Communication and Collaboration
The communication plan constitutes a constant updating procedure that starts with the kick-off meeting of the project and continues with the total set of communication activities that took place during the whole project period. The exact CARISMA Communication Plan provides a detailed description of the project plan regarding, exclusively, dissemination and communication actions implemented by the CARISMA Consortium.
Stakeholder engagement forms a key aspect of the CARISMA project. Stakeholders, as ‘practitioners’, bring knowledge’ to the research tasks in the project. This helps to assess options for mitigation against multiple aspects, such as costs, carbon footprint, public acceptance and other benefits and risks. CARISMA also aims to explore how contextual factors (economic, social, technical, political) can contribute to or slow down deployment and diffusion of mitigation options. Stakeholder inputs help to understand possible contextual factors and identify possible measures to address these factors.
At the CARISMA project website project results are posted in different forms: from detailed research documents to policy briefs. Next to the project website, CARISMA, together with other EU-funded projects on mitigation, has created an online portal http://ClimateChangeMitigation.eu which contains highlights from these projects, thematically categorised.
Stakeholder engagement and communication of results are key elements of CARISMA. In this report, we explain how these two aspects have been implementation during the first year and a half of the project, including how we aim at promoting project outputs to policy impacts through engaging with policy makers.
CARISMA has prepared a Synthesis Report, in the form of a slide deck, to update stakeholders on the first 18 months of the project. It describes, for each main topic and for workpackages, what has been achieved and what will be the next steps, including references to publications.
Research and Innovation: mitigation options and programmes
This document accompanies the database of mitigation options. The goal of this document is to explain why and how the database was compiled.
In line with the Paris Agreement, the European Union (EU) targets to cut member states’ emissions by 80-95% by year 2050 (see EU Energy Roadmap 2050). While models exist trying to predict whether and how such targets could be met, no up-to-date knowledge exists on the actually conducted research, development and innovation (RD&I) of the EU to commit to the target. This deliverable is aimed to fill this knowledge gap. It is a horizon scan of FP6, FP7 and Horizon 2020 RD&I projects on mitigation.
Assessment of technologies for climate change mitigation
For two technology options for mitigation - of Bio-Energy with Carbon Capture and Storage (BECCS) and Solar Photovoltaic (Solar PV) - this report contains an overview of issues for further research in order to enable their further development, deployment and diffusion. The report identifies research gaps and priority areas for further research, and provides insights for policy decision on both technology options. The analysis in the report is based on assessment of stakeholder perspectives and concerns and review of scientific literature.
This report includes system costs in the macroeconomic assessment of wind and PV moving beyond classical LCOE assessments of renewable energy expansion and showed the critical importance of incorporating macroeconomic effects and feedbacks for policy evaluation and design.
Mapping and Assessing Policies for Mitigation
This Deliverable presents the insights gathered during our research efforts on two work package tasks. The first part of the report categorises and analyses information available in 24 climate change policy databases and identifies gaps and potential information needs. Moreover, it sheds some light on the question of whether the policy information available actually meets the needs of stakeholders using these databases by using an extensive online and offline stakeholder consultation process. The second part of the report focuses on the issue area of policy interactions. Four case studies (France, Austria, Greece, EU-wide) analyse how different climate change mitigation policies (Energy Efficiency Measures, Renewable Energy Support) and instruments (EU ETS) interact with each other and what lessons can be drawn from past experiences in those countries.
This report presents the main findings from a meta-analysis of climate change mitigation policy evaluations in the European Union (EU) and the six Member States: Austria, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Greece and the United Kingdom.
Policy implementation: understanding contexts
This report first characterises the complex problem of climate change by elaborating on the 'wicked' nature of climate change as having impacts on all sectors of society. Then it explains key features of climate change governance by highlighting its diffused nature, how it involves a myriad of actors and a range of non-hierarchical, collaborative modes of governance. The report explores how coherence in the international climate governance architecture can be improved. It concludes with a discussion on the role of the EU in international climate governance after the Paris Agreement.
Institutional, economic and social contexts influence the formulation as well as the implementation of climate policy instruments. To design more robust and adaptive instruments, it is necessary to understand different categories and types of contextual factors that are central to EU climate change mitigation. This paper identifies three types of contextual factors: institutions and governance; innovation and investment; attitudes, behaviour and lifestyle. By categorising the contextual factors and mapping examples of how each factor shapes and influences mitigation policies and their outcome, this paper seeks to contribute to more systematic understanding and structured discussions for EU and member state policy-makers.
This report is aimed at addressing two main research questions, one about how contextual factors that are beyond direct control of policymakers may actually influence the outcome of specific policy instruments and another about how these factors are accounted for in the adoption and implementation of policy instruments.
International Collaboration on Research and Innovation for Mitigation
This policy brief provides guidance and recommendations to international institutions on how to get involved in climate change mitigation collaboration projects around research and innovation. It does so by looking closely at experiences of past and current research and innovation collaborations in the field of climate change mitigation.
As collaborative research and innovation (R&I) initiatives have the potential to advance climate technology transfer across borders, in particular in developing countries, European governments have put in place various initiatives to facilitate deployment of climate technologies. In the CARISMA project, such initiatives were mapped in a background report, and discussed in a workshop involving stakeholders from government, industry, academia and international organisations.
As international collaborative research and innovation (R&I) initiatives have the potential to advance climate change mitigation technology transfer across borders, in particular in developing countries, some industries have developed various international R&I collaborative initiatives to facilitate deployment of low-carbon technologies and practices. This Policy Brief summarises general lessons and identifies recommendations for stimulating international collaborations on R&I among industries for policy makers and for industry.
This report provides an updated overview of research and development (R&D) offshoring, focusing on the key drivers and challenges for the MNCs involved. The report identifies the following main drivers for the observed increase in R&D offshoring to emerging economies: (i) cost considerations;(ii) the effective adaptation of products to local markets; (iii) the search for talent and new ideas; and (iv) the aspiration to tap into local systems of innovation. The main challenges of R&D offshoring the report identifies are: (i) cultural and organisational differences; (ii) how to manage globally dispersed R&D activities; and (iii) how to protect intellectual property rights.