4.6 Review Book Chapter

Three Decades of Climate Mitigation: Why Haven't We Bent the Global Emissions Curve?

Journal

Publisher

ANNUAL REVIEWS
DOI: 10.1146/annurev-environ-012220-011104

Keywords

climate mitigation; energy transitions; lock-ins; power; knowledge traditions; societal transformations

Funding

  1. Swedish Energy Agency [46532-1]
  2. EPSRC [EP/S032002/1]
  3. UKRI Future Dams project [ES/P011373/1]
  4. Swedish Research Council FORMAS [2018-01686, 2019-01993]
  5. European Commission Horizon 2020 project PARIS REINFORCE [820846]
  6. ESRC [ES/R008884/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  7. Vinnova [2019-01993] Funding Source: Vinnova
  8. Formas [2018-01686, 2019-01993] Funding Source: Formas

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Despite three decades of efforts and research, global carbon dioxide emissions have continued to rise due to the central role of power and ideologies influencing the failure to curb emissions.
Despite three decades of political efforts and a wealth of research on the causes and catastrophic impacts of climate change, global carbon dioxide emissions have continued to rise and are 60% higher today than they were in 1990. Exploring this rise through nine thematic lenses-covering issues of climate governance, the fossil fuel industry, geopolitics, economics, mitigation modeling, energy systems, inequity, lifestyles, and social imaginaries-draws out multifaceted reasons for our collective failure to bend the global emissions curve. However, a common thread that emerges across the reviewed literature is the central role of power, manifest in many forms, from a dogmatic political-economic hegemony and influential vested interests to narrow techno-economic mindsets and ideologies of control. Synthesizing the various impediments to mitigation reveals how delivering on the commitments enshrined in the Paris Agreement now requires an urgent and unprecedented transformation away from today's carbon- and energy-intensive development paradigm.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available