Task 6.1 Political requirements
Objectives
The objective of Task 6.1. is
Metrics for comparing GHGs should not only be
evaluated in terms of their scientific robustness and performance, but
should also be evaluated in terms of its political feasibility. At a general
level, the political applicability of an index or methodology for the comparison
of different GHGs can be evaluated in terms of at least four main functions,
which all prompt different requirements to the metric (see also Skodvin
and Fuglestvedt, 1997):
In WP 6.1, four approaches to the objectives are applied:
1. Literature review (role of scientific and policy making models) and own analysis of climate negotiations focusing on the political discussion and adoption of
A draft working paper on "Political requirements of metrics of climate change" has been developed. Two basic categories of requirements have been distinguished: First, those that stem directly from legal texts (UNFCCC, the Kyoto Protocol), and second, those procedural ones that may be derived from the negotiation context. Generally, environmental and political effectiveness are criteria for successful negotiations and decision-making. Negotiation processes are regularly confronted with tensions and trade-offs between these two criteria. As regards revised or new metrics of climate change, effectiveness can be interpreted as follows:
Based on the assessment of legal text and procedures, a working list of political requirements was developed, building on the wotk of Skodvin and Fuglestvedt (1997)3 and Fuglestvedt et al. (2002).
Regarding the legal text requirements, particularly
relevant are three functions of metrics:
1. Scientific assessments:
Regarding the procedural requirements at least
three categories have to be considered:
1. Simplicity and transparency: The metric
should be easily to understand and to use.
2. Flexibility: The methodology should
be open to advancements in scientific knowledge and to changes in the negotiation
process.
3. Political feasibility: Uncertainties
should be reduced to the maximum extent possible.
Socio-economic relevance and policy implication
Task 6.1 generates background material that will
be used in Task 6.2 and later for the assessment of new or refined metrics
of climate change. The preliminary checklist to assess the political applicability
of any metric of climate change already provides important insights in
how metrics might be further developed in the climate negotiations.
Discussion and conclusion
An important result is the recommendation that
a more thorough assessment of the design and use of metrics in other than
the climate regime would be extremely fruitful. In particular, experiences
with the role that the RAINS-model, an "Integrated Assessment Model", played
in the negotiations for the Gothenburg Protocol appeared to be helpful
for understanding the particular circumstances in which metrics are more
or less useful in environmental regimes. This investigation aims at improving
the applicability of a metric under the climate regime, in particular with
respect to the procedural requirements that have so far been developed.
A first but short overview on the ozone and LRTAP regime with regard to
the metrics and decision making tools applied has been elaborated. As a
conclusion from these works, three concepts of how metrics fulfil their
functions in multilateral environmental regimes are distinguished.
Plan and objectives for next period
1. The working paper in Task 6.1 is close to a final version. Three tasks are currently carried out in order to complement the current draft:
Task 6.2 Evaluation of existing
metrics
Objectives
The objectives of this task are
Methodological issues
WP 6.2 basically relies on a review of available
metrics and their scientific evaluation (from WP 4) and the list of requirements
(from Task 6.1).
Achievements
Work on WP 6.2 concentrated on a partial assessment
of the currently used metric CO2 equivalents and GWP on the basis of the
evolving list of requirements. This assessment will be complemented and
revised as the list develops.
Socio-economic relevance and policy implication
The assessment will perform a thorough evaluation
of existing metrics, notably the GWP methodology, according to requirements
formulated in 6.1. It will also evaluate some of the major existing proposals
for refinements of the GWP methodology in terms of the same requirements.
This will provided prominent input for the climate negotiations, as methodological
issues are currently on the Agenda of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific
and Technological Advice (SBSTA). Furthermore the inclusion of other than
the six "Kyoto basket" source gases will be a prominent issue in the climate
negotiations not least subsequent to the fundamentally altered positions
of the USA.
Discussion and conclusion
Preliminary work shows that the differentiation
of functions suggested in Task 6.1 which metrics of climate change have
to fulfil leads to the conclusion that a phased approach to metrics of
climate change is expected to be fruitful: depending on the function (for
scientific assessments, negotiations or trading), different metrics may
be most adequate. Or, depending on the functions, it might be most adequate
to consider the choice of metrics within specific context. This would imply
the need to consider metrics with regard to their applicability and their
integration in more or less complex decision making tools, especially with
respect to the science/policy interface.
Plan and objectives for next period
We plan to application of the final checklist
(from Task 6.1) to the summary of existing metrics provided by WP 4.
Task 6.3 Evaluation of refined metrics
This Task has not yet been started.
Plan and objectives for next period
We plan
Task 6.4 Overall evaluation
This Task has not yet been started.
Plan and objectives for next period
We plan to perform an overall evaluation of the
metrics, both existing and refined (jointly from the view points of natural
sciences, economics and political science).