The document discusses several factors that constrain efforts to adapt to and mitigate climate change on both national and international levels. Population growth, lack of education, divergent social attitudes, inadequate governance and access to resources all reduce societies' ability to coordinate adaptation policies and pursue mitigation strategies through sustainable technologies and behaviors. International cooperation through frameworks like the UNFCCC, IPCC, and Kyoto Protocol aim to establish shared principles and support developing countries' participation, but challenges remain in overcoming differences between nations to achieve meaningful emissions reductions at a global scale.

1. CLIMATE CHANGE

2. Constraining Factor Potential Implications for Adaptation Potential Implications for Mitigation
Adverse externalities of population growth and
urbanization
Increase exposure of human populations to climate variability and change as well as demands
for, and pressures on, natural resources and ecosystem services.
Driveeconomicgrowth,energydemandandenergyconsumption, resulting in increases in
greenhousegas emissions.
Deficits of knowledge, edu- cation and human capital Reducenational,institutionalandindividualperceptionsof therisksposedbyclimatechangeas
wellasthecostsand benefitsofdifferentadaptationoptions
Reduce national, institutional and individual risk perception, willingness to change behavioural
patterns and practices and to adopt social and technological innovations to reduce emissions
Divergences in social and cultural attitudes, values and
behaviours
Reduce societal consensus regarding climate riskand therefore demandforspecificadaptation
policiesandmeasures
Influence emission patterns, societal perceptions of the utility of mitigation policies and
technologies, and willing- ness to pursue sustainable behaviours and technologies
Challenges in governance and institutional arrangements Reduce the ability to coordinate adaptation policies and measures and to deliver capacity to actors
to plan and implement adaptation .
Undermine policies, incentives and cooperation regarding the development of mitigation
policies andtheimplementationof efficient,carbon-neutralandrenewableenergytechnologies
Lack of access to national and international climate finance Reduces the scale of investment in adaptation policies and measures and therefore their
effectiveness.
Reduces the capacity of developed and, particularly, developing nations to pursue policies and
technologiesthat reduceemissi- ons

3. Inadequate technology Reducestherangeofavailable adaptation options aswellas their effectiveness in
reducing or avoiding risk from increasing rates or magnitudes of climate change.
Slowstherateatwhichsocietycanreducethecarbonintensityof
energy services and transition toward low-carbon and carbon-neutral
technologies.
Insufficient quality and/or quantity of natural
resources
Reduce the coping range of actors, vulnerability to non-climatic factors and
potential competition for resources that enhances vulnerability.
Reduce the long-term sustainability of different energy technologies.
Adaptation and development deficits Increase vulnerability to current climate variability as well as future climate
change .
Reduce mitigative capacity and undermine international cooperative efforts
on climate owing to a contentious legacy of cooperation on development
Inequality Places the impacts of climate change and the burden of adaptation
disproportionately on the most vulnerable and/or transfers them to future
generations.
Constrains the ability for developing nations with low income levels, or
different communities or sectors within nations, to contribute to greenhouse
gas mitigation.

4. INTERNATIONAL EFFORTS TO TACKLE CLIMATE CHANGE
• Intergovernmental panel on climate change (IPCC)
• IPCC was jointly established by United Nations environmental
programme (UNEP) and the world Meteorological organization in
November 1988. IPCC is a consortium of over 100 Nations and has
produced five major reports (assessment report) dealing with the
various aspects of the climate change in 1990, 1995, 2001, 2007and
2014.
• IPCC provides the international community with technological
guidance to deal with the problems of climate change.

5. United nations framework convention on climate change
(UNFCCC)
• United Nations Framework convention on climate change (UNFCCC) was
formally adopted on may 9, 1992 at UN Headquarters in New York.
• The United Nations Conference on Environmental and Development
(UNCED, Earth summit), held at Rio de janeiro, Brazil in June 1992,
established the principles for reducing greenhouse gas emission and
adopted the text of Framework Convention for Climate Change.
• UNFCCC came into force in march 1994.objective was achieving
stabilization of greenhouse gas concentration in the atm. At a level that
would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate
system. CoP2 led to the establishment of Environmental Fund to support
projects in developing countries to prepare inventory of sources and sinks
of greenhouse gases.

6. KYOTO PROTOCOL
• Kyoto protocol of the UNFCCC was adopted in Kyoto, Japan on 11 December 1997 and entered
into force on 16 February 2005. the 37 most industrialized countries (currently 192 parties) of the
146 nations ratifying the Kyoto protocol have agreed to reduce their GHG emissions below 1990
levels during an initial commitment period of 2008 through 2012.
• The Kyoto Protocol implemented the objective of the UNFCCC to fight global warming by reducing
greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere to "a level that would prevent dangerous
anthropogenic interference with the climate system”. The Kyoto Protocol applies to the six
greenhouse gases listed in Annex A: Carbon dioxide (CO2), Methane (CH4), Nitrous oxide (N2O),
Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) Perfluorocarbons (PFCs) and Sulphur hexafluoride (SF6).
• The Protocol is based on the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities: it
acknowledges that individual countries have different capabilities in combating climate change,
owing to economic development, and ergo puts the obligation to reduce current emissions on
developed countries on the basis that they are historically responsible for the current levels of
greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.
• The industrialized countries are allowed to achieve some emissions reductions by investing in
energy and tree planting projects (reforestation and afforestation) in developing countries
through the Clean Development Mechanism.

7. Montreal protocol on substances that deplete
the ozone layer
• The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (a protocol to the Vienna
Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer) is an international treaty designed to protect
the ozone layer by phasing out the production of numerous substances that are responsible for
ozone depletion. It was agreed on 26 August 1987, and entered into force on 26 January 1989,
followed by a first meeting in Helsinki, May 1989.
• The Montreal protocol, a landmark international agreement to agreement to protect the
stratospheric ozone by agreeing to limit the production and use of ozone-depleting substances,
phasing out of ozone-depleting substances and helping the developing countries to implement
use of alternatives to CFCs.
• Additional requirements have been added to the Montreal protocol through amendments
adopted in London 1990, Copenhagen (1992), Montreal (1997) and Beijing (1999). To date 189
countries have signed the Montreal protocol for their commitment to environmental
sustainability. In accordance with these agreements, the developed countries have phased out
production and use of CFC, halons, etc. by January 1996. And will phase put Methyl Bromide by
January 2005, and HCFCs by January 2030. Developing countries have agreed to freeze most CFC
consumption as of July 1996 based on 1995-97 averages, to reduce this consumption by 50%
January 2005 and to fully eliminate these CFCs by 1 January 2010.

8. Global environmental change research programmes
• The International Council for Scientific Union (ICSU) is the common
scientific sponsor of the four international global change
programmes. These are the international Geosphere-Biosphere
Programme (IGBP), International Human Dimensions Programme on
Global Environment change (IHDP), World Climate Research
Programme (WCRP), and DIVERSITAS.

9. ADAPTATION AND MITIGATION
• Climate change has the characteristics of a collective action problem at the global scale, because most GHGs accumulate over time
and mix globally, and emissions by any agent (e.g., individual, community, company, country) affect other agents. Effective
mitigation will not be achieved if individual agents advance their own interests independently. Cooperative responses, including
international cooperation, are therefore required to effectively mitigate GHG emissions and address other climate change issues.
The effectiveness of adaptation can be enhanced through complementary actions across levels, including international
cooperation. The evidence suggests that outcomes seen as equitable can lead to more effective cooperation.
• Near-term reductions in energy demand are an important element of cost-effective mitigation strategies, provide more flexibility
for reducing carbon intensity in the energy supply sector, hedge against related supply-side risks, avoid lock-in to carbon-intensive
infrastructures, and are associated with important co-benefits. The most cost-effective mitigation options in forestry are
afforestation, sustainable forest management and reducing deforestation, with large differences in their relative importance across
regions; and in agriculture, cropland management, grazing land management and restoration of organic soils.
• Behaviour, lifestyle and culture have a considerable influence on energy use and associated emissions, with high mitigation
potential in some sectors, in particular when complementing technological and structural change (medium evidence, medium
agreement). Emissions can be substantially lowered through changes in consumption patterns, adoption of energy savings
measures, dietary change and reduction in food wastes.
• Mitigation policy could devalue fossil fuel assets and reduce revenues for fossil fuel exporters, but differences between regions
and fuels exist (high confidence). Most mitigation scenarios are associated with reduced revenues from coal and oil trade for major
exporters (high confidence). The availability of CCS would reduce the adverse effects of mitigation on the value of fossil fuel assets

10. • Five Reasons For Concern (RFCs) aggregate climate change risks and illustrate the implications of warming
and of adaptation limits for people, economies and ecosystems across sectors and regions. The five RFCs are
associated with: (1) Unique and threatened systems, (2) Extreme weather events, (3) Distribution of impacts,
(4) Global aggregate impacts, and (5) Largescale singular events.
• Policy linkages among regional, national and sub-national climate policies offer potential climate change
mitigation benefits. Potential advantages include lower mitigation costs, decreased emission leakage and
increased market liquidity.
• National governments play key roles in adaptation planning and implementation (robust evidence, high
agreement) through coordinating actions and providing frameworks and support. While local government
and the private sector have different functions, which vary regionally, they are increasingly recognized as
critical to progress in adaptation, given their roles in scaling up adaptation of communities, households and
civil society and in managing risk information and financing
• Regulatory approaches and information measures are widely used and are often environmentally effective.
Examples of regulatory approaches include energy efficiency standards; examples of information
programmes include labelling programmes that can help consumers make better-informed decisions
• Solar Radiation Management (SRM) involves large-scale methods that seek to reduce the amount of
absorbed solar energy in the climate system. SRM is untested and is not included in any of the mitigation
scenarios. If it were deployed, SRM would entail numerous uncertainties, side effects, risks and
shortcomings and has particular governance and ethical implications. SRM would not reduce ocean
acidification. If it were terminated, there is high confidence that surface temperatures would rise very
rapidly impacting ecosystems susceptible to rapid rates of change.

11. Thank you