creating mechanisms to help developing countries cope with loss and damage from climate change, but the negotiations are largely neglecting scientific questions about what the impacts of climate change actually are. Mitigation efforts have failed to prevent the continued increase of anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Adaptation is now unlikely to be sufficient to prevent negative impacts from current and future climate change1. In this context, vulnerable nations argue that existing frameworks to promote mitigation and adaptation are inadequate, and have called for a third international mechanism to deal with residual climate change impacts, or “loss and damage”2. In 2013, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) responded to these calls and established the Warsaw International Mechanism (WIM) to address loss and damage from the impacts of climate change in developing countries3. An interim Executive Committee of party representatives has been set up, and is currently drafting a two-year workplan comprising meetings, reports, and expert groups; and aiming to enhance knowledge and understanding of loss and damage, strengthen dialogue among stakeholders, and promote enhanced action and support. Issues identified as priorities for the WIM thus far include: how to deal with non-economic losses, such as loss of life, livelihood, and cultural heritage; and linkages between loss and damage and patterns of migration and displacement2. In all this, one fundamental issue still demands our attention: which losses and damages are relevant to the WIM? What counts as loss and damage from climate change?

Attribution of extreme weather events in Africa: A preliminary exploration of the science and policy implications

At the most recent session of the Conference of the Parties (COP19) in Warsaw (November 2013) the Warsaw international mechanism for loss and damage associated with climate change impacts was established under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The mechanism aims at promoting the implementation of approaches to address loss and damage associated with the adverse effects of climate change. Specifically, it aims to enhance understanding of risk management approaches to address loss and damage. Understanding risks associated with impacts due to highly predictable (slow onset) events like sea-level rise is relatively straightforward whereas assessing the effects of climate change on extreme weather events and their impacts is much more difficult. However, extreme weather events are a significant cause of loss of life and livelihoods, particularly in vulnerable countries and communities in Africa. The emerging science of probabilistic event attribution is relevant as it provides scientific evidence on the contribution of anthropogenic climate change to changes in risk of extreme events. It thus provides the opportunity to explore scientifically-backed assessments of the human influence on such events. However, different ways of framing attribution questions can lead to very different assessments of change in risk. Here we explain the methods of, and implications of different approaches to attributing extreme weather events with a focus on Africa. Crucially, it demonstrates that defining the most appropriate attribution question to ask is not a science decision but needs to be made in dialogue with those stakeholders who will use the answers.

Implications of event attribution for loss and damage policy

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) has established the Warsaw International Mechanism (WIM) to deal with loss and damage associated with climate change impacts, including extreme events, in developing countries. It is not yet known whether events will need to be attributed to anthropogenic climate change to be considered under the WIM. Attribution is possible for some extreme events- a climate model assessment can estimate how greenhouse gas emissions have affected the likelihood of their occurrence. Dialogue between scientists and stakeholders is required to establish whether, and how, this science could play a role in the WIM.

What does global mean temperature tell us about local climate?

The subject of climate feedbacks focuses attention on global mean surface air temperature (GMST) as the key metric of climate change. But what does knowledge of past and future GMST tell us about the climate of specific regions? In the context of the ongoing UNFCCC process, this is an important question for policy-makers as well as for scientists. The answer depends on many factors, including the mechanisms causing changes, the timescale of the changes, and the variables and regions of interest. This paper provides a review and analysis of the relationship between changes in GMST and changes in local climate, first in observational records and then in a range of climate model simulations, which are used to interpret the observations. The focus is on decadal timescales, which are of particular interest in relation to recent and near-future anthropogenic climate change. It is shown that GMST primarily provides information about forced responses, but that understanding and quantifying internal variability is essential to projecting climate and climate impacts on regional-to-local scales. The relationship between local forced responses and GMST is often linear but may be nonlinear, and can be greatly complicated by competition between different forcing factors. Climate projections are limited not only by uncertainties in the signal of climate change but also by uncertainties in the characteristics of real-world internal variability. Finally, it is shown that the relationship between GMST and local climate provides a simple approach to climate change detection, and a useful guide to attribution studies.

Stakeholder perceptions of event attribution in the loss and damage debate

In 2013 the Warsaw International Mechanism (WIM) for loss and damage (L&D) associated with climate change impacts was established under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). For scientists, L&D raises ques- tions around the extent that such impacts can be attributed to anthropogenic climate change, which may generate complex results and be controversial in the policy arena. This is particularly true in the case of probabilistic event attribution (PEA) science, a new and rapidly evolving field that assesses whether changes in the probabilities of extreme events are attributable to GHG emissions. If the potential applications of PEA are to be considered responsibly, dialogue between scientists and policy makers is fundamental. Two key questions are considered here through a literature review and key stakeholder interviews with representatives from the science and policy sectors underpinning L&D. These provided the opportunity for in-depth insights into stakeholders’ views on firstly, how much is known and understood about PEA by those associated with the L&D debate? Secondly, how might PEA inform L&D and wider climate policy? Results show debate within the climate science community, and limited understanding among other stakeholders, around the sense in which extreme events can be attributed to climate change. However, stake- holders do identify and discuss potential uses for PEA in the WIM and wider policy, but it remains difficult to explore precise applications given the ambiguity surrounding L&D. This implies a need for stakeholders to develop greater understandings of alternative conceptions of L&D and the role of science, and also identify how PEA can best be used to support policy, and address associated challenges.

New use of global warming potentials to compare cumulative and short-lived climate pollutants

Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) have requested guidance on common greenhouse gas metrics in accounting for Nationally determined contributions (NDCs) to emission reductions1. Metric choice can affect the relative emphasis placed on reductions of ‘cumulative climate pollutants’ such as carbon dioxide versus ‘short-lived climate pollutants’ (SLCPs), including methane and black carbon2, 3, 4, 5, 6. Here we show that the widely used 100-year global warming potential (GWP100) effectively measures the relative impact of both cumulative pollutants and SLCPs on realized warming 20–40 years after the time of emission. If the overall goal of climate policy is to limit peak warming, GWP100 therefore overstates the importance of current SLCP emissions unless stringent and immediate reductions of all climate pollutants result in temperatures nearing their peak soon after mid-century7, 8, 9, 10, which may be necessary to limit warming to “well below 2 °C” (ref. 1). The GWP100 can be used to approximately equate a one-off pulse emission of a cumulative pollutant and an indefinitely sustained change in the rate of emission of an SLCP11, 12, 13. The climate implications of traditional CO2-equivalent targets are ambiguous unless contributions from cumulative pollutants and SLCPs are specified separately.

O processo de comercialização de créditos de carbono em empresas instaladas no Brasil

Tese apresentada ao Programa de Pós-graduação em Administração - Doutorado da Universidade Municipal de São Caetano do Sul.

Climate Change and Development in Latin America and the Caribbean. Overview 2009

Includes bibliography