The Paris Agreement and the inherent inconsistency of climate policymaking

Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change

Volumn 7, Issue 6, 2016, Pages 790-797

  Geden, Oliver ^a  

^a GERMAN INSTITUTE FOR INTERNATIONAL AND SECURITY AFFAIRS   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLIMATE RESEARCH; CLIMATE STABILIZATION; CLIMATE TARGETS; LONG TERM PLANNING; LONG-TERM POLICIES; POLICY DISCOURSE; PUBLIC DOMAINS; TEMPERATURE INCREASE;

TECHNOLOGY;

ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENT; POLICY ANALYSIS; POLICY APPROACH; POLICY MAKING;

EID: 84991408251     PISSN: 17577780     EISSN: 17577799     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/wcc.427     Document Type: Review

References (50)

1. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Statement on IPCC principles and procedures. Geneva; 2010.
2. Lee H. Turning the focus to solutions. Science 2015, 350:1007.
3. Sjöblom G. Problems and problem solutions in politics. some conceptualisations and conjectures. In: Castles FG, Wildenmann R, eds. Visions and Realities of Party Government, vol. 1. Berlin/New York: De Gruyter; 1986, 72–119.
4. Zahariadis N. Ambiguity and Choice in Public Policy: Political Decision Making in Modern Democracies. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press; 2003.
5. Jegen M, Mérand F. Constructive Ambiguity: comparing the EU's energy and defence policies. West Eur Polit 2014, 34:182–203.
6. Vogler J. Climate Change in World Politics. London: Palgrave Macmillan; 2015.
7. Berger PL, Luckmann T. The Social Construction of Reality. A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. London: Penguin; 1966.
8. Peters GP. The ‘best available science’ to inform 1.5°C policy choices. Nat Clim Change 2016, 6:646–649.
9. Hulme M. 1.5°C and climate research after the Paris Agreement. Nat Clim Change 2016, 6:222–224.
10. Schellnhuber HJ, Rahmstorf S, Winkelmann R. Why the right climate target was agreed in Paris. Nat Clim Change 2016, 6:649–653.
11. Mitchell D, James R, Forster PM, Betts RA, Shiogama H, Allen M. Realizing the impacts of a 1.5°C warmer world. Nat Clim Change 2016, 6:735–737. doi:10.1038/nclimate3055.
12. Shackley S, Wynne B. Representing uncertainty in global climate change science and policy: boundary-ordering devices and authority. Technol Hum Val 1996, 21:275–302.
13. Geden O, Beck S. Renegotiating the global climate stabilization target. Nat Clim Change 2014, 4:747–748.
14. UNFCCC. Adoption of the Paris Agreement. FCCC/CP/2015/L.9/Rev.1, 2015.
15. Brunsson N. The Consequences of Decision-Making. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2007.
16. UNFCCC. Report of the conference of the parties on its fifteenth session. In: Proceedings of the Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC. Part Two: Action taken by the Parties at Its Fifteenth Session, FCCC/CP/2009/11/Add.1, Copenhagen, Denmark, 7–19 December, 2009.
17. UNFCCC. Synthesis report on the aggregate effect of the intended nationally determined contributions. FCCC/CP/2015/7, 2015.
18. Geden O. Climate advisers must maintain integrity. Nature 2015, 521:27–28.
19. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). The Emissions Gap Report 2015: A UNEP Synthesis Report. Nairobi; 2015.
20. UNEP. The Emissions Gap Report 2013: A UNEP Synthesis Report. Nairobi; 2013.
21. Victor DG. Global Warming Gridlock: Creating More Efficient Strategies for Protecting the Planet. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2011.
22. Hare W, Stockwell C, Flachsland C, Oberthür C. The architecture of the global climate regime: a top-down perspective. Clim Policy 2013, 10:600–614.
23. Rayner S. How to eat an elephant: a bottom-up approach to climate policy. Clim Policy 2013, 10:615–621.
24. European Commission. The Road from Paris. COM(2016)110 final; 2016.
25. Rogelj J, den Elzen M, Höhne N, Fransen T, Fekete H, Winkler H, Schaeffer R, Sha F, Riahi K, Meinshausen M. Paris Agreement climate proposals need a boost to keep warming well below 2°C. Nature 2016, 534:631–639.
26. Fuss S, Canadell JG, Peters GP, Tavoni M, Andrew RM, Ciais P, Jackson RB, Jones CD, Kraxner F, Nakicenovic N, et al. Betting on negative emissions. Nat Clim Change 2014, 4:850–853.
27. 2 emissions. Nat Clim Change 2016, 6:42–50.
28. Wiltshire A, Robertson E. Reversing climate change by large scale deployment of carbon-dioxide removal through Bio-Energy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS). AVOID 2 report WPD2b, 2015.
29. 2 removal methods. Nature 2016, 530:153–155.
30. Meadowcroft J. Exploring negative territory: carbon dioxide removal and climate policy initiatives. Clim Change 2013, 118:137–149.
31. Rogelj J, Luderer G, Pietzcker RC, Kriegler E, Schaeffer M, Krey V, Riahi K. Energy system transformations for limiting end-of-century warming to below 1.5°C. Nat Clim Change 2015, 5:519–527.
32. Tavoni M, Socolow R. Modeling meets science and technology: an introduction to a special issue on negative emissions. Clim Change 2013, 118:1–14.
33. Moss R, Babiker M, Brinkmann S, Calvo E, Carter T, Edmonds J, Elgizouli I, Emori S, Erda L, Hibbard K, et al. Towards new scenarios for analysis of emissions, climate change, impacts, and response strategies. IPCC Expert Meeting Report, Geneva, 2008.
34. van Vuuren DP, Stehfest E, den Elzen M, Kram T, van Vliet J, Deetman S, Isaac M, Klein Goldewijk M, Hof A, Mendoza Beltran A, et al. RCP2.6: exploring the possibility to keep global mean temperature increase below 2°C. Clim Change 2011, 109:95–116.
35. Brunsson N. The Organization of Hypocrisy: Talk, Decisions, and Actions in Organizations. 2nd ed. Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School Press; 2002.
36. Edenhofer O, Kowarsch M. Cartography of pathways: a new model for environmental policy assessments. Environ Sci Policy 2015, 51:56–64.
37. Bourdieu P. Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1977.
38. Geden O. Modifying the 2°C target. Climate policy objectives in the contested terrain of scientific policy advice, political preferences, and rising emissions. SWP Research Paper 05/2013, Berlin, 2013.
39. Geels F, Berkhout F, van Vuuren D. Bridging analytical approaches for low-carbon transitions. Nat Clim Change 2016, 6:576–583. doi:10.1038/nclimate2980.
40. Beck M, Krueger T. The epistemic, ethical, and political dimensions of uncertainty in integrated assessment modeling. WIREs Clim Change 2016, 7:627–645.
41. Strassheim H, Kettunen P. When does evidence-based policy turn into policy-based evidence? Configurations, contexts and mechanisms. Evid Policy 2014, 10:259–277.
42. Wesselink A, Colebatch H, Pearce W. Evidence and policy: discourses, meaning and practices. Policy Sci 2014, 47:339–344.
43. Cairney P. The Politics of Evidence-Based Policy-Making. Palgrave Pivot: Basingstoke; 2016.
44. Rickards L, Wiseman J, Kashima Y. Barriers to effective climate change mitigation: the case of senior government and business decision makers. WIREs Clim Change 2014, 5:753–773.
45. Krasner SD. Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 1999.
46. Geden O. An actionable climate target. Nat Geosci 2016, 9:340–342.
47. Spruijt P, Knol AB, Vasileiadou E, Devilee J, Lebret E, Petersen AC. Roles of scientists as policy advisers on complex issues: a literature review. Environ Sci Policy 2014, 40:16–25.
48. Rose DC. Five ways to enhance the impact of climate science. Nat Clim Change 2014, 4:522–524.
49. Beck S. Moving beyond the linear model of expertise? IPCC and the test of adaptation. Reg Environ Change 2011, 11:297–306.
50. Lentsch J, Weingart P. Introduction: the quest for quality as a challenge to scientific policy advice: an overdue debate? In: Lentsch J, Weingart P, eds. The Politics of Scientific Advice: Institutional Design for Quality Assurance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2011, 3–18.