Africa has only contributed a small fraction of global greenhouse gas emissions yet faces disproportionate risks from climate change. This imbalance is one of many inequities associated with climate change and raises questions concerning the origin, distribution and thematic prioritization of funding for climate-change research on Africa. This article analyses a database comprising USD 1.51 trillion of research grants from 521 organizations around the world and covering all fields of research from 1990 to 2020. At most 3.8% of global funding for climate-change research is spent on African topics – a figure incommensurate with Africa’s share of the world population and vulnerability to climate change. Moreover, institutions based in Europe and North America received 78% of funding for climate research on Africa, while African institutions received only 14.5%. Research on climate mitigation received only 17% of the funding while climate impacts and adaptation each received around 40%. Except for Egypt and Nigeria, funding supported research on former British colonies more than other African countries. The findings highlight the need to prioritise research on a broader set of climate-change issues in Africa and to increase funding for Africa-based researchers in order to strengthen African ownership of research informing African responses to climate change.
14 November 2022 in Energy, Ecology and Environment
The energy transition is progressing slowly in the ten member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). To achieve ASEAN’s target of 23% renewables in the primary energy supply by 2025, the region would need to invest USD 27 billion in renewable energy every year. However, the ASEAN countries attracted no more than USD 8 billion annually from 2016 to 2021. Through a comparative review of three key factors for attracting investment—renewable energy legislation, energy governance reform, and general conditions for investors—this study examines why the region’s renewable energy sector has not attracted more capital. The contribution of the article is threefold. First, it develops a new review model for assessing the business climate for renewable energy in any country. Second, it offers an update on the state of renewable energy deployment in the ASEAN countries. Third, taking into account international best practices, it identifies the obstacles and solutions to attracting investment in renewable energy in Southeast Asia. The article finds that carbon lock-in is pervasive, regulatory practices have been copy-pasted from the fossil-fuel sector to the renewables sector, and, except for Malaysia and Vietnam, no ASEAN country has implemented a major pro-renewable energy governance reform. Certain advanced renewable energy measures, such as auctions and feed-in tariffs, have been adopted in some member states, but the institutional capacity to implement them is limited. The share of renewables in the energy governance system needs to be increased.
This article assesses the extent to which the academic community engaged with climate change in Central Asia between 1991 and 2021. The article finds that climate change has been neglected in the field of Central Asia area studies. Out of a total 13,488 journal articles in eight key journals for Central Asia research, only 33 articles (0.24%) were on climate change or a related topic. Climate change has been similarly neglected at the events of 17 Central Asia area studies associations. Out of 1305 conference panels, none was focused on climate change. Out of 10,249 individual presentations, only two (0.02%) were focused on climate change. The very same scholars who have been most active in the securitization of Central Asia have ignored the severe security threats that climate change poses to the region. The article contributes to the field of Central Asian studies by drawing attention to severe knowledge gaps that hinder the Central Asian countries from adapting to climate change. It concludes with six recommendations.