Search results

The important role played by the UK in the negotiation of the Framework Convention on Climate Change in 1992 can be explained by the support given to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and especially to its working group on scientific assessment. Outlines the context in which this support became possible and the role and functioning of the Panel. Argues that a mature national research lobby assured that the international scientific advisory process was incorporated into both domestic environmental policy and environmental diplomacy. By ensuring that scientific assessment was indeed considered to be policy relevant by policy‐makers, attention and resources were attracted to a research area of global significance. Policy relevance was claimed on the basis of the argument that predictions of future climates and their impacts on eco‐systems, now including potential health risks to the population, are essential precautionary reasons. Suggests that this assertion needs debate. By supporting global research which is primarily concerned with predicting the behaviour of systems that include human beings as a biological species, more fundamental questions about the capacity of political systems and societies to respond to and cope with the asserted environmental threats are not addressed. If political inability to act leads mainly to support for more research, how should the research enterprise react?

The purpose of this study was to investigate the trends of climate change and their impact on businesses in Kenya’s Public Listed Companies (PLCs).

Out of 66 PLCs, the researchers interviewed 10 companies, and therefore obtained a 15% sample. The methodology was utilization of both primary and secondary data and by use of a combination of the structured and unstructured interviews.

The findings indicated that, although climate change issues are mentioned or implied in strategic plans and core values, they rarely however, translate to normal or day-to-day conversation or operation of the businesses. PESTEL factors are cited as having a very positive impact on businesses that are technological and economic, contrary to environmental/climate change factors which have a more negative than positive effect on the business. Electricity outages/shortages will have serious impact, while agricultural, tourism, insurance, and aviation sectors are likely to be most severely affected by climate change. The hypothesis that climate change is affecting all businesses was accepted while that stating that climate change is significantly impacting businesses negatively rather than positively by increasing operating costs which may result to closure if not mitigated by 2030 was rejected.

Companies should not adopt a “business as usual” attitude but invest in training on effects and strategies for mitigation as well as adaptation and translate climate issues into action as well as create synergy in tackling climate change issues.

The research is valuable to environmentalists, meteorologists, business community, academicians, as well as scientists and scholars alike both nationally and internationally.

This chapter explains how the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), an important achievement of the Rio Earth Summit held in 1992, instigated interest in, and enthusiasm for, the fight against climate change in the international arena, promoting national actions, creating common frameworks and motivating corporations to take action against climate change. The Convention recognised climate change as a problem in 1994 when the UNFCCC took effect, which was remarkable considering that there was much less scientific evidence available at that time. Through extensive literature review, this chapter presents the origin and content of the Convention and explains how it creates new international instruments for mitigating climate change, its impact on corporate climate change-related accountability practices and where it stands now after 20 years in operation. The researcher argues that there is a need for strong cooperation among national and international actors such as governments, companies, national and international non-governmental organisations and international governmental organisations in order to create climate change-related accountability.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2007) of 2007 concluded that most of the warming of the climate is very likely driven by human activities that increase greenhouse gas (GHG) concentrations in the atmosphere. Activities such as burning of fossil fuels for power generation and in vehicles, as well as increasing deforestation, result in emissions of four long-lived GHGs: carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and halocarbons (a group of gases containing fluorine, chlorine, or bromine). The report projects that by the end of the 21st century global temperatures could rise by 1.1–6.4°C over 1990 levels, while global mean sea levels could rise by 18–59cm, depending on future scenarios of varying global emission levels. This is likely to adversely impact ecosystem resilience, putting many plant and animal species at the risk of extinction. Sea level rise and coastal erosion coupled with temperature extremes, heat waves, and heavy precipitation events that are projected to become more frequent will affect the health and well-being of millions of people around the world.

The purpose of this study is to assess how intergovernmental panel on climate change’s (IPCC’s) sixth assessment report of Working Group I (WGI), a Summary for Policymakers (SPM), has evaluated the current climate change situation. The author uses the qualitative content analysis (QCA) method (i.e. summative content analysis [SCA]) to identify critical points of the SPM.

To better understand the WGI report and its SPM, the author uses the thematic analysis, often called the QCA method. This study takes more steps and uses one of the main qualitative content analysis approaches (i.e. SCA). Therefore, QCA (SCA) can help the author count the occurrence of certain words using computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software that quantifies the words in the data. This process helps the author to understand codes and patterns (e.g. the concept in the results section).

Interestingly, the AR6 says more about adaptation for policy makers in sections C (Climate information for risk assessment) and D (Mitigation of future climate change) than in sections A and D. Finally, this study concludes that the IPCC WGI SPM has addressed evidence on global climate change policymaking for SPMa, SPMd (mitigation-based strategies and mitigation policy [MP]) and SPMb, SPMc (adaptation policy and adaptation-based strategy).

First, this study refers only to the contribution of WGI, a SPM. The findings of this study do not necessarily provide a full understanding of what the AR6 WGI SPM says about climate change. It points out that the QDA Miner software and Voyant tool do not include all variables and examples where mitigation and adaptation-based strategies are discussed. The guidance for coding is based on the approved version of IPCC AR6 WGI SPM. The final limitation is that the relatedness of key words (e.g. confidence, high and warming) is sometimes ambiguous; even experts may disagree on how the words are linked to form a concept. Thus, this method works at the keyword level. A more intelligent method would use more meaningful information than keywords.

This study used qualitative data analysis (SCA) to explore what was said about climate change in four sections of the IPCC AR6 WGI SPM, which may influence current and future global climate change policymaking.

This chapter reviews factors responsible for climate change, impacts of the change on animal health, zoonotic diseases, and their linkage with One-Health program.

This chapter is based on the available literature related to climate change and its effect on animal health and production from different points. The causes and change forcers of climate change, direct and indirect effects of the change on animal health management, host–pathogen–vector interaction, and zoonotic diseases are included. Inter-linkage between climate change and One-Health program are also assessed.

Beside natural causes of climatic change, greenhouse gases are increasing due to human activities, causing global climate changes which have direct and indirect animal health and production performance impacts. The direct impacts are increased ambient temperature, floods, and droughts, while the indirect are reduced availability of water and food. The change and effect also promote diseases spread, increase survival and availability of the pathogen and its intermediate vector host, responsible for distribution and prevalence of tremendous zoonotic, infectious, and vector-borne diseases. The adverse effect on the biodiversity, distribution of animals and micro flora, genetic makeup of microbials which may lead to emerging and re-emerging disease and their outbreaks make the strong linkage between climate change and One-Health.

Global climate change is receiving increasing international attention where international organizations are increasing their focus on tackling the health impacts. Thus, there is a need for parallel mitigation of climate change and animal diseases in a global form.

Most research on climate change is limited to environmental protection, however this chapter provides a nexus between climate change, animal health, livestock production, and the One-Health program for better livelihood.

The impact of climate disasters (e.g., floods, storms, or landslides), which are generally of low intensity and high frequency, should not be overlooked in developing countries. Global experiences related to the damage due to these disasters indicate that such events can be devastating in communities that are vulnerable to hazardous impacts. Cumulative effects of climate disasters are a sign of a potential catastrophe. Moreover, the recent increase in these events poses additional issues that increase the cost of local public administration, including emergency operation and infrastructure recovery. This chapter explains key problems related to climate disasters that are increasing, particularly in the local area of developing countries, and clarifies the need to incorporate climate disaster risk reduction into public development planning and practice. The chapter also provides descriptions of the research location, approaches of the study, and the structure of this book.

Climate change was identified as an urgent global problem that requires governments to unite their efforts to prepare for potential climate risks at the First World Climate Conference in 1979. This recognition led to the establishment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 1988 to assess the magnitude and timing of changes and estimate their impacts. The IPCC published its First Assessment Report in 1990, which became a basis for negotiations on a climate change convention under the United Nations General Assembly. Between February 1991 and May 1992, the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee for a Framework Convention on Climate Change met five times under the auspices of the General Assembly, and the Convention text was adopted on May 9, 1992 at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, where 154 states signed. The Convention entered into force on March 21, 1994. It has near universal membership with 194 Parties (member countries) having ratified (UNFCCC, 2006).

This study investigates the impact of the Paris Agreement (and other factors) on carbon information disclosures to the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP).

A sample of South African listed companies was selected and data analysed from 2013 to 2017. A random effect panel data model using SPSS was used to determine whether the Paris Agreement had an effect on carbon information disclosure.

The results indicate that (1) the Paris Agreement, as an example of an intergovernmental coordination initiative, is significant in creating awareness and increasing the carbon disclosures to the CDP. Furthermore, (2) in terms of the other factors examined, providing incentives for managing climate change and assessing climate risks further into the future improves disclosure quality, while no relationship was found between the CDP score and the approval by key management personnel.

This research examines CDP disclosures for an emerging market before and after the signing of the Paris Agreement.

This research shows the importance of supportive government policy. Furthermore, a commitment to climate change disclosure is manageable and achievable and needs to be implemented at the management level.