Correction to ‘Building equity in: strategies for integrating equity into modelling for a 1.5°C world’

Klinsky, Sonja; Winkler, Harald

doi:10.1098/rsta.2018.0115

Cited by 14 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Existing literature shows that most policies can generate both co-benefits and adverse side-effects (Klinsky & Winkler, 2018;Ürge-Vorsatz et al, 2014;von Stechow et al, 2015), with the direction of co-impacts and inequality outcomes depending on contextual factors, policy design and implementation, and action that is taken to address the potentially negative social co-impacts. The evidence on social co-benefits and adverse sideeffects, as well as potential measures to mitigate adverse side-effects or to maximize the co-benefits, provided the basis for further analysis on potential inequality impacts.…”

Section: Co-benefits and Adverse Side-effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Ekener-Petersen, Höglun, & Finnveden, 2014;Jakob & Steckel, 2014;Marcu & Vangenechten, 2018; The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC], 2014). Yet the methodological challenges of capturing the full extent of various types of co-impacts have largely prevented their systematic incorporation in most quantitative policy analyses (Klinsky & Winkler, 2018;Stern, 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In policy discourse, inequality is generally regarded as undesirable, with economic inequality in particular increasingly recognized as a barrier to economic growth and political stability (Dabla-Norris, Kochhar, Suphaphiphat, Ricka, & Tsounta, 2015;OECD, 2015;Pickett & Wilkinson, 2015;Piketty, 2014;Stiglitz, 2015), international development (Ramos Pinto, 2013) and greater climate ambition (Klinsky & Winkler, 2018). Alleviating inequality and poverty thus constitute important macroeconomic and development objectives (OECD, 2015;Ramos Pinto, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In climate change discourse, inequality and equity are typically mentioned in reference to the inequitable distribution of the costs (including economic and social) and benefits of climate change and climate change policies, often across the globe. The poorest and marginalized populations (such as indigenous peoples) are least responsible for past greenhouse gas emissions (benefits), most vulnerable to climate change (costs), and possess least resources to adapt to extreme climate events and rising temperatures (Brugnach, Craps, & Dewulf, 2017;Klinsky & Winkler, 2018;Klinsky et al, 2016;Marino & Ribot, 2012;Ramos-Castillo, Castellanos, & Galloway McLean, 2017). In recent years, growing attention has been directed to the risks associated with climate change that may exacerbate inequalities, and the barriers this would present to the achievement of the SDGs (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Less attention, however, has been given to the potentially adverse inequality effects of climate change mitigation policies (e.g. Alber et al, 2017;Brugnach et al, 2017;Klinsky & Winkler, 2018;Ramos-Castillo et al, 2017), although research in this field has progressed in the second half of 2018. For example, a recent assessment of equity and environmental justice in the context of urban climate change drew attention to the way in which existing inequalities result in differential vulnerability to climate change, highlighting a need for urban climate policies to 'include equity and environmental justice as primary long-term goals' (Reckien et al, 2018, p. 174).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Social impacts of climate change mitigation policies and their implications for inequality

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Paris Agreement and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) set ambitious targets for environmental, economic and social progress. Climate change mitigation policies play a central role in this process. To maximize the benefits and minimize the negative effects of climate change mitigation policies, policymakers need to be aware of the indirect and often complex social and inequality impacts that these policies may have and the pathways through which these impacts emerge. Better understanding of the distributional and inequality impacts is important to avoid negative social and distributional outcomes as countries ratchet up their climate policy ambition in the post-Paris context. This paper synthesizes evidence from the existing literature on social co-impacts of climate change mitigation policy and their implications for inequality. The analysis shows that most policies are linked to both co-benefits and adverse side-effects, and can compound or lessen inequalities depending on contextual factors, policy design and policy implementation. The risk of negative outcomes is greater in contexts characterized by high levels of poverty, corruption and economic and social inequalities, and where limited action is taken to identify and mitigate potentially adverse side-effects. Key policy insights. The risk of adverse social outcomes associated with climate change mitigation policies, including worsening inequality, increases as countries ratchet up their ambition to meet the Paris Agreement targets. Many policies that have so far only been piloted will need to be up-scaled.. Negative inequality impacts of climate policies can be mitigated (and possibly even prevented), but this requires conscious effort, careful planning and multistakeholder engagement. Best results can be achieved when potential inequality impacts are taken into consideration in all stages of policy making, including policy planning, development and implementation.. Climate change mitigation policies should take a pro-poor approach that, in best case scenarios, can also lead to a reduction of existing inequalities.

show abstract

Section: Co-benefits and Adverse Side-effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Social impacts of climate change mitigation policies and their implications for inequality

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

What do we know about the employment impacts of climate policies? A review of the ex post literature

Godinho

2022

WIREs Climate Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Concern around the employment impacts of climate mitigation policies can be a contentious and politized issue, with potentially limiting implications for climate action. It persists despite a significant ex ante literature that suggests that aggregate effects will most likely be limited and net positive. This review analyses 60 papers assessing the employment impacts of climate policies ex post, in 20 countries and 2 country groups. Eight broad mitigation policies are covered: (1) emissions trading, (2) carbon taxes, (3) feed-in tariffs, renewable energy (4) procurement and ( 5) deployment, (6) green economy/jobs, (7) environmental regulation, and (8) other policies and regulations. The analysis confirms that employment impacts tend to be modest and net positive or neutral, but reveals that distributional outcomes can be uneven, disadvantaging certain groups and at times reinforcing existing inequalities. Additionally, lower quality jobs or weak labor market regulations may decrease the attractiveness of jobs created or increase job transition costs. These findings provide some justification for increased focus on how climate policies can ensure a "just transition of the workforce and the creation of decent work and quality jobs" stipulated in the Paris Agreement, but also suggest that climate action should not be delayed for fear of widespread negative employment impacts. Ex post assessments offer an important lens into the determinants of climate policy employment outcomes and should be advanced and harnessed in support of accelerated and just action. This article is categorized under: Economics of Mitigation > Climate Economics Social Justice and the Politics of Development > Climate and Development K E Y W O R D S climate mitigation, employment impacts, ex-post review 1 | INTRODUCTION Unmitigated climate change will have severe, negative impacts across all spheres of human existence, including employment and livelihoods (IPCC, 2022). In a best-case scenario where mitigation efforts are accelerated in pursuit of

show abstract

Managing biodiversity in the Anthropocene: discussing the Nature Futures Framework as a tool for adaptive decision-making for nature under climate change

Palacios‐Abrantes

Badhe²,

Bamford

et al. 2022

Sustain Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conservation approaches to social-ecological systems have largely been informed by a framing of preserving nature for its instrumental societal benefits, often ignoring the complex relationship of humans and nature and how climate change might impact these. The Nature Futures Framework (NFF) was developed by the Task Force on scenarios and models of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services as a heuristic approach that appreciates the diverse positive values of nature and its contribution to people. In this overview, we convene a group of experts to discuss the NFF as a tool to inform management in social-ecological systems facing climate change. We focus on three illustrative case studies from the global south across a range of climate change impacts at different ecological levels. We find that the NFF can facilitate the identification of trade-offs between alternative climate adaptation pathways based on different perspectives on the values of nature they emphasize. However, we also identify challenges in adopting the NFF, including how outputs can be translated into modeling frameworks. We conclude that using the NFF to unpack diverse management options under climate change is useful, but that there are still gaps where more work needs to be done to make it fully operational. A key conclusion is that a range of multiple perspectives of people’s values on nature could result in adaptive decision-making and policy that is resilient in responding to climate change impacts in social-ecological systems.

show abstract

Correction to ‘Building equity in: strategies for integrating equity into modelling for a 1.5°C world’

Cited by 14 publications

References 0 publications

Social impacts of climate change mitigation policies and their implications for inequality

Social impacts of climate change mitigation policies and their implications for inequality

What do we know about the employment impacts of climate policies? A review of the ex post literature

Managing biodiversity in the Anthropocene: discussing the Nature Futures Framework as a tool for adaptive decision-making for nature under climate change

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About