This will require urgent and *** unprecedented levels of support — the UNEP Adaptation Gap Report indicates that
the global cost of adaptation could be as much as *** $ 200 or $ 300 billion per year by 2050 — but it is right that the rich countries responsible for the problem help to protect the culture, heritage and identity of the most vulnerable communities and countries... Q: What should EU governments be doing about it?
Not exact matches
But a quick summary
of some
of my thoughts: I think a case can be made for some combination
of equal per - capita payback and tax reduction, but the rationale for this must be that this somehow compensates for the
costs of global warming or
adaptation to that; as much
of this occurs in the future (with different people), this is private sector economic investment to boost the economy now so that it may make itself more robust in the future -LRB-?).
You seem to have steered clear
of the questions in which science intersects with policy (
global warming is happening but it's not calamitous; the
costs estimated for cutting emissions exceed the overinflated
costs of adaptation, etc...).
DIVA is a
global model to estimate impacts
of sea level rise on all coastal nations as well as the
costs and benefits
of possible
adaptation measures.
On climate finance, Harjeet Singh,
global climate lead at ActionAid International, said: «The issue
of finance underpins so many different parts
of the climate negotiations, because poor countries simply can't cover the triple
costs of loss and damage,
adaptation and mitigation on their own.
The scope
of this chapter, with a focus on food crops, pastures and livestock, industrial crops and biofuels, forestry (commercial forests), aquaculture and fisheries, and small - holder and subsistence agriculturalists and artisanal fishers, is to: examine current climate sensitivities / vulnerabilities; consider future trends in climate,
global and regional food security, forestry and fisheries production; review key future impacts
of climate change in food crops pasture and livestock production, industrial crops and biofuels, forestry, fisheries, and small - holder and subsistence agriculture; assess the effectiveness
of adaptation in offsetting damages and identify
adaptation options, including planned
adaptation to climate change; examine the social and economic
costs of climate change in those sectors; and, explore the implications
of responding to climate change for sustainable development.
This analytical report shows the wide range
of adverse impacts
of climate change in Africa and assesses the balance
of economic
costs, as a function
of a range
of scenarios including both successful and failed
global mitigation efforts, and strong compared to weak implementation
of adaptation measures.
Consequently, we need to focus efforts on the benefits /
costs of «
adaptation» compared to all other major
global humanitarian projects.
He argues that to tackle
global warming we need smarter solutions focused on getting long - term solutions like
cost - competitive renewables and that many
of the impacts
of global warming would be better addressed through
adaptation.»
The situation is indeed clear; we can logically conclude from geology, physics, climate science, ecology, and economics that a few hundred more ppm
of CO2 would most likely be net beneficial globally and even for those areas or circumstances in which
global warming would not be beneficial it would be considerably more feasible and
cost effective to implement local
adaptations than attempt
global mitigation which comes with no money - back guarantees should the entire (100 %) world not play ball.
Those nations who have consistently emitted ghgs above their fair share
of safe
global ghg emissions are responsible for the reasonable
adaptation costs and damages
of poor nations and people who have not caused climate change.These responsibilities are required both by basic ethics and justice and international law.
South Africa likely will use the analysis in Paris to make a case for a
global adaptation goal based on quantification
of adaptation costs.
We expect South Africa's INDC to galvanize important conversations about a
global adaptation goal, the connections between mitigation and
adaptation, and the challenges
of costing adaptation action.
On climate finance, Harjeet Singh,
Global Climate Lead, ActionAid International: «The issue
of finance underpins so many different parts
of climate negotiations, because poor countries simply can't cover the triple
costs of loss and damage,
adaptation and mitigation on their own.
It was between 10 and 100 times more costly to try to make
global warming go away today than to let the warming occur — even if the warming were at the rate predicted by the IPCC, and even if the
cost of inaction was as high as the Stern Report had imagined — and to concentrate on focused
adaptation when and where and only if and only to the extent that might be necessary.
Those nations, sub-national governments, organizations, businesses, and individuals that are emitting greenhouse gases above their fair share
of safe
global emissions have obligations, duties, and responsibilities for the
costs of adaptation or damages to those who are harmed or will be harmed by climate change.
IIED: Accurate
cost benefit analysis
of climate change
adaptation actions is not only critical in designing effective local - level
adaptation strategies, but also for generating information that feeds into national and
global climate policy agreements.
In the area
of climate change, the report highlights the findings
of its Emissions Gap Report 2013 — which details the gap between current
global emissions and the reduction needed to remain on track to meet the 2 degree Celsius
global warming target — and its Africa
Adaptation Gap Report, which describes the costs of adaptation measures on the African continent under various global warming
Adaptation Gap Report, which describes the
costs of adaptation measures on the African continent under various global warming
adaptation measures on the African continent under various
global warming scenarios.
The estimated
global cost, after
adaptation, is $ 200B for 0.5 m rise and $ 1T for 1 m rise in 2100: The economic impact
of substantial sea - level rise These
costs are dwarfed by the benefits for agriculture and health (see Figure 3 in the first link).
China is the world's second largest CO2 emitter behind the U.S. To what extent China gets involved in combating
global climate change is extremely important both for lowering compliance
costs of climate mitigation and
adaptation and for moving international climate negotiations forward.
However, it's not just on the
cost of adaptation that the proposed ERF makes miscalculations: it also gets wrong the
global costs of mitigation effort in 2020.
Read more:
Adaptation Emerges as Key Part
of Any Climate Change Plan
Global Climate Change 39 % Increase in CO2 by 2030: Latest Grim Business - as - Usual Emissions Projection Financing Needed But Scarce for Climate Change
Adaptation in Africa â $ ¨ Worst Case IPCC Climate Change Trajectories Are Being Realized Climate Change Will
Costs US States Billions
of Dollars