On the political feasibility of climate change mitigation pathways: Is it too late to keep warming below 1.5°C?
On the political feasibility of climate change mitigation pathways: Is it too late to keep warming below 1.5°C?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/wcc.621
复制
发表时间：
2019-10-23
影响因子：
9.2
通讯作者：
Cherp, Aleh
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Jewell, Jessica;Cherp, Aleh
将全球变暖控制在1.5摄氏度以下在技术上是可行的，但在政治上可行吗？了解政治可行性需要回答三个问题：(a)“什么的可行性？”、(b)“何时何地的可行性？”和(c)“对谁来说可行性？”。就 1.5 摄氏度目标而言，这些问题转化为 (a) 确定包含 1.5 摄氏度路径的具体行动； (b) 评估这些行动在不同社会经济和政治背景下的经济和政治成本； (c) 评估相关社会行为者承担这些费用的经济和体制能力。这种政治可行性观点强调成本和能力，与普遍关注利益和动机形成鲜明对比，后者将愿望误认为可行性。关于所需气候行动的政治可行性的证据并不系统，但明确表明所需行动的成本相对于相关背景下承担这些成本的能力来说太高了。未来，成本可能会下降，产能可能会增加，这将减少至少某些解决方案的政治限制。然而，这不太可能及时发生以避免温度超调。进一步的研究应侧重于探索受成本和能力约束的“动态政治可行性空间”，以找到更可行的气候稳定途径。本文分类为：碳经济和气候减缓>能源脱碳和/或减少需求
Keeping global warming below 1.5 degrees C is technically possible but is it politically feasible? Understanding political feasibility requires answering three questions: (a) "Feasibility of what?," (b) "Feasibility when and where?," and (c) "Feasibility for whom?." In relation to the 1.5 degrees C target, these questions translate into (a) identifying specific actions comprising the 1.5 degrees C pathways; (b) assessing the economic and political costs of these actions in different socioeconomic and political contexts; and (c) assessing the economic and institutional capacity of relevant social actors to bear these costs. This view of political feasibility stresses costs and capacities in contrast to the prevailing focus on benefits and motivations which mistakes desirability for feasibility. The evidence on the political feasibility of required climate actions is not systematic, but clearly indicates that the costs of required actions are too high in relation to capacities to bear these costs in relevant contexts. In the future, costs may decline and capacities may increase which would reduce political constraints for at least some solutions. However, this is unlikely to happen in time to avoid a temperature overshoot. Further research should focus on exploring the "dynamic political feasibility space" constrained by costs and capacities in order to find more feasible pathways to climate stabilization. This article is categorized under: The Carbon Economy and Climate Mitigation > Decarbonizing Energy and/or Reducing Demand