Editing IPCC:AR6/WGIII/Chapter-13 (section)

=== 13.8.4 Integrated Governance Including Equity and Sustainable Development ===

<div id="h2-28-siblings" class="h2-siblings"></div>

Climate policy integration carries implications for the pursuit of the SDGs, given that it is nearly impossible to achieve the desired socio-economic gains if fundamental environmental issues, such as climate change, are not addressed ( [[#Gomez-Echeverri--2018|Gomez-Echeverri 2018]] ). Research on climate resilient development pathways ( [[#Roy--2018|Roy et al. 2018]] ), for instance, argues for long-term policy planning that combines the governance of national climate and SD goals, builds institutional capacity across all sectors, jurisdictions, and actors, and enhances participation and transparency ( ''robust evidence'' , ''high agreement'' ) ( [[IPCC:Wg3:Chapter:Chapter-4|Chapter 4]] and 17).

In the Global South, climate change policies are often established in the context of sustainable development and of other pressing local priorities (e.g., air pollution, health, and food security). National climate policy in these countries tends to give prominence to adaptation based on country vulnerability, climatic risk, gender-based differences in exposur to that risk, and the importance of local/traditional and indigenous knowledge ( [[#Beg--2002|Beg et al. 2002]] ; [[#Duguma--2014b|Duguma et al. 2014b]] ). Despite the evidence that integrated mitigation and adaptation policies can be effective and efficient ( [[#Klein--2005|Klein et al. 2005]] ) and can potentially reduce trade-offs, there is still limited evidence of how such integrated policies would specifically contribute to progress on the SDGs ( ''robust evidence'' , ''high agreement'' ) (Kongsager et al.2016; [[#Di%20Gregorio--2017|Di Gregorio et al. 2017]] ; [[#Antwi-Agyei--2018|Antwi-Agyei et al. 2018]] ; De Coninck et al. 2018; [[#Campagnolo--2019|Campagnolo and Davide 2019]] ).

Where mainstreaming of environmental concerns has been attempted through national plans, they have had success in some cases when backed by strong political commitments that support a vertical coordination structure rather than horizontal structures led by the focus ministry ( [[#Nunan--2012|Nunan et al. 2012]] ). Such political commitments are therefore crucial to success but insufficient in and of themselves ( [[#Runhaar--2018|Runhaar et al. 2018]] ; [[#Wamsler--2020|Wamsler et al. 2020]] ). Integration of the budget process is particularly important, as are aligned time frames across different objectives ( [[#Saito--2013|Saito 2013]] ). Recognition of the functional interactions across policy sectors is improved by a translation of long-term policy objectives into a plan that aligns with integration goals ( [[#Corry--2012|Corry 2012]] ; [[#Oels--2012|Oels 2012]] ; [[#Dupont--2019|Dupont 2019]] ).

There are important links between inequality, justice and climate change ( [[#Ikeme--2003|Ikeme 2003]] ; [[#Bailey--2017|Bailey 2017]] ). Many of these operate through the benefits, costs and risks of climate action (distributive justice), while others focus on differential participation and recognition of sub-national actors and marginalised groups (procedural justice) ( [[#Bulkeley--2013|Bulkeley and Castán Broto 2013]] ; [[#Bulkeley--2013|Bulkeley et al. 2013]] ; [[#Hughes--2013|Hughes 2013]] ; [[#Reckien--2018|Reckien et al. 2018]] ; [[#Romero-Lankao--2019|Romero-Lankao and Gnatz 2019]] ).

Justice principles are rarely incorporated in climate change framing and action( [[#Sovacool--2015|Sovacool and Dworkin 2015]] ; [[#Genus--2016|Genus and Theobald 2016]] ; [[#Heikkinen--2019|Heikkinen et al. 2019]] ; [[#Romero-Lankao--2019|Romero-Lankao and Gnatz 2019]] ). Yet, equity is salient to mitigation debates, because climate change mitigation policies can have also negative impacts ( [[#Brugnach--2017|Brugnach et al. 2017]] ; [[#Ramos-Castillo--2017|Ramos-Castillo et al. 2017]] ; [[#Klinsky--2018|Klinsky 2018]] ), exacerbated by poverty, inequality and corruption( [[#Reckien--2018|Reckien et al. 2018]] ; [[#Markkanen--2019|Markkanen and Anger-Kraavi 2019]] ). The siting of facilities and infrastructure that advance decarbonisation (such as public transit infrastructure, renewable energy facilities and so on) may have implications for environmental justice. Integrated attention to justice in climate, environment and energy, as well as involvement of host communities in siting assessments and decision-making processes, can help to avoid such conflict ( [[#McCord--2020|McCord et al. 2020]] ; [[#Hughes--2020|Hughes and Hoffmann 2020]] ). As a result, successful policy integration goes beyond optimising public management routines, and must resolve key trade-offs between actors and objectives ( [[#Meadowcroft--2009|Meadowcroft 2009]] ; [[#Nordbeck--2016|Nordbeck and Steurer 2016]] ).

The potential for transformative climate change policy that delivers both adaptation and mitigation is also shaped by a number of enabling and disabling factors tied to governance processes ( ''robust evidence'' , ''high agreement'' ) ( [[#Burch--2014|Burch et al. 2014]] ) ( [[#13.9|Section 13.9]] ).

<div id="Box 13.17 | Enabling and Disabling Factors for Integrated Governance of Mitigation" class="h2-container"></div>

<span id="box-13.17-enabling-and-disabling-factors-for-integrated-governance-of-mitigation-and-adaptation"></span>