4.4 Relationship between adaptation and mitigation options and relationship with sustainable development

There is growing understanding of the possibilities to choose and implement climate response options in several sectors to realise synergies and avoid conflicts with other dimensions of sustainable development. {WGIII SPM}

Climate change policies related to energy efficiency and renewable energy are often economically beneficial, improve energy security and reduce local pollutant emissions. Reducing both loss of natural habitat and deforestation can have significant biodiversity, soil and water conservation benefits, and can be implemented in a socially and economically sustainable manner. Forestation and bioenergy plantations can restore degraded land, manage water runoff, retain soil carbon and benefit rural economies, but could compete with food production and may be negative for biodiversity, if not properly designed. {WGII 20.3, 20.8; WGIII 4.5, 9.7, 12.3, SPM}

There is growing evidence that decisions about macro-economic policy, agricultural policy, multilateral development bank lending, insurance practices, electricity market reform, energy security and forest conservation, for example, which are often treated as being apart from climate policy, can significantly reduce emissions (Table 4.3). Similarly, non-climate policies can affect adaptive capacity and vulnerability. {WGII 20.3; WGIII SPM, 12.3}

Both synergies and trade-offs exist between adaptation and mitigation options. {WGII 18.4.3; WGIII 11.9}

Examples of synergies include properly designed biomass production, formation of protected areas, land management, energy use in buildings, and forestry, but synergies are rather limited in other sectors. Potential trade-offs include increased GHG emissions due to increased consumption of energy related to adaptive responses. {WGII 18.4.3, 18.5, 18.7, TS.5.2; WGIII 4.5, 6.9, 8.5, 9.5, SPM}