当前位置: X-MOL 学术Glob. Environ. Chang. › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
The policy discourse on negative emissions, land-based technologies, and the Global South
Global Environmental Change ( IF 8.9 ) Pub Date : 2022-06-18 , DOI: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2022.102550
Gregor Jaschke, Frank Biermann

Negative emissions are increasingly seen as a policy option to limit climate change. However, the most readily available technologies that could deliver negative emissions require, if deployed at scale, large amounts of land, with huge risks for livelihoods and the environment. This land is often assumed to be in the Global South. This article analyzes the nascent policy discourse on negative emissions by assessing 116 policy documents by 97 organizations with a focus on land-based technologies (afforestation and reforestation, bioenergy with carbon capture and storage, biochar, soil carbon sequestration). We conclude that this policy discourse is largely centered in the Global North (mostly in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Germany), with only five organizations directly linked to the Global South. 61% of the organizations in our sample, however, somehow refer to the Global South in their contributions, with nongovernmental organizations being most strongly focused on the role of the Global South and in particular the risks for vulnerable countries. While the earlier policy discourse on negative emissions was linked to a more general “geoengineering” discourse, this link has loosened in the last years. Overall, in the documents that we studied, negative emissions technologies seem to become more accepted, and parts of the discourse shift towards deployment. Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage seems more often associated with risks if compared to other land-based negative emissions technologies, especially with a view to the Global South.



中文翻译:

关于负排放、陆基技术和全球南方的政策讨论

负排放越来越被视为限制气候变化的政策选择。然而,如果大规模部署,最容易获得的可以产生负排放的技术需要大量土地,这会给生计和环境带来巨大风险。这片土地通常被认为位于全球南方。本文通过评估 97 个组织的 116 份政策文件,分析了关于负排放的新兴政策论述,重点关注陆上技术(造林和再造林、具有碳捕获和储存的生物能源、生物炭、土壤碳固存)。我们的结论是,这种政策话语主要集中在全球北方(主要在美国、英国和德国),只有五个组织与全球南方直接相关。然而,我们样本中 61% 的组织在其贡献中以某种方式提到了全球南方,非政府组织最关注全球南方的作用,特别是脆弱国家的风险。虽然早期关于负排放的政策讨论与更普遍的“地球工程”讨论有关,但这种联系在过去几年中有所松动。总体而言,在我们研究的文件中,负排放技术似乎越来越被接受,部分讨论转向部署。与其他基于陆地的负排放技术相比,具有碳捕获和储存功能的生物能源似乎更常与风险相关联,特别是从全球南方的角度来看。非政府组织最关注全球南方的作用,尤其是脆弱国家面临的风险。虽然早期关于负排放的政策讨论与更普遍的“地球工程”讨论有关,但这种联系在过去几年中有所松动。总体而言,在我们研究的文件中,负排放技术似乎越来越被接受,部分讨论转向部署。与其他基于陆地的负排放技术相比,具有碳捕获和储存功能的生物能源似乎更常与风险相关联,特别是从全球南方的角度来看。非政府组织最关注全球南方的作用,尤其是脆弱国家面临的风险。虽然早期关于负排放的政策讨论与更普遍的“地球工程”讨论有关,但这种联系在过去几年中有所松动。总体而言,在我们研究的文件中,负排放技术似乎越来越被接受,部分讨论转向部署。与其他基于陆地的负排放技术相比,具有碳捕获和储存功能的生物能源似乎更常与风险相关联,特别是从全球南方的角度来看。虽然早期关于负排放的政策讨论与更普遍的“地球工程”讨论有关,但这种联系在过去几年中有所松动。总体而言,在我们研究的文件中,负排放技术似乎越来越被接受,部分讨论转向部署。与其他基于陆地的负排放技术相比,具有碳捕获和储存功能的生物能源似乎更常与风险相关联,特别是从全球南方的角度来看。虽然早期关于负排放的政策讨论与更普遍的“地球工程”讨论有关,但这种联系在过去几年中有所松动。总体而言,在我们研究的文件中,负排放技术似乎越来越被接受,部分讨论转向部署。与其他基于陆地的负排放技术相比,具有碳捕获和储存功能的生物能源似乎更常与风险相关联,特别是从全球南方的角度来看。

更新日期:2022-06-19
down
wechat
bug