Editing IPCC:AR6/WGIII/Chapter-1 (section)

== 1.10 Conclusions ==

<div id="h1-11-siblings" class="h1-siblings"></div>

Global conditions have changed substantially since the IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report in 2014. The Paris Agreement and the SDGs provided a new international context, but global intergovernmental cooperation has been under intense stress. Growing direct impacts of climate change are unambiguous and movements of protest and activism – in countries and transnational organisations at many levels – have grown. Global emissions growth had slowed but not stopped up to 2018/19, albeit with more diverse national trends. Growing numbers of countries have adopted ‘net zero’ CO 2 and/or GHG emission goals and decarbonisation or low-carbon growth strategies, but the current NDCs to 2030 collectively would barely reduce global emissions below present levels ( [[#1.3.3|Section 1.3.3]] ). An unfolding technology revolution is making significant contributions in some countries, but as yet its global impact is limited. Global climate change can only be tackled within, and if integrated with, the wider context of sustainable development, and related social goals including equity concerns. Countries and their populations have many conflicting priorities. Developing countries in particular have multiple urgent needs associated with earlier stages of sustainable development as reflected in the non-climate SDGs. Developed countries are amongst the most unsustainable in terms of overall consumption, but also face social constraints particularly arising from distributional impacts of climate policies.

The assessment of the key drivers for, and barriers against mitigation undertaken in this chapter underscore the complexity and multi-dimensional nature of climate mitigation. Historically, much of the academic analysis of mitigating climate change, particularly global approaches, has focused on modelling costs and pathways, and discussion about ‘optimal’ policy instruments. Developments since AR5 have continued to highlight the role of a wide range of factors intersecting the political, economic, social and institutional domains. Yet despite such complexities, there are signs of progress emerging from years of policy effort in terms of technology, social attitudes, and emission reductions in some countries, with tentative signs of impact on the trajectory of global emissions. The challenge remains how best to urgently scale up and speed up the climate mitigation effort at all scales – from local to global – to achieve the level of mitigation needed to address the problem as indicated by climate science. A related challenge is how to ensure that mitigation effort and any associated benefits of action are distributed fairly within and between countries and aligned to the overarching objective of global sustainable development. Lastly, globally effective and efficient mitigation will require international cooperation especially in the realms of finance and technology.

Multiple frameworks of analytic assessment, adapted to the realities of climate change mitigation, are therefore required. We identified four main groups. ''Aggregate economic'' frameworks – including environmental costs or goals, and with due attention to implied behavioural, distributional and dynamic assumptions – can provide insights about trade-offs, cost-effectiveness and policies for delivering agreed goals. ''Ethical frameworks'' are equally essential to inform both international and domestic discourse and decisions, including the relationship with international (and intergenerational) responsibilities, related financial systems, and domestic policy design in all countries. Explicit frameworks for analysing ''transition and transformation'' across multiple sectors need to draw on both socio-technical transition literatures, and those on social transformation. Finally, literatures on ''psychology, behaviour and political sciences'' can illuminate obstacles that have impeded progress to date and suggest ways to overcome them.

No single analytical framework, or single discipline, on its own can offer a comprehensive assessment of climate change mitigation. Together they point to the relevance of growing literatures and discourses on Just Transitions, and the role of governance at multiple levels. Ultimately all these frameworks are needed to inform the decisions required to deepen and connect the scattered elements of progress to date, and hence accelerate progress towards agreed goals and multiple dimensions of climate change mitigation in the context of sustainable development.

<div id="1.11" class="h1-container"></div>

<span id="knowledge-gaps"></span>