A method to identify barriers to and enablers of implementing climate change mitigation options

Linda Steg; Janet Veldstra; Kiane de Kleijne; Şiir Kılkış; André F.P. Lucena; Lars J. Nilsson; Masahiro Sugiyama; Pete Smith; Massimo Tavoni; Heleen de Coninck; Renée van Diemen; Phil Renforth; Sebastian Mirasgedis; Gregory Nemet; Robert Görsch; Helene Muri; Paolo Bertoldi; Luisa F. Cabeza; Érika Mata; Aleksandra Novikova; Lucas R. Caldas; Marta Chàfer; Radhika Khosla; David Vérez

doi:10.1016/j.oneear.2022.10.007

A method to identify barriers to and enablers of implementing climate change mitigation options

Linda Steg^* (Corresponding Author), Janet Veldstra, Kiane de Kleijne, Şiir Kılkış, André F.P. Lucena, Lars J. Nilsson, Masahiro Sugiyama, Pete Smith, Massimo Tavoni, Heleen de Coninck, Renée van Diemen, Phil Renforth, Sebastian Mirasgedis, Gregory Nemet, Robert Görsch, Helene Muri, Paolo Bertoldi, Luisa F. Cabeza, Érika Mata, Aleksandra NovikovaLucas R. Caldas, Marta Chàfer, Radhika Khosla, David Vérez

^*Corresponding author for this work

Aberdeen Centre For Environmental Sustainability

Research output: Contribution to journal › Review article › peer-review

12 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Mitigation option are not yet being implemented at the scale required to limit global warming to well below 2°C. Various factors have been identified that inhibit the implementation of specific mitigation options. Yet, an integrated assessment of key barriers and enablers is lacking. Here we present a comprehensive framework to assess which factors inhibit and enable the implementation of mitigation options. The framework comprises six dimensions, each encompassing different criteria: geophysical, environmental-ecological, technological, economic, sociocultural, and institutional feasibility. We demonstrate the approach by assessing to what extent each criterion and dimension affects the feasibility of six mitigation options. The assessment reveals that institutional factors inhibit the implementation of many options that need to be addressed to increase their feasibility. Of all the options assessed, many factors enable the implementation of solar energy, while only a few barriers would need to be addressed to implement solar energy at scale.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	1216-1227
Number of pages	12
Journal	One Earth
Volume	5
Issue number	11
Early online date	18 Nov 2022
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2022.10.007
Publication status	Published - 18 Nov 2022

Bibliographical note

L.S. and J.V. took a lead in developing the feasibility assessment approach and coordinated the assessment; all other authors provided input and feedback. H.d.C. K.d.K. and L.S. developed the feasibility assessment approach for mitigation options reported in SR1.5 of the IPCC, on which the feasibility assessment approach proposed in this paper is based. K.d.K. S.K. A.F.P.L. G.N. L.J.N. M.S. P.S. R.G. and H.M. assessed the feasibility of the options discussed in the paper and drafted the relevant text. M.T. assessed the level of deployment of the selected options in scenarios compliant with the Paris Agreement. L.S. took a lead in drafting the paper, and all authors provided feedback on the drafts. The authors declare no competing interests.

Data Availability Statement

Supplemental Information: Supplemental information can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
oneear.2022.10.007

Keywords

barriers
climate change
enablers
feasibility
IPCC
mitigation options

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1016/j.oneear.2022.10.007Licence: Unspecified

Steg_etal_OE_A_Method_To_AAM
© 2022. This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
Accepted author manuscript, 1.51 MBLicence: CC BY-NC-ND

Cite this

Steg, L., Veldstra, J., de Kleijne, K., Kılkış, Ş., Lucena, A. F. P., Nilsson, L. J., Sugiyama, M., Smith, P., Tavoni, M., de Coninck, H., van Diemen, R., Renforth, P., Mirasgedis, S., Nemet, G., Görsch, R., Muri, H., Bertoldi, P., Cabeza, L. F., Mata, É., ... Vérez, D. (2022). A method to identify barriers to and enablers of implementing climate change mitigation options. One Earth, 5(11), 1216-1227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2022.10.007

Steg, L, Veldstra, J, de Kleijne, K, Kılkış, Ş, Lucena, AFP, Nilsson, LJ, Sugiyama, M, Smith, P, Tavoni, M, de Coninck, H, van Diemen, R, Renforth, P, Mirasgedis, S, Nemet, G, Görsch, R, Muri, H, Bertoldi, P, Cabeza, LF, Mata, É, Novikova, A, Caldas, LR, Chàfer, M, Khosla, R & Vérez, D 2022, 'A method to identify barriers to and enablers of implementing climate change mitigation options', One Earth, vol. 5, no. 11, pp. 1216-1227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2022.10.007

@article{47eb5debfc13406489997ee7357764bd,

title = "A method to identify barriers to and enablers of implementing climate change mitigation options",

abstract = "Mitigation option are not yet being implemented at the scale required to limit global warming to well below 2°C. Various factors have been identified that inhibit the implementation of specific mitigation options. Yet, an integrated assessment of key barriers and enablers is lacking. Here we present a comprehensive framework to assess which factors inhibit and enable the implementation of mitigation options. The framework comprises six dimensions, each encompassing different criteria: geophysical, environmental-ecological, technological, economic, sociocultural, and institutional feasibility. We demonstrate the approach by assessing to what extent each criterion and dimension affects the feasibility of six mitigation options. The assessment reveals that institutional factors inhibit the implementation of many options that need to be addressed to increase their feasibility. Of all the options assessed, many factors enable the implementation of solar energy, while only a few barriers would need to be addressed to implement solar energy at scale.",

keywords = "barriers, climate change, enablers, feasibility, IPCC, mitigation options",

author = "Linda Steg and Janet Veldstra and {de Kleijne}, Kiane and {\c S}iir Kılkı{\c s} and Lucena, {Andr{\'e} F.P.} and Nilsson, {Lars J.} and Masahiro Sugiyama and Pete Smith and Massimo Tavoni and {de Coninck}, Heleen and {van Diemen}, Ren{\'e}e and Phil Renforth and Sebastian Mirasgedis and Gregory Nemet and Robert G{\"o}rsch and Helene Muri and Paolo Bertoldi and Cabeza, {Luisa F.} and {\'E}rika Mata and Aleksandra Novikova and Caldas, {Lucas R.} and Marta Ch{\`a}fer and Radhika Khosla and David V{\'e}rez",

note = "L.S. and J.V. took a lead in developing the feasibility assessment approach and coordinated the assessment; all other authors provided input and feedback. H.d.C. K.d.K. and L.S. developed the feasibility assessment approach for mitigation options reported in SR1.5 of the IPCC, on which the feasibility assessment approach proposed in this paper is based. K.d.K. S.K. A.F.P.L. G.N. L.J.N. M.S. P.S. R.G. and H.M. assessed the feasibility of the options discussed in the paper and drafted the relevant text. M.T. assessed the level of deployment of the selected options in scenarios compliant with the Paris Agreement. L.S. took a lead in drafting the paper, and all authors provided feedback on the drafts. The authors declare no competing interests. ",

year = "2022",

month = nov,

day = "18",

doi = "10.1016/j.oneear.2022.10.007",

language = "English",

volume = "5",

pages = "1216--1227",

journal = "One Earth",

issn = "2590-3330",

publisher = "Cell Press",

number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A method to identify barriers to and enablers of implementing climate change mitigation options

AU - Steg, Linda

AU - Veldstra, Janet

AU - de Kleijne, Kiane

AU - Kılkış, Şiir

AU - Lucena, André F.P.

AU - Nilsson, Lars J.

AU - Sugiyama, Masahiro

AU - Smith, Pete

AU - Tavoni, Massimo

AU - de Coninck, Heleen

AU - van Diemen, Renée

AU - Renforth, Phil

AU - Mirasgedis, Sebastian

AU - Nemet, Gregory

AU - Görsch, Robert

AU - Muri, Helene

AU - Bertoldi, Paolo

AU - Cabeza, Luisa F.

AU - Mata, Érika

AU - Novikova, Aleksandra

AU - Caldas, Lucas R.

AU - Chàfer, Marta

AU - Khosla, Radhika

AU - Vérez, David

N1 - L.S. and J.V. took a lead in developing the feasibility assessment approach and coordinated the assessment; all other authors provided input and feedback. H.d.C. K.d.K. and L.S. developed the feasibility assessment approach for mitigation options reported in SR1.5 of the IPCC, on which the feasibility assessment approach proposed in this paper is based. K.d.K. S.K. A.F.P.L. G.N. L.J.N. M.S. P.S. R.G. and H.M. assessed the feasibility of the options discussed in the paper and drafted the relevant text. M.T. assessed the level of deployment of the selected options in scenarios compliant with the Paris Agreement. L.S. took a lead in drafting the paper, and all authors provided feedback on the drafts. The authors declare no competing interests.

PY - 2022/11/18

Y1 - 2022/11/18

N2 - Mitigation option are not yet being implemented at the scale required to limit global warming to well below 2°C. Various factors have been identified that inhibit the implementation of specific mitigation options. Yet, an integrated assessment of key barriers and enablers is lacking. Here we present a comprehensive framework to assess which factors inhibit and enable the implementation of mitigation options. The framework comprises six dimensions, each encompassing different criteria: geophysical, environmental-ecological, technological, economic, sociocultural, and institutional feasibility. We demonstrate the approach by assessing to what extent each criterion and dimension affects the feasibility of six mitigation options. The assessment reveals that institutional factors inhibit the implementation of many options that need to be addressed to increase their feasibility. Of all the options assessed, many factors enable the implementation of solar energy, while only a few barriers would need to be addressed to implement solar energy at scale.

AB - Mitigation option are not yet being implemented at the scale required to limit global warming to well below 2°C. Various factors have been identified that inhibit the implementation of specific mitigation options. Yet, an integrated assessment of key barriers and enablers is lacking. Here we present a comprehensive framework to assess which factors inhibit and enable the implementation of mitigation options. The framework comprises six dimensions, each encompassing different criteria: geophysical, environmental-ecological, technological, economic, sociocultural, and institutional feasibility. We demonstrate the approach by assessing to what extent each criterion and dimension affects the feasibility of six mitigation options. The assessment reveals that institutional factors inhibit the implementation of many options that need to be addressed to increase their feasibility. Of all the options assessed, many factors enable the implementation of solar energy, while only a few barriers would need to be addressed to implement solar energy at scale.

KW - barriers

KW - climate change

KW - enablers

KW - feasibility

KW - IPCC

KW - mitigation options

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85134301665&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.oneear.2022.10.007

DO - 10.1016/j.oneear.2022.10.007

M3 - Review article

AN - SCOPUS:85134301665

SN - 2590-3330

VL - 5

SP - 1216

EP - 1227

JO - One Earth

JF - One Earth

IS - 11

ER -

A method to identify barriers to and enablers of implementing climate change mitigation options

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Data Availability Statement

Keywords

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this