Co-benefits in policy-making
Co-benefits of GHG mitigation can be an important decision criteria in analyses carried out by policy-makers, but they are often neglected, and often the co-benefits are not quantified, monetised or even identified by businesses and decision-makers. Appropriate consideration of co-benefits can greatly influence policy decisions concerning the timing and level of mitigation action, and there can be significant advantages to the national economy and technical innovation. Co-benefits increasingly emerged on the stage of international, political debates. The IPCC first mentioned the role of co-benefits in 2001, followed by its fourth and fifth assessment cycle stressing improved working environment, reduced waste, health benefits and reduced capital expenditures. In the early 2000s the OECD was further fostering its efforts in promoting ancillary benefits. During the past decade, co-benefits have been discussed by several other international organisations: The International Energy Agency ( IEA) spelled out the "multiple benefits approach" of energy efficiency while the International Renewable Energy Agency (Co-benefits in research
Positive secondary effects that occur from climate mitigation and adaptation measures have been mentioned in research since the 1990s. The term co-benefits refers to "simultaneously meeting several interests or objectives resulting from a political intervention, private sector investment or a mix thereof". Opportunistic co-benefits appear as auxiliary or side effect while focusing on a central objective or interest. Strategic co-benefits result from a deliberate effort to seizing several opportunities (e.g., economic, business, social, environmental) with a single purposeful intervention." Co-benefits, also often referred to as ancillary benefits, have been addressed in scientific literature and were firstly dominated by studies that describe how lower GHG emissions lead to better air quality and consequently impact human health positively. The scope of co-benefits research expanded to its economic, social, ecological and political implications. From an economic perspective, co-benefits can enhance increased employment through carbon tax revenues and the implementation of renewable energy. A higher share of renewables can additionally lead to more energy security. Socioeconomic co-benefits have been analysed such as energy access in rural areas and improved rural livelihoods. Despite climate protection, mitigation policies can foster additional ecological trade-offs such as improved soil conservation, fertility, biodiversity and wildlife habitat. Further, mitigation policies bear opportunities for capacity building, participation and forest governance for local communities. Different research groups currently examine the impacts of co-benefits of climate change mitigation. One of these projects is the COBENEFITS project of the Institute for Advanced Sustainability Studies in Potsdam, Germany. The COBENEFITS project is part of the International Climate Initiative (IKI). The Federal Ministry of the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMU) supports this initiative on the basis of a decision adopted by the German Bundestag. The project is conducted in close collaboration with government ministries, agencies, research institutions, and think tanks as political partners and knowledge partners in the target countries. These four target countries are India, South Africa, Turkey, and Vietnam. The project team, thereby, cooperates with national authorities and knowledge partners to develop key insights that enable them to mobilise these co-benefits in their countries and accelerate domestic processes aimed at achieving their international climate protection commitments.Main co-benefits for people
Clean air
Climate change mitigation policies can lead to lower emissions of co-emitted air pollutants, for instance by shifting away from fossil fuel combustion. In addition, gases such as black carbon and methane contribute both to global warming and to air pollution, such that their mitigation can bring benefits in terms of limiting global temperature increases as well as improving air quality. Implementation of the climate pledges made in the run-up to the Paris Agreement could therefore have significant benefits for human health by improving air quality. The replacement of coal-based energy with renewables can lower the number of premature deaths caused by air pollution. A higher share of renewable energy and consequently less coal-related respiratory diseases can decrease health costs.Active lifestyle
Health
Employment and economic development
Co-benefits can positively impact employment, industrial development, states' energy independence and energy self-consumption. The deployment of renewable energies can foster job opportunities. Depending on the country and deployment scenario, replacing coal power plants with renewable energy can more than double the number of jobs per average MW capacity. Investments in renewable energies, especially in solar- and wind energy, can boost the value of production. Countries which rely on energy imports can enhance their energy independence and ensure supply security by deploying renewables. National energy generation from renewables lowers the demand for fossil fuel imports which scales up annual economic saving. Households and businesses can additionally benefit from investments in renewable energy. The deployment of rooftop solar and PV-self-consumption creates incentives for low-income households and can support annual savings for the residential sector. One example in the United Kingdom has explored different options with sustainable housing since the 1990s. Surveys have identified over four hundred sustainable housing developments or single houses in the UK, with nearly two hundred built or planned since the mid-1990s. The goal of these sustainable homes is to reduce the carbon footprint of a large group of people. All these homes are considered low carbon housing, and to be considered as such, they must incorporate one of the following features: passive low energy design, a thermally efficient built form, and use of renewable energy technologies. Not only do these homes help the Earth through reducing carbon emission, but they are attractive and cheap homes for people to purchase. They helped many people who were struggling to find suitable living become homeowners. Eager homeowners were excited to purchase the carbon friendly homes because they saw an opportunity to not only become homeowners, but to also help the environment along the way.Energy access
Positive secondary effects from mitigation strategies also occur on the socioeconomic dimension. The full electrification of remote areas through a centralised power grid remains often impeded by black outs. Rural areas which are not fully electrified can benefit from the deployment of renewable energies. Solar-powered mini-grids can remain economically viable, cost-competitive and reduce the number of power cuts. Energy reliability has additional social implications: stable electricity improves the quality of education.Teleworking
One major contributor to the necessity to use various transportation methods daily is an individuals employment. Teleworking limits the amount of times that employees need to commute to work in-person and reduces the amount of transportation used everyday which, in turn, helps to lower overall emissions. It is estimated that 40 - 49 megatons of greenhouse gases could be mitigated by the year 2050 if teleworking is fully utilized by the maximum number of possible actors. Numerous co-benefits such as increased work efficiency, company savings (for example no more office space costs), and employee satisfaction stem from teleworking. This idea is held back by social and psychological fears as employees fear possible negative impacts on careers as well as increased social isolation.References
{{Reflist Emissions reduction Environmental social science concepts Human impact on the environment Climate change mitigation