We have published a new research article in Climate Policy that extends the existing comparative analysis of CDR policies to Brazil, China, and India, countries that have not yet been covered in the literature on CDR policy and governance.

• Schenuit, Felix, Elina Brutschin, Oliver Geden, Fei Guo, Aniruddh Mohan, Ana Carolina Oliveira Fiorini, Sonakshi Saluja, Roberto Schaeffer, Keywan Riahi (2024): Taking stock of carbon dioxide removal policy in emerging economies: developments in Brazil, China, and India. Climate Policy. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2024.2353148 (open access)

Abstract:

Deliberately removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere is an important elementof bringing mitigation pathways in line with the climate goals of the Paris Agreement.To reach global net-zero CO2 emissions and limit global warming to 1.5°C with no orlimited overshoot, global mitigation pathways assessed by IPCC’s Sixth AssessmentReport require some world regions to achieve net-negative CO2emissions withlarge-scale carbon dioxide removal (CDR) deployment. This raises importantquestions about the availability and feasibility of CDR deployment in differentsocietal and political contexts.

This paper therefore combines an analysis of CDR deployment in a sample ofscenarios from the IPCC AR6 database with a bottom-up analysis of the state ofCDR governance and policy in countries considered key in scaling up CDR capacityand not yet covered by existing research. In particular, the paper focuses on Brazil,China, and India as important emerging economies and large emitters. Wehighlight the expected use of CDR methods in those regions in scenarios andsystematically assess and compare the level of CDR regulation and innovationacross these countries. This comparative perspective has the potential to broadenthe understanding of existing and emerging CDR policies and politics.

The synthesis of the case studies provides three key contributions to existingliterature: First, we explore the state of CDR governance and policymaking in keyemerging economies. As in OECD countries, there is a notable lack of CDRregulation and innovation to enable the scale of CDR required in the short- andmedium term. Second, we identify thatrepurposing policiesis a key type ofemerging CDR policymaking in these countries targeting CDR methods in the landuse, land use change and forestry (LULUCF) sector. We find that the repurposingefforts strengthen the level of regulation and innovation for this group ofmethods. Third, we explore three building blocks (regional differentiation, delay ofupscaling, sustainability thresholds) of plausible CDR deployment narratives thatcould help bridge integrated assessment models and comparative case studies infuture research

Open access version available here