一个(错过的)机会之窗?对全球COVID-19恢复方案进行全面盘点和能源系统影响评估

IF 6.9 2区 经济学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Eleftheria Zisarou , Panagiotis Fragkos , Dirk-Jan Van De Ven , Shivika Mittal , Natasha Frilingou , Clàudia Rodés-Bachs , Stefanos Tsotras , Angelos Potiriadis , Georgios Xexakis , Konstantinos Koasidis , Haris Doukas , Adam Hawkes , Alexandros Nikas
{"title":"一个(错过的)机会之窗?对全球COVID-19恢复方案进行全面盘点和能源系统影响评估","authors":"Eleftheria Zisarou ,&nbsp;Panagiotis Fragkos ,&nbsp;Dirk-Jan Van De Ven ,&nbsp;Shivika Mittal ,&nbsp;Natasha Frilingou ,&nbsp;Clàudia Rodés-Bachs ,&nbsp;Stefanos Tsotras ,&nbsp;Angelos Potiriadis ,&nbsp;Georgios Xexakis ,&nbsp;Konstantinos Koasidis ,&nbsp;Haris Doukas ,&nbsp;Adam Hawkes ,&nbsp;Alexandros Nikas","doi":"10.1016/j.erss.2025.104216","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>COVID-19 reshaped global economic priorities at the time, with recovery packages offering unprecedented fiscal stimuli aimed at revitalising economies from the impacts of the pandemic and associated policy responses—including lockdowns. While these packages were quickly framed as an opportunity for aligning socioeconomic recovery spending with near- and longer-term climate goals, early assessments of their decarbonisation footprint were constrained by and/or oriented towards optimistic interpretations of the limited information available then. We examine the potential of recovery packages to bridge the medium- and long-term climate ambition gap towards meeting the Paris Agreement goals. To enable such a comprehensive assessment, we first develop an open-access database of global green recovery measures. Second, we explicitly translate these measures as inputs into three Integrated Assessment Models, to assess their implications for energy systems, emissions, and technology development globally. Third, we quantify the missed opportunity in global recovery spending in terms of accelerating the clean energy transition, by exploring a theoretical reallocation of funding from energy affordability measures towards green technologies. Our results suggest that, while the actual synthesis of global recovery funding may not be sufficient to boost climate efforts towards meeting the Paris climate goals with sustained effects post-2030, redirecting part of the funds to low-carbon technologies could accelerate decarbonisation and electrification trends in some sectors. Whether or not the global COVID-19 recovery portfolio is adjusted to better support transition goals, recovery funds alone cannot guarantee a comprehensive and effective transition; this requires complementary systemic reforms, targeted sectoral strategies, and international collaboration.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48384,"journal":{"name":"Energy Research & Social Science","volume":"127 ","pages":"Article 104216"},"PeriodicalIF":6.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A window of (missed) opportunity? A comprehensive stocktake and energy-system impact assessment of global COVID-19 recovery packages\",\"authors\":\"Eleftheria Zisarou ,&nbsp;Panagiotis Fragkos ,&nbsp;Dirk-Jan Van De Ven ,&nbsp;Shivika Mittal ,&nbsp;Natasha Frilingou ,&nbsp;Clàudia Rodés-Bachs ,&nbsp;Stefanos Tsotras ,&nbsp;Angelos Potiriadis ,&nbsp;Georgios Xexakis ,&nbsp;Konstantinos Koasidis ,&nbsp;Haris Doukas ,&nbsp;Adam Hawkes ,&nbsp;Alexandros Nikas\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.erss.2025.104216\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>COVID-19 reshaped global economic priorities at the time, with recovery packages offering unprecedented fiscal stimuli aimed at revitalising economies from the impacts of the pandemic and associated policy responses—including lockdowns. While these packages were quickly framed as an opportunity for aligning socioeconomic recovery spending with near- and longer-term climate goals, early assessments of their decarbonisation footprint were constrained by and/or oriented towards optimistic interpretations of the limited information available then. We examine the potential of recovery packages to bridge the medium- and long-term climate ambition gap towards meeting the Paris Agreement goals. To enable such a comprehensive assessment, we first develop an open-access database of global green recovery measures. Second, we explicitly translate these measures as inputs into three Integrated Assessment Models, to assess their implications for energy systems, emissions, and technology development globally. Third, we quantify the missed opportunity in global recovery spending in terms of accelerating the clean energy transition, by exploring a theoretical reallocation of funding from energy affordability measures towards green technologies. Our results suggest that, while the actual synthesis of global recovery funding may not be sufficient to boost climate efforts towards meeting the Paris climate goals with sustained effects post-2030, redirecting part of the funds to low-carbon technologies could accelerate decarbonisation and electrification trends in some sectors. Whether or not the global COVID-19 recovery portfolio is adjusted to better support transition goals, recovery funds alone cannot guarantee a comprehensive and effective transition; this requires complementary systemic reforms, targeted sectoral strategies, and international collaboration.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48384,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Energy Research & Social Science\",\"volume\":\"127 \",\"pages\":\"Article 104216\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Energy Research & Social Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221462962500297X\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Energy Research & Social Science","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221462962500297X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

COVID-19重塑了当时的全球经济优先事项,复苏计划提供了前所未有的财政刺激措施,旨在重振经济,使其免受大流行和相关政策应对措施(包括封锁)的影响。虽然这些一揽子计划很快被视为将社会经济复苏支出与近期和长期气候目标相结合的机会,但对其脱碳足迹的早期评估受到当时有限信息的乐观解读的制约。我们研究了恢复计划在实现《巴黎协定》目标方面弥合中长期气候雄心差距的潜力。为了进行这样一个全面的评估,我们首先开发了一个开放获取的全球绿色恢复措施数据库。其次,我们明确地将这些措施作为输入转化为三个综合评估模型,以评估它们对全球能源系统、排放和技术发展的影响。第三,我们从加速清洁能源转型的角度,通过探索从能源可负担性措施到绿色技术的资金重新分配的理论,量化了全球复苏支出中错失的机会。我们的研究结果表明,虽然全球恢复资金的实际综合可能不足以推动气候努力,以实现巴黎气候目标,并在2030年后产生持续影响,但将部分资金转向低碳技术可能会加速某些行业的脱碳和电气化趋势。无论是否调整全球COVID-19恢复投资组合以更好地支持过渡目标,恢复资金本身都无法保证全面有效的过渡;这需要互补的系统性改革、有针对性的部门战略和国际合作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

A window of (missed) opportunity? A comprehensive stocktake and energy-system impact assessment of global COVID-19 recovery packages

A window of (missed) opportunity? A comprehensive stocktake and energy-system impact assessment of global COVID-19 recovery packages
COVID-19 reshaped global economic priorities at the time, with recovery packages offering unprecedented fiscal stimuli aimed at revitalising economies from the impacts of the pandemic and associated policy responses—including lockdowns. While these packages were quickly framed as an opportunity for aligning socioeconomic recovery spending with near- and longer-term climate goals, early assessments of their decarbonisation footprint were constrained by and/or oriented towards optimistic interpretations of the limited information available then. We examine the potential of recovery packages to bridge the medium- and long-term climate ambition gap towards meeting the Paris Agreement goals. To enable such a comprehensive assessment, we first develop an open-access database of global green recovery measures. Second, we explicitly translate these measures as inputs into three Integrated Assessment Models, to assess their implications for energy systems, emissions, and technology development globally. Third, we quantify the missed opportunity in global recovery spending in terms of accelerating the clean energy transition, by exploring a theoretical reallocation of funding from energy affordability measures towards green technologies. Our results suggest that, while the actual synthesis of global recovery funding may not be sufficient to boost climate efforts towards meeting the Paris climate goals with sustained effects post-2030, redirecting part of the funds to low-carbon technologies could accelerate decarbonisation and electrification trends in some sectors. Whether or not the global COVID-19 recovery portfolio is adjusted to better support transition goals, recovery funds alone cannot guarantee a comprehensive and effective transition; this requires complementary systemic reforms, targeted sectoral strategies, and international collaboration.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Energy Research & Social Science
Energy Research & Social Science ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES-
CiteScore
14.00
自引率
16.40%
发文量
441
审稿时长
55 days
期刊介绍: Energy Research & Social Science (ERSS) is a peer-reviewed international journal that publishes original research and review articles examining the relationship between energy systems and society. ERSS covers a range of topics revolving around the intersection of energy technologies, fuels, and resources on one side and social processes and influences - including communities of energy users, people affected by energy production, social institutions, customs, traditions, behaviors, and policies - on the other. Put another way, ERSS investigates the social system surrounding energy technology and hardware. ERSS is relevant for energy practitioners, researchers interested in the social aspects of energy production or use, and policymakers. Energy Research & Social Science (ERSS) provides an interdisciplinary forum to discuss how social and technical issues related to energy production and consumption interact. Energy production, distribution, and consumption all have both technical and human components, and the latter involves the human causes and consequences of energy-related activities and processes as well as social structures that shape how people interact with energy systems. Energy analysis, therefore, needs to look beyond the dimensions of technology and economics to include these social and human elements.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信