Refine
Year of Publication
- 2016 (14) (remove)
Document Type
- Working Paper (14) (remove)
Division
- Energie-, Verkehrs- und Klimapolitik (14) (remove)
Im Rahmen des Forschungsprojekts "Energiesuffizienz - Strategien und Instrumente für eine technische, systemische und kulturelle Transformation zur nachhaltigen Begrenzung des Energiebedarfs im Konsumfeld Bauen/Wohnen" wurden vielfältige denkbare Suffizienzentscheidungen und -handlungen beobachtet, analysiert, beschrieben und systematisiert. Doch welche dieser Entscheidungen und Handlungen werden bereits heute breit praktiziert, welche werden möglicherweise zukünftig akzeptiert und welche Rahmenbedingungen müssen sich dazu ändern? Eine zentrale Forschungsfrage des Projektes war es zu untersuchen, welche Akzeptanz und Akzeptabilität für bestimmte Suffizienzentscheidungen und –handlungen in der deutschen Bevölkerung besteht. Wie offen sind Menschen für das Teilen von Waschmaschinen oder für einen Umzug in eine kleinere Wohnung, wenn die eigene Wohnung durch Veränderungen der Personenzahl des Haushalts zu groß geworden ist? Wie schätzen Menschen, die eine sehr große Wohnfläche haben, diese selbst ein?
Suffizienzentscheidungen und -handlungen müssen in der Regel von der haushaltsführenden Person initiiert und getragen werden und können direkt oder indirekt zu einem höheren Arbeitsaufwand führen. Deshalb sind insbesondere die Akzeptabilität der Optionen für die Haushaltsvorstände sowie deren Akzeptanz und die Einstellung dieser Personengruppe zu Suffizienzentscheidungen und -handlungen von besonderer Relevanz. Um die Beantwortung der o. g. Forschungsfrage quantitativ zu untermauern, wurde deshalb eine Breitenbefragung konzipiert und durchgeführt, in der 601 haushaltsführende Personen als zentrale Akteure suffizienzrelevanter Entscheidungen im Haushalt interviewt wurden.
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.
Carbon markets in a <2 °C world : will there be room for international carbon trading in 2050?
(2016)
This JIKO Policy Paper analyses a series of very ambitious mitigation scenarios and complements this analysis with a review of several sectoral technology roadmaps. The results are quite clear: there is no reason to believe that international carbon trading will become obsolete any time soon. Whether or not international carbon trading is to play a role in international climate protection efforts is in the end not a physical or economic question, but a political one.
This Policy Brief outlines the "identity crisis" in which voluntary carbon standards find themselves after the adoption of the Paris Agreement. It describes how the new international legal framework threatens to undermine the legitimation and credibility of voluntary carbon standards and discusses first ideas how the arising challenges could be dealt with.
Offsetting for international aviation : the state of play of market-based measures under ICAO
(2016)
This JIKO Policy Brief summarizes the state of play of the negotiations on a global market-based mechanism (global MBM) under ICAO. It specifies the respective responsibilities and different approaches of ICAO and the UNFCCC. It traces the historic activities in regard of climate protection under ICAO and provides an overview of the current negotiation process that is to culminate at the upcoming ICAO General Assembly in autumn 2016. Furthermore, the Policy Brief reflects on the CDM experience and derives recommendations.
This paper analyses the risks to environmental integrity associated to the transfers of mitigation outcomes in the context of Art. 6 of the Paris Agreement and provides an overview on approaches and tools that could be used for addressing them. The analysis shows that some of the environmental integrity risks can be dealt with at the technical level. This relates, inter alia, to the risks of mitigation outcomes being unreal or non-permanent as well as to carbon leakage and rebound effects. Here, robust MRV provisions should be established. Other risks will be difficult to address without touching the new and open structure of the Paris Agreement. This applies, for example, to risks associated to the diverse nature of NDCs, and requires further investigation.
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.