| 1. |
- Field, Christopher B., et al.
(författare)
-
Summary for Policymakers
- 2014
-
Ingår i: Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and SectoralAspects.. - 9781107415379 ; , s. 1-32
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)
|
|
| 2. |
- Pereira, Laura M., et al.
(författare)
-
From fAIrplay to climate wars : making climate change scenarios more dynamic, creative, and integrative
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Ecology and Society. - 1708-3087. ; 26:4
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Understanding possible climate futures that include carbon dioxide removal (CDR) and solar radiation modification (SRM) requires thinking not just about staying within the remaining carbon budget, but also about politics and people. However, despite growing interest in CDR and SRM, scenarios focused on these potential responses to climate change tend to exclude feedbacks between social and climate systems (a criticism applicable to climate change scenarios more generally). We adapted the Manoa Mash Up method to generate scenarios for CDR and SRM that were more integrative, creative, and dynamic. The method was modified to identify important branching points in which different choices in how to respond to climate change (feedbacks between climate and social dynamics) lead to a plurality of climate futures. An interdisciplinary group of participants imagined distant futures in which SRM or CDR develop into a major social-environmental force. Groups received other seeds of change, such as Universal Basic Income or China's Belt and Road Initiative, and surprises, such as permafrost collapse that grew to influence the course of events to 2100. Groups developed narratives describing pathways to the future and identified bifurcation points to generate families of branching scenarios. Four climate-social dynamics were identified: motivation to mitigate, moral hazard, social unrest, and trust in institutions. These dynamics could orient toward better or worse outcomes with SRM and CDR deployment (and mitigation and adaptation responses more generally) but are typically excluded from existing climate change scenarios. The importance of these dynamics could be tested through the inclusion of social-environmental feedbacks into integrated assessment models (IAM) exploring climate futures. We offer a step-by-step guide to the modified Manoa Mash-up method to generate more integrative, creative, and dynamic scenarios; reflect on broader implications of using this method for generating more dynamic scenarios for climate change research and policy; and provide examples of using the scenarios in climate policy communication, including a choose-your-own adventure game called Survive the Century (https://survivethecentury.net/), which was played by over 15,000 people in the first 2 weeks of launching.
|
|
| 3. |
- Mach, Katharine J., et al.
(författare)
-
Climate as a risk factor for armed conflict
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Nature. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0028-0836 .- 1476-4687. ; 571:7764, s. 193-197
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Research findings on the relationship between climate and conflict are diverse and contested. Here we assess the current understanding of the relationship between climate and conflict, based on the structured judgments of experts from diverse disciplines. These experts agree that climate has affected organized armed conflict within countries. However, other drivers, such as low socioeconomic development and low capabilities of the state, are judged to be substantially more influential, and the mechanisms of climate–conflict linkages remain a key uncertainty. Intensifying climate change is estimated to increase future risks of conflict.
|
|
| 4. |
- Mach, Katharine J., et al.
(författare)
-
Directions for Research on Climate and Conflict
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Earth's Future. - 2328-4277. ; 8:7
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The potential links between climate and conflict are well studied, yet disagreement about the specific mechanisms and their significance for societies persists. Here, we build on assessment of the relationship between climate and organized armed conflict to define crosscutting priorities for future directions of research. They include (1) deepening insight into climate?conflict linkages and conditions under which they manifest, (2) ambitiously integrating research designs, (3) systematically exploring future risks and response options, responsive to ongoing decision-making, and (4) evaluating the effectiveness of interventions to manage climate?conflict links. The implications of this expanding scientific domain unfold in real time.
|
|
