| 1. |
- Máñez Costa, Maria, et al.
(author)
-
Co-production of Climate Services : A diversity of approaches and good practice from the ERA4CS projects (2017–2021)
- 2022
-
Reports (other academic/artistic)abstract
- This guide presents a joint effort of projects funded under the European Research Area for Climate Services (ERA4CS) (http://www.jpi-climate.eu/ERA4CS), a co- funded action initiated by JPI Climate with co-funding by the European Union (Grant 690462), 15 national public Research Funding Organisations (RFOs), and 30 Research Performing Organisations (RPOs) from 18 European countries. This guide sets out to increase the understanding of different pathways, methods, and approaches to improve knowledge co-production of climate services with users as a value-added activity of the ERA4CS Programme.Reflecting on the experiences of 16 of the 26 projects funded under ERA4CS, this guide aims to define and recommend good practices for transdisciplinary knowledge co-production of climate services to researchers, users, funding agencies, and private sector service providers. Drawing on responses from ERA4CS project teams to a questionnaire and interviews, this guide maps the diversity of methods for stakeholder identification, involvement, and engagement. It also conducts an analysis of methods, tools, and mechanisms for engagement as well as evaluation of co-production processes.This guide presents and discusses good practice examples based on the review of the ERA4CS projects, identifying enablers and barriers for key elements in climate service co-production processes. These were: namely (i) Forms of Engagement; (ii) Entry Points for Engagement; and, (iii) Intensity of Involvement. It further outlines key ingredients to enhance the quality of co-producing climate services with users and stakeholders.Based on the analysis of the lessons learned from ERA4CS projects, as well as a review of key concepts in the recent literature on climate service co-production, we provide a set of recommendations for researchers, users, funders and private sector providers of climate services.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Rocklöv, Joacim, Professor, 1979-, et al.
(author)
-
Decision-support tools to build climate resilience against emerging infectious diseases in Europe and beyond
- 2023
-
In: The Lancet Regional Health. - : Elsevier. - 2666-7762. ; 32
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Climate change is one of several drivers of recurrent outbreaks and geographical range expansion of infectious diseases in Europe. We propose a framework for the co-production of policy-relevant indicators and decision-support tools that track past, present, and future climate-induced disease risks across hazard, exposure, and vulnerability domains at the animal, human, and environmental interface. This entails the co-development of early warning and response systems and tools to assess the costs and benefits of climate change adaptation and mitigation measures across sectors, to increase health system resilience at regional and local levels and reveal novel policy entry points and opportunities. Our approach involves multi-level engagement, innovative methodologies, and novel data streams. We take advantage of intelligence generated locally and empirically to quantify effects in areas experiencing rapid urban transformation and heterogeneous climate-induced disease threats. Our goal is to reduce the knowledge-to-action gap by developing an integrated One Health—Climate Risk framework.
|
|
| 4. |
- Rockström, Johan, et al.
(author)
-
Climate change : The necessary, the possible and the desirable Earth League climate statement on the implications for climate policy from the 5th IPCC Assessment
- 2014
-
In: Earth’s Future. - 2328-4277. ; 2:12, s. 606-611
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The development of human civilisations has occurred at a time of stable climate. This climate stability is now threatened by human activity. The rising global climate risk occurs at a decisive moment for world development. World nations are currently discussing a global development agenda consequent to the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), which ends in 2015. It is increasingly possible to envisage a world where absolute poverty is largely eradicated within one generation and where ambitious goals on universal access and equal opportunities for dignified lives are adopted. These grand aspirations for a world population approaching or even exceeding nine billion in 2050 is threatened by substantial global environmental risks and by rising inequality. Research shows that development gains, in both rich and poor nations, can be undermined by social, economic and ecological problems caused by human-induced global environmental change. Climate risks, and associated changes in marine and terrestrial ecosystems that regulate the resilience of the climate system, are at the forefront of these global risks. We, as citizens with a strong engagement in Earth system science and socio-ecological dynamics, share the vision of a more equitable and prosperous future for the world, yet we also see threats to this future from shifts in climate and environmental processes. Without collaborative action now, our shared Earth system may not be able to sustainably support a large proportion of humanity in the decades ahead.
|
|
| 5. |
- Roelfer, Lena, et al.
(author)
-
Leveraging Governance Performance to Enhance Climate Resilience
- 2022
-
In: Earth's Future. - : American Geophysical Union (AGU). - 2328-4277. ; 10:10
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Enhancing the resilience of complex social-ecological systems (SES) to climate change requires transformative changes. Yet, there are knowledge gaps on how best to achieve transformation. In this study, we present an approach for assessing governance performance in SES and identifying leverage points to ultimately enhance climate resilience. The approach combines three different methods including a capital approach framework, fuzzy cognitive mapping, and a leverage points analysis. Using a coastal case-study in Algoa Bay, South Africa, the performance of governance processes contributing to different forms of capital is assessed. Subsequently, leverage points - where a small shift may lead to transformative changes in the system as a whole - are identified based on measures of centrality and performance. Results suggest that a range of leverage points can improve governance performance and therefore climate resilience in the case-study. Leverage points include improving (a) support from the provincial government; (b) priority given to climate change in the integrated development plan; (c) frequency of collaborations; (d) participation in the implementation of climate action plans; (e) allocation of funding to climate change actions; (f) the overall level of preparedness in terms of staff with relevant expertise; (g) public awareness and understanding of climate change. The approach can also be used to analyze and model the relations and interactions between capitals. The study advances methodological and theoretical knowledge on the identification of leverage points for enabling transformations toward climate resilience and broader sustainability goals in SES.
|
|
| 6. |
- Warszawski, Lila, et al.
(author)
-
All options, not silver bullets, needed to limit global warming to 1.5 °C : a scenario appraisal
- 2021
-
In: Environmental Research Letters. - : IOP Publishing. - 1748-9326. ; 16:6
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Climate science provides strong evidence of the necessity of limiting global warming to 1.5 °C, in line with the Paris Climate Agreement. The IPCC 1.5 °C special report (SR1.5) presents 414 emissions scenarios modelled for the report, of which around 50 are classified as '1.5 °C scenarios', with no or low temperature overshoot. These emission scenarios differ in their reliance on individual mitigation levers, including reduction of global energy demand, decarbonisation of energy production, development of land-management systems, and the pace and scale of deploying carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies. The reliance of 1.5 °C scenarios on these levers needs to be critically assessed in light of the potentials of the relevant technologies and roll-out plans. We use a set of five parameters to bundle and characterise the mitigation levers employed in the SR1.5 1.5 °C scenarios. For each of these levers, we draw on the literature to define 'medium' and 'high' upper bounds that delineate between their 'reasonable', 'challenging' and 'speculative' use by mid century. We do not find any 1.5 °C scenarios that stay within all medium upper bounds on the five mitigation levers. Scenarios most frequently 'over use' CDR with geological storage as a mitigation lever, whilst reductions of energy demand and carbon intensity of energy production are 'over used' less frequently. If we allow mitigation levers to be employed up to our high upper bounds, we are left with 22 of the SR1.5 1.5 °C scenarios with no or low overshoot. The scenarios that fulfil these criteria are characterised by greater coverage of the available mitigation levers than those scenarios that exceed at least one of the high upper bounds. When excluding the two scenarios that exceed the SR1.5 carbon budget for limiting global warming to 1.5 °C, this subset of 1.5 °C scenarios shows a range of 15–22 Gt CO2 (16–22 Gt CO2 interquartile range) for emissions in 2030. For the year of reaching net zero CO2 emissions the range is 2039–2061 (2049–2057 interquartile range).
|
|
