Case studies in co-benefits approaches to climate change mitigation and adaptation

Spencer, Benjamin T.; Lawler, Josh; Lowe, Celia; Thompson, LuAnne; Hinckley, T. M.; Kim, Sung Hyun; Bolton, Susan; Meschke, Scott; Olden, Julian D.; Voss, Joachim

doi:10.1080/09640568.2016.1168287

Cited by 48 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Mirroring findings from Stringer et al [6] and Dyer et al [8], this research suggests that enabling environments can be put in place through enhanced communication and multi-stakeholder cooperation. As noted in an interview with a scientist, despite training being delivered to help policy implementers choose planting sites, planting was implemented in the wrong habitats.…”

Section: Benefit Reportedmentioning

confidence: 59%

“…For instance, urban green spaces help to improve the physical and mental well-being of residents, while delivering at the same time adaptation benefits (e.g., cooling and storm-water drainage) and mitigation benefits through, for example, the shading of buildings [5]. Reforestation and agroforestry schemes can help, for instance, to sequester carbon, prevent flooding, enhance biodiversity, rehabilitate degraded lands, provide a local energy supply for the rural poor and improve land use and watershed management [6]. In the water sector, hydropower facilities can reduce fossil fuel use and improve energy security [7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Links between Climate Change Mitigation, Adaptation and Development in Land Policy and Ecosystem Restoration Projects: Lessons from South Africa

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Links between climate change adaptation, mitigation and development co-benefits in land policy and ecosystem restoration projects are hampered by limited understanding of how multi-faceted policy, institutions and projects interact. This paper explores perceptions of co-benefits produced by two community-level projects that pursue ecosystem restoration in South Africa. It develops a new analytical framework to assess the enabling and constraining factors in delivering triple wins for adaptation, mitigation and development. The aim is to investigate the potential for integrating community perspectives into policy and project development and implementation. Data collected through mixed-methods (policy analysis, semi-structured interviews, participatory site visits and focus groups) are analysed using thematic analysis. We find that while the projects investigated have potential to deliver triple wins, siloed approaches presently hinder effective implementation. In particular, project focus on job creation hampers the achievement of longer-term mitigation and adaptation benefits. Operational flexibility, long-term goals, multi-sectoral cooperation and enabling frameworks are imperative to the achievement of triple wins. Findings provide valuable lessons that can be applied across sub-Saharan Africa towards achieving triple wins in climate and development policy and practice, especially those developed with job creation and ecological restoration aims.

show abstract

Section: Benefit Reportedmentioning

confidence: 59%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Links between Climate Change Mitigation, Adaptation and Development in Land Policy and Ecosystem Restoration Projects: Lessons from South Africa

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…79 For example, mitigation and adaptation responses carry the potential for positive and adverse consequences, including through multiple trade-offs and co-benefits with other sustainable development goals, and thereby affect the overall nature and complexity of risk. 80,81 The inclusion of response in risk assessment also allows for greater understanding of the relationship between climate change risk and resilience because responses are a key part of the governance and learning about the feedbacks that shape social-ecological systems. 82 As such, the inclusion of response as a determinant of risk helps further the foundations for a framework-level integration of concepts of climate resilient development pathways and climate change risk within climate change assessments.…”

Section: Ll Open Accessmentioning

confidence: 99%

A framework for complex climate change risk assessment

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…An often proposed political solution is to strengthen policy integration. Spencer et al (2017), for example, argue for a co-benefits approach that includes providing incentives across multiple scales and time frames, promoting long-term integrated impact assessment, and fostering multidimensional communication networks. Several studies point out that visualization and consideration of co-benefits could be helpful when striving for further measures in areas as disparate as e.g.…”

Section: Policy Aspectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Climate policy co-benefits: a review

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Concern over mitigation costs impedes the adoption of the climate policies needed to achieve agreed global warming targets. While costs are important to consider, so are benefits. However, the evidence for climate policy co-benefits, that is, the benefits in addition to avoided climate change costs, is commonly overlooked in policy-making. In many areas, the research is limited and not comprehensively synthesised. This article counters that problem and reviews 239 peer-reviewed articles, selected from 1,749 hits from a literature search covering 'co-benefits' and related terms. Aiming to aid policy-makers and to identify research gaps, we structure, describe, analyse and synthesize the rapidly expanding knowledge on climate policy co-benefits. Improved air quality is the co-benefit category dominating the literature, but studies covering a broad geographic range also focus on diet, physical activity, soil and water quality, biodiversity, economic performance, and energy security. In these areas, co-benefits are shown to be of substantial economic value, regarding air quality often of the same order of magnitude as mitigation costs, in some instances even larger. However, the share of studies quantifying or monetizing cobenefits is limited, and the empirical evidence is small, in particular for areas besides air quality and health. Furthermore, the knowledge is seldom used in policy-making, meaning that decision-making is often biased and overly concerned with costs, leading to suboptimal climate policies and goal failures. Evidently, more research is needed, as well as improved decision-making. Understanding and acting on climate policy co-benefits can promote policies that better mitigate climate change and improve overall welfare. Key policy insights. Climate policy co-benefits in well-researched fields such as air quality and health are large, often equalling or exceeding mitigation costs. . Despite their significance, co-benefits are seldom considered in decision-making, leading to biased policies and goal failures. . In several areas, such as diet and energy security, co-benefits are sparsely researched, but emerging evidence points to high values. . More research is needed, including on how to describe the total value of different co-benefits. . Improved processes, documentation requirements and criteria in decision-making are needed, in order to ensure that political decision-makers consider co-benefits. ARTICLE HISTORY

show abstract

Case studies in co-benefits approaches to climate change mitigation and adaptation

Cited by 48 publications

References 50 publications

Links between Climate Change Mitigation, Adaptation and Development in Land Policy and Ecosystem Restoration Projects: Lessons from South Africa

Links between Climate Change Mitigation, Adaptation and Development in Land Policy and Ecosystem Restoration Projects: Lessons from South Africa

A framework for complex climate change risk assessment

Climate policy co-benefits: a review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About