Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
Filter
  • Clapp, Christa  (5)
  • Paris : OECD Publishing  (5)
  • Cambridge [u.a.] : Cambridge Univ. Press
  • Energy  (5)
Datasource
Material
Language
Years
Publisher
  • Paris : OECD Publishing  (5)
  • Cambridge [u.a.] : Cambridge Univ. Press
Keywords
  • 1
    Language: English
    Pages: 1 Online-Ressource (52 p.) , 21 x 29.7cm.
    Series Statement: OECD/IEA Climate Change Expert Group Papers no.2014/07
    Keywords: Energy ; Environment
    Abstract: Shifting public and private investment from “brown” to “green” is an essential part of climate change. The post-2020 climate agreement to be agreed at COP 21 in December 2015 has the potential to play a significant role in signalling the importance of such a shift. This paper explores how the 2015 agreement could spur further mobilisation of climate finance by examining the current state of play regarding existing financing environments and mechanisms. These include examining the existing international institutional arrangements under the UNFCCC to see how balanced financing, co-ordination, streamlining and complementarity between institutions could be achieved. The paper also highlights the key role that in-country enabling environments can play in further mobilising public and private climate finance, and discusses how the 2015 agreement could enhance both “pull” and “push” factors for mobilisation. In addition, the paper also discusses how the agreement could facilitate the broad use of a spectrum of financial instruments and the further development of an enhanced system for measurement, reporting and verification of climate finance.
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    Language: English
    Pages: 1 Online-Ressource (44 p.) , 21 x 29.7cm.
    Series Statement: OECD/IEA Climate Change Expert Group Papers no.2012/01
    Keywords: Energy ; Environment
    Abstract: Developed countries have committed under the international negotiations to jointly mobilising USD 100 billion per year by 2020 for climate change mitigation and adaptation in developing countries. Yet consistent and comprehensive data to track this commitment are currently lacking. Such data will also help governments and the private sector understand how much and what type of climate finance is flowing today, so as to be able to evaluate progress and effectiveness of international climate finance flows. Estimates based on available data are highly uncertain and incomplete, highlighting several challenges in establishing a robust tracking system. A more political question is what should be the internationally agreed definition of “climate finance” or, absent agreement on that, what types of flows or activities might count towards the USD 100 billion? On the more technical side, challenges include clearly defining flows and sources of international climate finance, determining the cause and effect of flows, and establishing the boundaries of finance flowing towards climate change action. This paper considers what data are currently available to track climate finance, and demonstrates the complex nature of financial flows through examples across international and domestic as well as public and private flows. The examples highlight questions on how to count and track climate finance.
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 3
    Language: English
    Pages: 1 Online-Ressource (25 p.) , 21 x 29.7cm.
    Series Statement: OECD/IEA Climate Change Expert Group Papers no.2012/04
    Keywords: Energy ; Environment
    Abstract: Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions baselines are reference emissions levels. This paper focuses on projected forward-looking baselines that can be used both to inform national climate policy and to set goals that are defined relative to a business-as-usual (BaU) scenario. As some developing countries have defined national mitigation goals for 2020 in this way, the underlying assumptions and methodologies used in setting these emissions baselines are relevant for assessing the magnitude of both the country's expected total emissions reductions and the global aggregate emissions mitigation effort. Currently, there is limited international guidance available on setting national GHG baselines. The resulting variance and lack of transparency makes it difficult to understand emissions pledges defined as relative to BaU, and difficult to compare emissions scenarios across countries. Moving towards international guidance on setting baselines could improve transparency, clarity and comparability, while still allowing countries to maintain diversity in approaches. This paper discusses good practice and presents options for how guidance might be developed for key elements of baseline setting. The options are presented as “tiers” that move from less detailed to more detailed guidance. The first tier describes guidance that would leave maximum flexibility for individual countries, whilst encouraging transparency. The second tier offers more detailed guidance for countries with greater domestic resources and capabilities. Countries could adhere to the tiers according to their capabilities, although they would be encouraged to follow the more detailed approach. The proposed tiers represent different levels of detail, rather than accuracy or data quality. More detailed guidance does not necessarily lead to “better” baselines, though it may help to improve understanding of different baselines.
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 4
    Language: English
    Pages: 1 Online-Ressource (59 p.) , 21 x 29.7cm.
    Series Statement: OECD/IEA Climate Change Expert Group Papers no.2010/02
    Keywords: Energy ; Environment
    Abstract: The term low-emission development strategies (LEDS) first emerged under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in 2008 and its possible role in a future climate framework continues to be debated. Though no formally agreed definition exists, LEDS are generally used to describe forward-looking national economic development plans or strategies that encompass low-emission and/or climate-resilient economic growth. LEDS can serve multiple purposes but are primarily intended to help advance national climate change and development policy in a more co-ordinated, coherent and strategic manner. A LEDS can provide value-added to the myriad of existing climate change and development related strategies and reports that already exist by providing integrated economic development and climate change planning. This paper outlines how the concept of LEDS has evolved in the climate policy discourse and explores how it could usefully add to the large number of existing strategies, action plans, and reporting documents that are already available. The paper outlines gaps that LEDS could fill, the elements it could contain, and how LEDS can be prepared to ensure that they are effective and efficient in delivering their intended goals. To derive early lessons and insights on experiences, challenges, and approaches adopted in the preparation of national climate change strategies and LEDS, this paper examines seven countries in detail: Guyana, Indonesia, Israel, Mexico, Nigeria, Thailand and the UK. Each country will face its own specific challenges in preparing a LEDS. Common challenges are likely to include: advancing agreement across government on priority policies; obtaining and analysing reliable data on mitigation costs and climate change impacts; identifying and addressing barriers to implementation; and limited financial and human resources. Despite these challenges, the process of preparing a LEDS can facilitate working towards agreement across government on economic development and climate change priorities, and can help attract political support and funding, both domestically and from the international community.
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 5
    Language: English
    Pages: 1 Online-Ressource (85 p.) , 21 x 29.7cm.
    Series Statement: OECD/IEA Climate Change Expert Group Papers no.2009/07
    Keywords: Energy ; Environment
    Abstract: Determining comparability of effort between mitigation actions and targets proposed by different countries is an ongoing issue for international climate negotiations. A number of indicators have been proposed to reflect comparability of effort and differences in national circumstances; key amongst these are greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (per capita), GDP per capita, as well as GHG mitigation potential. This paper focuses on mitigation potential to provide a comparative assessment between six OECD member economies: Australia, Canada, the EU, Japan, Mexico and the US. GHG mitigation potential is defined to be the level of GHG emission reductions that could be realised, relative to the projected emission baseline in a given year, for a given carbon price. Data for the selected countries were obtained across the time horizon of 2005-2050 from a total of 19 models, including models that are used to inform climate policy-makers in each of these economies. The paper examines the implications of model structure, and assesses how baseline scenarios vary between the models, before analysing the GHG mitigation potential estimates. GHG mitigation potential is compared for carbon prices of USD 20, 50 and 100/tCO2e. For an assumed carbon price of USD 50/tCO2e, mitigation potential in Japan is estimated to be relatively lower than for the other five economies, ranging from 5-20% emission reduction from baseline in 2020. Although noticeably fewer models report data for Mexico at this price level, the models show deeper potential reductions in the range of 25-37% at the same carbon price. Mitigation potential estimates for Australia, Canada and the US show a wider range of 14-39% reduction relative to 2020 baselines. The EU shows a relatively tighter range of 16-29% emission reductions to 2020. The results of this study show greater emission reduction potentials in the year 2050 than in the year 2020 across the six economies examined, reflecting structural and technical changes that occur over time, including the availability of carbon capture and storage from 2030. In general, the paper finds closer agreement across the models for mitigation potential in 2020 than for later years, reflecting greater uncertainty as projections extend into the future.
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...