Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM


Top Flashcards (Certified)
All Flashcards

GARP SCR Exam > Chapter 4 > Flashcards

Chapter 4 Flashcards

1
Q

Big debate between academia and policymakers

A

optimal level of emission reductions - DICE model

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

DICE model

A

Dynamic Integrated Climate Economy - economist developed model to assess costs and benefits of mitigating climate change through emissions reductions vs. physical impacts of climate change

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Important questions to consider

A
  1. allocation of moral responsibility
  2. inherent difficulties of climate action
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Allocation of moral responsibility

A

relationship between: 1. country’s wealth
2. country’s historic emissions

– potential trade off between emissions and economic development

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Countries who have greatest share of cumulative emissions

A

US, EU, Russia, Japan

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Countries who have sharply increased emissions in past 2 decades

A

China, India

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Countries expected to drive future emissions reductions

A

Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Brazil

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Current Emissions

A

Asia: 53%
North America: 18%
Europe: 17%

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Cumulative Emissions

A

Asia: 29%
North America: 29%
Europe: 33%

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

History of Climate summits

A
  1. 1979: First World Climate Summit (organized by world meteorological organization)
    -1988: IPCC created (WMO co-creator)
  2. 1992: Earth summit in Rio
    -UNFCCC creation (subsequent summits known as COP)
  3. COP 1: 1995 - Berlin
  4. COP 3: 1997 - Kyoto
    -Kyoto protocol
  5. Cop 15: 2009 - Copenhagen
    -failure
    6.Cop 21: 2015 - Paris Agreement
    - (in advance of COP 26): Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero
  6. Cop 26: 2021 - Glasgow
    -establishment of ratchet mechanism
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Kyoto Protocol

A

Annex I (high income) countries attain 5% emissions reduction compared to 1990 level by 2008-2012

Between AI countries:
1. emission trading
2. join-implementation
3. clean development mechanism

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Emissions Trading

A

AI countries with deeper emissions cuts could sell surplus emissions allowances to other AI countries

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Joint Implementation

A

Between AI countries - one country could invest in emission reduction projects in another country to help meet its own emissions reduction targets

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Clean Development Mechanism (CDM)

A

Way for emissions cuts to be spread to developing countries - AI country could get credit for conducting emissions reduction project in non-AI country

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Cop 15

A

Copenhagen- failure because no new binding treaty was made (after failure of Kyoto protocol)
-laid groundwork for P.A. - 2 degree limit

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Paris Agreement

A
  1. Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC): submitted by each country to UNFCCC and periodically re-evaluated
  2. Keep well below 2 and aim for 1.5
  3. Recognition of all stakeholders
    -UN Race to Net Zero
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Ratcheting System

A

Cop 26 - Glasgow: countries are expected to tighten their NDCs every 5 years which will then be evaluated at COP meetings (NDCs at P.A were not aligned to 2 C - 2020 NDCs were more so aligned)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Carbon Pricing

A
  1. Carbon Tax
  2. Cap and Trade schemes
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Carbon Tax

A

price / ton of CO2 emitted (favored by economists)

pros: raise revenue for government

cons: level of taxes are frequently tweaked which can be detrimental to investors and businesses that need certainty over multiple years to make investment decisions

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Cap-and-trade scheme

A

(more flexible) Total amount of emissions is capped (and gradually decreased) but emission permits can be traded between parties

Pros:
1. Allow industries/sectors that are more succesful in reducing emissions to sell excess permits to those in sectors where emissions reductions are more expensive or technologically infeasible
2. Can create credible cash flows that can facilitate larger and longer-term investment decisions

Cons:
1. Can cause volatile Carbon pricing or shock (like Financial crisis) can lead to oversupply of permits and therefore decrease incentive to reduce emissions

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Current amount of Carbon Pricing Initiatives

A

Currently 64 Carbon pricing initiatives that cover 46 countries

However, for many of them, the price / ton of CO2 emitted is <$100 (which is the assumed amount needed in order to have a significant impact)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Power Generation Sector

A
  1. Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS): A range of quota-based regulations that aim to increase the supply of renewable electricity by requirement commercial power producers to source a specific portion of supply from renewable E sources (has been deployed in 173 countries)
  2. Feed-in tarrifs: Offer guaranteed price/unit of electricity generated at which producers can sell their electricity for a fixed period of time (between 15-25 years) (incentive for people to invest and produce renewable E)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Transportation Sector

A

Fuel efficiency standards for cars
1. EU implemented CO2 emissions standards for cars and automobile manufacturers at fleet level
2. EV purchase subsidies (similar to feed-in tariffs) encourage uptake of EVs

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

C40

A

Global coalition of cities dedicated to combat climate change (helped contribute internal pressure to bring about P.A.)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
America's Pledge
After US pulled out of P.A. state governors, cities, counties, higher education, healthcare systems, corporations and firms all pledged to uphold P.A
26
NSA Climate Commitments
NSA: Non-state and Subnational Actor ex: C40, America's Pledge - NSAs decrease emissions by 3.8-5.5% more by 2030 than national pledges in a 10 high-emission country study
27
Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard enables GHG emissions accounting at corporation level
Standardized through GHG Protocol
28
GHG Protocol
established late 1990's by World Resource Institute (WRI) and World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD)
29
GHG protocol standards and sub-protocols
1. Project protocol 2. Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Standard 3. Product Standard 4. Policy Action Standard 5. Mitigation Goal Standard
30
Project Protocol
Quantifies GHG emissions reduction benefits of climate change mitigation projects
31
Corporate Value Chain Standard
Companies can assess entire value chain emissions impact and identify where to focus reduction activities
32
Product Standard
Understand full life cycle emissions of a product and focus efforts on greatest GHG emissions reduction opportunities
33
Policy Action Standard
Standardized approach for estimating GHG effect of policies and actions
34
Mitigation Goal Standard
Guidance for designing national and subnational mitigation goals and standardized approach for assessing and reporting progress towards goal achievement
35
Heart of GHG protocol
Direct and Indirect emissions (Scope 1,2,3)
36
Scope 1,2,3
Scope 1: Direct emissions from owned or controlled sources Scope 2: Indirect emissions from generation of purchased Energy Scope 3: Indirect emissions that occur in the value chain of reporting company (including upstream and downstream emissions)
37
Upstream emissions examples
transportation and distribution; business travel; purchased goods and services
38
Downstream emissions examples
Use of sold products; transportation and distribution; investments
39
Risk of Double counting
Counting scope 3 can lead to risk of double counting ex: Scope 1 emissions of a power generator = scope 2 emissions of electric appliance user = scope 3 emissions of appliance manufacturer AND retailer -2 or more companies do not account for the same emissions within the same scope
40
Multi development Banks (MDBs)
Tasked with supporting public-sector investment in physical and human capital projects conducive to socio-economic development
41
Public policy to promote green finance
mostly involves setting up green finance hubs or taskforces
42
Green Taxonomies
Intended to inform policy, regulatory and market decisions. EU taxonomy: sets performance thresholds for economic activities by sector and sub-sector To count as green, activities must: a. make a substantive contribution to 1/6 environmental objectives b. do no significant harm to the other 5/6 c. meet minimum safeguards overtime: green taxonomies could help determine what companies can access green subsidies/incentives from governments and what tax or incentives investors could receive based on their investments in green companies and assets
43
Green taxonomies pros
pros: 1. facilitate comparibility across investments 2. reduce burden to determine whether investment is green 3. help tackle greenwashing 4. improve understanding of company activities on the environment therefore helping green portfolios and loan books
44
Green Taxonomy cons
cons: extremely challenging to assess every type of economic activity, determine if green and then apply consistently to every company 1. Binary "green" assessment: different companeis could have different shades of being green - which taxonomy could make indistinguishible 2. Lobbying: administrative process required to develop a green taxonomy may be open to lobbying and political influence 3. Asset Bubbles: over time, green taxonomy could artificially inflate value of assets labeled "green" - potentially creating F stability risk 4. Sub-optimal targeting: incentives based on green taxonomies could benefit owners of green assets that have already been created - rather than investors of new green assets 5. Decreased quality: labels encourage institutions to "buy the label" without properly assessing the economic activities / cash flows of the investment (Green finance may have a role in public policy and fiscal decisions (ex: allocate subsidies) but NOT play a central role in tackling greenwashing.
45
NGFS
Network for Greening the Financial System: initiative that brings central banks and regulators together to work on climate integration - promotes collaboration and sharing of expertise on climate risk among supervisory institutions (founded by 3 EU central banks: France, UK, Netherlands)
46
Central banks and Financial Supervisors have integrated climate change into
1. Microprudential supervision 2. Macroprudential supervision
47
Microprudential Supervision
oversight of specific FIs (banks, insurers) for Financial soundness - ex: BoE: climate risk integration (governance, risk management, scenario analysis, disclosures)
48
Macroprudential supervision
examines the stability of broader Financial system
49
Climate integration in governance
FI have structures to ensure climate risks are actively managed at highest level by senior managers and board of directors
50
Climate integration into risk management
firms are often asked to use some combination of scenario analysis and stress testingc
51
limate integration into disclosures
recommendations of TCFD are seen sas best practice, and mandatory by UK and NZ
52
Stress-tests
a micro¯o prudential tool at disposal of central banks : model the reaction of an individual FI (or whole F system) to a hypothetical shock
53
Climate Counter-cyclical Capital Buffer
macroprudential measure : capital requirement that would require banks to build up a higher equity capital base during period of Carbon intensive credit
54
Large exposure limits
macroprudential measure: limit banks' exposure to Carbon intensive assets that are considered high risk of stranding
55
Race to Net Zero
(private secotor) founded by chile and uk high level climate champions to bring business, investors, cities & regions together to accelerate economic transition towards achieving P.A. goals
56
Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net zero
consolidation of many net zero groupings therefore bringin together entire Financial systemt
57
Nature and Bio-diversity
More than 1/2 world's economic output is moderately/highly dependon on nature
58
TNFD
Taskforce on Nature related F Disclosures Four pillars of TNFD (same as four pillars of TCFD) 1. Governance 2. Strategy 3. Risk-Management 4. Metrics and targets
59
NGFS 6 recommendations
1. integrating climate related risks into F stability monitoring and micro-supervision (mapping physical and transition risk transmission channels within F syst. and adopting key risk indicators to monitor these risks) 2. integrating S factors into own portfolio management 3. bridging the data gap (share and publicize data) 4. building awareness and intellectual capacity and encouraging technical assistance and knowledge sharing 5. achieving robust and internationally consistent climate and env. related disclosures 6. supporting the development of a taxonomy of economic activities
60
Examples of microprudential policies
1. requirement to disclose climate risks 2. ensuring senior executives have oversight of climate risks 3. expectation that banks conduct scenario analysis
61
Common climate related macroprudential policy
climate stress tests

GARP SCR Exam (8 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2025 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions