{"word_count": 512, "character_count": 3646}
Assessing carbon lock-in / Peter Erickson, Sivan Kartha, Michael Lazarus and Kevin Tempest,  Environmental Research Letters, vol. 10, n° 8, 8 p.  (SEI Initiative on Fossil Fuels and Climate Change) http://www.sei-international.org/publications?pid=2811The term “carbon lock-in” refers to the tendency for certain carbon-intensive technological systems to persist over time, “locking out” lower-carbon alternatives, and owing to a combination of linked technical, economic, and institutional factors. These technologies may be costly to build, but relatively inexpensive to operate and, over time, they reinforce political, market, and social factors that make it difficult to move away from, or “unlock” them. As a result, by investing in assets prone to lock-in, planners and investors restrict future flexibility and increase the costs of achieving agreed climate protection goals. The authors present here a straightforward approach to assess the speed, strength, and scale of carbon lock-in for major energy-consuming assets in the power, buildings, industry, and transport sectors. They pilot the approach at the global level, finding that carbon lock-in is greatest, globally, for coal power plants, gas power plants, and vehicles. The approach can be readily applied at the national or regional scale, and may be of particular relevance to policy-makers interested in enhancing flexibility in their jurisdictions for deeper emissions cuts in the future, and therefore in limiting the future costs associated with “stranded assets”.Emergence of polycentric climate governance and its future prospects / Andrew J. Jordan, et al., Nature Climate Change, Published online 10 August 2015 http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate2725.htmlAbstract : The international climate regime represented by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change has been widely critiqued. However, 'new' dynamic forms of climate governing are appearing in alternative domains, producing a more polycentric pattern. Some analysts believe that the new forms will fill gaps in the existing regime, but this optimism is based on untested assumptions about their diffusion and performance. The advent of polycentric governance offers new opportunities for climate action, but it is too early to judge whether hopes about the effectiveness of emerging forms of climate governance are well founded.Connecting the dots – Results-based financing in climate policy / Carsten Warnecke, Frauke Röser, Gesine Hänsel, Niklas Höhne. New Climate Institute, Aug. 2015, 34 p. http://newclimate.org/2015/08/27/connecting-the-dots-results-based-financing-in-climate-policy/This study clarifies the definition of results-based financing (RBF) and in particular its role in the context of climate policy. The publication is aimed at readers from the carbon markets and climate finance communities alike. It facilitates a common understanding of what RBF as a financing modality involves and is therefore meant to also be a good starting point for readers looking into this topic for the first time. An overview of results-based finance options and opportunities for linking market and non-market approaches is provided. Combining carbon market and non-market climate finance, rather than continuing their parallel existence, results in benefits from synergies from a methodological as well as financial perspective. Based on RBF experiences in both areas, it is shown how climate finance and carbon markets could learn from each other in order to further improve and result in more effective mitigation impacts for the benefit of the climate.&#160;