39
Figure 5.4: The range of estimated potential emission reductions in various NSA studies.
Figure 5.4a: Emission reduction potential of pledged commitments by NSAs.
70 Individual commitments 0.53 60 0.46 50 1.85 0.02 0.45 0.55 3.7 3.7 8 40 19 Ranges
Scaled up potential based on assumptions
40 2ºC scenario Single Initiatives 0.4 0.74 1.40 5.5
59 56
Current policy scenario
Unconditional NDC scenario
Multiple Initiatives 65
No policy baseline
Figure 5.4b: Scaled up potential emission reductions based on single and multiple initiatives.
* Data-Driven Yale, NewClimate Institute, and PBL Netherlands
Source: Based on data in table 5.2. Note: a) For studies that include ranges, median estimates are provided with ranges indicated in Figures 5.4a and 5.4b. b) Studies that are cross-hatched evaluate single and multiple ICI goals rather than individual actors’ recorded and quantifi ed pledges. They rely on assumptions of future scaled-up impact and therefore represent potential rather than a quantifi ed analysis of individual actors’ NSA pledges. c) Extrapolation of 2025 estimates has been made.
Key information, such as actors’ target and baseline emissions, emissions scopes (that is, direct or indirect), and inventory emissions with historic time-series available, are often inconsistently reported (if at all), with subnational actors from the European Union reporting the largest amount of data required for mitigation impact assessments and the greatest gaps found in emerging and developing countries (Hsu et al., 2018, forthcoming).
Finally, as the estimates and numbers in this report exclude national cooperative initiatives and networks, they underestimate the scale and spread of NSA climate actions, particularly in regions where actors have less access or capability to engage with transnational initiatives.
Some efforts under way to address data reporting and methodological consistency should help improve the future data landscape for analyzing NSAs’ contributions. For example, the World Resources Institute’s Greenhouse Gas Protocol Initiative released in 2015 (the Global Protocol for Community-Scale Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventories (Fong et al., 2015)) and a consortium of non- government institutes, through the Initiative for Climate Action Transparency (ICAT), are currently developing guidance for NSAs, national governments and other audiences to account for and measure NSA climate mitigation contributions (see also box 5.3). These and other efforts should help improve consistency among NSA-reported data.
Annual GHG emissions in 2030 (GtCO2e)
America's Pledge (2018)
Kuramochi et al. (2017) Yale-NCI-PBL* (2018) 1a
Yale-NCI-PBL* (2018) 1b Roelfsema (2017)
Arup and C40 Cities (2014)
Global Covenant of Mayors (2018) Compact of Mayors (2015)
The Climate Group (2017)
Erickson and Tempest (2014) Roelfsema et al. (2018)
CDP and WeMeanBusiness (2016)
Graichen et al. (2017) Yale-NCI-PBL* (2018)
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112
