ERL特刊精选|Focus on Evidence Synthesis for Climate Solutions

特刊详情

客座编辑

• Jan Minx，英国利兹大学
• Lea Berrang Ford，英国利兹大学
• James Ford，英国利兹大学
• Neal Haddaway，瑞典斯德哥尔摩环境研究所
• Felix Creutzig，德国柏林工业大学
• Robbert Biesbroek，荷兰瓦格宁根大学
• Biljana Macura，瑞典斯德哥尔摩环境研究所

研究背景

Find out more at the Learning on Climate Solutions workshop（https://www.mcc-berlin.net/solutions.html） being held from October 15 – 17, 2018 in Berlin.

主题范围

This focus collection intends to catalyze synthetic evidence on climate solutions for key topics relevant for IPCC AR6. It aims to commission a whole series of reviews using systematic methods for an enhanced understanding of mitigation and adaptation options, i.e. what mitigation and adaptation policies and measures work well under what conditions and why. Submissions should focus on key topic areas from the AR6 outlines of Working Group 2 and Working Group 3 including:

• Energy demand reductions and lifestyle change
• Climate and non-climate policies at different scales and their political economy
• Innovation and technological breakthroughs
• Long-lived infrastructures and committed carbon
• Climate finance
• Tracking adaptation and mitigation progress

Here, “systematic review” refers to a whole suite of formal methods to aggregate evidence into discrete bodies of knowledge by reconciling evidence and understanding sources of variation in a rigorous way. Guided by the principles of reproducibility and transparency they include formal quantitative methods for aggregating statistical and experimental research (such as meta-analysis), methods to review qualitative theory and evidence (such as meta-ethnographies), as well as methods to compile mixed quantitative and qualitative evidence (such as realist reviews). Yet, all approaches share the feature that they follow a clear methodological protocol that involves the following steps: 1) clearly defining the research question; 2) systematically searching defined literature databases for a defined time period; 3) justifying and making transparent sources and selection of the literature; 4) systematically assessing the quality of the selected evidence; 5) justifying and making transparent methods used to synthesize the evidence based; and 6) appraising confidence in the results (Berrang-Ford et al 2015).

参考文献

Berrang-Ford L, Pearce T and Ford J D 2015 Systematic review approaches for climate change adaptation research Reg. Environ. Chang.

Donnelly C A 2018 Four principles for synthesizing evidence Nature 558, 361–4

Ford J D, Berrang-Ford L, Biesbroek R, Araos M, Austin S E and Lesnikowski A 2015 Adaptation tracking for a post-2015 climate agreement Nat. Clim. Chang.

Haddaway N R and Macura B 2018 The role of reporting standards in producing robust literature reviews Nat. Clim. Chang.

Lesnikowski A, Ford J, Biesbroek R, Berrang-Ford L and Heymann S J National level progress on adaptation 2016 Nat. Clim. Change

Minx J C 2018 A How can climate policy stay on top of a growing mountain of data? The Guardian Guard. Online

Minx J C J C, Callaghan M, Lamb W F W F, Garard J and Edenhofer O 2017 Learning about climate change solutions in the IPCC and beyond Environ. Sci. Policy 77 252–9

Ringquist E 2013 Meta-Analysis for Public Management and Policy (John Wiley & Sons Inc.)

Sutherland W J and Wordley C F R 2018 A fresh approach to evidence synthesis Nature 558, 364–5