What Policies Address Both the Coronavirus Crisis and the Climate Crisis?

Abstract

The coronavirus pandemic has led many countries to initiate unprecedented economic recovery packages. Policymakers tackling the coronavirus crisis have also been encouraged to prioritize policies which help mitigate a second, looming crisis: climate change. We identify and analyze policies that combat both the coronavirus crisis and the climate crisis. We analyze both the long-run climate impacts from coronavirus-related economic recovery policies, and the impacts of long-run climate policies on economic recovery and public health post-recession. We base our analysis on data on emissions, employment and corona-related layoffs across sectors, and on previous research. We show that, among climate policies, labor-intensive green infrastructure projects, planting trees, and in particular pricing carbon coupled with reduced labor taxation boost economic recovery. Among coronavirus policies, aiding services sectors (leisure services such as restaurants and culture, or professional services such as technology), education and the healthcare sector appear most promising, being labor intensive yet low-emission—if such sectoral aid is conditioned on being directed towards employment and on low-carbon supply chains. Large-scale green infrastructure projects and green R&D investment, while good for the climate, are unlikely to generate enough employment to effectively alleviate the coronavirus crisis. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s10640-020-00451-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Transforming the COVID-19 Threat into an Opportunity: The Pandemic as a Stage to the Sustainable Economy

“…This climate change mitigation effect currently has significant potential to generate unanticipated systemic shocks in the global economy. These results are also in line with the findings of other previous studies that highlighted the increased focus on adapting economies to the negative effects of climate change and achieving the goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions [62][63][64][65]. Thus, achieving climate neutrality will require contributions from all economic sectors.…”

COVID-19 and Climate Change: A Tale of Two Global Problems

“…For example, according to [18] certain temporary adjustments, such as teleworking and increased reliance on digital channels, may endure long after the lockdowns have ended, thus reducing transportation demand and emissions. Others argue that COVID-19 is a historical opportunity to reset the path of economic development and reboot it on a low-carbon alternative, for instance taking advantage of low interest rates to boost sustainable investment projects [20][21][22][23][24]. However, it is also noted that this goal may not be seen by governments and citizens alike as an immediate priority amid the pressing needs of the recovery, let alone that super-low oil prices are not likely to help the transition to carbon-free energy sources.…”

Towards a Successful Post COVID-19 Transition of Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning in Complex Sustainability Science Research-to-Policy Projects

“…Phase two "context responsive MEL" was induced by the presence of a novel global pandemic, which gradually gravitated towards the "new normal" [10]. As the context quickly evolved and the real impact was felt across the world, the MEL community jostled to develop new and improved project management approaches and rules of engagement in a world where travel and physical contact restrictions were introduced, and virtual working arrangements became the norm [11]. With this shift came increased and inevitable investments in information and communication technology (ICT) platforms to enable limited but meaningful contact with field level activities, partners and beneficiaries.…”