In its latest Assessment Report, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2007) projects that without further action the global average surface t- perature would rise by a further 1. 8–4. 0°C until the end of this century. But even if the rise in temperature could be limited to the lower end of this range, irreversible and possibly catastrophic changes are likely to occur. Consequently, the protection of the earth’s atmosphere requires substantial efforts to reduce CO and other green- 2 house gas emissions – especially in countries with very high per capita emissions. To limit the imminent rise in temperature, in the Kyoto-Protocol, the European Union has committed itself to reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases by 8% up to 2008–2012 compared to 1990 levels. Within the EU burden sharing agr- ment, some countries have to achieve even higher emissions reductions. Germany was assigned a reduction target of 21%. The entry into force of the Kyoto Protocol in February 2005 marks a first step towards meting global climate targets, but more ambitious action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is needed after 2012, when the Kyoto targets expire. Under German presidency, the EU has committed itself to unilaterally reduce its greenhouse gas emissions until 2020 by 20%. In case a Post- Kyoto agreement can be reached, the EU reduction target would be 30% (CEU, 2007).

Climate change is one of the greatest challenges of this century. Mitigation requires a large-scale transition to a low-carbon economy. This paper provides an overview of the rapidly growing literature on the role of macroeconomic and financial policy tools in enabling this transition. The literature provides a menu of policy tools for mitigation. A key conclusion is that fiscal tools are first in line and central, but can and may need to be complemented by financial and monetary policy instruments. Some tools and policies raise unanswered questions about policy tool assignment and mandates, which we describe. The literature is scarce, however, on the most effective policy mix and the role of mitigation tools and goals in the overall policy framework.

Ending poverty and stabilizing climate change will be two unprecedented global achievements and two major steps toward sustainable development. But the two objectives cannot be considered in isolation: they need to be jointly tackled through an integrated strategy. This report brings together those two objectives and explores how they can more easily be achieved if considered together. It examines the potential impact of climate change and climate policies on poverty reduction. It also provides guidance on how to create a “win-win†? situation so that climate change policies contribute to poverty reduction and poverty-reduction policies contribute to climate change mitigation and resilience building. The key finding of the report is that climate change represents a significant obstacle to the sustained eradication of poverty, but future impacts on poverty are determined by policy choices: rapid, inclusive, and climate-informed development can prevent most short-term impacts whereas immediate pro-poor, emissions-reduction policies can drastically limit long-term ones.

This Congressional Budget Office (CBO) study--prepared at the request of the Ranking Member of the House Committee on Science--presents an overview of issues related to climate change, focusing primarily on its economic aspects. The study draws from numerous published sources to summarize the current state of climate science and provide a conceptual framework for addressing climate change as an economic problem. It also examines public policy options and discusses the potential complications and benefits of international coordination. In keeping with CBO's mandate to provide impartial analysis, the study makes no recommendations.

Climate change is a global concern of special relevance to Southeast Asia, a region that is both vulnerable to the effects of climate change and a rapidly increasing emitter of greenhouse gases (GHGs). This study focuses on five countries of Southeast Asia that collectively account for 90% of regional GHG emissions in recent years---Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Thailand, and Viet Nam. It applies two global dynamic economy–energy–environment models under an array of scenarios that reflect potential regimes for regulating global GHG emissions through 2050. The modeling identifies the potential economic costs of climate inaction for the region, how the countries can most efficiently achieve GHG emission mitigation, and the consequences of mitigation, both in terms of benefits and costs. Drawing on the modeling results, the study analyzes climate-related policies and identifies how further action can be taken to ensure low-carbon growth.

This paper takes stock of Seychelles’ plans to manage climate change, from the perspective of its macroeconomic implications. It suggests macro-relevant reforms that could strengthen the plans’ likelihood of success. It highlights high public awareness and a body of existing sustainable development planning, which puts Seychelles several steps ahead toward preparedness. Next steps would be to ensure that climate change planning is integrated with the forthcoming National Development Plan. Disaster preparedness is a relatively strong point, but there is much still to be done—from improving warning systems to resilience building to contingency financing.