Report by UK

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity:
UK

There could be more on the issues of fuel poverty amongst rich nations, as the rich/poor divide is still large even there. I will send through a draft chapter from a report I am writing which could help, though it is UK centric. If required a could write a page on these issues for the WG.
View full comment by Tom Bradley...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity:
UK

Figure heading says 'residential sector' but the figure itself suggests it covers the residential and other sectors. Needs to be clear what's meant by 'other sectors' (see next point)
View full comment by Ute Collier...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity:
UK

A suggestion for evidence for this section which has yet to be written. Residents living in a sustainable communty in London report high levels of well being and quality of life even though they are consuming fewer resources than the local average "BedZED seven years on" http://www.bioregional.com/news-views/publications/bedzed-seven-years-on/
View full comment by Sue Riddlestone...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity:
UK

I think a reference to the useful application of the forthcoming sustainable development goals would be a good signpost here. It was agreed at Rio+20 (paragraphs 245-251) that a set of "Sustainable Development Goals" will be developed. I think that this should be mentioned in WGIII report, as I think this will be an important way that nations will be delivering truly sustainable development and so mitigation strategies post 2015. The document says that the SDG's should be "
View full comment by Sue Riddlestone...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity:
UK

An example of a civil society approach to implementing sustainable development paths based on limit to resources and equity is "one planet living" http://www.bioregional.com/oneplanetliving/what-is-one-planet-living/
View full comment by Sue Riddlestone...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 0
UK

The tenor of much of the chapter makes barely recognised predictive epistemological and utilitarian ethical assumptions.
View full comment by Mark Charlesworth...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 0
UK

There is a danger that Human capital is an unexamined concept in this chapter and the usage typically makes humans and their relationships little more than cogs in the machinery of industrialism and capitalism. Some uses do suggest a less utilitarian view - e.g. where increased human capital could promote 'for changing consumption patterns'.
View full comment by Mark Charlesworth...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 0
UK

The use of the term “luxury” is misleading (see e.g. Sections 4.4.1 and 4.7.3.1): I suggest it is replaced by “non-essential” or “inessential”. This is because luxury consumption can refer to purchase of goods that are higher than average price per unit, such as a Burberry coat or expensive cheese. In fact the purchase of luxury goods by consumers is generally less environmentally damaging than average consumption (Girod and De Haan 2010). The reason is that con
View full comment by Angela Druckman...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 0
UK

Despite the flagged sections “to be completed” and some points of disagreement noted below, this chapter is in a superb state for a FOD: congratulations to the authors. The starting review of previous IPCC reports is extremely helpful. As someone not well versed in this area, I found it all an enjoyable and informative read. My comments are correspondingly limited. I have one overall stylistic criticism which is that – in sharp contrast with many of the other chapt
View full comment by Michael Grubb...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 1 To Page 115
UK

I wanted to preface my comments with a short note to explain: i) I am an LA for WGII and wanted to review something in WGIII to get a sense of what was evolving - to make sure we are linking appropriately with WGIII; ii) I am not an expert in mitigation; iii) I have only reviewed the parts of this chapter on which I feel that I have some expertise - hence there are many sections that I have not read.
View full comment by Emma Tompkins...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 10 , Line 32 To Page 10 , Line 35
UK

Discussion of the harm to individuals, societies and nature from over consumption and under consumption could include mention of 'Global Virtue Tradition' - in particular moderation or temperance - that stretches back before Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics, is arguably the ethical starting point of the majority of the global population, includes epistemology most capable of coping with difficulties in predicting the Earth System and includes directly relevant literature such a
View full comment by Mark Charlesworth...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 11 , Line 26 To Page 11 , Line 27
UK

That the key message understood by Chapter 4 from Chapter 3 is 'notions of well‐being and social welfare function' is unsurprising but a sad indictment of the narrow focus of Chapter 3 on undemocratic and irrational utilitarian ethics in the face of an unpredictable Earth System which cannot be adequately understood to be fed in to CBA (Charlesworth and Okereke, 2010).
View full comment by Mark Charlesworth...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 11 , Line 33 To Page 17 , Line 16
UK

This section, 4.2, is very theoretical and lacks empirical evidence. I have to admit the text looks much like my introductory lecture to sustainable development that I give to the 3rs year undergrads. A lot of this information provided in this section is straight from text books, it is not cutting edge research with relevance for lcimate change mitigation. I would reduce the entire section in its current form to a couple of paragraphs and use the remaining space to provide up
View full comment by Emma Tompkins...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 11 , Line 39 To Page 13 , Line 21
UK

This section 4.2.1 seems unnecessary, refer to a text book which describes all this, cut to a couple of sentences - what is new in this area?
View full comment by Emma Tompkins...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 13 , Line 22 To Page 17 , Line 16
UK

It may be more useful to focus on inequity principally created by market ideology, market fundamentalism or market dogmatism (e.g. Soros G (1998) The Crisis of Global Capitalism) and Stiglitz (http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/2001/stiglitz-autobio.html). That is it is easier to identify inequity and its causes and perhaps address these causes than produce a universally agreed description of equity which can be worked towards. To be even blunter, work
View full comment by Mark Charlesworth...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 13 , Line 44 To Page 14 , Line 3
UK

It can be argued that the problem is less discounting than it is 'comparing streams of utility over time'. Asking the broader question 'what is the right thing to do or right approach to take' should lead to more satisfying answers, as this can include a range of ethical schemes with virtue typically being more comfortable with taking a longer view than at least utilitarian ethics - this can often be seen by the organisations and individuals who take a long term view rather t
View full comment by Mark Charlesworth...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 14 , Line 4 To Page 14 , Line 39
UK

I am not convinced by this argument. I would either think how better to explain these points or delete all this text
View full comment by Emma Tompkins...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 14 , Line 40 To Page 14 , Line 50
UK

Nicely argued, BUT there are no references, on what are you basing this?
View full comment by Emma Tompkins...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 15 , Line 1 To Page 15 , Line 14
UK

Delete - unnecessary
View full comment by Emma Tompkins...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 15 , Line 26 To Page 15 , Line 30
UK

No reference. Reference needed to verify this. If there is no reference - delete
View full comment by Emma Tompkins...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 15 , Line 47 To Page 15 , Line 49
UK

It should be noted that von Weizsäcker et al. (1998) is critical of contemporary economic structures and the philosophical assumptions that underpin these (ibid, 143-209, 271-299). Further it suggests that efficiency gains will not be enough (ibid, 258, 269, 292-3), particularly given that the advertising industry (and much popular culture) can probably create infinite wants. (ibid, xxvi-xxviii) give examples of how contemporary economic structures unjustly militate against
View full comment by Mark Charlesworth...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 16 , Line 5 To Page 16 , Line 39
UK

I am not clear what point is being made here, or how this sectionis relevant to sustainable development and mitigation? I would delete
View full comment by Emma Tompkins...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 17 , Line 26 To Page 18 , Line 44
UK

This section (4.3.1) focusses on basic population and demography issues, while this provides an interesting background for people with no knowledge about this area it is not about mitigation and sustainable development. There are many clear links bwteen population, demography and sustainable development, this is an area full of interesting issues, e.g. discussion of IPAT and its failings, emissions pathways, cultural practices around emissions...it would be good to see more o
View full comment by Emma Tompkins...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 19 , Line 19 To Page 19 , Line 20
UK

It would be truer to say that population is ethically and politically sensitive but that consumption is really only politically sensitive to 'liberal democracies' that 'buy' votes by offering ever greater material wealth to the majority of their population.
View full comment by Mark Charlesworth...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 19 , Line 27 To Page 20 , Line 14
UK

all intersting text but not related to mitigation - delete
View full comment by Emma Tompkins...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 20 , Line 15 To Page 20 , Line 22
UK

Nice, clear, consise and well referenced paragraph
View full comment by Emma Tompkins...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 21 , Line 1 To Page 21 , Line 33
UK

Introductory text book stuff on governance, not related to climate change, reduce to 3 sentences max
View full comment by Emma Tompkins...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 21 , Line 34 To Page 21 , Line 48
UK

much superfluous text, reduce to 2 sentences summarising key points
View full comment by Emma Tompkins...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 22 , Line 31 To Page 22 , Line 37
UK

Nice use of examples to explain the point, it would be nice to see more of this evidence based synthesis
View full comment by Emma Tompkins...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 23 , Line 12 To Page 23 , Line 23
UK

I am not clear why you selected health and energy as the two sectors to look at. It would be helpful to explain why you think these are the sectors of interest re: STI
View full comment by Emma Tompkins...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 23 , Line 4 To Page 23 , Line 7
UK

Science and technology are regarded as key means to achieve sustainability, particularly if they contribute to maintain economic development whilst using environmental resources more efficiently and enhancing social development.' In a report by the IPCC I would have expect an explicit recognition that resources are unlikely to be the limit on sustainability especially a conventional economics can address these issues adequately albeit typically unfairly - rather stress to the
View full comment by Mark Charlesworth...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 25 , Line 35 To Page 25 , Line 47
UK

all intersting text but not related to mitigation - delete
View full comment by Emma Tompkins...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 31 , Line 1
UK

I think this is correct but should not be surprising: another way of putting it is that a "Second Domain" instrument like the CDM, founded upon assumptions of optimising market instruments for price-led investments, cannot be expected to address "First Domain" phenomena (see chapters 2 and 7 of Grubb, Hourcade and Neuhoff op.cit). Earlier empirical data relating to CDM performance, and analysis of sectoral performance, was pubslihed as M.Grubb and T. Laing, "Global carbon m
View full comment by Michael Grubb...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 31 , Line 3 To Page 31 , Line 6
UK

The sentence beginning with "This suggests…" is a non-sequitur. Just because a technology is mature, does not mean that all people have access to it. The fact that CDM might favor more mature technologies does not mean that CDM cannot contribute to energy access, industrialization or sustainability. On the contrary, when more mature RE technologies are rolled out in more markets this actually increases the opportunity for increased energy access, industrialization and su
View full comment by Tracy Lane...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 31 , Line 39 To Page 34 , Line 13
UK

Good to see questioning of consumerism including 'The spread of consumerism or consumption‐based lifestyles is arguably a “mega driver” of global environmental degradation – including global warming.'
View full comment by Mark Charlesworth...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 34 , Line 14 To Page 35 , Line 31
UK

The discussion of happiness and consumption here tends to make utilitarian ethical assumptions and misses a more profound category of literature. In philosophy virtue speaks more directly to happiness than its utilitarian complement or competitor. Aristotle argues that happiness comes through virtue including moderate (i.e. not too much or too little) consumption. Sandler R and Cafaro P (Eds. (2005) Environmental virtue ethics, Lanham, Md.: Rowman) relate virtue directly to c
View full comment by Mark Charlesworth...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 35 , Line 3
UK

It might be interesting to try and link the "satiation" effects to the apparent disappearance of any systemsatic link between per-capita income and energy/emissions, which seems to occur at lower levels ($10-15,000: see my comments on Chapters 5 and 14, Figure 14-2). However perhaps this is beyond scope of IPCC.
View full comment by Michael Grubb...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 35 , Line 32 To Page 38 , Line 34
UK

It is good to see discussion of sustainable consumption. Lack of concrete progress on sustainable consumption over the last 20 years is in part related to the factors discussed; however, a factor almost completely ignored in the literature - presumably rooted in ideologically assumptions of funding decisions is discussion of reducing or moderating consumption. Nearly all the literature focuses on technological changes to make products with a lower impact or on encouraging con
View full comment by Mark Charlesworth...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 39
UK

If this is the place where AR5 addresses consumption vs production accounting, it might be interesting to try and produce a graphic correlating to Figure 14-2 but showing how it would change on a consumption basis? Or this may be a task for Chapter 5.
View full comment by Michael Grubb...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 39 , Line 11 To Page 43 , Line 28
UK

Carbon accounting is largely based on assumptions falsified by Charlesworth M & Okereke C (2010, Policy responses to rapid climate change: An epistemological critique of dominant approaches, Global Environ. Change, 20:121-129, doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2009.09.001) and section 4.4.5 would be a good candidate to be trimmed leaving the references by indicating the literature but less of the detail, in my opinion.
View full comment by Mark Charlesworth...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 40 , Line 13 To Page 40 , Line 13
UK

Multi-regional input-output models are not a class of hybrid LCA-EIO methods. Multi-regional input-output models are a type of EIO model in which the imports to a region are modelled using the technology of the region of origin, whereas simpler EIO models generally assume that imports are produced using the domestic technology of the destination (consumimg) region.
View full comment by Angela Druckman...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 40 , Line 15 To Page 40 , Line 17
UK

Add: Rajamani, Lavanya. 2012. “The Changing Fortunes of Differential Treatment in the Evolution of International Environmental Law.” International Affairs 88 (3): 605-623.
View full comment by Henry Shue...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 41 , Line 43 To Page 41 , Line 43
UK

Move the word "average" to earlier in the sentence, as follows 'The growth in average CO2 household emissions was 15% on between 1990 and 2004........'
View full comment by Angela Druckman...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 41 , Line 45 To Page 41 , Line 56
UK

Replace ""and since 1996, increased household energy use"" with ""with only slight relative decoupling between expenditures and CO2 emissions occurring since 1996"".
View full comment by Angela Druckman...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 41 , Line 29 To Page 41 , Line 33
UK

Add: Shue, Henry. 2013. “Climate Hope: Implementing the Exit Strategy.” Chicago Journal of International Law 13(2).
View full comment by Henry Shue...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 42 , Line 28 To Page 42 , Line 28
UK

The report to President Lyndon Johnson was by Roger Revelle, not the Jasons, and was in 1965. The report by the Jasons was to President Jimmy Carter, and was in 1977. Oreskes, Naomi, and Erik M. Conway. 2010. Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco to Global Warming. Bloomsbury Press, New York. 170-172.
View full comment by Henry Shue...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 43 , Line 7 To Page 43 , Line 7
UK

PAS 2050 was updated in 2011.
View full comment by Angela Druckman...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 44 , Line 24 To Page 53 , Line 33
UK

Including a development pathway where widespread moderation of consumption by the global middle class and those with higher wealth still would appear a useful addition.
View full comment by Mark Charlesworth...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 44 , Line 6 To Page 44 , Line 8
UK

Add: Shue, Henry. 2011. Human Rights, Climate Change, and the Trillionth Ton. In: The Ethics of Global Climate Change, ed. Denis G. Arnold. Oxford University Press, United Kingdom. 292-314.
View full comment by Henry Shue...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 5 , Line 11 To Page 5 , Line 14
UK

The 'definitions' of sustainability all make more consumerist and utilitarian ethical assumptions than does Brundtland or the Rio Declaration. Literature such as Dobson and Jacobs would help broaden and crystalize the authors understanding of sustainable development and sustainability.
View full comment by Mark Charlesworth...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 5 , Line 33 To Page 5 , Line 35
UK

I was a little concerned to see the use and support of the IPAT explaination of transition to SD in the Exec Summary. There is a significant critique of IPAT, and this should be cited. Many authors disregard IPAT as it is only useful in limited contexts. E.g. empirical tests show different types of impacts (e.g. CO2 or SO2) relate differently to changes in population, affluence and technology, i.e. the relationship does not always hold. Further the simple multiplicative rela
View full comment by Emma Tompkins...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 51 , Line 3
UK

This is potentially a crucially important paragraph that in my view misses the fundamental point. Rigidities of all sorts characterise short-term options and constraints, and this para correctly implies that this is about far more than just capital stock, but has a lot to do with behaviour, expectations, habits etc; classic First Domain characteristics. Keynes' General theory can be interpreted as illustrating what these rigidities of "First Domain" characteristics do to c
View full comment by Michael Grubb...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 53 To Page 55
UK

There is some confusion thorughout this section beteen mitigation and mitigative capacity, and adaptation vs adaptive capacity, While these concepts are really clearly laid out in the second para of this section, these definitions are then not used in section 4.6.1.2 'differences between mitigative and adaptive capacities'
View full comment by Emma Tompkins...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 54 , Line 13 To Page 54 , Line 14
UK

delete sentence starting 'Some have thus viewed..' as it repeats previous sentence
View full comment by Emma Tompkins...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 54 , Line 18 To Page 54 , Line 18
UK

delete 'Caring enhances political willingness', there are many cases where this is not the case, e.g. UK love of animals and hatred of animal testing, yet we still have animal testing
View full comment by Emma Tompkins...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 54 , Line 3 To Page 54 , Line 3
UK

Make reference to adaptive capacity section in WGII
View full comment by Emma Tompkins...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 54 , Line 34 To Page 54 , Line 40
UK

Many references to response capacity, start with IPCC (2001), Tompkins and Adger (2005) and then more…it would be interesting to track the trajectory of this idea.
View full comment by Emma Tompkins...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 54 , Line 6 To Page 54 , Line 6
UK

Apologies for referencing my own work, but these ideas about response capacity have been around for some time e.g. see: Tompkins EL, and Adger WN. 2005. Defining response capacity to enhance climate change policy. Environmental Science and Policy 8(6):562-571, this paper has been cited about 40 times, and several of these papers also build on this conceptualisation of repsonse capacity.
View full comment by Emma Tompkins...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 55 , Line 2 To Page 22 , Line 18
UK

this section confuses adaptation with adaptive capacity, and mitigation with mitigative capacity, They are not the same (as exlpained earlier in this chapter, yet they appear to be used synonymously in this section. The starting point for this chpater woudl be Yohe 2001
View full comment by Emma Tompkins...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 55 , Line 27 To Page 55 , Line 36
UK

The previous literatyure on response capacity argues that this capacity is about: availability of technolgy and ability and willingness of society to act. The aspect of willingness is missing from this section
View full comment by Emma Tompkins...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 58 , Line 1 To Page 58 , Line 11
UK

Both CBA and cost-effectiveness approaches are called into question by Charlesworth M & Okereke C (2010, Policy responses to rapid climate change: An epistemological critique of dominant approaches, Global Environ. Change, 20:121-129, doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2009.09.001) with forms of precaution being the most widely recognised option that remains logically viable.
View full comment by Mark Charlesworth...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 59 , Line 22 To Page 59 , Line 29
UK

Charlesworth M & Okereke C (2010, Policy responses to rapid climate change: An epistemological critique of dominant approaches, Global Environ. Change, 20:121-129, doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2009.09.001) suggests that predictions of regional climate changes are sufficiently problematic that any complacency about climate impacts by any group are 'misplaced' to say the least.
View full comment by Mark Charlesworth...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 59 , Line 37 To Page 62 , Line 6
UK

Charlesworth M & Okereke C (2010, Policy responses to rapid climate change: An epistemological critique of dominant approaches, Global Environ. Change, 20:121-129, doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2009.09.001) calls into question all consequential approaches to policy including refinements of conventional utilitarian economic approaches as consequences cannot be robustly be predicted in any meaningful way. These refinements may be useful to move policy in the right direction where eco
View full comment by Mark Charlesworth...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 59 , Line 9 To Page 59 , Line 10
UK

Order of authors is reversed. Correct is: Oreskes, Naomi, and Erik. M. Conway
View full comment by Henry Shue...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 6 , Line 31 To Page 6 , Line 31
UK

Check for consistency in the use of 'adaptation' vs 'adaption' throughout
View full comment by Emma Tompkins...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 6 , Line 4
UK

I find this surprising. In terms of major energy end-use categories, industry is around 30% of energy and 40% of global fossil fuel CO2 emissions (including process emissions). I appreciate that industry is mostly producing products for other end-uses so in their some of this could be assigned downstream, but it hard to see how this can all be assigned to mobility or housing (let alone agriculture). I would also question the use of trying such a total downstream "ultimate
View full comment by Michael Grubb...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 6 , Line 42 To Page 6 , Line 43
UK

I am not convinced by the argument in the exec sum, or the chapter, that making development pathways more sustainable can go a long way to mitigation, adaptation, and adaptive/mitigative capacity. I do not think this argument is made in this chapter. I woudl reconsider including this conclusion here.
View full comment by Emma Tompkins...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 62 , Line 7 To Page 63 , Line 15
UK

Unquestioned utilitarian assumptions limit the imagination of this discussion of 'commons'.
View full comment by Mark Charlesworth...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 7 , Line 42 To Page 7 , Line 44
UK

This sentence does not read clearly, I am not sure what is meant
View full comment by Emma Tompkins...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 73 , Line 39 To Page 77 , Line 7
UK

This section although recognising the difficulties associated with indicators does not question whether indictors are an appropriate tool for climate change and sustainable development; the section also tends to make simplistic normative ethical utilitarian assumptions. Charlesworth M & Okereke C (2010, Policy responses to rapid climate change: An epistemological critique of dominant approaches, Global Environ. Change, 20:121-129, doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2009.09.001) calls i
View full comment by Mark Charlesworth...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 78 , Line 1 To Page 78 , Line 2
UK

This description of environmental sustainability barely includes climate change which is surprising given the nature of the report. This indicates the paucity of the definition and the tendency of much work on sustainable development to put industrial and economic output ahead of the natural basis of industry and economic growth. This is the flavour of much of section 4.8.
View full comment by Mark Charlesworth...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 9 To Page 31
UK

While this section is an intersting read about the history of sustainable development, the legacy of colonialism, and sustainability indicators, it is: i) far too long; ii) not directly relevant to mitigation. I now make various suggestions below how to address issues within this section.
View full comment by Emma Tompkins...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 9 To Page 31
UK

2. the main suggestion is to try to reduce these 24 pages into 9. I assume that this chapter should be 25 pages long (or thereabouts), that leaves about 3 pages per sub section. I think that this can be easily done, and this is the focus of most of my comments below.
View full comment by Emma Tompkins...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 9 To Page 31
UK

No focus on mitigation in these pages, which I think, significantly weakens this section. Also it results in a lot of superfluous text. Much of this section could be deleted and replaced with many of the comprehensive reviews of sustainable development, or e.g. population change
View full comment by Emma Tompkins...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 9 , Line 44 To Page 10 , Line 24
UK

1. start the section with an explanation of what is low carbon climate resilient development and immediately equate this with sustainability, e.g. links with production, consumption, population and demography etcc..
View full comment by Emma Tompkins...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 9 , Line 44 To Page 10 , Line 24
UK

This section has no punch, and could really do with setting out the big points early on, at present you lose the reader, there is no clear focus on the big themese running through this chapter - what are they? There is mention of Rockstrom's work but little else - is this the only big theme?
View full comment by Emma Tompkins...

First Order Draft, Sustainable Development and Equity: From Page 9 , Line 47 To Page 9 , Line 49
UK

Final sentence doesn't say anything - delete
View full comment by Emma Tompkins...

Breakdown for UK

Chapter 172
Chapter 221
Chapter 3140
Chapter 477
Chapter 565
Chapter 696
Chapter 7394
Chapter 8217
Chapter 928
Chapter 106
Chapter 11123
Chapter 1278
Chapter 1320
Chapter 142
Chapter 1548
Chapter 1658
Annex II3
Entire Report38
Total Hits1486

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (beta version)