[gep-ed] New Report: The Climate Implications of China’s Belt and Road Initiative

[Gallagher, Kevin]

Hi Gep-ed folks,

You may have interest in this new study we just released with WRI on the 
climate change implications of China’s Belt and Road Initiative.

Kevin Gallagher

In a new report with the Washington-based World Resources Institute, 
researchers at the Global Development Policy Center find that China’s Belt and 
Road Initiative (BRI) is yet to be aligned with the low-carbon priorities 
included in BRI countries
[http://r20.rs6.net/on.jsp?ca=c3c26c8c-71a2-4705-86f7-2370a8ba91f8&a=1109340385094&c=098ff6f0-b5fd-11e3-8b6d-d4ae5292c426&ch=18e26050-b821-11e7-9dc7-d4ae528ed502]

[http://files.constantcontact.com/64fe6d94201/fb1335ee-29ea-4914-9fcf-91b149b01910.png]


New Report: The Climate Implications of China’s Belt and Road Initiative



In a new report with the Washington-based World Resources Institute, 
researchers at the Global Development Policy Center find that China’s Belt and 
Road Initiative (BRI) is yet to be aligned with the low-carbon priorities 
included in BRI countries’ commitments under the Paris Climate Agreement.







"Moving the Green Belt and Road Initiative:
>From Words to Actions"






[http://files.constantcontact.com/64fe6d94201/6b08ca46-acd1-477a-bca4-5aeaa8afad47.png]







The report, ‘Moving the Green Belt and Road Initiative: from Words to Actions,’ 
provides an assessment of the degree to which Chinese energy and transportation 
investments in BRI countries from 2014-2017 align with the green energy 
priorities stated in BRI countries’ Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs).

The analysis is based on calculating commercial bank loans and investments in 
addition to policy lending and investment from entities such as the China 
Development Bank and the Silk Road Fund. We juxtapose those flows alongside our 
quantitative estimates of BRI countries’ NDC priorities in green energy.

We find that most Chinese finance and investment in energy and transportation 
are heavily tied to carbon-intensive sectors and are not aligned with host 
country NDCs in BRI countries.


To download the report on the GDP Center web 
page

To view accompanying blog piece from the WRI web 
page.






BRI Countries Covered by This Study


[https://files.constantcontact.com/64fe6d94201/7c40f5c0-6b57-4b26-9d7c-ae0dc4b22fca.png]






Click here to view on our 
website

RE: [gep-ed] scholars' open letter on California tropical forest offsetsproposal

[Rafael Friedmann]

Kathleen and Gep-ed colleagues

I’ve read your call to action and the letter you plan to send to the CARB. I 
agree with your concerns, BUT also think you would be better served by having  
a proposal and/or offering ideas on what a TFS-based offset program would need 
to provide and how it would need to be monitored, to be able to participate in 
the offsets. I think that amongst the many signatories and others, you could 
conceive of projects/programs that would indeed result in GHG reductions that 
are more likely to be additional and with minimal leakage. This could include 
outright land purchases that included ongoing sustainable exploitation by those 
already living there—and if needed, by programs to enable them to live in a 
more sustainable manner. Basically, don’t just say no, but also offer what 
might be something that could work, given all the experience you’ve gained from 
past programs.

Critical statements can be made of all current offset programs on 
additionality, leakage, etc. Climate change emissions reduction programs and 
the emissions themselves typically impact atmospheric and nature’s responses on 
longer timelines than many of us will be alive to confirm that efforts to 
reduce them succeeded. 

So… given the many other benefits of reducing deforestation, can we help CARB 
develop credible and trackable projects and programs with the CA GHG offset $ 
to get more reforestation, less deforestation, more sustainable living 
practices by those living in these high biodiversity forests?

I hope you concur with my thoughts and add at least a paragraph offering to 
work with the CARB to develop useful criteria for a TFS based option. Perhaps 
some of your signatories are willing to offer to participate in a working group 
to that effect.

Sincerely,

Rafael Friedmann
Clean Energy Consultant

From: Kathleen McAfee
Sent: Thursday, November 8, 2018 3:39 PM
To: gep-ed@googlegroups.com
Subject: [gep-ed] scholars' open letter on California tropical forest 
offsetsproposal

Dear friends and colleagues, 

      Forgive me if you've already seen this open letter to the California Air 
Resources Board. Please sign it have done research relevant to REDD+/PES, 
carbon trading/offsets, tropical forest conservation, etc. and agree with our 
message of caution. We have 50+ signatures so far; hope to get more by Nov. 11. 
We'll present it at a pubic ARB session on Nov. 16. Links to letter & sign-on 
are below. Here's the story:

The ARB may soon approve yet another way for the state's biggest greenhouse-gas 
emitters to buy their way out of their legal obligations by purchasing dubious 
offsets, this time in the global South. ARB's proposed new Tropical Forest 
Standard would link California's cap-and-trade program to subnational states in 
the forested tropics. This is a bad idea for reasons we have tried to summarize 
in the letter. It would set a terrible international precedent as California 
officials continue to promote the state's climate policy as a model for the 
world. 

Until now the ARB has mainly taken its cues from environmental economists, its 
own technical staff, big green NGOs, carefully vetted officials and indigenous 
spokespeople from Brazil and Mexico, and consultants with personal and career 
interests in carbon trading and forest conservation financed by offsets. The 
ARB board and staff seem unaware of the actual record and problems of REDD+ 
PES, and when told about this, respond that their proposed "jurisdictional 
REDD" would surmount such problems. Our letter voices widespread concerns about 
forest carbon offset programs shared by so many geographers and other 
researchers who are closer to understanding how these projects are working on 
the ground.

We three authors are approaching this from different perspectives but we think 
the case against this TFS initiative is very strong. We are not condemning 
REDD+, etc., nor offsets in general in the letter. We are stressing the ways 
that the TFS could implicate the state in harmful practices, would fail to 
achieve any net environmental gain, and fails to meet California's legislated 
requirements.

Please sign if you agree, and circulate the letter to other scholars with 
academic credentials who have worked on REDD/PES, carbon trading/offsetting, 
tropical forests/conservation/development, etc. We will be adding more 
citations: suggestions appreciated. 

** You can add your name to the letter at THIS LINK:

Here is a link to the letter.

Here  is information about the Tropical Forest Standard and how to submit 
individual letters to the ARB.  Do let us know if you have questions or 
comments.

Kathy
-- 
Kathleen McAfee
Professor, International Relations
San Francisco State University
kmca...@sfsu.edu

Everyone can enjoy a life of luxurious leisure if the machine-produced wealth 
is shared, or most people can end up miserably poor if the machine-owners 
successfully lobby against wealth redistribution. Stephen Hawking
-- 

[gep-ed] scholars' open letter on California tropical forest offsets proposal

[Kathleen McAfee]

Dear friends and colleagues,
  Forgive me if you've already seen this open letter to the California
Air Resources Board. *Please sign it have done research relevant to
REDD+/PES, carbon trading/offsets, tropical forest conservation, etc. and
agree with our message of caution.* We have 50+ signatures so far; hope to
get more by *Nov. 11.* We'll present it at a pubic ARB session on Nov. 16.
Links to letter & sign-on are below. Here's the story:

The ARB may soon approve yet another way for the state's biggest
greenhouse-gas emitters to buy their way out of their legal obligations by
purchasing dubious offsets, this time in the global South. ARB's proposed
new Tropical Forest Standard would link California's cap-and-trade program
to subnational states in the forested tropics. This is a bad idea for
reasons we have tried to summarize in the letter. It would set a terrible
international precedent as California officials continue to promote the
state's climate policy as a model for the world.

Until now the ARB has mainly taken its cues from environmental economists,
its own technical staff, big green NGOs, carefully vetted officials and
indigenous spokespeople from Brazil and Mexico, and consultants with
personal and career interests in carbon trading and forest conservation
financed by offsets. The ARB board and staff seem unaware of the actual
record and problems of REDD+ PES, and when told about this, respond that
their proposed "jurisdictional REDD" would surmount such problems. Our
letter voices widespread concerns about forest carbon offset programs
shared by so many geographers and other researchers who are closer to
understanding how these projects are working on the ground.

We three authors are approaching this from different perspectives but we
think the case against this TFS initiative is very strong. We are not
condemning REDD+, etc., nor offsets in general in the letter. We are
stressing the ways that the TFS could implicate the state in harmful
practices, would fail to achieve any net environmental gain, and fails to
meet California's legislated requirements.

Please sign if you agree, and circulate the letter to other scholars with
academic credentials who have worked on REDD/PES, carbon
trading/offsetting, tropical forests/conservation/development, etc. We will
be adding more citations: suggestions appreciated.

** You can add your name to the letter at THIS LINK

:

Here

is
a link to the letter.

Here

  is information about the Tropical Forest Standard and how to submit
individual letters to the ARB.  Do let us know if you have questions or
comments.

Kathy
-- 
Kathleen McAfee
Professor, International Relations
San Francisco State University
kmca...@sfsu.edu

*Everyone can enjoy a life of luxurious leisure if the machine-produced
wealth is shared, or most people can end up miserably poor if the
machine-owners successfully lobby against wealth redistribution. *Stephen
Hawking

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"gep-ed" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to gep-ed+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[gep-ed] Fwd: [GREENPOLITICS] ENVIRONMENTAL POLITICS Volume 27 Number 6 November 2018 is now online

[John M Meyer]

Environmental politics colleagues, this special issue of the journal
Environmental Politics will be of interest to many...
Best,
John

-- Forwarded message -
From: Christopher Rootes 
Date: Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 2:28 PM
Subject: [GREENPOLITICS] ENVIRONMENTAL POLITICS Volume 27 Number 6 November
2018 is now online
To: 


Environmental Politics, Vol. 27, No. 6  (2018) is now online at
https://www.tandfonline.com/toc/fenp20/current

Environmental Politics

Volume 27 Number 6 November 2018

Special Issue: Environmental NGOs at a crossroads

Guest editors: Nathalie Berny and Christopher Rootes

Articles

947 Environmental NGOs at a crossroads?
Nathalie Berny and Christopher Rootes

973 Apocalypse adjourned: the rise and decline of cold war environmentalism
in Germany
Stefan Bargheer

994 Friends of the Earth as a policy entrepreneur: ‘The Big Ask’ campaign
for a UK Climate Change Act
Neil Carter and Mike Childs

1014 The public interest environmental law group: from USA to Europe
Martin Goodman and James Connelly

1033 Institutionalisation and distinctive competences of environmental
NGOs: the expansion of French organisations
Nathalie Berny

1057 Friends of the Earth International: agonistic politics, modus vivendi
and political change
Brian Doherty and Timothy Doyle

1079 The ‘efficacy dilemma’ of transnational climate activism: the case of
COP21
Joost de Moor

1101 Authority, strategy, and influence: environmental INGOs in comparative
perspective
Sarah S. Stroup and Wendy H. Wong

1122 Black and green: the future of Indigenous–environmentalist relations
in Australia
Jenny Pickerill

1146 Pro-environmental strategies in search of an actor: a strategic
environmental management perspective on environmental NGOs
Laurent Mermet


–
Christopher Rootes,
Editor-in-chief and Chair, Editorial Board, Environmental Politics,
School of Social Policy, Sociology & Social Research,
Cornwallis NE,
University of Kent, CANTERBURY, Kent CT2 7NF

email: environmental-polit...@kent.ac.uk

For latest articles published online in iFirst, see
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/showAxaArticles?journalCode=fenp20

Environmental Politics
2017 Impact Factor: 2.695 © 2018 Clarivate Analytics, 2017 Journal Citation
reports ® 5-Year Impact Factor: 3.158



To unsubscribe from the GREENPOLITICS list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=GREENPOLITICS&A=1


-- 
John M. Meyer, Professor and Chair
Department of Politics , Humboldt State
University
Arcata, CA 95521  USA. p: 707.826.4497
Editor, Environmental Politics
 @Env_Pol

users.humboldt.edu/john.m.meyer

he/him/his (Why include this? Click here
to learn more.)

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"gep-ed" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to gep-ed+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.