Cities are large emitters of greenhouse gasses, but are also extremely vulnerable to climate change impacts. This unique position makes cities networks relevant in international discussions on mitigation, where they have over the past few months effectively created a new initiative to cut emissions, along with a credible emissions accounting and reporting protocol, a data repository, and a portal to share progress. At the same time that cities groups are advocating mitigation at the international level, groups within cities are proposing innovative adaptation ideas to address local level climate change impacts, including creative solutions to adapt the urban landscape to sea level rise.
In 2016, the European Council approved the new climate and energy targets that would lead the EU action through to 2030. While these policies mark progress towards the EU’s long-term decarbonization objective, there are some contradictions to consider. Most notably, although the 20-20-20 package was in place, in the last few years the energy mix of some EU countries showed an increased reliance on fossil fuels. In addition, total emissions in Europe declined, but mainly because the economic crisis reduced energy demand in many EU Member States. The new European framework therefore comes at a critical time particularly because the 2030 policy commitments should be able to cope with this contradictions and actually promote investment into low-carbon sources. The article will explore these issues by discussing what would be the consequences of these targets into the energy market.
Green infrastructure and integrated transportation are the two dominant green best practices that cities around the world are implementing and that research related to the climate change impacts of extreme temperatures and air pollution advocate for. Are these policies enough to address climate change and its impacts on human health, now and in the future? The answer to this question depends on whether cities choose to continue with the same status quo policies or develop new policies in the light of climate change.
Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) not only affects the economic growth but also affects the environmental protection of the host country. With China’s background of pursuing green growth, we need to consider the performance of FDI from the economic and environmental benefit aspects. On this basis, using slacks-based measure directional distance function (SBMDDF) to build up green growth efficiency, economic efficiency and environmental efficiency indexes, empirical research on FDI in 104 Chinese cities from 2004 to 2011 has shown that: (1) Different cities have differences in their green growth efficiency. Shenzhen city is always efficient in green economic growth. (2) Overall, FDI is positive on Chinese cities’ green growth. (3) When the green growth efficiency is broken down into economic efficiency and environmental efficiency, FDI promotes China’s economic green growth through both environmental benefits and economic benefits. (4) The effect of FDI differs in different sectors. FDI in the emission-intensive sector promotes green efficiency mainly through the improvement of economic efficiency.
The discourse of “green growth” has recently gained ground in environmental governance deliberations and policy proposals. It is presented as a fresh and innovative agenda centered on the deployment of engineering sophistication, managerial acumen, and market mechanisms to redress the environmental and social derelictions of the existing development model. But the green growth project is deeply inadequate, whether assessed against criteria of social justice or the achievement of sustainable economic life upon a materially finite planet.
This volume outlines three main lines of critique. First, it traces the development of the green growth discourse qua ideology. It asks: what explains modern society’s investment in it, why has it emerged as a master concept in the contemporary conjuncture, and what social forces does it serve? Second, it unpicks and explains the contradictions within a series of prominent green growth projects. Finally, it weighs up the merits and demerits of alternative strategies and policies, asking the vital question: “If not green growth, then what?”