Mitigation of climate change. Risk and uncertainty research gaps in the specification of mitigation actions

Abstract

In this perspective paper, we are concerned with the general problem of how to increase the probability of achieving the expected outcomes of climate change mitigation actions. Climate change mitigation actions prevent, limit, reduce, delay or slow the rate of environmental changes produced by greenhouse gas emissions. A mitigation action can fail to achieve its intended outcome or create an adverse outcome elsewhere, which means uncertainty about mitigation outcomes or risk. Thus, mitigation risk can be defined by the deviation from a given mitigation goal and the associated uncertainties. We observe a lack of take-up of crucial concepts associated with risk in the climate change mitigation literature. Next, the concepts of risk, risk perception, risk acceptance and agents’ concerns are sometimes used interchangeably. As discussed in this paper, this has resulted in a lack of research about, for example, critical causes of mitigation failure. This situation means that some crucial knowledge gaps remain unaddressed or little researched. In this paper, we strive to identify those research gaps that need to be addressed in managing mitigation actions. Based on literature on risk, clarifications and distinctions regarding the potential meaning, scope, roles and implications among key concepts, such as risk knowledge, mitigation risk, uncertainty, agents’ concerns, risk perception and risk acceptance are given. A key distinction is that the central concept of concerns is associated with agentsʼ objectives, interests, visions, needs, preferences, norms, criteria or values and is different from risk perception. Following this, the gaps this perspective paper discusses are identified and justified by the analysis of how specialised literature in mitigation of climate change reflects aspects linked to the risk concepts. The discussed gaps entail the identification and operationalisation of agents’ concerns, the lack of knowledge about the influence of risk perception and risk acceptance on the weighting of agents’ concerns, and the impacts of the disparity in power relations among agents involved in mitigation.