Search results

This study aims to assess readiness for climate change mitigation in the Kingdom of Bahrain.

Two stages were followed aiming at understanding the situation related to climate change mitigation in Bahrain and assessing the mitigation readiness. Baseline and mitigation scenarios for the period 2019–2040 were developed using the Low Emissions Analysis Platform software based on historical emissions and energy data for the period 1990–2018. Using the analytic hierarchy process, the mitigation readiness was assessed by 13 experts, and priority areas for mitigation action were identified.

CO₂e emissions are projected to grow continuously. However, no explicit climate change strategy is in place yet. Mitigation is tackled implicitly through energy efficiency and renewable energy initiatives. These initiatives can make 23% reduction in CO₂e emissions by 2040. Adopting additional measures is needed to achieve the recently set emission reduction target of 30% by 2035. The findings revealed potential areas for improving mitigation efforts in Bahrain. Priority areas for mitigation actions, as identified by experts, were mainly related to policy and governance. Focus needs to be paid to the social aspect of climate change mitigation.

Literature on mitigation readiness in developing countries is sparse. Knowledge of the requirements for climate change mitigation and assessment of the country’s performance can prioritize areas for improving mitigation action. Several lessons can be learnt from the case of Bahrain. In addition, the adopted methodology can be applied to other developing or Arab countries at local or institutional levels. However, its application to specific sectors may require adjustments.

This paper aims to examine the policy environments, institutional arrangements and practical implementation of some initiatives undertaken by the Government of Cameroon, together with some relevant stakeholders, in addressing climate change mitigation and adaptation at various levels in the country, which are prerequisites to promote synergistic ways of addressing climate change mitigation and adaptation.

Using a qualitative approach to data collection, the paper draws upon information collected from relevant literature and interviews with 18 key country resource personnel.

Results revealed that most reviewed policies/programs/strategies do not mention “climate change” explicitly but propose some activities which indirectly address it. Interaction is fair within the government ministries but weak between these ministries and other institutions. Inadequate financial resources are being opined as the most important challenge stakeholders are (and would continue) facing as a result of adopting integrated approaches to climate change. Other challenges include inadequate coordination, insufficient sensitization and capacity building, ineffective implementation, inadequate compliance, lack of proper transparency and inadequate public participation. To redress the aforementioned constraints and challenges, the paper concludes by outlining a number of recommendations for policy design.

The following recommendations were made: create a national technical committee to oversee and provide scientific guidance to the government on synergistic approaches; promote private sector investment and sponsorship on synergistic approaches; create local awareness, etc. It is important to underscore that minimal studies have been conducted to analyze multi-stakeholder perspectives on synergies between climate change mitigation and adaptation in Cameroon. This study attempts to bridge this major gap.

This study aims to examine the impact of social norms on climate change mitigation readiness, the mediating role of environmental purchasing intentions and attitudes on the relationship between social norms and climate change mitigation readiness.

Data were collected from transport facility operators and managers of shipping firms and bus transport firms. The SPSS software and covariance-based software (CB-SEM) were used to obtain results on the impact of social norms on climate change mitigation readiness, the mediating role of environmental purchasing intentions on the relationship between social norms and climate change mitigation readiness, and the mediating role of attitudes on the relationship between social norms and climate change mitigation readiness.

The findings indicated that social norms influenced climate change mitigation readiness, while both attitudes and environmental purchasing intentions partially mediated the relationship between social norms and climate change mitigation readiness.

The study mainly focused on transport facility operators and managers of shipping firms and bus firms eliminating other participants in the transport sector. Further, the research focused on majorly three psychological factors that included social norms, intentions and attitudes leaving out other psychological factors.

Climate change mitigation is a major issue of concern to policy makers and researchers. Much of the focus is placed on mitigation strategies with the passengers and private vehicle owners as the major target. Other research focuses on reducing the impact of climate change outcomes through introduction of cleaner technologies. However, issues concerning the role of psychological factors in enhancing climate change mitigation readiness have not been given significant attention.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate local climate change mitigation planning in California with the goal of understanding how the relationships between the state, the local air agencies, and the localities within their jurisdictions shape the willingness and capacity of local communities to plan for climate change mitigation through greenhouse gas emissions reduction.

The research: analyses documents relating to localities' climate change mitigation planning activities, including the production of action plans, general plan elements, emissions inventories, or official resolutions supporting mitigation planning, establishment of partnerships with other governmental and non‐governmental organizations, and development of community input processes and planning committee membership and structure. It also involves measurement and descriptive analysis of variables capturing: local air agencies' institutional character, orientation regarding climate change policymaking, and mitigation planning activities and programs; and localities' mitigation planning processes and policies, institutional and demographic characteristics, and relationships with other sub‐state entities working on climate change mitigation.

Intergovernmental partnerships can powerfully impact localities' technical and financial capacities for pursuing climate change mitigation planning. This exploratory study points to the potential for strong leadership by air quality control agencies to greatly influence the decision of localities within their jurisdictions to engage in voluntary mitigation planning. Furthermore, decentralized collaboration does not prevent, and may encourage, policy harmonization through localities' widespread reliance on the technical assistance from specialized non‐governmental organizations.

Findings might enable advocates of local‐level climate change mitigation planning to target their resources for maximal returns in terms of geographic policy coverage and pledged GHG emissions reductions. Theoretically, this study contributes to discussions on the relationship between the quality of policy outputs and various forms of environmental governance.

Climate change mitigation planning in the USA is in a formative stage. In fact, the authors found that even the California Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) must work continuously and with imperfect data to compile a list of the state's local‐level mitigation planning efforts. This study contributes to the growing body of knowledge of local planning policy innovations in California and highlights the importance of leadership from the regional scale for city‐level engagement with mitigation planning.

The purpose of this paper is to explain the US society’s insignificant mitigation of climate change using Niklas Luhmann’s (1989) autopoietic social systems theory in ecological communication. Specifically, the author’s analysis falls within the context of Luhmann re-moralized while focusing on particular function systems’ binary codes and their repellence of substantive US climate change mitigation policy across systems.

The author achieves this purpose by resituating Luhmann’s conception of evolution to forgo systems teleology and better contextualize the spatial-temporal scale of climate change; reinforcing complexity reduction and differentiation by integrating communication and media scholar John D. Peters’s (1999) “communication chasm” concept as one mechanism through which codes sustain over time; and applying these integrated concepts to prominent the US climate change mitigation attempts.

The author concludes that climate change mitigation efforts are the amalgamation of the systems’ moral communications. Mitigation efforts have relegated themselves to subsystems of the ten major systems given the polarizing nature of their predominant care/harm moral binary. Communication chasms persist because these moral communications cannot both adhere to the systems’ binary codes and communicate the climate crisis’s urgency. The more time that passes, the more codes force mitigation organizations, activist efforts and their moral communications to adapt and sacrifice their actions to align with the encircling systems’ code.

In addition to the conceptual contribution, the social implication is that by identifying how and why climate change mitigation efforts are subsumed by the larger systems and their codes, climate change activists and practitioners can better tool their tactics to change the codes at the heart of the systems if serious and substantive climate change mitigation is to prevail.

To the author’s knowledge, there has not been an integration of a historical communication concept into, and sociological application of, ecological communication in the context of climate change mitigation.

As adaptation and mitigation are separated in international and national policies, there is also a division in the financial resources mobilized by the international community to help developing countries deal with climate change. Given that mitigation activities can benefit or hinder adaptation, and vice versa, promoting activities that contribute to both objectives can increase the efficiency of fund allocation and minimize trade-offs, particularly in land-related activities such as agriculture and forestry. The purpose of this study is to analyze how climate funding organizations consider the integration of adaptation and mitigation.

The authors interviewed representatives of climate funds directed toward forestry and agriculture to gain a better understanding of how they perceive the benefits, risks and barriers of an integrated approach; whether they have concrete activities for promoting this approach; and how they foresee the future of adaptation–mitigation integration.

Interviews revealed a diverse range of perceived benefits, risks and barriers at local, national and global scales. Most interviewees focused on the local benefits of this integration (e.g. increasing the resilience of forest carbon projects), whereas others emphasized global risks (e.g. decreasing global funding efficiency because of project complexity). Despite the general interest in projects and policies integrating adaptation and mitigation, few relevant actions have been implemented by organizations engaged in climate change finance.

This paper provides new insight into how the representatives of climate funds perceive and act on the integration of adaptation and mitigation in forestry and agriculture. The findings by the authors can inform the development of procedures for climate change finance, such as the Green Climate Fund. While managers of climate funds face barriers in promoting an integrated approach to adaptation and mitigation, they also have the capacity and the ambition to overcome them.

Bioenergy is a key component of climate change mitigation strategies aiming at low stabilization. Its versatility and capacity to generate negative emissions when combined with carbon capture and storage add degrees of freedom to the timing of emission reductions. This paper aims to explore the robustness of a bioenergy-based mitigation strategy by addressing several dimensions of uncertainty on biomass potential, bioenergy use and induced land use change emissions.

Different mitigation scenarios were explored by two different energy-economy optimization models coupled to the same land use model, which provides a common basis for the second generation bioenergy dynamics in the two energy-economy models.

Using bioenergy is found to be a robust mitigation strategy as demonstrated by high biomass shares in primary energy demand in both models and in all mitigation scenarios.

A variety of possible storylines about future uses of biomass exist. The comparison of the technology choices preferred by the applied models helps understand how future emission reductions can be achieved under alternative storylines.

The presented comparison-based assessment goes beyond other comparison studies because both energy-economy models are coupled to the same land use model.

Responding to a recent editorial call for sustainable development (Truong and Saunders, 2021), this study aims to explore the persuasiveness of climate-change-related appeals.

Three scenario-based experiments were conducted to test the effect of climate-change-related appeals on persuasion, the underlying mechanism causing that effect and associated boundary conditions. Statistical results were based on analysis of variance, mediation and moderation analysis.

Adaptation-oriented appeals are more persuasive than mitigation-oriented appeals. Specifically, adaptation (versus mitigation) appeals activate a self-regulation process that encourages people to think about the future, making them more likely to address climate change. This effect is salient when consumers’ environmental concerns are low.

To boost message persuasiveness, marketers and public policymakers could construct abstract and long-horizon climate-change-related appeals and provide prompts or interventions to promote people’s elaborations about potential outcomes.

To boost message persuasiveness, marketers and public policymakers could construct abstract and long-horizon climate-change-related appeals and provide prompts or interventions to promote people’s elaborations about potential outcomes.

Revealing mitigation and adaptation climate-change-related appeals yield diverse effects.

Purpose: This chapter discusses the need for climate change risk mitigation and why it is not the responsibility of Central Banks to mitigate climate change risk.

Methodology: This chapter uses critical discourse analysis to explain why central banks should not have the responsibility for climate change risk mitigation.

Findings: This chapter argues that the responsibility for managing climate change risk should lie with elected officials, other groups and institutions but not Central Banks. Elected officials, or politicians, should be held responsible to deal with the consequence of climate change events. Also, international organizations and everybody can take responsibility for climate change while the Central Bank can provide assistance – but Central Banks should not lead the climate policy making or mitigation agenda.

Implication: The policy implication is that the responsibility for climate change risk mitigation should be shifted to politicians who are elected officials of the people. Also, international climate change organizations or groups can take responsibility for mitigating the climate change risk of member countries. Finally, citizens in a country or region should have equal responsibility for climate change. Climate information should be provided to every citizen to help them prepare for future climatic conditions.

Originality: This chapter propagates the idea that Central Banks should take a lead role in dealing with the problems of climate change. This chapter is the first chapter to contest a Central Bank-led climate change risk mitigation agenda.