Co-benefits of addressing climate change can motivate action around the world

Personal and political action on climate change is traditionally thought to be motivated by people accepting its reality and importance. However, convincing the public that climate change is real faces powerful ideological obstacles1, 2, 3, 4, and climate change is slipping in public importance in many countries5, 6. Here we investigate a different approach, identifying whether potential co-benefits of addressing climate change7 could motivate pro-environmental behaviour around the world for both those convinced and unconvinced that climate change is real. We describe an integrated framework for assessing beliefs about co-benefits8, distinguishing social conditions (for example, economic development, reduced pollution or disease) and community character (for example, benevolence, competence). Data from all inhabited continents (24 countries; 6,196 participants) showed that two co-benefit types, Development (economic and scientific advancement) and Benevolence (a more moral and caring community), motivated public, private and financial actions to address climate change to a similar degree as believing climate change is important. Critically, relationships were similar for both convinced and unconvinced participants, showing that co-benefits can motivate action across ideological divides. These relationships were also independent of perceived climate change importance, and could not be explained by political ideology, age, or gender. Communicating co-benefits could motivate action on climate change where traditional approaches have stalled.

Co-benefits, trade-offs, barriers and policies for greenhouse gas mitigation in the agriculture, forestry and other land use (AFOLU) sector

The agriculture, forestry and other land use (AFOLU) sector is responsible for approximately 25% of anthropogenic GHG emissions mainly from deforestation and agricultural emissions from livestock, soil and nutrient management. Mitigation from the sector is thus extremely important in meeting emission reduction targets. The sector offers a variety of cost-competitive mitigation options with most analyses indicating a decline in emissions largely due to decreasing deforestation rates. Sustainability criteria are needed to guide development and implementation of AFOLU mitigation measures with particular focus on multifunctional systems that allow the delivery of multiple services from land. It is striking that almost all of the positive and negative impacts, opportunities and barriers are context specific, precluding generic statements about which AFOLU mitigation measures have the greatest promise at a global scale. This finding underlines the importance of considering each mitigation strategy on a case-by-case basis, systemic effects when implementing mitigation options on the national scale, and suggests that policies need to be flexible enough to allow such assessments. National and international agricultural and forest (climate) policies have the potential to alter the opportunity costs of specific land uses in ways that increase opportunities or barriers for attaining climate change mitigation goals. Policies governing practices in agriculture and in forest conservation and management need to account for both effective mitigation and adaptation and can help to orient practices in agriculture and in forestry towards global sharing of innovative technologies for the efficient use of land resources. Different policy instruments, especially economic incentives and regulatory approaches, are currently being applied however, for its successful implementation it is critical to understand how land-use decisions are made and how new social, political and economic forces in the future will influence this process.

Relocation and Resilience: Exploring Co-Benefits in Aberdeen, WA

Thesis (Master's)--University of Washington, 2016-06

Development of a tool for rapidly assessing the implementation difficulty and emissions benefits of innovations

Consumer goods manufacturers aiming to reduce the environmental impact associated with their products commonly pursue incremental change strategies, but more radical approaches may be required if we are to address the challenges of sustainable consumption. One strategy to realize step change reductions is to prepare a portfolio of innovations providing different levels of impact reduction in exchange for different levels of organizational resource commitment. In this research a tool is developed to support this strategy, starting with the assumption that through brainstorming or other eco-innovation approaches, a long-list of candidate innovations has been created. The tool assesses the potential greenhouse gas benefit of an innovative option against the difficulty of its implementation. A simple greenhouse gas benefit assessment method based on streamlined LCA was used to analyze impact reduction potential, and a novel measure of implementation difficulty was developed. The predictions of implementation difficulty were compared against expert opinion, and showed similar results indicating the measure can be used sensibly to predict implementation difficulty. The assessment of the environmental gain versus implementation difficulty is visualized in a matrix, showing the trade-offs of several options. The tool is deliberately simple with scalar measures of CO 2 emissions benefits and implementation difficulty so tool users must remain aware of other potential environmental burdens besides greenhouse gases (e.g. water, waste). In addition, although relative life cycle emissions benefits of an option may be low, the absolute impact of an option can be high and there may be other co-benefits, which could justify higher levels of implementation difficulty. Different types of consumer products (e.g. household, personal care, foods) have been evaluated using the tool. Initial trials of the tool within Unilever demonstrate that the tool facilitates rapid evaluation of low-carbon innovations. © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Evaluación de los co-beneficios sobre el desarrollo sostenible y la reducción de la pobreza de proyectos de mitigación del cambio climático en Brasil

El cambio climático y los diferentes aspectos del concepto de “desarrollo” están intrínsecamente interconectados. Por un lado, el desarrollo económico de nuestras sociedades ha contribuido a un aumento insostenible de las emisiones de gases de efecto invernadero, las cuales están desestabilizando el sistema climático global, generando al mismo tiempo una distribución desigual de la capacidad de las personas para hacer frente a estos cambios. Por otro lado, en la actualidad existe un amplio consenso sobre que el cambio climático impacta directamente y de manera negativa sobre el denominando desarrollo sostenible. De igual manera, cada vez existe un mayor consenso de que el cambio climático va a desafiar sustancialmente nuestra capacidad de erradicar la pobreza a medio y largo plazo. Ante esta realidad, no cabe duda de que las estrategias de adaptación son esenciales para mantener el desarrollo. Es por esto que hasta el momento, los mayores esfuerzos realizados por unir las agendas globales de la lucha contra la pobreza y del cambio climático se han dado en el entorno de la adaptación al cambio climático. Sin embargo, cada vez son más los actores que defienden, desde distintos escenarios, que existen sinergias entre la mitigación de emisiones y la mejora de las condiciones de vida de las poblaciones más vulnerables, favoreciendo así un “desarrollo sostenible” sin disminuir los recursos financieros destinados a la adaptación. Para hacer efectivo este potencial, es imprescindible identificar diseños de estrategias de mitigación que incrementen los resultados de desarrollo, contribuyendo al desarrollo sostenible al mismo tiempo que a reducir la pobreza. En este contexto se sitúa el objetivo principal de esta investigación, consistente en analizar los co-beneficios locales, para el desarrollo sostenible y la reducción la pobreza, de proyectos de mitigación del cambio climático que se implementan en Brasil. Por co-beneficios se entienden, en el lenguaje de las discusiones internacionales de cambio climático, aquellos beneficios que van más allá de la reducción de emisiones de Gases de Efecto Invernadero (GEI) intrínsecas por definición a los proyectos de mitigación. Los proyectos de mitigación más relevantes hasta el momento bajo el paraguas de la Convención Marco de las Naciones Unidas para el Cambio Climático (CMNUCC), son los denominados Mecanismos de Desarrollo Limpio (MDL) del Protocolo de Kioto. Sin embargo, existen alternativas de proyectos de mitigación (tales como los denominados “estándares adicionales” a los MDL de los Mercados Voluntarios de Carbono y las Tecnologías Sociales), que también serán tenidos en cuenta en el marco de este estudio. La elección del tema se justifica por la relevancia del mismo en un momento histórico en el que se está decidiendo el futuro del régimen climático a partir del año 2020. Aunque en el momento de redactar este documento, todavía no se ha acordado la forma que tendrán los futuros instrumentos de mitigación, sí que se sabe que los co-beneficios de estos instrumentos serán tan importantes, o incluso más, que las reducciones de GEI que generan. Esto se debe, principalmente, a las presiones realizadas en las negociaciones climáticas por parte de los países menos desarrollados, para los cuales el mayor incentivo de formar parte de dichas negociaciones se basa principalmente en estos potenciales co-beneficios. Los resultados de la tesis se estructuran alrededor de tres preguntas de investigación: ¿cómo están contribuyendo los MDL implementados en Brasil a generar co-beneficios que fomenten el desarrollo sostenible y reduzcan la pobreza?; ¿existen proyectos de mitigación en Brasil que por tener compromisos más exigentes en cuanto a su contribución al desarrollo sostenible y/o la reducción de la pobreza que los MDL estén siendo más eficientes que estos en relación a los co-beneficios que generan?; y ¿qué características de los proyectos de mitigación pueden resultar críticas para potenciar sus co-beneficios en las comunidades en las que se implementan? Para dar respuesta a estas preguntas, se ha desarrollado durante cuatro años una labor de investigación estructurada en varias fases y en la que se combinan diversas metodologías, que abarcan desde el desarrollo de un modelo de análisis de cobeneficios, hasta la aplicación del mismo tanto a nivel documental sobre 194 documentos de diseño de proyecto (denominado análisis ex-ante), como a través de 20 casos de estudio (denominado análisis ex-post). Con la realización de esta investigación, se ha confirmado que los requisitos existentes hasta el momento para registrar un proyecto como MDL bajo la CMNUCC no favorecen sustancialmente la generación de co-beneficios locales para las comunidades en las que se implementan. Adicionalmente, se han identificado prácticas y factores, que vinculadas a las actividades intrínsecas de los proyectos de mitigación, son efectivas para incrementar sus co-beneficios. Estas prácticas y factores podrán ser tenidas en cuenta tanto para mejorar los requisitos de los actuales proyectos MDL, como para apoyar la definición de los nuevos instrumentos climáticos. ABSTRACT Climate change and development are inextricably linked. On the one hand, the economic development of our societies has contributed to the unsustainable increase of Green House Gases emissions, which are destabilizing the global climate system while fostering an unequal distribution of people´s ability to cope with these changes. On the other hand, there is now a consensus that climate change directly impacts the so-called sustainable development. Likely, there is a growing agreement that climate change will substantially threaten our capacity to eradicate poverty in the medium and long term. Given this reality, there is no doubt that adaptation strategies are essentials to keep development. This is why, to date, much of the focus on poverty in the context of climate change has been on adaptation However, without diverting resources from adaptation, there may exist the potential to synergize efforts to mitigate emissions, contribute to sustainable development and reduce poverty. To fulfil this potential, it is key identifying how mitigation strategies can also support sustainable development and reduce poverty. In this context, the main purpose of this investigation is to explore the co-benefits, for sustainable development and for poverty reduction, of climate change mitigation projects being implemented in Brazil. In recent years the term co-benefits, has been used by policy makers and academics to refer the potentially large and diverse range of collateral benefits that can be associated with climate change mitigation policies in addition to the direct avoided climate impact benefits. The most relevant mitigation projects developed during the last years under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) are the so-called Clean Development Mechanisms (CDM) of the Kyoto Protocol. Thus, this research will analyse this official mechanism. However, there are alternatives to the mitigation projects (such as the "add-on standards" of the Voluntary Carbon Markets, and the Social Technologies) that will also be assessed as part of the research. The selection of this research theme is justified because its relevance in a historic moment in which proposals for a future climate regime after 2020 are being negotiated. Although at the moment of writing this document, there is not a common understanding on the shape of the new mitigation instruments, there is a great agreement about the importance of the co-benefits of such instruments, which may be even more important for the Least Developed Countries that their expected greenhouse gases emissions reductions. The results of the thesis are structured around three research questions: how are the CDM projects being implemented in Brazil generating local co-benefits that foster sustainable development and poverty reduction?; are other mitigation projects in Brazil that due to their more stringent sustainable development and/o poverty reduction criteria, any more successful at delivering co-benefits than regular CDM projects?; and what are the distinguishing characteristics of mitigation projects that are successful at delivering co-benefits? To answer these research questions, during four years it has been developed a research work structured in several phases and combining various methodologies. Those methodologies cover from the development of a co-benefits assessment model, to the application of such model both to a desktop analysis of 194 project design documents, and to 20 case studies using field data based on site visits to the project sites. With the completion of this research, it has been confirmed that current requirements to register a CDM project under the UNFCCC not substantially favour co-benefits at the local level. In addition, some practices and factors enablers of co-benefits have been identified. These characteristics may be taken into consideration to improve the current CDM and to support the definition of the new international market mechanisms for climate mitigation.

Managing the health effects of temperature in response to climate change : challenges ahead

BACKGROUND: Although many studies have shown that high temperatures are associated with an increased risk of mortality and morbidity, there has been little research on managing the process of planned adaptation to alleviate the health effects of heat events and climate change. In particular, economic evaluation of public health adaptation strategies has been largely absent from both the scientific literature and public policy discussion. OBJECTIVES: his paper aims to discuss how public health organizations should implement adaptation strategies, and how to improve the evidence base for policies to protect health from heat events and climate change. DISCUSSION: Public health adaptation strategies to cope with heat events and climate change fall into two categories: reducing the heat exposure and managing the health risks. Strategies require a range of actions, including timely public health and medical advice, improvements to housing and urban planning, early warning systems, and the assurance that health care and social systems are ready to act. Some of these actions are costly, and the implementation should be based on the cost-effectiveness analysis given scarce financial resources. Therefore, research is required not only on the temperature-related health costs, but also on the costs and benefits of adaptation options. The scientific community must ensure that the health co-benefits of climate change policies are recognized, understood and quantified. CONCLUSIONS: The integration of climate change adaptation into current public health practice is needed to ensure they increase future resilience. The economic evaluation of temperature-related health costs and public health adaptation strategies are particularly important for policy decisions.

Australia and Forest Carbon Partnerships : Indigenous Land Rights

One of the ways in which indigenous communities seek justice is through the formal recognition of their sovereign rights to land. Such recognition allows indigenous groups to maintain a physical and spiritual connection with their land and continue customary management of their land. Indigenous groups world over face significant hurdles in getting their customary rights to land recognized by legal systems. One of the main difficulties for indigenous groups in claiming customary land rights is the existence of a range of conflicting legal entitlements attaching to the land in question. In Australia, similar to New Zealand and Canada legal recognition to customary land is recognized through a grant of native title rights or through the establishment of land use agreement. In other jurisdictions such as Indonesia and Papua New Guinea a form of customary land title has been preserved and is recognized by the legal system. The implementation of REDD+ and other forms of forest carbon investment activities compounds the already complex arrangements surrounding legal recognition of customary land rights. Free, prior and informed consent of indigenous groups is essential for forest carbon investment on customary land. The attainment of such consent in practice remains challenging due to the number of conflicting interests often associated with forested land. This paper examines Australia’s experience in recongising indigenous land rights under its International Forest Carbon Initiative and under its domestic Carbon Credits (Carbon Farming Initiative) Act (Australia) 2011. Australia’s International Forest Carbon initiative has a budget of $273 million dollars. In 2008 the governments of Australia and Indonesia signed the Indonesia-Australia Forest Carbon Partnership Agreement. This paper will examine the indigenous land tenure and justice lessons learned from the implementation of the Kalimantan Forest and Climate Partnership (KFCP). The KFCP is $30 million dollar project taking place over 120,000 hectares of degraded and forested peatland in Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. The KFCP project site contains seven villages of the Dayak Ngdu indigenous people. In 2011 Australia established a domestic Forest Carbon Initiative, which seeks to provide new economic opportunities for farmers, forest growers and indigenous landholders while helping the environmental by reducing carbon pollution. This paper will explore the manner in which indigenous people are able to participate within these scheme noting the limits and opportunities in deriving co-benefits for indigenous people in Australia under this scheme.

Growing biodiverse carbon-rich forests

Regrowing forests on cleared land is a key strategy to achieve both biodiversity conservation and climate change mitigation globally. Maximizing these co-benefits, however, remains theoretically and technically challenging because of the complex relationship between carbon sequestration and biodiversity in forests, the strong influence of climate variability and landscape position on forest development, the large number of restoration strategies possible, and long time-frames needed to declare success. Through the synthesis of three decades of knowledge on forest dynamics and plant functional traits combined with decision science, we demonstrate that we cannot always maximize carbon sequestration by simply increasing the functional trait diversity of trees planted. The relationships between plant functional diversity, carbon sequestration rates above-ground and in the soil are dependent on climate and landscape positions. We show how to manage ‘identities’ and ‘complementarities’ between plant functional traits in order to achieve systematically maximal co-benefits in various climate and landscape contexts. We provide examples of optimal planting and thinning rules that satisfy this ecological strategy and guide the restoration of forests that are rich in both carbon and plant functional diversity. Our framework provides the first mechanistic approach for generating decision-making rules that can be used to manage forests for multiple objectives, and supports joined carbon credit and biodiversity conservation initiatives, such as Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation REDD+. The decision framework can also be linked to species distribution models and socio-economic models in order to find restoration solutions that maximize simultaneously biodiversity, carbon stocks and other ecosystem services across landscapes. Our study provides the foundation for developing and testing cost-effective and adaptable forest management rules to achieve biodiversity, carbon sequestration and other socio-economic co-benefits under global change.

Considering research enquiry into biophilic urbanism and office worker productivity

In cities, people spend a significant portion of their time indoors, much of which is in office buildings. The quality and nature of these spaces have the potential to be a strong determinant of people’s health and wellbeing. There is a body of evidence that suggests experiences of nature increase the rate of attention recovery, reduce stress, depression and anxiety, and increase cognitive abilities. Further, the presence of nature inside buildings (such as pot plants and internal green walls) can improve indoor air quality, potentially reducing illness and increasing cognitive function. Urban design that integrates nature into the built environment to provide these benefits, among others, is called ‘biophilic urbanism’ and is the subject of growing international interest and research. The potential for these benefits to increase worker productivity in office buildings is of particular interest, as this could significantly increase the financial performance of office building-based organisations. However, productivity is a complex concept that is difficult to define, and affected by a multitude of factors, which make it difficult to measure. This inability to quantify productivity increases from investments in nature- experiences in office buildings is currently a significant barrier to such investments. Within this context, this paper considers opportunities for research to explore the relationship between office-based nature experiences and productivity, by reviewing existing research in this field and reflecting on the authors’ own experiences. This review has a particular focus on the importance of quantifying this link in order to encourage private property owners to voluntarily integrate nature into buildings to provide city-wide ecosystem service benefits. The paper begins with a contextual overview of how biophilic urbanism can potentially increase worker productivity. Existing methods of measuring and evaluating the performance of biophilic urbanism within the context of office buildings are then explored, along with a discussion of issues with such methods that are currently limiting investment in biophilic urbanism to increase worker productivity and wellbeing. This includes a summary of a survey within a Perth office building to explore the impact of views of nature through a window. Drawing on these insights, the paper makes recommendations regarding opportunities for focusing future investigations to enhance understanding of how biophilic urbanism can contribute to increased wellbeing and productivity in office buildings. This paper builds on work conducted as part of the Sustainable Built Environment National Research Centre Project 1.5, Harnessing the Potential of Biophilic Urbanism in Australia, which considered the role of nature integrated into the built environment in responding to emerging challenges of climate change, resource shortages and population pressures, while providing a host of co- benefits to a range of stakeholders.

Considering research enquiry into biophilic urbanism and office worker productivity

In cities, people spend a significant portion of their time indoors, much of which is in office buildings. The quality and nature of these spaces have the potential to be a strong determinant of people’s health and wellbeing. There is a body of evidence that suggests experiences of nature increase the rate of attention recovery, reduce stress, depression and anxiety, and increase cognitive abilities. Further, the presence of nature inside buildings (such as pot plants and internal green walls) can improve indoor air quality, potentially reducing illness and increasing cognitive function. Urban design that integrates nature into the built environment to provide these benefits, among others, is called ‘biophilic urbanism’ and is the subject of growing international interest and research. The potential for these benefits to increase worker productivity in office buildings is of particular interest, as this could significantly increase the financial performance of office building-based organisations. However, productivity is a complex concept that is difficult to define, and affected by a multitude of factors, which make it difficult to measure. This inability to quantify productivity increases from investments in nature- experiences in office buildings is currently a significant barrier to such investments. Within this context, this paper considers opportunities for research to explore the relationship between office-based nature experiences and productivity, by reviewing existing research in this field and reflecting on the authors’ own experiences. This review has a particular focus on the importance of quantifying this link in order to encourage private property owners to voluntarily integrate nature into buildings to provide city-wide ecosystem service benefits. The paper begins with a contextual overview of how biophilic urbanism can potentially increase worker productivity. Existing methods of measuring and evaluating the performance of biophilic urbanism within the context of office buildings are then explored, along with a discussion of issues with such methods that are currently limiting investment in biophilic urbanism to increase worker productivity and wellbeing. This includes a summary of a survey within a Perth office building to explore the impact of views of nature through a window. Drawing on these insights, the paper makes recommendations regarding opportunities for focusing future investigations to enhance understanding of how biophilic urbanism can contribute to increased wellbeing and productivity in office buildings. This paper builds on work conducted as part of the Sustainable Built Environment National Research Centre Project 1.5, Harnessing the Potential of Biophilic Urbanism in Australia, which considered the role of nature integrated into the built environment in responding to emerging challenges of climate change, resource shortages and population pressures, while providing a host of co- benefits to a range of stakeholders.

Good for the environment good for health

“First do no harm”. This phrase, attributed to the 19th century surgeon, Thomas Inman, 1 reflects an equivalent phrase found in Epidemics, Book I of the Hippocratic School, “Practise two things in your dealings with disease: either help or do not harm the patient”. Pharmacists have played, and continue to play, an important role in reducing patient harm from medication misadventures. Now, they have a new role to play. The delivery of pharmaceutical care contributes to climate change (e.g. through the embedded carbon in the manufacture and distribution of medicines, disposal of waste, and energy and water use),2 which in turn has a negative impact on health. 3,4 This paradox argues a moral and ethical obligation by pharmacists, to deliver pharmaceutical care more sustainably – do no harm. Sustainability “…. is concerned, on one hand, with resources and how we can preserve them, and, on the other hand, with waste products and how we can best reduce or dispose of them.” 5(p.37) It is about preserving and nurturing Earth’s resources and systems for this generation and future generations to enjoy. Pharmacists play an important role in preventative health strategies such as smoking cessation, promotion of healthier lifestyles and vaccination/immunisation programmes and have the potential to also play a significant role in delivering pharmaceutical care more sustainably. Sustainable pharmaceutical care may be considered a virtuous cycle - what is good for the environment is also good for our health. 5 The good news for community pharmacy owners and managers is that implementing sustainability initiatives in the pharmacy can also have significant financial co-benefits.

Projecting excess emergency department visits and associated costs in Brisbane, Australia, under population growth and climate change scenarios

The direct and indirect health effects of increasingly warmer temperatures are likely to further burden the already overcrowded hospital emergency departments (EDs). Using current trends and estimates in conjunction with future population growth and climate change scenarios, we show that the increased number of hot days in the future can have a considerable impact on EDs, adding to their workload and costs. The excess number of visits in 2030 is projected to range between 98–336 and 42–127 for younger and older groups, respectively. The excess costs in 2012–13 prices are estimated to range between AU$51,000–184,000 (0–64) and AU$27,000–84,000 (65+). By 2060, these estimates will increase to 229–2300 and 145–1188 at a cost of between AU$120,000–1,200,000 and AU$96,000–786,000 for the respective age groups. Improvements in climate change mitigation and adaptation measures are likely to generate synergistic health co-benefits and reduce the impact on frontline health services.

Competing Ecosystem services: an Assessment of Carbon and timber in the Tropical forests of Central America

4 p.

Competing Ecosystem Services: an Assessment of Carbon and Timber in the Tropical Forests of Central America

29 p.