scholarly journals Blue carbon: a study of the potential of coastal ecosystem resource management in global climate policy and carbon markets

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sebastian Thomas
2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 127
Author(s):  
Jay Mar D. Quevedo ◽  
Yuta Uchiyama ◽  
Kevin Muhamad Lukman ◽  
Ryo Kohsaka

Blue carbon ecosystem (BCE) initiatives in the Coral Triangle Region (CTR) are increasing due to their amplified recognition in mitigating global climate change. Although transdisciplinary approaches in the “blue carbon” discourse and collaborative actions are gaining momentum in the international and national arenas, more work is still needed at the local level. The study pursues how BCE initiatives permeate through the local communities in the Philippines and Indonesia, as part of CTR. Using perception surveys, the coastal residents from Busuanga, Philippines, and Karimunjawa, Indonesia were interviewed on their awareness, utilization, perceived threats, and management strategies for BCEs. Potential factors affecting residents’ perceptions were explored using multivariate regression and correlation analyses. Also, a comparative analysis was done to determine distinctions and commonalities in perceptions as influenced by site-specific scenarios. Results show that, despite respondents presenting relatively high awareness of BCE services, levels of utilization are low with 42.9–92.9% and 23.4–85.1% respondents in Busuanga and Karimunjawa, respectively, not directly utilizing BCE resources. Regression analysis showed that respondents’ occupation significantly influenced their utilization rate and observed opposite correlations in Busuanga (positive) and Karimunjawa (negative). Perceived threats are found to be driven by personal experiences—occurrence of natural disasters in Busuanga whereas discerned anthropogenic activities (i.e., land-use conversion) in Karimunjawa. Meanwhile, recognized management strategies are influenced by the strong presence of relevant agencies like non-government and people’s organizations in Busuanga and the local government in Karimunjawa. These results can be translated as useful metrics in contextualizing and/or enhancing BCE management plans specifically in strategizing advocacy campaigns and engagement of local stakeholders across the CTR.


2021 ◽  
Vol 73 (05) ◽  
pp. 8-8
Author(s):  
Pam Boschee

Carbon credits, carbon taxes, and emissions trading systems are familiar terms in discussions about limiting global warming, the Paris Agreement, and net-zero emissions goals. A more recent addition to the glossary of climate policy is “carbon tariff.” While the concept is not new, it recently surfaced in nascent policymaking in the EU. In 2019, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen proposed a “carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM)” as part of a proposed green deal. In March, the European Parliament adopted a resolution on a World Trade Organization (WTO)-compatible CBAM. A carbon tariff, or the EU’s CBAM, is a tax applied to carbon-intensive imports. Countries that have pledged to be more ambitious in reducing emissions—and in some cases have implemented binding targets—may impose carbon costs on their own businesses. Being eyed now are cross-border or overseas businesses that make products in countries in which no costs are imposed for emissions, resulting in cheaper carbon-intensive goods. Those products are exported to the countries aiming for reduced emissions. The concern lies in the risk of locally made goods becoming unfairly disadvantaged against competitors that are not taking similar steps to deal with climate change. A carbon tariff is being considered to level the playing field: local businesses in countries applying a tariff can better compete as climate policies evolve and are adopted around the world. Complying with WTO rules to ensure fair treatment, the CBAM will be imposed only on high-emitting industries that compete directly with local industries paying a carbon price. In the short term, these are likely to be steel, chemicals, fertilizers, and cement. The Parliament’s statement introduced another term to the glossary of climate policy: carbon leakage. “To raise global climate ambition and prevent ‘carbon leakage,’ the EU must place a carbon price on imports from less climate-ambitious countries.” It refers to the situation that may occur if businesses were to transfer production to other countries with laxer emission constraints to avoid costs related to climate policies. This could lead to an increase in total emissions in the higher-emitting countries. “The resolution underlines that the EU’s increased ambition on climate change must not lead to carbon leakage as global climate efforts will not benefit if EU production is just moved to non-EU countries that have less ambitious emissions rules,” the Parliament said. It also emphasized the tariff “must not be misused to further protectionism.” A member of the environment committee, Yannick Jadot, said, “It is a major political and democratic test for the EU, which must stop being naïve and impose the same carbon price on products, whether they are produced in or outside the EU, to ensure the most polluting sectors also take part in fighting climate change and innovate towards zero carbon. This will give us the best chance of remaining below the 1.5°C warming limit, whilst also pushing our trading partners to be equally ambitious in order to enter the EU market.” The Commission is expected to present a legislative proposal on a CBAM in the second quarter of 2021 as part of the European Green Deal.


Author(s):  
Joseph E. Aldy ◽  
Scott Barrett ◽  
Robert N. Stavins

Author(s):  
E. Burkova

This article considers the most relevant component of the global environmental problem – the climate one. The article aims to identify the reaction of a national state to the global climate challenge. The subject of consideration is climate policy and, more broadly, the whole set of reactions of the political sphere of society to the global climate change. Among the tasks set by the author is to understand the nature of setting and solving new climatic environmental problems, to find out how they fit into national development strategies, to establish the interdependence of the climate ambitions of countries with the type of development, the carbon intensity of their economies, the structure of exports, the degree of energy independence. The solution of these tasks is carried out on the example of a number of new independent states (including CIS ones). A brief comparative analysis of these countries’ and the EU climate activities is carried out. The breakthrough event of the European environmental policy – the Green Deal of 2019 is taken as a starting point for the analysis. The main attention is paid to the key instrument of the EU climate policy today – the border carbon tax. Additional attention is paid to the observance of the principles of social justice in the implementation of new environmental activities (a just transition mechanism). The paper pays special attention to the role of Russia in the global climatic process. An assessment of the state of the climate segment of the environmental protection industry of our country, as well as the prospects for its development, is given.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document