By Mark Levine (Senior Advisor, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, US)
As the economies and cities in developing countries grow, they will represent the total global increase in GHG emissions through the end of this century. These countries currently have the least capability to limit GHG emissions. In addition to ensuring radical GHG emission reductions in developed countries, COP26 must also now provide a range of significant assistance to developing countries to create local capabilities to reduce emissions. A broad outline is presented of what this entails.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has expressed its view that “acceptable” levels of impact are compatible with a warming of only 1.5 to 2˚C; we are already 60% of the way to 1.5 ˚C temperature increase. Achieving a temperature increase of only 2˚C will be extraordinarily challenging, requiring a global drop in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 50% in 2050 and to zero by 2100. There are regions of the world that have the potential and may also have the political wherewithal to limit their emissions to be compatible with a 2˚C warming. These include Western Europe, China, Japan, the “Four Tigers” of S.E. Asia, and several countries in South America. India and the United States have the potential to follow a 2˚C path but face severe political barriers (very different in each country). Together, these countries represent less than 50% of current GHG emissions.
This leaves countries representing more than half the world’s population, mostly developing countries, as major outliers. As their economies and cities grow, these countries will represent the total global increase in GHG emissions through the end of this century, as they have during the past three decades (see Figure 1). These countries have the least capability to limit GHG emissions.
It is imperative that there be developed plans and actions to enable developing countries to reduce emissions. As their cities are rapidly expanding, there is an opportunity now to create low-energy and zero-carbon infrastructure and buildings. Such plans need to include the following elements:
To carry this out, it will be necessary to:
A recent report of the Green Climate Fund (Hourcade et al., 2021, p. 12) notes the"
“misalignment [of investment] is compounded by the limited capital flows from high-savings to low-savings regions (mostly developing countries). . . .With an estimated $14 trillion of negative-yielding debt in OECD countries and $26 trillion of low carbon climate-resilient investment opportunities in developing countries by 2030. [C]apital seeking higher results should flow from developed countries to developing countries to address this gap. This is not happening. Three-quarters of global climate is deployed in the country in which it is sourced, revealing a strong preference for home-country investments where risks are well understood. This explains why sub-Saharan Africa accounts for only 5% of climate-related financial flows in non-OECD countries.”
The redirection of investment flows and associated soft investments are urgently needed. It would be desirable for the leadership of the next (planning) step to be shared by the United States and China, working collaboratively. (China and the U.S. together account for a large portion of global emissions; they worked very effectively together to enable the agreement at the Paris meeting in 2015.) This call to action is both essential and long overdue. Addressing the issues of developing countries needs to be at the forefront of topics to be discussed in Conference of the Parties (COP) to be held starting at the end of October in Glasgow.
Hourcade, J.C; Glemarec, Y; de Coninck, H; Bayat-Renoux, F.; Ramakrishna, K., Revi, A. (2021). Scaling up climate finance in the context of Covid-19 - Executive Summary. South Korea: Green Climate Fund.
US urban land-use reform: a strategy for energy sufficiency
Z M Subin, J Lombardi, R Muralidharan, J Korn, J Malik, T Pullen, M Wei & T Hong
Mapping supply chains for energy retrofit
F Wade & Y Han
Operationalising building-related energy sufficiency measures in SMEs
I Fouiteh, J D Cabrera Santelices, A Susini & M K Patel
Promoting neighbourhood sharing: infrastructures of convenience and community
A Huber, H Heinrichs & M Jaeger-Erben
New insights into thermal comfort sufficiency in dwellings
G van Moeseke, D de Grave, A Anciaux, J Sobczak & G Wallenborn
‘Rightsize’: a housing design game for spatial and energy sufficiency
P Graham, P Nourian, E Warwick & M Gath-Morad
Implementing housing policies for a sufficient lifestyle
M Bagheri, L Roth, L Siebke, C Rohde & H-J Linke
The jobs of climate adaptation
T Denham, L Rickards & O Ajulo
Structural barriers to sufficiency: the contribution of research on elites
M Koch, K Emilsson, J Lee & H Johansson
Life-cycle GHG emissions of standard houses in Thailand
B Viriyaroj, M Kuittinen & S H Gheewala
IAQ and environmental health literacy: lived experiences of vulnerable people
C Smith, A Drinkwater, M Modlich, D van der Horst & R Doherty
Living smaller: acceptance, effects and structural factors in the EU
M Lehner, J L Richter, H Kreinin, P Mamut, E Vadovics, J Henman, O Mont & D Fuchs
Disrupting the imaginaries of urban action to deliver just adaptation [editorial]
V Castán-Broto, M Olazabal & G Ziervogel
Building energy use in COVID-19 lockdowns: did much change?
F Hollick, D Humphrey, T Oreszczyn, C Elwell & G Huebner
Disrupt and unlock? The role of actors in urban adaptation path-breaking
J Teebken
Evaluating past and future building operational emissions: improved method
S Huuhka, M Moisio & M Arnould
Assessing retrofit policies for fuel-poor homes in London
M C Georgiadou, D Greenwood, R Schiano-Phan & F Russo
Evaluating mitigation strategies for building stocks against absolute climate targets
L Hvid Horup, P K Ohms, M Hauschild, S R B Gummidi, A Q Secher, C Thuesen & M Ryberg
Equity and justice in urban coastal adaptation planning: new evaluation framework
T Okamoto & A Doyon
Normative future visioning: a critical pedagogy for transformative adaptation
T Comelli, M Pelling, M Hope, J Ensor, M E Filippi, E Y Menteşe & J McCloskey
Nature for resilience reconfigured: global- to-local translation of frames in Africa
K Rochell, H Bulkeley & H Runhaar
How hegemonic discourses of sustainability influence urban climate action
V Castán Broto, L Westman & P Huang
Fabric first: is it still the right approach?
N Eyre, T Fawcett, M Topouzi, G Killip, T Oreszczyn, K Jenkinson & J Rosenow
Gender and the heat pump transition
J Crawley, F Wade & M de Wilde
Social value of the built environment [editorial]
F Samuel & K Watson
Understanding demolition [editorial]
S Huuhka
Data politics in the built environment [editorial]
A Karvonen & T Hargreaves
Latest Commentaries
Construction Management Research: The Challenge of Consequences
Everything has consequences. Indeed, a fundamental goal of much construction management (CM) research is precisely to create consequences and bring about positive change. However, exactly how such consequences will manifest is not always predictable, which also makes them highly challenging. Fred Sherratt (University of Colorado, Boulder) explains why CM research needs to shift its focus from questions of 'if we can' to 'if we should' in order to embrace consequential consideration.
Designing Beyond Climate Change
Humanity is changing the Earth’s climate quickly and substantially. Huge impacts are now evident on the weather, oceans, ecosystems and certainly on buildings and cities. So much remains to be done around the world to reshape our infrastructure for the ongoing and coming impacts from human-caused climate change. Ilan Kelman (University College London) explains why the challenge is doing so without losing sight of other minor and major dangers.