Climate change is an area where different actors hold different opinions about the appropriate modes of solutions. Discussions are ongoing between proponents of market solutions and those favouring government regulations. Other discussions include the role of technological innovations, lifestyle changes, new economic models, and population dynamics. Similarly, there exist a wide range of preferences for what elements that should be included in a future climate agreement. For instance, should there be binding commitments by major emitters to put caps on emissions or voluntary pledged mitigation actions by developed country Parties? The INS has explored both of these questions since 2011, as presented below. For an analysis of the question about solutions to climate change, please see Nasiritousi, Hjerpe and Buhr (2014).
Surveyed participants’ views on the most effective modes of solutions to tackle climate change at COP 17-19. Green represents strong agreement and red strong disagreement. Categories: Efforts to limit population growth, lifestyle changes, new economic models valuing sustainability, government regulation, market mechanisms, technological innovations. The data shows that respondents agree most with the statement that climate change is most effectively tackled through lifestyle changes and disagree most that climate change is most effectively tackled through limits to population growth.
This figure shows a cross-tabulation of solutions favoured by different actor types at COP17 and COP18. Figures in bold indicate highest percentage response for each category of answers on mode of solution. It shows that negotiators expressed that climate change is most effectively tackled through New economic models valuing sustainability (agreement 73.6%), national governments, local governments, and intergovernmental organisations recognised Technological innovations (79.6%, 83.9% and 84.7%, respectively), while business and industry groups view Market mechanisms as the most effective solutions (82.7%). The other actor groups–environmental NGOs, researchers and other participants–view Government regulation as most effective (81.1%, 84.7% and 79.2%, respectively).
COP 19 surveyed participants’ views on which components for mitigation should be included in a future climate agreement. Green represents strong agreement and red strong disagreement. Categories: Binding commitments by major emitters to put caps on emissions, A global temperature goal for all Parties, A collective binding cap on emissions by Annex I Parties, Nationally appropriate mitigation actions by developing country Parties, Technology policy agreements, such as performance or renewable portfolio standards for all Parties but with different responsibilities, Technology investment targets in research and development for all Parties but with different responsibilities, Carbon markets, Voluntary pledged mitigation actions by developed country Parties. Our data suggest a very high level of agreement that two components should be part of a future climate change agreement: the cap on emissions from major emitter and the global temperature goal. In relative terms, thus, the respondents prefer a cap targeted towards major emitters rather than to the more greenhouse-gas emission heterogeneous category Annex 1 countries. Moreover, the survey suggests that there is high agreement that both the NAMA and technology policy elements, particularly the policy part, should be part of a future agreement. Interestingly, the two least preferred elements are carbon markets and voluntary mitigation pledges. This survey item will form base for a scientific publication analyzing whether preferences for and/or changes in preferences for the different mitigation elements can explain what eventually ended up in the Paris agreement.