So far, qualitative syntheses have been achieved mainly through a more narrative form of examination (e.B. Dimitrov et al 2019). While these journals provide extremely valuable information on existing evidence7, the rapid increase in the volume and diversity of climate-related literature has called into question the ability of these journals to remain comprehensive and transparent (Petticrew and Mccartney 2011, Minx et al 2017). Our experience has shown that to meet the demand for a more systematic synthesis of evidence on policy processes, we need better systematic methods to categorize and compile qualitative assessments of policies that are scalable to meet the challenge of “great literature”. Advances in big data methods offer significant opportunities here (Minx et al 2017, Lamb et al 2018, 2019). While formal re-entry into the deal is easy, the biggest challenge for a Biden administration would be to propose a new US administration. NDC, which is widely regarded as ambitious and credible. Looking for a glimmer of hope in the UNITED Nations` poignant report on climate change? We can determine the effects of climate change through the political, economic and social choices we make today. The UN report warns that the terrible effects of climate change will occur sooner than expected.
Here`s why we need to follow the report`s advice and why every ton of emissions reduction can make a difference. The second part of our analysis is based on an assessment of factors, barriers and recommendations. In other words, we look for the main arguments put forward in the literature to explain why the Paris Agreement will prove effective in achieving its objectives. Table 2 broadly defines what we mean by drivers, obstacles and recommendations. Based on an initial reading of all documents, we iteratively develop a code book to identify the detailed categories of drivers, obstacles and recommendations: first, we extract text extracts from summaries and conclusions that could be considered as drivers/obstacles/recommendations, and then we develop common categories through these extracts, and we refine our codebook into several sets of coding subsamples of 5 to 10 articles from all authors. Finally, the codebook (see annex 1) was applied to all documents. We also distinguish between hypothetical/real, as well as direct/indirect/different,5 factors and obstacles. We only cod the summary and conclusions, arguing that these articles were most likely to have common arguments about the effectiveness of the PA.
The Paris Agreement is a historic environmental agreement adopted by almost all countries in 2015 to combat climate change and its negative impacts. The agreement aims to significantly reduce global greenhouse gas emissions in order to limit the increase in global temperature this century to 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, while looking for ways to limit the increase to 1.5 degrees. The agreement contains commitments from all major emitting countries to reduce their pollution from climate change and to strengthen these commitments over time. The Compact provides a means for developed countries to support developing countries in their mitigation and adaptation efforts, and provides a framework for transparent monitoring, reporting and tightening of countries` individual and collective climate goals. First, a number of contributions recommend using a variety of different indicators that allow science and other stakeholders to discuss their pros and cons, thus allowing countries to select the indicators and methods best suited to their specific context and capabilities (Magnan and Ribera 2016, Aldy et al 2017, Jacoby et al 2017, Höhne et al 2018, Winkler et al 2018). Second, we identify several proposals to link climate action monitoring to sustainable development monitoring (Sarr 2018, Chan et al 2019, Waisman et al 2019). The need to track NDC progress beyond simple emissions accounting has been another recurring theme (Iyer et al 2017, Nature Climate Change 2017, Jeffery et al 2018). We identify a variety of specific recommendations to structure the MRV process, ranging from a commitment by nations to include statements on how progress in implementing adaptation plans will be assessed (Morgan et al 2019) to the inclusion of long-term mitigation strategies in the PA Transparency Framework (Mayer 2019). Finally, a large number of documents recommend specific methods for tracking progress, focusing primarily on measuring mitigation efforts (Herrala and Goel 2016, Peters et al 2017, Kameyama and Kawamoto 2018, Craft and Fisher 2018a, Müller and Michaelowa 2019, Scotford and Minas 2019, Waisman et al 2019).
The EU`s Initial Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) under the Paris Agreement was a commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at least 40% by 2030 compared to 1990 levels within the broader climate and energy framework by 2030. All key EU legislation to achieve this goal has been adopted by the end of 2018. Informing these developments and supporting decision-makers in the successful implementation of PA mechanisms therefore remains a key task for academic research. Although there is research that supports and questions the effectiveness of PA, no attempt has been made to systematically synthesize this area of research, as existing journals lack systematic methods (Petticrew and Mccartney 2011, Minx et al 2017) or remain too narrow in their purpose (for an overview of existing reviews, see page 4 of the protocol in the stacks.iop.org/ERL/15/083006/mmedia additional documents). . . .