Editing IPCC:AR6/SR15/Chapter-5 (section)

==== 5.5.3.3 Country and community strategies and experiences ====

<div id="section-5-5-3-3-block-1"></div>

There are many possible pathways towards climate-resilient futures (O’Brien, 2018; Tàbara et al., 2018) <sup>[[#fn:r353|353]]</sup> . Literature depicting different sustainable development trajectories in line with CRDPs is growing, with some of it being specific to 1.5°C global warming. Most experiences to date are at local and sub-national levels (Cross-Chapter Box 13 in this chapter), while state-level efforts align largely with green economy trajectories or planning for climate resilience (Box 5.3). Due to the fact that these strategies are context-specific, the literature is scarce on comparisons, efforts to scale up and systematic monitoring.

States can play an enabling or hindering role in a transition to a 1.5°C warmer world (Patterson et al., 2018) <sup>[[#fn:r354|354]]</sup> . The literature on strategies to reconcile low-carbon trajectories with sustainable development and ecological sustainability through green growth, inclusive growth, de-growth, post-growth and development as well-being shows ''low agreement'' (see Chapter 4, Section 4.5). Efforts that align best with CRDPs are described as ‘transformational’ and ‘strong’ (Ferguson, 2015) <sup>[[#fn:r355|355]]</sup> . Some view ‘thick green’ perspectives as enabling equity, democracy and agency building (Lorek and Spangenberg, 2014; Stirling, 2014; Ehresman and Okereke, 2015; Buch-Hansen, 2018) <sup>[[#fn:r356|356]]</sup> , others show how green economy and sustainable development pathways can align (Brown et al., 2014; Georgeson et al., 2017b) <sup>[[#fn:r357|357]]</sup> , and how a green economy can help link the SDGs with NDCs, for instance in Mongolia, Kenya and Sweden (Shine, 2017) <sup>[[#fn:r358|358]]</sup> . Others still critique the continuous reliance on market mechanisms (Wanner, 2014; Brockington and Ponte, 2015) <sup>[[#fn:r359|359]]</sup> and disregard for equity and distributional and procedural justice (Stirling, 2014; Bell, 2015) <sup>[[#fn:r360|360]]</sup> .

Country-level pathways and achievements vary significantly ( ''robust evidence, medium agreement'' ). For instance, the Scandinavian countries rank at the top of the Global Green Economy Index (Dual Citizen LLC, 2016) <sup>[[#fn:r361|361]]</sup> , although they also tend to show high spill-over effects (Holz et al., 2018) <sup>[[#fn:r362|362]]</sup> and transgress their biophysical boundaries (O’Neill et al., 2018) <sup>[[#fn:r363|363]]</sup> . State-driven efforts in non-member countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development include Ethiopia’s ‘Climate-resilient Green Economy Strategy’, Mozambique’s ‘Green Economy Action Plan’ and Costa Rica’s ecosystem- and conservation-driven green transition paths. China and India have adopted technology and renewables pathways (Brown et al., 2014; Death, 2014, 2015, 2016; Khanna et al., 2014; Chen et al., 2015; Kim and Thurbon, 2015; Wang et al., 2015; Weng et al., 2015) <sup>[[#fn:r364|364]]</sup> . Brazil promotes low per capita GHG emissions, clean energy sources, green jobs, renewables and sustainable transportation, while slowing rates of deforestation (see Chapter 4, Box 4.7) (Brown et al., 2014; La Rovere, 2017) <sup>[[#fn:r365|365]]</sup> . Yet concerns remain regarding persistent inequalities, ecosystem monetization, lack of participation in green-style projects (Brown et al., 2014) <sup>[[#fn:r366|366]]</sup> and labour conditions and risk of displacement in the sugarcane ethanol sector (McKay et al., 2016) <sup>[[#fn:r367|367]]</sup> . Experiences with low-carbon development pathways in LDCs highlight the crucial role of identifying synergies across scale, removing institutional barriers and ensuring equity and fairness in distributing benefits as part of the right to development (Rai and Fisher, 2017) <sup>[[#fn:r368|368]]</sup> .

In small islands states, for many of which climate change hazards and impacts at 1.5°C pose significant risks to sustainable development (see Chapter 3 Box 3.5, Chapter 4 Box 4.3, Box 5.3), examples of CRDPs have emerged since the AR5. This includes the SAMOA Pathway: SIDS Accelerated Modalities of Action (see Chapter 4, Box 4.3) (UNGA, 2014; Government of Kiribati, 2016; Steering Committee on Partnerships for SIDS and UN DESA, 2016; Lefale et al., 2017) <sup>[[#fn:r369|369]]</sup> and the Framework for Resilient Development in the Pacific, a leading example of integrated regional climate change adaptation planning for mitigation and sustainable development, disaster risk management and low-carbon economies (SPC, 2016) <sup>[[#fn:r370|370]]</sup> . Small islands of the Pacific vary significantly in their capacity and resources to support effective integrated planning (McCubbin et al., 2015; Barnett and Walters, 2016; Cvitanovic et al., 2016; Hemstock et al., 2017; Robinson and Dornan, 2017) <sup>[[#fn:r371|371]]</sup> . Vanuatu (Box 5.3) has developed a significant coordinated national adaptation plan to advance the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, respond to the Paris Agreement and reduce the risk of disasters in line with the Sendai targets (UNDP, 2016; Republic of Vanuatu, 2017) <sup>[[#fn:r372|372]]</sup> .

<div id="section-5-5-3-3-block-2" class="box"></div>

<span id="box-5.3-republic-of-vanuatu-national-planning-for-development-and-climate-resilience"></span>