Climate change: Back to development

Author/s Michel Damian, Luigi De Paoli
Publishing Year 2018 Issue 2017/3 Language English
Pages 20 P. 5-24 File size 277 KB
DOI 10.3280/EFE2017-003001
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

The Paris Agreement has created a double bifurcation. First, from top-down approach (with an emissions limit imposed from above) to a bottom-up approach based on national emissions reduction pledges. And second, from a mitigation-centered policy to a more balanced mitigation and adaptation efforts. The following work proposes, however, that further steps must be taken to bring the theme of development back to the center of the fight against climate change. The article is divided into four parts. First is a reflection on the fact that mitigation has captured much of the attention during the past twenty years, but that adaptation is progressively gaining importance in policies to combat climate change. The next section explains why, starting from the Framework Convention on Climate Change in 1992, the objective of the "stabilization of greenhouse gases concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system" has led first to define the increase of 2 ° C as the limit not to be exceeded, then to the search for an equivalent level of CO2 concentration and last to the related carbon budget. The third part shows why the goal of not exceeding the 2 ° C temperature increase is illusory when considering the discrepancy between actual mitigation policies and theoretical commitments required based on the data presented by the IPCC. Even salvation coming from negative emission technologies at the moment seems more theoretical than real. The final conclusions state that, given the insufficiency of the mitigation tools, adaptation must be taken seriously - not as a passive solution, but as a conception of a different kind of development, which is required not only to fight climate change, but also for other purposes. .

Keywords: Climate change, adaptation, mitigation, sustainable development, Paris agreement

Jel codes: Q54, F53, Q01

  1. Agrawal A., Lemos M.C. (2015). Adaptive development. Nature Climate Change, 5(3): 185-187.
  2. Bonnefous B. et al. (2017). Emmanuel Macron : « Il faut un choc dans nos modes de production ». Le Monde, December 12 --
  3. Burton I. (1994). Deconstructing adaptation and reconstructing. Delta, 5(1): 14-15.
  4. Cox P.M., Huntingford C., Williamson M.S. (2018). Emergent constraint on equilibrium climate sensitivity from global temperature variability. Nature, 18 January 2018.
  5. CTI (Carbon Tracker Initiative) (2018). Carbon budgets explained --
  6. Damian M. (2016). A new political economy of climate change. Economics and policy of energy and the environment, 57(2/2015): 5-14.
  7. Damian M. (2014). La politique climatique change enfin de paradigme. Economie Appliquée, tome LXVII(1): 37-72.
  8. Damian M. (2007). Il faut réévaluer la place de l’adaptation dans la politique climatique. Natures Sciences Sociétés, 15: 407-410.
  9. DeLeo R.A. (2017). Anticipatory policymaking in global venues: Policy change, adaptation, and the UNFCCC. Futures, 92: 39-47.
  10. De Paoli L. (2015). The fight against climate change: Some proposal for action for Italy in Europe. Economics and policy of energy and the environment, 1: 9-27.
  11. Dovie D.B.K., Lwasa S. (2017). Correlating negotiation hotspot issues, Paris climate agreement and the international climate policy regime. Environmental Science & Policy, 77: 1-8.
  12. EEA (2018). Atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations --
  13. ESRL-NOAA (2018). Trends in Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide --
  14. Faran T.S., Olsson L. (2018). Geoengineering: neither economical, nor ethical – a risk – reward nexus analysis of carbon dioxide removal. International Environmental Agreements: Politic, Law and Economics, 18(1): 63-77.
  15. Gao Y., Gao X., Zhang X. (2017). The 2 °C Global Temperature Target and the Evolution of the Long-Term Goal of Addressing Climate Change – From the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change to the Paris Agreement. Engineering, 3: 272-278. DOI: 10.1016/J.ENG.2017.01.022
  16. Gupta J., Arts K. (2018). Achieving the 1.5 C objective: just implementation through a right to (sustainable) development approach. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 18(1): 11-28.
  17. Hall N. (2017). What is adaptation to climate change? Epistemic ambiguity in the climate finance system. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 17(1): 37-53.
  18. Hall N., Persson A. (2017). Global climate adaptation governance: Why is it not legally binding?, European Journal of International Relations. DOI: 10.1177/1354066117725157
  19. Hanemann, M., 2008. Observations on the Economics of Adaptation: Uncertainty and Timing, Presentation, Paris, OECD Workshop on the Economics of Adaptation, April 7-8 --
  20. Hansen J. et al. (2013). Assessing “Dangerous Climate Change”: Required Reduction of Carbon Emissions to Protect Young People, Future Generations and Nature, PLoS ONE 8(12): e81648.
  21. Heede R., Oreskes N. (2016). Potential emissions of CO2 and methane from proved reserves of fossil fuels: An alternative analysis. Global Environmental Change, 36: 12-20.
  22. Helleman J. (2015). Everyone knows climate adaptation is crucial, but beyond that it’s pretty hazy. The Conversation Global, December 5 --
  23. Honegger M., Rainer D. (2018). The political economy of negative emissions technologies: consequences for international policy design. Climate Policy, 18(3): 306-321. DOI: 10.1080/14693062.2017.1413322
  24. Hood M. (2018). 1.5 C climate goal ‘very unlikely’ but doable: draft UN report., January 13 --
  25. IEA-OECD (2008). World Energy Outlook, WEO ed 2008 and ed. 2017, OECD/IEA, --
  26. IEA (2017). CO2 emissions from fuel combustion: Highlights, 2017 ed.
  27. IPCC (2001). Climate Change 2001: Synthesis Report, Summary for Policymakers --
  28. IPCC (2005). Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage --
  29. IPCC (2007). Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report --
  30. IPCC (2013). Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis, Geneva --
  31. IPCC (2014). Climate Change 2014. Synthesis Report. Summary for Policymakers. Geneva --
  32. IPCC (2014). Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change, Summary for Policymakers --
  33. Jaeger C.C., Jaeger J. (2010). Three Views of Two Degrees. ECF Working Paper 2/2010.
  34. Lesnikowski A. et al. (2017). What does the Paris Agreement mean for adaptation? Climate Policy, 17(7): 825-831.
  35. McGlade C., Ekins P. (2014). Un-burnable oil: An examination of oil resource utilisation in a decarbonised energy system. Energy Policy, 64: 102-112.
  36. Mekouar M.A. (2017). L’Afrique à l’épreuve de l’Accord de Paris. Revue Juridique de l’Environnement, 42(HS03): 59-71.
  37. Morocco (2015). Intended Nationally Determined Contribution. UNFCCC, June 5. --
  38. Nieto J. et al. (2018). Less than 2 C? An Economic-Environmental Evaluation of the Paris Agreement. Ecological Economics, 146: 69-84.
  39. OECD-ITF (2018). Transport CO2 and the Paris Climate Agreement: Reviewing the Impact of Nationally Determined Contributions, --
  40. Pielke Jr. R.A. (1998). Rethinking the role of adaptation in climate policy. Global Environmental Change, 8(2): 159-170.
  41. Pielke Jr. et al. (2007). Lifting the taboo on adaptation. Nature, 445(7128): 597-598.
  42. Reuters (2018). Warming set to breach Paris accord’s toughest limit by mid century: draft.
  43. January 11 --
  44. Rojelj J. et al. (2018). Scenarios towards limiting global mean temperature increase below 1.5 C. Nature Climate Change, 8: 325-332.
  45. Rousset N. (2012). Economie du changement climatique : Des politiques d’atténuation aux politiques d’adaptation. Thèse de doctorat en sciences économiques, Laboratoire Economie du développement durable et de l’énergie (EDDEN, CNRS), Université Grenoble Alpes, 20 décembre.
  46. Schelling T.C. (1983). Climatic Change: Implications for Welfare and Policy, in National Research Council. Changing Climate: Report of the Carbon Dioxide Assessment Committee, Washington, DC, National Academy Press, 449-482.
  47. Schelling T.C. (2007). Climate Change: The Uncertainties, the Certainties, and What They Imply About Action. Economists’ Voice --
  48. Scott Hosking J., MacLeod D., Phillips T., Holmes C.R., Watson P., Shuckburgh E.F., Mitchell D. (2018). Changes in European wind energy generation potential within a 1.5 C warmer world. Environ. Res. Lett. 13 (2018) 054032.
  49. Stern N. (2009). A blueprint for a safer planet: How to manage climate change and create a new era of progress and prosperity. Bodley Head, London.
  50. Stern N. (2006). Stern Review: The Economics of Climate Change. HM Treasury, London.
  51. United Nations (1987). Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future, (also known as “Bruntland Report”) --
  52. United Nations (1992). United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change --
  53. United Nations (2009). Copenhagen Accord, FCCC/CP/2009/11/Add.1 --
  54. United Nations (2015). Adoption of the Paris Agreement. Paris, December 12 --
  55. Victor D.G., Kennel C.F. (2014). Ditch the 2 C warming goal. Nature, 514, 2 October: 30-31.
  56. Vidal J. (2018). How Bill Gates aims to clean up the planet. The, February 4 --
  57. O’Neill D.V. et al. (2018). A good life for all within planetary boundaries. Nature Sustainability, 1: 88-95 --

  • Global impacts of projected climate changes on the extent and aboveground biomass of mangrove forests Lidiane P. Gouvêa, Ester A. Serrão, Kyle Cavanaugh, Carlos F. D. Gurgel, Paulo A. Horta, Jorge Assis, in Diversity and Distributions /2022 pp.2349
    DOI: 10.1111/ddi.13631

Michel Damian, Luigi De Paoli, Climate change: Back to development in "ECONOMICS AND POLICY OF ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT" 3/2017, pp 5-24, DOI: 10.3280/EFE2017-003001