The Case for Participation in Cooperative Approaches Under the Paris Climate Accord
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The issue of climate change and how to mitigate its adverse effects has become one of the preeminent challenges for the international community. Many international efforts have been adopted in the past to address the issue of warming temperatures but have unfortunately fallen short of their stated objectives. The failure of past agreements is largely due to their inability at achieving the level of cooperation necessary from party nations to undertake the substantive actions necessary. Ultimately the lack of broad participation, compliance incentives and progress towards lowering emissions created an obstacle that prevented nations from collectively addressing climate change. In 2015, came a new era in international climate change policy with the adoption of the Paris Climate Agreement. The treaty marked a stark departure from past international treaties, granting individual nations additional flexibility and governance over their respective climate initiatives. Notwithstanding its significance, however, there remains critical challenges that must be addressed if the Paris Climate Agreement is expected to maintain its international support. At present, the United States has declared its intention to withdraw from the Agreement and existing signatories are currently limited to domestic emissions mitigation policies. Article 6 of the Paris Climate Agreement provides the framework for cooperative approaches between nations. This provision opens the possibility of emissions trading and carbon markets as a means to more effectively encourage cooperation between nations and deliver cost-effective measures to address climate change. Currently, however, the required guidelines and modalities governing Article 6 have yet to be formally adopted, stalling the ability for nations to engage in mitigation opportunities that may exist across borders. From Canada’s perspective, Article 6 holds the potential to improve its ability to meet their climate commitment, assist other nations lower their carbon footprint and deliver a global reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. To uncover this potential, this paper lays out a hypothetical cooperative approach between Canada and China for the displacement of Chinese coal fired electricity with Canadian LNG. The goal was to test the feasibility of such an agreement, its compatibility with the Paris Climate Agreement and to identify the challenges that may act as obstacles. Based on the findings of this analysis, there exists the possibility for such an approach to occur that delivers a net reduction in global emissions and acts complementary to the climate commitments of both Canada and China. Moreover, such an approach also provides the opportunity for China to address other issues such as air pollution and the transition away from less efficient coal fired electricity plants. At the same time, however, such an agreement is challenged by the low price of domestically sourced coal in China, lack of LNG infrastructure, and regulatory concerns relating to the development and export of LNG in Canada.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,083 | 0,061 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,020 | 0,032 |
| Communication savante | 0,022 | 0,017 |
| Science ouverte | 0,005 | 0,020 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,032 | 0,028 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,011 | 0,002 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».