Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (4)
Year of Publication
- 2016 (4) (remove)
Document Type
- Conference Object (4) (remove)
Language
- English (4) (remove)
Division
- Energie-, Verkehrs- und Klimapolitik (4) (remove)
The European Horizon 2020-project COMBI ("Calculating and Operationalising the Multiple Benefits of Energy Efficiency in Europe") aims at estimating the energy and non-energy impacts that a realisation of the EU energy efficiency potential would have in the year 2030. The project goal is to cover the most important technical potentials identified for the EU27 by 2030 and to come up with consistent estimates for the most relevant impacts: air pollution (and its effects on human health, eco-systems/crops, buildings), social welfare (including disposable income, comfort, health and productivity), biotic and abiotic resources, the energy system and energy security and the macro economy (employment, economic growth and the public budget). This paper describes the overall project research design, envisaged methodologies, the most critical methodological challenges with such an ex-ante evaluation and with aggregating the multiple impacts. The project collects data for a set of 30 energy efficiency improvement actions grouped by energy services covering all sectors and EU countries. Based on this, multiple impacts will be quantified with separate methodological approaches, following methods used in the respective literature and developing them where necessary. The paper outlines the approaches taken by COMBI: socio-economic modelling for air pollution and social welfare, resource modelling for biotic/abiotic and economically unused resources, General Equilibrium modelling for long-run macroeconomic effects and other models for short-run effects, and the LEAP model for energy system modelling. Finally, impacts will be aggregated, where possible in monetary terms. Specific challenges of this step include double-counting issues, metrics, within and cross-country/regional variability of effects and context-specificity.
A learning experience : integrating theory and practice for the implementation of INDCs ; thinkpiece
(2016)
A major cornerstone on the way to low-carbon sustainable development on a global scale will be a swift and effective implementation of all countries' INDCs submitted to the UNFCCC prior to Paris. However, doing so will require transforming development pathways away from currently pervasive carbon lock-ins. This can only be successful if countries take a systemic view on their development agendas, and link mitigation, adaptation and other developmental priorities together for a coherent overarching sustainable development strategy. The ownership for this process needs to be with the countries themselves as such strategies touch fundamentally upon national policy-making and implementation. At the same time, developing countries have access to bi- and multilateral financial and technical cooperation. To enable a systemic, country-led perspective, development cooperation needs to shift its paradigms away from currently prevalent project-level interventions.
A truly innovative and transformational shift with the objective of pursuing a low-carbon and climate resilient society needs to open up space for experimentation as new ways of doing things need to be put into practice. Experiments will not always be successful, but foster learning on a national as well as an international level on pitfalls and solutions in new approaches to low-carbon sustainable development. Not least, there needs to be a renewed focus on programmatic approaches that link various topical domains for a country-led process, and a critical look at development work that is "doomed to succeed".
Our article draws from systems theory, development studies and recent work on transitions studies and transformational change in the international domain. It links up different theoretical concepts with practical approaches in order to outline a future development agenda that will be owned by developing countries and supported non-invasively by bi- and multilateral development cooperation to foster low-carbon development pathways that are urgently needed to solve the climate crisis.
The South African government started the development of a basic energy efficiency policy framework in 2005, including a voluntary label for refrigerators. This initial label was the intended precursor to a mandatory standards and labelling (S&L) programme, but the impacts achieved were only very limited. Based on this first experience, the South African Bureau of Standards (SABS) formed in 2008 a working group for the development of the new and more specific South African National Standard SANS 941. This standard identifies energy efficiency requirements, labelling and measurement methods as well as the maximum allowable standby power for a set of appliances as reliable basis for introducing a mandatory regulation. Nevertheless, due to many existing barriers, such as lack of funding and low priority assigned to the initiative, a very long period passed by between the S&L planning and final policy implementation. Finally, in November 2014, the South African government published mandatory performance standards coming into force in 2015/2016 for a first set of appliances consisting of refrigerators, washing machines, dryers, dishwashers, electric water heaters, ovens, A/C and heat pumps. To analyse the effectiveness of the new S&L programme and the potential influence of delays in the implementing process, the authors performed an immediate first-hand evaluation of the new policy.
As analytical reference base for available energy efficiency potentials, results from bottom-up scenario calculations will be presented exemplarily as case study for cold appliances covered by the S&L programme. A retrospective market study will show market trends before policy implementation and compare results with the new mandatory requirements. For the further policy analysis, a programme theory approach will be applied, in order to better understand why, how and under what conditions the policy works. Relationships with other energy efficiency policies and measures as well as positive or negative effects will be described. Furthermore, cause-impact relationships will be analysed to explain the functioning of the policy. Finally, success and failure factors will illustrate what needs to be done to achieve the desired energy efficiency targets. Henceforth, even though this study does not assess the direct transferability of the South African S&L programme to other regions, its findings could be relevant and useful for countries planning the implementation of similar policies.
The international governance landscape on climate change mitigation is increasingly complex across multiple governance levels. Climate change mitigation initiatives by non-state stakeholders can play an important role in governing global climate change and contribute to avoiding unmanageable climate change. It has been argued that the UNFCCC could and should play a stronger role in "orchestrating" the efforts of these initiatives within the wider climate regime complex and thus inspire new and enhanced climate action. In fact, the Lima-Paris Action Agenda supporting cooperative climate action among state and non-state actors was supposed to be a major outcome of COP21.
There is little doubt that successful mitigation initiatives can create a momentum for climate protection. What is missing, is a systematic analysis of how this momentum can feed back into the UNFCCC negotiation process, inspiring also enhanced and more ambitious climate mitigation by states in future iterations of the cycle of nationally determined contributions under the Paris Agreement. This paper aims to close this gap: building on a structurational regime model, the article [1] develops a theory of change of how and through which structuration channels non-state initiatives can contribute to changing the politics of international climate policy; [2] traces existing UNFCCC processes and the Paris Agreement with a view to identifying entry points for a more direct feedback from non-state initiatives; and [3] derives recommendations on how and under which agenda items positive experiences can resonate within the UNFCCC negotiation process.