Figure - uploaded by Willem Pieter Pauw
Content may be subject to copyright.

Source publication
Research
Full-text available
The NDC Explorer allows users to analyse and compare (Intended) Nationally Determined Contributions through interactive maps and bar charts, as well as country files. The NDC Explorer holds 60 different sub-categories divided over the following main categories: Mitigation; Adaptation; Finance and Support; Planning and Process; and 'Broader Picture'...

Similar publications

Conference Paper
Full-text available
Climate change is becoming dangerous due to increase in Green House Gas (GHG) emissions. Carbon dioxide (CO2) is one of the major gasses among these emissions. There are many techniques available to analyze these emissions. Carbon footprint analysis is one of them. In this study, carbon footprint analysis based on the annual fossil fuel consumption...

Citations

... The low support to basic development sectors is observed despite their importance in building long-term resilience and adaptive capacity. This is also despite substantial climate-related health risks and thirty of the countries included in our analysis specifically identifying health as a vulnerable sector in their NDCs (Pauw et al., 2017). Similarly, twenty-six African countries identified ecosystems as vulnerable (Pauw et al., 2017), yet the amounts of adaptationrelated funding for biodiversity are negligible. ...
... This is also despite substantial climate-related health risks and thirty of the countries included in our analysis specifically identifying health as a vulnerable sector in their NDCs (Pauw et al., 2017). Similarly, twenty-six African countries identified ecosystems as vulnerable (Pauw et al., 2017), yet the amounts of adaptationrelated funding for biodiversity are negligible. This is in strong contrast to the growing interest in ecosystem-based adaptation and nature-based solutions to reduce climate risks (United Nations Environment Programme, 2021). ...
Article
Full-text available
Under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, international financial assistance is expected to support African and other developing countries as they prepare for and adapt to the impacts of climate change. The impact of this finance depends on how much finance is mobilized and where it is targeted. However, there has been no comprehensive quantitative mapping of adaptation-related finance flows to African countries to date. Here we track development finance principally targeting adaptation from bilateral and multilateral funders to Africa between 2014 and 2018. We find that the amounts of finance are well below the scale of investment needed for adaptation in Africa, which is a region with high vulnerability to climate change and low adaptation capacity. Finance targeting mitigation (US$30.6 billion) was almost double that for adaptation (US$16.5 billion). The relative share of each varies greatly among African countries. More adaptation-related finance was provided as loans (57%) than grants (42%) and half the adaptation finance has targeted just two sectors: agriculture; and water supply and sanitation. Disbursement ratios for adaptation in this period are 46%, much lower than for total development finance in Africa (at 96%). These are all problematic patterns for Africa, highlighting that more adaptation finance and targeted efforts are needed to ensure that financial commitments translate into meaningful change on the ground for African communities. Key policy insights • Between 2014 and 2018, adaptation-related finance committed by bilateral and multilateral funders to African countries remained well below US$5.5 billion per year, or roughly US$5 per person per year; these amounts are well below the estimates of adaptation costs in Africa. • Funders have not strategically targeted support for adaptation activities towards the most vulnerable to climate change African countries. • Lessons from countries that have been more successful in accessing finance point to the value of more sophisticated domestic adaptation policies and plans; of alignment with priorities of the NDC; of meeting funding requirements of specific funders; and of the strategic use of climate funds by national planners. • A low adaptation finance disbursement ratio in this period in Africa (at 46%) relates to barriers impeding the full implementation of adaptation projects: low grant to loan ratio; requirements for co-financing; rigid rules of climate funds; and inadequate programming capacity within many countries.
... Although the NDCs are non-binding, they provide an indication of national priorities and interests of a contributing country related to mitigation and adaptation. Water is one of the top five sectors described as vulnerable to climate change within the NDCs, as it is identified by 100 countries 44 . Despite this focus, limited concrete action has been proposed related to sanitation 45 . ...
Article
Full-text available
Although sanitation systems are fundamental for human health and sustainable development, limited focus has been placed on their contributions to climate mitigation and adaptation. Climate change threatens existing systems, as well as efforts to increase services for 2.3 billion people who lack even a basic sanitation service. At the same time, the sanitation and wastewater sector directly produces emissions associated with breakdown of organic matter, and treatment processes require large energy inputs. In light of these challenges, we describe gaps in how sanitation is being addressed in mitigation and adaptation, discuss how this results in little inclusion of sanitation in climate policy and financing at the global level, and implications of these gaps for different sanitation systems and geographic regions. Finally, we describe the need for planning frameworks to facilitate integration of climate change into sanitation policy and programming. This will be critical to increasing understanding of sanitation and climate change linkages among stakeholders, and more effectively including sanitation in climate action.
... To initiate our discourse analysis, we identified a priori analytical categories based on our initial review of the current literature on NDCs. In particular, we drew on many of the categories identified by the scholars at NDC Explorer (Pauw et al., 2018). We aggregated and condensed analytical categories identified by NDC Explorer to include the following analytical categories: vulnerability, agriculture, water, renewable energy, health, ecosystems, market mechanisms, land use, forestry, monitoring and review, conditional mitigation targets, unconditional mitigation targets, costs of adaptation, adaptation finance, adaptation actions, mitigation finance, technology transfer, capacity building, section on fairness, responsibility, gender, human rights, and REDD. ...
Article
Full-text available
In the lead‐up to the 2015 Conference of Parties meeting in Paris, 186 countries, representing over 95% of global emissions, submitted Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). The NDCs outline national goals for greenhouse gas emission reductions and identify financial needs for unfolding mitigation and adaptation efforts. In this study, we review various analyses of the NDCs that cover the aggregate impact and strength of emissions reduction commitments and discuss recent literature on the adequacy and sectoral focus of the NDCs. We then argue that the NDCs are more than just goal setting reports; they are important discursive documents that are contested, negotiated, and ongoing. To supplement the existing literature, we examine the discursive narratives embedded in the NDCs from the 19 founding nations of the Climate Vulnerable Forum and the top 10 greenhouse gas emitters. Our literature review of quantitative and sectoral aspects of the NDCs highlights the inadequacy of the NDC commitments in the context of limiting warming to 2°C, discusses the uncertainties in the promised mitigation strategies, and identifies the reliance of many countries on policies such as those on forests or renewable energy. Our own analysis of the discourses in the NDCs adds critical depth by highlighting the stark contrasts in NDC discourses between North and South, as well as between historical emitters and emerging economies. These contrasts reflect deeper debates regarding justice and equity between nations within the UNFCCC negotiations. This article is categorized under: • Climate and Development > Decoupling Emissions from Development
... This article analyses all 168 NDCs submitted as of June 2019 based on the NDC Explorer. This online, interactive tool aims to enhance transparency and comparison of NDCs by using a universal set of categories to capture the diversity in scope, content and level of detail of NDCs (see Pauw et al., 2016). ...
... To increase the likelihood of attracting support, developing countries should set out credible cost estimates and have sufficiently detailed and feasible investment plans in place. This issue can be addressed, for example, by examining and revising the existing plans and strategies that often underlie the NDCs (see Pauw et al., 2016). ...
... Tree charts showing the number of NDCs that include cost estimates (in blue) and that are conditional upon support, for mitigation (left) and adaptation (right). Based on data fromPauw et al. (2016). ...
Article
Full-text available
The Paris Agreement’s success depends on parties’ implementation of their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) towards the Paris Agreement’s goals. In these climate action plans, most developing countries make their mitigation and adaptation contributions conditional upon receiving international support (finance, technology transfer and/or capacity building). While provision of support for NDC implementation could enhance equity among countries, the feasibility of NDC implementation might be challenged by the large number of conditional NDCs. This paper addresses the implications of this tension based on an analysis of all 168 NDCs. We find that feasibility is challenged because conditions applied to NDCs are often not well defined. Moreover, the costs of implementing all conditional contributions are too high to be covered by existing promises of support from developed countries, even if the entire annual $100 billion of climate finance were earmarked for NDC implementation. Consistent with principles of equity and the prioritization in the Paris Agreement, a higher proportion of Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and Small Island Developing States (SIDS) have conditional NDCs than do other countries. However, differences between the distribution of countries requesting support and those currently receiving support, in particular among middle-income countries, demonstrates potential tensions between feasibility and equity. The article concludes with recommendations on how cost estimates and updated NDCs can be strengthened to ensure support for NDC implementation is targeted more equitably and cost-effectively.
... Some estimates suggest SIDS globally would save around $3.3 billion annually if they switched all energy to renewable sources, equivalent on average to around 3.3% of their GDP though some countries could achieve much higher percentage savings, especially in the Pacific and Indian Oceans [1]. SIDS give high priority to the energy sector in their national development plans, in their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) submitted to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) [7] and in joint declarations like the Samoa Pathway [8]. The Samoa Pathway highlights access to affordable, modern energy services, renewable energy and energy efficiency as key elements of SIDS sustainable development strategies. ...
Article
Full-text available
Background Energy is given high priority in the national development agendas of most Small Island Developing States (SIDS) because it is intertwined with social, economic and environmental challenges. Many SIDS experience heavy fiscal burdens associated with imported fuels, some have very low electricity access rates, and islands also have a strong interest in the transition to cleaner energy because they are particularly vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. This paper presents a global mapping of development finance for SIDS’ energy sectors. We analyse whether energy aid has increased following international commitments to support developing countries tackle climate change and whether this is supporting renewable energy, whether finance has been targeted to different recipient countries based on either their income status or their electricity access rates and whether electricity access rates have substantially improved during this time, and whether financial commitments are actually being disbursed. Methods Focusing mainly on the period 2002–2016, we use data reported by bilateral and multilateral sources to the Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development’s Development Assistance Committee on financial support to 37 SIDS. Our analysis includes almost 5700 energy-related transactions between 2002 and 2016. Data on populations and electricity access rates of individual countries come from the World Bank’s Open Data platform. Results We observe an increase in funding since 2009 and a shift towards renewables, and solar particularly, though oil-fired plants and other non-renewables continue to be funded. Energy aid is unevenly spread between SIDS, on a total and a per capita basis. There is little correlation between the allocations made to individual countries and either their income or energy access gaps, and improvements in electricity access have been slow in those countries where the gap is largest. We also identify low disbursement rates, suggesting implementation problems. Conclusions There is an urgent need to improve the quantity and quality of aid to help SIDS tackle their significant energy challenges. While the trend towards more funding for renewables is positive, low disbursement levels and limited support for strengthening local human and institutional capacities may be limiting its effectiveness.
... 4 They mirror each country's ambition to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions (GHG), taking into consideration its domestic circumstances and capabilities. Many countries also address other issues in the climate contributions, such as what support they need from, or will provide to other countries (Pauw et al. 2016 trade elements will be discussed: reducing trade barriers, regulating trade on climate grounds, regulating timber trade, standards and labelling, border carbon adjustments, renewable energy, fossil fuel subsidy reform, international market mechanisms, technology transfer, response measures, and co-benefits. ...
... Source: Pauw et al. (2016) Not party to the UNFCCC Not submitted More specifically, several climate contributions mention the regulation of, or even a ban on the import of old or inefficient vehicles. For example, according to the climate contribution of Bahamas, the country "will discourage the importation of inefficient motor vehicles by linking the tax regime to mileage per gallon and the engine capacity." ...
... Source: Pauw et al. (2016) Not party to the UNFCCC Not submitted ...
Technical Report
Full-text available
The Paris Climate Agreement, reached in December 2015, is designed to drive greater climate action, while allowing countries to choose their own targets and mitigation measures. This diversity and scale-up in ambition will increase interactions between climate measures and trade. This paper analyses countries’ nationally-determined climate contributions (NDCs) from a trade perspective. It assesses which countries address key trade elements, and explores options for trade frameworks to support climate efforts and ways to minimise potential conflicts between the trade and climate regimes. While trade-related elements feature prominently in countries’ climate contributions, there is tremendous untapped potential to use trade for driving climate action. The paper proposes ways for future NDCs to positively incorporate more trade elements and create a mutually reinforcing relationship between the climate and trade regimes.
Article
Full-text available
This article introduces a new dataset on the climate change adaptation activities of international organizations (IOs). While climate change adaptation has been studied at the local level and in the context of major climate organizations, such as the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, we provide a first quantitative dataset on non-environmental IOs that can be linked to different social scientific datasets relevant for adaptation. Our new dataset contains information on the governance activities of 30 IOs from 1990 to 2017. Based on this dataset, we introduce different types of adaptation-related activities and develop a quantitative measure of IOs’ climate adaptation engagement. We map the adaptation engagement of the 30 IOs across organizations, across issue areas, and over time. This dataset can be used to compare adaptation activities across and within IOs, but also as an empirical foundation for the emerging research field of global adaptation governance, for which IO climate change adaptation activities are relevant.
Article
Full-text available
Although climate change and international trade are interdependent, policy-makers often address the two topics separately. This may inhibit progress at the intersection of climate change and trade and could present a serious constraint for global climate action. One key risk is carbon leakage through emission outsourcing, i.e. reductions in emissions in countries with rigorous climate policies being offset by increased emissions in countries with less stringent policies. We first analyze the Paris Agreement’s nationally determined contributions (NDC) and investigate how carbon leakage is addressed. We find that the risk of carbon leakage is insufficiently accounted for in these documents. Then, we apply a novel quantitative approach (Jiborn et al., 2018; Baumert et al., 2019) to analyze trends in carbon outsourcing related to a previous international climate regime—the Kyoto Protocol—in order to assess whether reported emission reductions were offset by carbon outsourcing in the past. Our results for 2000–2014 show a more nuanced picture of carbon leakage during the Kyoto Protocol than previous studies have reported. Carbon outsourcing from developed to developing countries was dominated by the USA outsourcing to China, while the evidence for other developed countries was mixed. Against conventional wisdom, we find that, in general, countries that stayed committed to their Kyoto Protocol emission targets were either only minor carbon outsourcers or actually even insourcers—although the trend was slightly negative—indicating that binding emissions targets do not necessarily lead to carbon outsourcing. We argue that multiple carbon monitoring approaches are needed to reduce the risk of carbon leakage.
Article
An effective climate agreement should simultaneously foster broad participation, high ambition, and sufficient compliance: this is the ‘effectiveness trilemma’. While the Paris Agreement has been acclaimed for spurring universal participation, its mitigation mechanism—an unenforced bottom-up framework of voluntary pledges—has been criticized for lacking ambition and incentivizing free riding. Does the Paris Agreement come with effectiveness trade-offs? How ambitious is the Agreement, and how likely is it that countries will comply with it? Using an effectiveness formula to assess ambition, I find that the Paris Agreement constitutes an important improvement compared to business-as-usual. Further, based on evidence from interviews with 21 climate negotiators and observers, the compliance prospects of the Agreement are evaluated as moderately positive. I conclude that the Agreement has the potential to overcome the effectiveness trilemma, and outline policy measures for achieving that objective.
Preprint
Full-text available
In the lead-up to COP21 in Paris, 2015, all Parties to the UNFCCC were invited to communicate their intended nationally determined contributions (INDCs), which could include information on how the Party considers its INDC is fair and ambitious (1/CP.20, para 14). The same information to accompany nationally determined contributions (NDCs) was included in the Paris decision adopted at COP21. While there is extensive literature on climate equity, comparatively little research exists on equity in NDCs. Analysis of equity in NDCs is important, firstly because NDCs represent a unique step in UN climate negotiations, in that they are universal and applicable to all Parties, and secondly because NDCs are formulated bottom-up. As countries determine their own priorities and ambitions they self-differentiate their responsibilities to address climate change. This research report examines equity considerations in the domestic processes for the preparation of NDCs. Four Parties are examined in this analysis, selected based on having widely varying domestic contexts and processes for NDC preparation. The four Parties are as follows: • Canada • The European Union (EU, representing 28 countries) • Kenya • South Africa Case studies were developed for each Party based on a common set of guiding research questions, and drew first on a content analysis of the NDC documents themselves, followed content analysis of other key primary texts, including policy documents, legislation and pronouncements by key individuals, as these were found to be highly relevant in the context of assessing equity in the NDCs. The content analysis was further supported with data gathered from interviews with key individuals, representing various actors and groups of actors relevant to the climate policy decision-making of each Party. The evidence gathered from these sources was further explored with reference to academic and grey literature, where necessary. Based on the findings of these case studies, a comparative analysis of the four NDCs was undertaken drawing on five themes that emerged across the four case studies, that illustrate how equity considerations influenced the NDCs, as follows: 1. How were mitigation targets in the NDC formulated, and how did Parties substantiate that these targets are fair and ambitious? 2. Did the scope of the NDCs include adaptation and/or Means of Implementation, and were these included from the perspective of equity? 3. Who are the key domestic actors or groups that influence climate policy discourse within each Party, and how did they influence the formulation of the NDC? 4. What impact has the NDC process had on domestic climate action more broadly? Have NDCs been a ‘game-changer’, or were they in fact reworked from previous or existing climate policy? 5. Could there be a role for facilitative guidance or the establishment of norms in helping Parties, more broadly, to develop their NDCs, and consider the fairness and ambition of their contributions? Emergent from these five thematic areas was the basis for discussion on whether, and to what extent, equity enables ambition in NDCs. Whilst such a question cannot be answered definitively based on the NDCs of four Parties, the case studies and comparative analysis do show how international considerations of equity can motivate Parties to develop NDCs that are ambitious. Equity is found to enable ambition internationally, in that the four Parties examined here based the formulation of their NDCs at least in part on considerations of submissions by other Parties. All four Parties refer to equity in their respective NDCs, though in some cases implicitly, and the case studies show that these Parties do more if others are doing so, and are generally motivated by a desire to be perceived as making a fair, or even leading, contribution to the global effort. Amongst the four Parties, NDCs are shown to have had a ‘lock-in’ effect for climate ambition, in the face of changing political circumstances at sub-Party level. This is reflected particularly in the cases of Canada, with a federal government structure, and the EU, which represents multiple Member States; in both cases, it is plausible that the NDC can provide a safeguard against potential backsliding by individual provinces or Member States, and evidence from both case studies showed that domestic ambition was raised at least partly as a consequence of the NDC. However, in general across the four case studies, it is also found that equity in domestic processes to prepare NDCs raises distributional issues within Parties or countries, which has the effect of tempering ambition at the national level. Parties have to balance ambition in their NDCs with national circumstances and other social or economic priorities. Such a balance varies depending on the specific context of each Party and, as such, the domestic political ‘culture’ of Parties is found to be highly important. In addition to political opposition from sub-Party government bodies, each of the case studies showed that the perspectives of various actors, including private business, civil society and other groupings specific to each Party, influence the NDC preparation process to varying degrees, depending on the relative strength and capability of the local actors to advance their interests. Furthermore, amongst the four Parties, domestic policy and planning tends to shape the scope and form of Parties’ NDCs, and their mitigation targets in particular, rather than the other way around. In each case, however, the NDCs have at least partly driven Parties either to raise their overall ambition, beyond what had previously been established domestically, or to develop further climate change response plans and measures for implementation. However, none of the four Parties have as yet updated the mitigation targets of their NDCs, and there was little evidence to instil confidence that the Parties’ NDCs would be updated in or before 2020, irrespective of equity considerations. The scope of the NDCs varies between developed and developing Parties, with both Kenya and South Africa including adaptation and means of implementation as part of the scope of their NDCs, whereas Canada and the EU both limited the scope of their NDCs to mitigation. However, both Canada and the EU treat adaptation and provision international support elsewhere. In the case of Canada, a short paragraph on adaptation does appear in the narrative component of the 2017 NDC submission, but this does not constitute an adaptation component of the NDC in the same way that it is included in the Kenyan and South African NDCs. In general, the understanding of equity in relation to adaptation appears limited by comparison to mitigation across the four case studies, and likely beyond them as well. Finally, while there remains little appetite among Parties for prescription on how to run domestic processes when including equity issues in future NDCs, there could perhaps be a role for facilitative guidance and the sharing of experiences on understanding of fairness considerations for NDCs. With provisions provided in the decision text from COP 24 in Katowice, 2018, for consideration of equity as a source of input to the five-yearly global stocktake, it is likely that analysis of equity, particularly at a domestic level, will continue to be relevant for Parties. In general, equity will continue to be crucial in order to move global climate change response negotiations forward.