If you are interested in joining our program, you can submit your application via CAMPUSonline. International applicants should also ensure that they obtain their VPD (preliminary review documentation) from UNI-assist before completing their application.

About the program

The Master’s program in Global Change Ecology is dedicated to understanding and analyzing one of the most pressing environmental issues of the 21st century: Global Change. Addressing challenges of an entirely new and interdisciplinary nature requires innovative approaches in both research and education. A key focus of the program is to combine natural science perspectives on global change with approaches from social science disciplines, preparing students to address complex environmental issues from multiple dimensions.

Key application information:

• Application Platform: Apply via CAMPUSonline: Apply here
• International applicants: A VPD from UNI-assist is required prior to application. Details on how to obtain this document can be found here: UBT International Office – UNI-assist
• Step-by-Step Guide for International Applicants: Use this guide to navigate the application process smoothly: Application Guide

Why apply?

The GCE Master’s program offers a comprehensive and interdisciplinary approach to global environmental challenges, providing you with the knowledge and skills to make a meaningful impact. This is an excellent opportunity to be part of a diverse academic community and benefit from a high quality education at the University of Bayreuth.

Application Timeline

The application period will remain open for two more months, so there is still time to apply. Don’t miss your chance to join our program!

Stay tuned for our next blog post with more details about the program from our program director in an upcoming online event. In the meantime, get your application started today!

If you have any additional questions, please visit the Application Guide website or contact us via email.

The post Call for Applications: Apply Now to be the next GCE! appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

Taught in English, this interdisciplinary programme explores the environmental, ecological and societal dimensions of global change. Designed for enthusiastic and driven students, it equips you with the skills to excel in science, environmental protection and decision-making roles in the political and business spheres.

What sets this program apart?

• Elite Network of Bavaria: Benefit from the prestige and resources of one of the most renowned networks in Bavaria.
• International exposure: Study in a program with more than 50% international students from around the world. Gain invaluable experience by attending international conferences, science schools, and internships.
• Practical skills: Develop the ability to analyze complex environmental issues and formulate effective solutions.
• No tuition fee.
• Collaboration with the University of Augsburg: Expand your learning horizons through this unique partnership.

Are you ready to take the next step and become a GCE?

• Applications are open from March 1st to June 15th!
• International applicants: Secure your uni-assist VPD now!

The program begins each winter semester in mid-October at the University of Bayreuth in Germany.

Don’t miss this chance to shape the future of our planet.

Visit the Global Change Ecology website for detailed information and application instructions

The post Prepare to join the M.Sc. Global Change Ecology at Bayreuth University appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

We look forward to receiving your applications!

Application deadline: 15th June 2023!
Learn more clicking here.

Starting date: October 2023
Location: Bayreuth, Germany

The post OPEN FOR APPLICATIONS: M.Sc. Global Change Ecology appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

The Anthropocene

Humans are a planetary force. Since the Agricultural Revolution, 12’000 years ago, we have reduced the number of trees by half and increased carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere by 44%. Dumping all the concrete ever produced would cover the entire globe with a layer two millimetres thick [1].  
It is clear that we cannot continue on this destructive path, but how can we turn the tide?

The answer lies buried deep in the paradigms and structures of our societies, especially in the Global North. They shape our environments, the choices we can make, right down to our most intimate desires and even our fantasies of what the world could be like. As the saying goes “it is easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism”. If we want to enable the good life for everybody on this planet within the ecological limits, we must first of all break these chains of conventional thinking.

Igniting action

But where do we start? Just like a chemical reaction needs energy, we also need a catalyst that ignites something within us. We all know that being bombarded with facts, figures and how-to guides does not feel motivating and it can even make us feel worse. It is time to harness the force of emotions and specifically the power of awe.

Defining awe is a lost cause, for it reigns where words fall short. When you are in a state of awe, you are immersed in your surroundings, your inner monologue quietens, your ego falls by the wayside. You feel small on the one hand, but all the more deeply connected on the other. Your mind is filled with curiosity and wonder.

You might argue that you can also feel this when you lose yourself in surfing, playing table tennis or whatever it is that gives you the feeling of flow. And you are absolutely right. But there is one dimension of awe that we have not yet talked about. That is, how it makes us think and feel about nature.

Reconnect to nature

Written texts from the past 500 years show us that awe has always been an important element of experiencing nature. Ever since, it has also been described as a challenging experience marked by tension, overwhelming and captivating feelings at once. Awe differs from beauty in its power and limitlessness. Through awe, nature escapes control and domestication. It is not belittled like a well-tended garden, but admired and respected. Consistent with this, psychological research has found that awe enhances people’s connection to nature [2, 3, 4, 5, 6]. It actively works against the belief that humans dominate nature. Instead, it favours an ecological worldview that sees humans as one creature among many, co-existing in the biosphere.

The solution to our problems will not be to leave one half of the earth to its own devices and continue to ruthlessly extract what we think we need from the other half. The problem is not the human species, but our current relationship with the natural world. We need to move beyond the black and white thinking of either destruction or protection. It is about a new engagement with nature, and I am convinced that awe can be a stepping stone to that.

Awe and sustainable lifestyles

Awe can catalyse the transformation to sustainable lifestyles in various ways. First, it diverts attention from ourselves, which evokes feelings of humility and connection. Applied to sustainability, it can strengthen the motivation to protect people and the environment, even if this involves personal sacrifice. The effectiveness for promoting altruistic behaviour is also supported by the possible evolutionary origin of awe. This implies that awe is adaptive for individuals precisely by taming the dominance of self-interest for the benefit of the social collective. It enables individuals to gain perspective and find their place in the group. In light of this, awe has lost none of its importance over the past millennia. We should harness the moral capacity of awe at a time when the primacy of individualism is bringing us to the brink of an ecological disaster.

Above all, experiencing awe as a positive emotion is a valuable experience in and of itself, leading to increases in mood and well-being. It may also change the perception of time and reduce impatience, which is a significant effect in a chronically stressed society.

Finally, awe seems to encourage people to find meaning in their lives, engage in experiential activities and favour communal over commercial relationships. Overall, the experience of awe is a prime example of the idea of a symbiotic relationship between human well-being and environmental conservation.

Conclusion

Whenever you feel like it’s impossible to change the system, awe can be the shift in perspective that helps you look at the world with a sense of possibility. When you feel stressed, awe can give you the space to breathe. When you feel like you never have enough, awe can give you a sense of gratitude. And finally, when you feel lonely and isolated, awe can be the connector that provides you with a sense of belonging.

We can use awe in art, in architecture, in spatial planning and in communication. But the easiest way is to walk through the world with your eyes wide open, ready to be touched and awed.

References

[1] Lewis, S. L. & Maslin, M. A. (2018). The Human Planet. How We Created the Anthropocene. London: Penguin Books.

[2] Bai, Y., Maruskin, L. A., Chen, S., Gordon, A. M., Stellar, J. E., McNeil, G. D., … Keltner, D. J. (2017). Awe, the diminished self, and collective engagement: Universals and cultural variations in the small self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113(2), 185–209. Link here

[3] Bethelmy, L. C. & Corraliza, J. A. (2019). Transcendence and the Sublime Experience in Nature: Awe and Inspiring Energy. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 509. Link here

[4] Yang, Y., Hu, J., Jing, F. & Nguyen, B. (2018). From Awe to Ecological Behavior: The Mediating Role of Connectedness to Nature. Sustainability, 10(7), 2477. Link here
[5] Wang, L., Zhang, G., Shi, P., Lu, X. & Song, F. (2019). Influence of Awe on Green Consumption: The Mediating Effect of Psychological Ownership. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2484. Link here

[6] Zhao, H., Zhang, H., Xu, Y., Lu, J. & He, W. (2018). Relation Between Awe and Environmentalism: The Role of Social Dominance Orientation. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 2367. Link here

The post Sparking action: How awe can reconnect us to our planet appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

We look forward to receiving your applications!

Application deadline: 15 June, 2022!
Learn more clicking here.

Starting date: October 2022
Location: Bayreuth, Germany

The post CALL FOR APPLICATIONS for the M.Sc. Global Change Ecology appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

        Water is also a vehicle for many bacteria, protozoa and viral pathogens, which can cause diseases associated with gastroenteritis, and even other severe illnesses, such as meningitis and hepatitis [2]. Furthermore, with climate change influencing higher frequency of extreme events, the quantity and quality of water is compromised by both droughts and floods. Hence, the Sustainable Development Goal 6 aims to ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all, encompassing six targets to achieve universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water, as well as sanitation and hygiene, improving water quality, increasing water efficiency in the different sectors, implementation of an integrated water resources management, and protection and restoration of ecosystems [3].

Clean Water, Sanitation, and Health

        In 2020, officials recorded that 2 billion people (or 26% of the global population) lack access to safe potable water, and 3.6 billion people (or 46% of the global population) do not have access to safely managed sanitation facilities [4]. Access to clean drinking water and sanitation infrastructure is closely linked to health. In fact, a study conducted by the World Health Organization (WHO) in 2012 concluded that every US$1.00 invested in sanitation would result in a return of US$5.50 in lower costs for health systems, increasing productivity, and preventing premature deaths [5]. According to WHO data, the region most affected by sanitation deficiency is Sub-Saharan Africa, where 12% of the population has access to basic sanitation facilities, 19% has a limited structure available, 31% has the use of an unimproved system, and 18% practices open defecation (Figure 1). Additionally, other regions that have less than 50% of their population with access to safely managed sanitation systems include: Latin America and Caribbean, Western Asia and Northern Africa, and Central and Southern Asia.

        Experts estimate that the absence of proper water and sanitation facilities is the leading cause of the death for 827,000 people in low- and middle- income countries [5]. The main associated diseases are diarrhoea (responsible for 60% of the aforementioned number of deaths), cholera, typhoid, dysentery, hepatitis A, and polio, besides illnesses caused by intestinal worms, such as schistosomiasis and trachoma, and malnutrition [5; 7]. A sad reality, considering that most of these diseases can be easily preventable with access to potable water and to adequate sanitation systems. For instance, improved water and sanitation access could avert the deaths of children under age 5, which is estimated to be 297,000, as well as stunting [5].

         Furthermore, the current reality of precarious water and sanitation systems in many places around the world makes the fight against the spread of COVID-19 even more challenging. Adequate hygiene measures are key to prevent the spread of the virus. However, in low income countries, there is a high deficiency in water services to provide this benefit of proper hygiene. In Sub-Saharan Africa, for example, only 26% of its population have access to basic handwashing facilities (soap and water), 40% have limited access (i.e. without water or soap), and 34% completely lack any service or alternative [6]. Moreover, the presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA has been reported in wastewater, although the knowledge on the infectivity of the virus via wastewater is limited at the moment [8].

Clean Water, Sanitation, and Climate Change

         Climate change represents a serious threat to the provision of clean freshwater worldwide. This is largely due to the finding that climate change is projected to cause shifts in patterns of precipitation and evaporation, as well as alter the frequency and severity of extreme weather events [9, 10]. Estimates suggest that modifications in surface water area indicative of drought and flooding events are taking place in about one-fifth of the world’s river basins [11]. Droughts decrease water availability while maintaining or increasing demand, leading to water scarcity. Without the water they need for drinking, hygiene, or other uses like agriculture, people suffer. The little-available water can be more likely to contain pollutants, which can impact human health [12]. People may be driven to drink contaminated water, which results in a surge in waterborne diseases. With little or no rainfall and no water for irrigation, agriculture and livestock are negatively affected, and food supply also becomes endangered [13]. Additionally, drought-driven lack of water can cause conflict among users, as they compete for a dwindling resource. When conflict arises, it can impact and divert resources from the community’s infrastructure, including systems to maintain and sanitize fresh water [14].

         Like too little water, too much water is also a problem. When extreme events like flooding occur, there can be negative consequences for water quality and sanitation systems [15]. Flooding events have been associated with the presence of higher levels of microbes and pathogens, as well as metals and chemical and organic contaminants [16, 17]. Increased surface runoff associated with heavy rainfall can pick up sediment, contaminants like fertilizer, and other pollutants, which then might be transferred to a community’s water source [15, 17]. Heavy rainfall and flooding can also overload and damage infrastructure and sanitation systems, leaving communities with contaminated, unsafe water [18].

        Sustainable use of water resources, along with resilient infrastructure, forms a basis for gaining and maintaining access to clean water and sanitation for vulnerable communities across the world. An integrated, participatory approach to management, combined with risk assessment and adaptive solutions, including community lead and/or nature-based solutions, can increase water security and safety [19]. Strengthening cooperation between communities, countries, and other stakeholders, including with transboundary water management, promotes knowledge-sharing, harmonises the use of water resources, and ultimately augments the effectiveness of water governance. Additionally, increasing effective climate action and the protection of natural ecosystems will enhance the stability of the earth system and, thus, of water resources [20, 21].

Conclusions

         Ensuring the availability and accessibility of clean water to all, particularly in the face of ongoing climate change, is a key challenge moving forward. Access to sanitation systems and sufficient quantities of clean, quality water is paramount to human health and helps to fight diseases, including COVID-19. Prevention and investments in safely and sustainably managed water systems and sanitation facilities improve health and quality of life, besides contributing to a positive feedback in the economy for the health system. It is important to have this awareness and continue to develop technologies, form connections among various stakeholders, and engage in action in order to make progress towards the achievement of the targets of the SDG 6 for a universal and equitable access to water and sanitation systems.

References

[1] Bureau of Reclamation: Water Facts – Worldwide water supply

[2] Gall, A.M., Mariñas, B.J., Lu, Y., & Shisler, J.L. (2015). Waterborne Viruses: A Barrier to Safe Drinking Water. PLoS Pathogens, 11(6): e1004867

[3] United Nations: Goal 6 – Ensure access to water and sanitation for all

[4] United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Sustainable Development: Goal 6 – Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all

[5] World Health Organization: Sanitation Fact sheets

[6] Our World in Data: Clean water and sanitation

[7] World Health Organization: Water, sanitation and hygiene – exposure

[8] Kitajima et al. (2020). SARS-CoV-2 in wastewater: State of the knowledge and research needs. Science of The Total Environment 739: 139076.

[9] IPCC, 2014: Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, R.K. Pachauri and L.A. Meyer (eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, 151 pp.

[10] Konapala, G., Mishra, A.K., Wada, Y. et al. (2020). Climate change will affect global water availability through compounding changes in seasonal precipitation and evaporation. Nature Communications 11: 3044.

[11] UN Summary Progress Update 2021: SDG 6 – Water and sanitation for all; 

[12] Benotti, M. J., Stanford, B. D., & Snyder, S. A. (2010). Impact of drought on wastewater contaminants in an urban water supply. Journal of environmental quality 39(4): 1196–1200.

[13] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Health Implications of Drought;

[14] Levy, B. S., & Sidel, V. W. (2011). Water rights and water fights: preventing and resolving conflicts before they boil over. American journal of public health, 101(5): 778–780.

[15] Erickson, T. B., Brooks, J., Nilles, E. J., Pham, P. N., & Vinck, P. (2019). Environmental health effects attributed to toxic and infectious agents following hurricanes, cyclones, flash floods and major hydrometeorological events. Journal of toxicology and environmental health. Part B, Critical reviews 22(5-6): 157–171.

[16] Yard, E. E., Murphy, M. W., Schneeberger, C., Narayanan, J., Hoo, E., Freiman, A., Lewis, L. S., & Hill, V. R. (2014). Microbial and chemical contamination during and after flooding in the Ohio River-Kentucky, 2011. Journal of environmental science and health. Part A, Toxic/hazardous substances & environmental engineering, 49(11): 1236–1243.

[17] Sun, R., An, D., Lu, W., Shi, Y., Wang, L., Zhang, C., Zhang, P., Qi, H., & Wang, Q. (2016). Impacts of a flash flood on drinking water quality: case study of areas most affected by the 2012 Beijing flood. Heliyon 2(2): e00071.

[18] McCluskey, J. 2001.Water supply, health and vulnerability in floods. Waterlines. 19(3): 14-17.

[19] Agarwal, A., de los Angeles, M. S., Bhatia, R., Chéret, I., Davila-Poblete, S., Falkenmark, M., Gonzalez-Villarreal, F., Jønch-Clausen, T., Aït Kadi, M., Kindler, J., Rees, J., Roberts, P., Rogers, P., Solanes, M. & Wright, A. (2000). Integrated Water Resources Management. GWP-TAC Background Papers (4). 43 pp.

[20] UNECE – Water and adaptation to climate change

[21] IUCN – Water and climate chance issues brief

The post The SDGs Series (Goal 6): Clean Water and Sanitation for all appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

Ahead of COP26, expectations were high. These hopes were born out of urgency — the window to avert the worsening effects of climate change is rapidly closing. We know what is happening and we know why. The question now is, what do we do about it? To many, this conference was the place to get everyone in the room to answer this. What progress did we want? From the conference, many wanted to see more ambition. To achieve net zero by 2050 and limit warming to below 1.5°C, emissions gaps must be closed. This includes phasing out fossil fuels and supporting clean energy transition. We wanted to see agreements made on finance, delivering on the $100bn promised to developing countries as well as supporting their adaptation and resolving loss and damage. We wanted to see everyone working toward solving a common problem, taking accountability, and putting forth inclusive solutions. To tackle the current crisis, we need to work together and accelerate climate action in a just and concrete way – and this is what we wanted to see in Glasgow. 

GCE students’ impressions and experiences 

COP 26 was supposed to be the next world-changing Climate Conference after the Paris Agreement in 2015. This fact combined with the opportunity that GCE students have— to attend the UN Climate Change Conference as observers— created a very exciting moment that we were all looking forward to. After week 1 concluded, it was time for the second group of students to participate in the event as week 2 delegates. Thus, eleven students made their way to Glasgow (or more precisely, to small towns called “Bathgate” and “Barrhead,” where our accommodations were located). Every day, after approximately one hour train ride during beautiful early morning hours, we would arrive at the Scottish Exhibition Centre. 

Our first impression and probably the most mentioned word of the week: OVERWHELMING. It was really overwhelming to be at a conference where milestone agreements are supposed to be negotiated. COP26 comprised more than 20.000 attendants, numerous side events from different NGOs and GOs, and pavilions’ expositions (over 90!) from countries and organizations, where more events were held about their environmental initiatives, issues, technology as well as their culture. Additionally, some meetings were regularly scheduled, such as coordination meetings for different groups like RINGO (Research and Independent NGOs), under which GCE falls. We became more confident day by day, as we explored the venue and figured out how to arrange schedules for side events and the official negotiations. 

It was interesting to attend side events about different topics like peatlands, indigenous peoples’ rights, and carbon green washing. Furthermore, it was exciting to see how the draft version of the agreement was being negotiated. In the second week, a draft version of the COP outcome was already developed, and as a result “only” small adjustments were in debate. These events turned out to be really fascinating, as we learned “how can you discuss brackets in one paragraph for four hours” or “how to change words in paragraphs so they have a slightly different—but not too different— meaning.” We also heard discussions as the many nations searched for consensus to set up a very important element: the agreement itself. 

Another highlight for students was being able to meet Prof. Charlotte Streck, the lecturer for the GCE course of Climate Diplomacy (C1 Module: Climate Policies and Economies). While some had met Prof. Streck via Zoom during the Winter 2020/2021 Semester, COP26 marked the first time that students could interact with her in person. During a meeting with Prof. Streck in the “Action Hub” of the event centre, students were able to ask questions and gain insights into the COP experience. 

COP26 program week 2 

Each day at COP had a main theme set by the presidency. Week 2 started off with the Presidency Programme focusing on adaptation loss and damage. Major events as part of this included “Exploring Loss and Damage”, “Adaptation Fund Contributor Dialogue and Reflections from Recipients and Stakeholders”, and “Dialogue on Climate Finance”. Other major events were the “Annual gathering of indigenous knowledge holders (Part II)” as well as a speech by former US President Obama. Tuesday’s Presidency Programme was gender, science and innovation, with events such as “Advancing Gender Equality in Climate Action” and “Accelerating Innovation: collaboration for a net zero future” as some examples. The Wednesday theme was about transport, while Thursday focused on cities, regions, and the built environment. Friday was left free for the official closure of negotiations, although the COP26 continued into the weekend. In the end, there was no official closing ceremony on Friday. This happened instead on Saturday night, with some finalised agreements and agendas that had already been declared closed since Thursday evening. 

Civil society and action outside the negotiations  

Though the goal was to have “the most inclusive COP ever”, many have termed COP26 as rather exclusionary. This was especially the case for those from the Global South, due to the regularly changing COVID-19 travel regulations, travel costs, exorbitant accommodation prices, lack of interpreters (though our own week 2 attendee, Diana Pineda, was able to fill in!), representation and voice in the actual negotiation rooms where critical decisions were made. Blocking out the voices of those most impacted by climate change and injustice prevents us from delivering the outcomes needed for all. 

Therefore, a counter summit to COP26 also took place. “The People’s Summit for Climate Justice” was a society coalition of groups and individuals mobilized around climate justice during the COP. Among many other groups of people that didn´t have access to the COP26 (but wanted to participate) were environment and development NGOs, trade unions, feminist, faith, youth, and indigenous groups, as well as migrant and racial justice networks. Unanimously, the message was clear: “We are watching, and we demand climate justice!”. A series of demonstrations/protests took place throughout the summit, the largest ones happened on November 5^th and 12^th organized by Fridays for Future Scotland, convoking a big mass of people outside the venues, including participants from the civil society but also COP attendees.  

COP26 Outcomes 

COP26 was considered a last chance to keep 1.5 °C alive. Plenary and negotiations closed on Saturday, November 13^th, one day after the original schedule. In the end, parties adopted the “Glasgow Climate Pact”, and finalized the outstanding elements of the Paris Agreement. After two weeks of negotiations, the main outcomes from COP26 are: 

• The parties compromise to reduce the carbon emissions by 45% by the end of 2030 (compared with 2010 levels). 
• Carbon emissions must be neutralized by 2050. This means that any additional emission must be compensated by reforestation or carbon capture mechanisms. 
• For the first time in the history of COPs, it has recognized the need to transition from fossil fuel to renewable fuel.  
• Parties must present new official government targets by the end of 2022, since the current targets cannot contain global warming to the level of 1.5º C. 

Although COP26 achieved some progress, environmentalists criticized the pact, mainly regarding coal power use. The total abandonment of coal was modified at the last minute under the pressure of India, China, and other major consuming countries. The official document now refers to the “phase-down of inefficient fossil fuels”, rather than the “phase-out of fossil fuels” — as originally proposed. 

Have the initial expectations been fulfilled? 

There has been a lot of criticism regarding the final COP26 outcome. In order to keep 1.5°C alive, the initial agenda of the COP26 contained the point “HOW to reach the 1.5 °C goal”. Many were looking forward to the concretization of this goal, since it is still unclear how to get there. However, on the first day of the COP, the UK presidency proposed to take this point off the agenda without opposition from the participating delegations. It was also pointed out that, even if countries would fulfil their announced NDCs, it would not suffice to reach the 1.5 °C goal. So, a strong appeal was made to the participating states to formulate more ambitious NDCs. Therefore, this topic has not been further discussed and remains fuzzy in the Glasgow agreement. Furthermore, human and indigenous rights in general remain to become more present and formulated in the agreement.  

This quote by a representative at the COP summarizes the mood on the last day of the COP quite well: “Avoiding failure is not a success.” The last-minute draft presented by the Indian delegation obviously weakened the affected article significantly. Under pressure to reach a result, COP president Alok Sharma declared the draft, despite the disappointment of several delegations, as accepted and tearfully apologized for the final outcome. A very criticized fact, also in the context of the result, is that the number of fossil fuel lobbyists was higher than the largest governmental delegation (which was Brazil, with 479 delegates).  

Thoughts regarding next COP in Egypt

The next COP is going to take place in Egypt. Some say that this might be a good setting for holding such a conference, since the country is a rising economic power and therefore some sort of connector between developed and developing countries. Besides, it might symbolize a focus from the African continent — strongly affected by climate change — in the upcoming negotiations. However, there are some concerns about COP27. In Glasgow, civil society and its commitment in the form of protests and side events outside of the so-called Blue Zone was a highlight. These activities might be limited at COP27, given the state of human rights, especially women rights, and the right to demonstrate in Egypt. The fact that the conference is going to be held in Sharm el-Sheikh, the largest tourist resort of Egypt, might give the impression that the host country wants to paint a certain picture. However, after years of unchecked abuse by government authorities that has landed thousands in prisons, blocked hundreds of independent and opposition media websites, and brought accusations of extrajudicial killings by Egyptian security forces, The New York Times reports that there seem to be attempts of progress in response to international pressure. Overall, it remains to be seen how the next COP will develop. 

Why is a global climate conference, despite the criticized points, still important? 

When we consider the COP, we must remember that it is a negotiation space. While this means that there is the opportunity for shared decisions on the global scale, the nature of negotiation and the inevitable compromises that must be made for so many states to agree mean that not everyone will be fully happy with the outcome. The point is to make progress. And, while the outcome might have fallen a bit short of our expectations, we did make progress. Beyond the official outcomes, there was space for actors across sectors to meet and share ideas and projects for implementation. Additionally, we saw a galvanized civil society contribution. As we move away from COP26, this push for climate action and justice will not end – and we hope to see this reflected more clearly in COP27 and beyond. In this way, we can preserve our planet and secure a safe, healthy, and just future for those who come after us. 

The post COP26 Summary of Week 2 appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

Various Events at COP26

The COP conference is divided into Blue Zone and Green Zone. While the Blue Zone is only accessible for accredited participants, the Green Zone is open to the public. Within the Blue Zone, several negotiations and side events are taking place. They’re designated into either open or closed meetings. The closed meetings are not open to the observers, but this group can participate in open meetings with the compliance of the Covid-19 Code of Conduct. On the 1st and 2nd of November, UNFCCC launched a ticket system for NGO badge holders in light of the capacity limit in different negotiation rooms. The ticket collection process was very chaotic and confusing in the beginning, given that no one had experience with this pandemic-specific rule before and the organizers did not communicate instructions adequately. The ticket system was lifted after the World Leaders Summit; however, every negotiation room allows only for one representative from nine different NGO constituencies. The University of Bayreuth belongs to RINGO (Research and Independent NGOs), and it is highly recommended to attend the RINGO coordination meetings every morning for scheduling, as well as added information for any special events that take place and need to adopt the ticket system again.  

Apart from the negotiation and consultation for the technical details in the Agreements, there is a broad range of events organized by the UNFCCC secretariat and different pavilions. Some parties and organizations have their own pavilion, while some share with others. The pavilions provide a space for networking, experience sharing, panel discussions, and open dialogue between participants and experts. It’s very interesting to wander around different pavilions and see various projects and initiatives coming from the bottom-up. However, it’s worth bearing in mind that some of the host organizations are trying to promote certain ideas, so the messages that they deliver can be quite one-sided. On the other hand, the official side events from UNFCCC include different voices from various groups. It was more interesting for us to attend different side events and listen to both affirmative and negative sides.

Achievements in the first week

COP26 was kick-started by the World Leaders Summit on Monday. After the first week of negotiations, four main commitments were made in COP26:

1. 134 countries, covering 91% of the world’s forests, agreed to halt deforestation and land degradation by 2030.
2. 103 countries signed up for the Global Methane Pledge to cut 30% of methane emissions by 2030.
3. 40 countries have signed up for the Glasgow Breakthroughs, aiming to make green technologies affordable, accessible, and attractive globally by 2030. It focuses on five polluted sectors, including power, road transport, steel, hydrogen, and agriculture.
4. Over 450 of the world’s largest banks, insurance companies, pension funds, and many more finance-related institutions have committed to the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero (GFANZ). Signatories have committed to reporting on the annual carbon emissions related to their investments. The alliance does not include requirements to divest from fossil fuels, for example. In total, a sum of $ 130 trillion is covered under GFANZ, an equivalent of 40% of global GDP.

In addition to that, individual countries also ramped up their ambitions and made new commitments to curb carbon emission and mobilize climate finance. For example, India’s prime minister Narendra Modi pledged to net zero by 2070. Additionally, new commitments came from the United Kingdom, Spain, Japan, Australia, Norway, Ireland, and Luxembourg related to climate finance, contributing to closing the gap and probably delivering the promised $100 billion to developing countries every year by 2023.

Making progress but still not enough

We are witnessing progress at COP26. The International Energy Agency (IEA) predicted that temperature will rise 1.8 degrees if all the updated targets and pledges on the table are met. Before COP26, the climate action tracker projected that we are on a warming trajectory of  2.7 ℃. From 2.7  ℃ to 1.8  ℃ is great progress, but it’s still not enough. The latest IPCC report clearly stated anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions have largely changed the climate system and are directly linked to extreme weather hazards. Each additional degree of warming will no doubt increase and magnify natural disasters and might induce some devasting compound extreme events. It’s the code red for humanity. For many geographically vulnerable and least economically developed countries, 1.5 ℃ does not represent a choice but  a right to survival.

Moreover, most climate finance flows into projects that reduce carbon emissions instead of helping people adapt to the new climate. Adaptation accounts for less than 10 % of the global landscape of climate finance. Wealthy countries favor mitigation projects because success is easier and measurable. Another reason is that mitigation projects can be loan-based and the return is foreseen. If the world leaders can’t fix the disproportionate difference between mitigation and adaptation, it’s clear that climate justice still takes a distant back seat. Another uncertainty we must keep in mind is how the leaders bring their commitments back home and implement them in policies and laws. How to keep countries accountable would rely on the various mechanisms in the Paris Agreement, such as the ratchet mechanism and global stocktake. Much more technical details must be discussed in the second week. Thus, we should not be satisfied with the current outcomes. The more we get comfort from our achievement, the closer we get to failure. 

The post COP26 Summary of Week 1 appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

The last one and a half years have drastically shown how vulnerable mankind is on earth. The Covid-19 pandemic has revealed the many problems we face today but also in the future. Since Covid-19 disease originates from zoonotic coronavirus, there is a strong linkage between humans, animals, and the environment. Experts suggest that the 2019 pandemic outbreak was not the last one to come [1]. In order to tackle the problem and to be prepared for the future an integrated perspective is required. This is where the One Health approach comes into play.

What is the One Health approach?

Created in 2005, the One Health concept incorporates a multisector expertise and follows a holistic and transdisciplinary approach [2]. Generally speaking, health refers to the wellbeing of the physical, mental, and social status. But because the health issues are broad and complex, the One Health approach primarily focuses on health crisis related to ecological and environmental drivers and underscores the interconnectedness of health between humans, animals, plants, and the environment where they inhabit. It holds that to achieve ultimate human health, animals, plants, and environmental health needs to be addressed as well. Health threats shared by people, animals and the environment including zoonotic diseases, antimicrobial resistance, food safety and food security, vector-borne diseases, and environmental contamination are all common One Health issues [3].

Example of One Health – Antimicrobial Resistance

One example of applying the One Health approach in combating global health crisis is addressing antimicrobial resistance (AMR). In order to protect humans, livestock and agricultural production from bacterial infection, drugs containing antibiotics and antimicrobial agents have been widely used across the world. However, the pervading use of antimicrobial drugs has given rise to the microorganisms’ capability to adapt to those drugs. Consequently, the antimicrobial-resistant bacteria continue to harm human and animal health. What is worse, the antibiotics provide opportunities for zoonotic bacteria to develop resistance genes while transmitting to human bodies via food sources (e.g. meat products), direct animal contact, and contaminated environmental sources [4]. Facing the rapidly increasing threat posed by AMR, transdisciplinary collaboration and intersectoral countermeasures must come into force, such as the One Health approach.

Following this transdisciplinary approach, several organizations raise awareness of AMR. For instance, the World Health Organization developed the Global Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance System (GLASS), which drives local, national, and regional action. Laying the main focus on the collection, analysing and sharing of AMR data on global level, decision making on different levels should get enhanced [4,5].

According to the latest report, 109 countries and territories worldwide have enrolled in the Surveillance System until May 2021. The Assessment shows that GLASS significantly helped to foster the development of national AMR surveillance systems. As next steps it is aimed to enhance the completeness and quality of data [6].

Outlook

Most likely the Covid-19 pandemic has not been the last zoonotic disease posing a threat to humans. Close collaboration of different domains will be a key contribution for solving and preventing further crisis. The One Health Approach seems therefore a good possibility to tackle health related challenges in the future. Especially the holistic approach entails many opportunities for solutions on the global, national and local level. However more applicable frameworks should be provided, in order to enable a better implementation by different stakeholders with varied interests and interpretations of the One Health approach. Effective performance of One Health initiatives at all levels could hardly be achieved without developing more coherent and endurable frameworks for the increasingly diversified practitioners.

References

[1] Zowalaty, M. E., & Järhult, J. D. (2020). From SARS to COVID-19: A previously unknown SARS- related coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) of pandemic potential infecting humans – Call for a One Health approach. One Health, 9, 100124. doi: 10.1016/j.onehlt.2020.100124

[2] Destoumieux-Garzón, D., Mavingui P, Boetsch G, Boissier J, Darriet F, Duboz P, Fritsch C, Giraudoux P, Le Roux F, Morand S, Paillard C, Pontier D, Sueur C and Voituron Y (2018). The One Health Concept: 10 Years Old and a Long Road Ahead. Front. Vet. Sci. 5:14. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2018.00014

[3] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2018). National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases. One Health Basics. Last viewed 23.07.2021 from https://www.cdc.gov/onehealth/basics/index.html

[4] Schneider, M. C., Munoz-Zanzi, C., Min, K and Aldighieri, S. (2019). “One Health” From Concept to Application in the Global World. Global Public Health. doi: 10.1093/acrefore/9780190632366.013.29

[5] WHO (2021). Global Antimicrobial Resistance and Use Surveillance System (GLASS). Last viewed 27.07.2021 from https://www.who.int/initiatives/glass

[6] Global antimicrobial resistance and use surveillance system (GLASS) report 2021. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2021. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO.

The post The One Health approach to mitigate global health crisis related to ecological and environmental drivers appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

The coronavirus pandemic has affected societies, governments and economies across the world. Due to the numerous restrictions put in place to deal with this health crisis, many businesses are struggling, and layoffs are unavoidable in some areas. These pandemic restrictions have led to a temporary decrease in carbon emissions which has unexpectedly caused some countries like Germany to reach their emission goals in 2020 [1]. Nevertheless, the reduction of emissions is just a snapshot and not a long-term trend, proved by countries like the UK that have seen a rapid increase in carbon emissions after the lockdown has been lifted [2]. Unfortunately, the drop in emissions caused by the pandemic will only result in a 0.01 °C decrease in temperatures – which is well within natural variability [3].

In the face of a global recession, governments used stimulus packages to support affected business sectors to maintain employment or create new jobs. Simultaneously, the pressing challenge of tackling climate is more relevant than ever with 2020 being among the hottest years ever recorded [4]. There was great demand from scientists to include environmental and climatic conditions in the stimulus packages seeing the pandemic as a green rebound chance. The considerable spending during the time of crisis will have long-term effects on the structure of economies.

In this brief report, green stimulus packages are explained and connections to the 2009 financial crisis, where a green rebound was under discussion already, are shown. Next, the current stimulus packages of the G20 countries – which account for roughly 75 % of global carbon emissions [5] – are analysed according to their greenness and effectiveness to mitigate climate change. In conclusion, we deliver recommendations which stimulus measures prove the highest chances for tackling both the coronavirus pandemic, the economic downturn caused hereby and climate change.

Financial Crisis Stimulus Packages 2009

During the global financial crisis (GFC) in 2008-09, carbon emissions reduced sharply, but already by 2010, emissions reached a record level [6]. This increase could be explained by the fiscal measures governments worldwide implemented to stimulate economies, which were rather designed to revive the existing economies than considering the environmental consequences.  Although the recession caused by COVID-19 differs from the GFC, as a broader range of sectors is currently affected, some lessons could be learned from the last efforts of recovery [7]. The knowledge gained over a decade ago should be used to design recovery packages with a green stimulus to prevent a negative environmental impact like the one in 2009. Especially as COVID-19 spending with more than USD12 trillion to date [7] outsizes the GFC measures, which comprised approximately USD3 trillion [8].

Analysing the green stimulus of GFC recovery packages, 17.1 % of G20 public spending was dedicated to the support of renewable energy, energy efficiency and pollution control [9]. Those measures mostly focused on reducing carbon emissions while nature and biodiversity have been particularly neglected. One crucial finding emerges regarding the timeframe of the measures. After the economy began recovering in 2010, there has been no green expenditure of comparable size in any country, which suggests that short term policies are not sufficient for structural transformation of economies.

Moreover, a comparison of the stimulus types implemented in different countries shows an advantage of targeted policies as supporting green R&D investment over spending on large-scale infrastructure projects. As the limited success of the GFC recovery packages reveals, public spending alone cannot build up a sustainable economy. For this reason, various authors highlight the importance of pricing carbon and environmental damages [9]. A more general lesson learnt from the GFC crisis is that proper policy design is necessary to prevent environmentally harmful rebound effects [10].

Current Stimulus Packages

The amount of money spent by G20 governments on stimulus packages until December 2020 varies widely. Figure 1 shows per capita fiscal stimulus spending and per capita CO₂ emissions. Furthermore, the GSI of those stimulus packages is displayed. Interestingly, most countries that spend little money on stimulus packages have a very low GSI index, indicating that sustainability and climate-friendly measures are not implemented. One reason could be that some of those countries still heavily depend on fossil energy sources like coal (China), natural gas (Russia) and crude oil (Saudi Arabia) and thus are not willing to engage in green recovery measures.

Moving Forward

Due to the COVID-19 lockdowns, an 8% reduction of CO₂ occurred. This reduction puts us within the 7.6% of global yearly reduction that the UNFCCC says are required between 2020 and 2030 to limit global temperature increases to 1.5°C – and achieve the Paris agreement [7]. Therefore, in the effort to mitigate anthropogenic climate change the fight against COVID-19 must be used as a turning point in the climate discussion [14]. As a result of the unprecedented year of 2020, we have seen that change is possible. This is our chance to move forward as the response to the COVID-19 pandemic has cast a light on many of the systemic issues long ignored while also showing some potential solution [15].

The effects of the pandemic are striking, in fact, global energy demand was estimated to decrease by 6% in 2020 which was not only seven times what was seen after the 2008-2009 economic crisis, but it was also the first major decrease seen since World War II (Figure 2) [14]. The pandemic effectively demonstrated that many of the “dirtier industries” and fossil fuels were not resilient in the pandemic, seeing large economic losses [14, 16]. As many experts argue, this weakening of the power of fossil fuels and changes in norm creates the perfect time to transition away for these industries [3, 14, 15, 16]. This change is enabled further by the USD 9 trillion pledged by governments to combat the economic situation – which on average accounted for 7% of a countries GDP [17]. Experts argue that if used effectively these packages can bring us out of the pandemic and minimize the effects of climate change at the same time [16]. This is the case because the stimuli have more lasting impacts than regular discretionary spending [14].

Seeing these recovery packages as a tool to fight anthropogenic climate change is essential because of their potential to lock us into a more sustainable renewable energy-based future rather than continue reinforcing the statuesque [18]. For packages to be effective at dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic and being climate-friendly, the International Energy Agency put forward some recommendations [5]. It provided a sustainable recovery plan to implement in the next 3 years (2021-2023). If implemented the annual energy related GHG emissions would be 4.5 billion tones lower in 2023 making 2019 the peak of global emission and would put us on the path of reaching Paris targets while also creating 1.1% of economic growth globally each year while creating 9 million jobs. The areas they recommended to focus investments in were: increasing energy efficiency of buildings and manufacturing, fostering low carbon electricity and transportation, and innovation. Therefore, creating jobs, increases in economic growth and a better future are all compatible and not at odds.

Conclusion

Moving forward, we are essentially at a crossroads of what to do, we can pick one of several emission scenarios as seen in Figure 3. Where we can recover with green stimuli, fossil fuels, or have a 2-year blip due to COVID-19 restrictions and then a return to normal [5]. These scenarios have very different implications for the future of the planet. Since governments are already investing so heavily into their economies now is the perfect time to lock in a more resilient and sustainable future, one that creates new jobs and opportunities, rather than repeat the mistakes of the past. In effect, as we fight to “get back to normal” it is essential to ask what normal do we want?

References

[1] DW (2021). Deutschland übertrifft wegen Corona Klimaziel 2020. Deutsche Welle. https://www.dw.com/de/deutschland-%C3%BCbertrifft-wegen-corona-klimaziel-2020/a-56121979 (last visited: 06.01.2021)

[2] Harvey, F. (2020). Surprisingly rapid rebound in carbon emissions post-lockdown. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jun/11/carbon-emissions-in-surprisingly-rapid-surge-postlockdown (last visited: 06.01.2021)

[3] Forster, P. M., Forster, H. I., Evans, M. J., Gidden, M. J., Jones, C. D., Keller, C. A., … & Turnock, S. T. (2020). Current and future global climate impacts resulting from COVID-19. Nature Climate Change, 10(10), 913-919.

[4] Yulsman, T. (2020). Has 2020 Ended as the Warmest Year on Record?. Discover Magazine. https://www.discovermagazine.com/environment/will-2020-end-as-the-warmest-year-on-record (last visited: 06.01.2021)

[5] Godinho, C. et al. (2020). The Climate Transparency Report 2020. Climate Transparency. https://www.climate-transparency.org/g20-climate-performance/the-climate-transparency-report-2020 (last visited: 05.01.2021)

 [6] Cassim, Z. et al. (2020). The $10 trillion rescue: How governments can deliver impact. McKinsey&Company. https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/public-and-social-sector/our-insights/the-10-trillion-dollar-rescue-how-governments-can-deliver-impact# (last visited: 17.01.2021)

[7] Hepburn, C. et al. (2020). Will COVID-19 fiscal recovery packages accelerate or retard progress on climate change?. Oxford Review of Economic Policy 36(S1).

[8] Robins, N. et al. (2009). A Climate for Recovery. The colour of stimulus goes green. HSBC Bank plc. https://www.globaldashboard.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/HSBC_Green_New_Deal.pdf (last visited: 17.01.2021)

[9] Barbier, E. B. (2020). Greening the Post-Pandemic Recovery in the G20. Environmental and Resource Economics, 76:685-703.

 [10] Agrawala, S., D. Dussaux and N. Monti (2020), “What policies for greening the crisis response and economic recovery?: Lessons learned from past green stimulus measures and implications for the COVID-19 crisis”, OECD Environment Working Papers, No. 164, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/c50f186f-en

[11] Vivid Economics (2020).  Greenness of Stimulus Index. An assessment of COVID-19 stimulus by G20 countries and other major economies in relation to climate action and biodiversity goals. https://www.vivideconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/201214-GSI-report_December-release.pdf (last visited: 17.01.2021)

[12] Crippa, M., Guizzardi, D., Muntean, M., Schaaf, E., Solazzo, E., Monforti-Ferrario, F., Olivier, J.G.J., Vignati, E., Fossil CO2 emissions of all world countries – 2020 Report, EUR 30358 EN, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2020, ISBN 978-92-76-21515-8, doi:10.2760/143674, JRC121460.

[13] United Nations. Department of Economic and Social Affairs. World Populations Prospects 2019. Total Population – Both Sexes. https://population.un.org/wpp/Download/Standard/Population/ (last visited: 13.01.2021)

[14] Mukanjari, S., & Sterner, T. (2020). Charting a “green path” for recovery from COVID-19. Environmental and Resource Economics, 76(4), 825-853.

[15] Benach, J. (2020). We Must Take Advantage of This Pandemic to Make a Radical Social Change: The Coronavirus as a Global Health, Inequality, and Eco-Social Problem. International Journal of Health Services, 0020731420946594.

[16] IEA (2020), Renewables 2020, IEA, Paris https://www.iea.org/reports/renewables-2020 (Last visited 11.01.2021)

[17] IEA (2020), Sustainable Recovery, IEA, Paris https://www.iea.org/reports/sustainable-recovery(Last visited 13.01.2021)

[18] Jagers S.C., Harring, N., Lofgren, A. et al. 2020. On the preconditions for large-scale collective action. Journal of the Human Environment 49(2):1282-1296

[19] G20 (2021). https://www.g20.org/en/index.html (last visited: 17.01.2021)

The post How to Tackle Climate Change with Green COVID-19 Recovery Packages appeared first on Global Change Ecology.