《CAN:2022年气候变化绩效指数(32页).pdf》由会员分享,可在线阅读,更多相关《CAN:2022年气候变化绩效指数(32页).pdf(32页珍藏版)》请在三个皮匠报告上搜索。
1、2022RESULTSMonitoring Climate Mitigation Efforts of 60 Countries plus the EU covering 92%of the Global Greenhouse Gas EmissionsJan BurckThea Uhlich Christoph BalsNiklas HhneLeonardo NascimentoJamie Wong2CCPI Results 2022Germanwatch,NewClimate Institute&Climate Action NetworkContentsForeword31.Hopefo
2、rChange42.OverallResultsCCPI202262.1 Category ResultsGHG Emissions 82.2 Category ResultsRenewable Energy 102.3 Category ResultsEnergy Use 122.4 Category ResultsClimate Policy 143.KeyCountryResults164.Netzerotargetsgainsubstantialglobalsupport235.AbouttheCCPI266.Endnotes28Annex29With financial suppor
3、t from the Barthel FoundationWith the support of South PoleImprintAuthors:Jan Burck,Thea Uhlich,Christoph Bals,Niklas Hhne,Leonardo Nascimento,Jamie Wong,Ana Tamblyn,Jonas ReutherWithsupportof:Pieter van Breevoort,Bjrk Lucas,Ritika Tewari,Joseph DuttonEditing:Adam Goulston,Tobias RinnMaps:Made by 23
4、Design:Dietmar PutscherCoverphoto:Shutterstock/greenapertureNovember 2021You can find this publication as well as interactive maps and tables at www.ccpi.orgGermanwatchBonnOffice Kaiserstr.201 D-53113 Bonn,Germany Ph.:+49(0)228 60492-0 Fax:+49(0)228 60492-19 GermanwatchBerlinOffice Stresemannstr.72
5、D-10963 Berlin,Germany Ph.:+49(0)30 28 88 356-0 Fax:+49(0)30 28 88 356-1E-mail:infogermanwatch.org www.germanwatch.orgNewClimateInstituteCologneOffice Waidmarkt 11aD-50676 Cologne,Germany Ph.:+49(0)221 99983300NewClimateInstituteBerlinOffice Schnhauser Allee 10-11D-10119 Berlin,Germany Ph.:+49(0)030
6、 208492742CANClimateActionNetworkInternational Kaiserstr.201 D-53113 Bonn,Germany3CCPI Results 2022Germanwatch,NewClimate Institute&Climate Action NetworkThe Index is published by Germanwatch,NewClimate Institute and the Climate Action Network.The CCPIs unique climate policy section,evaluating count
7、ries national and international climate policy performance,is only possible through the continued support and contributions of around 450 climate and energy experts.We express our gratitude to these experts and greatly appreciate their time,efforts and knowledge in contributing to this publication.*
8、Authors and acknowledgements*A full list of contributors to the climate policy evaluation can be found in the Annex of this publication.Published annually since 2005,the Climate Change Perfor-mance Index(CCPI)is an independent monitoring tool for tracking the climate protection performance of 60 cou
9、n-tries and the EU.Every year,the CCPI sets off important public and political debates within the countries assessed.The CCPI aims to enhance transparency in international climate politics and enables comparison of climate protec-tion efforts and progress made by individual countries.The climate pro
10、tection performance of those countries,which together account for 92%of global greenhouse gas(GHG)emissions,is assessed in four categories:GHG Emissions,Renewable Energy,Energy Use and Climate Policy.The countries commitments under the Paris Agreement are still insufficient:to limit global warming t
11、o a maximum of 1.5C a more ambitious climate action is urgently needed.ForewordInforming the process of raising climate ambitionIn this context,the CCPI has gained further relevance as a long-standing and reliable tool to identify leaders and lag-gards in climate protection.The impact of the CCPI as
12、 a climate protection monitor-ing and communication tool also depends on whether and how the index is used by different actors.We are glad to see that the CCPI is increasingly used by financial actors to rate sovereign bonds.Given the key role of the financial market in determining whether investmen
13、ts are made in high-emission or low-emission infrastructures and tech-nology developments for shifting the trillions.Therefore,the CCPI is an important tool to promote the reallocation of investments by providing crucial information on climate change for Environmental,Social and Governance(ESG)ratin
14、gs for finance actors.Jan Burck(Germanwatch)Niklas Hhne(NewClimate Institute)Thea Uhlich(Germanwatch)Leonardo Nascimento(NewClimate Institute)Christoph Bals(Germanwatch)Tasneem Essop(Climate Action Network International)4CCPI Results 2022Germanwatch,NewClimate Institute&Climate Action Network1.Hope
15、for ChangeThe year 2021 has been a busy one for climate diplomacy.Several high-level international events have taken place,enhanced Nationally Determined Contributions(NDCs)sub-mit ted,agreements made,new scientific reports released.With newly elected US president Joe Biden,the US stepped back onto
16、the climate stage and re-joined the Paris Agreement.In April,Biden hosted the virtual Leaders Summit on Climate,inviting 40 world leaders to discuss increasing climate ambition and finance.In this context,the US-government submitted a new NDC and announced a 5052%emissions reduction by 2030(compared
17、 with 2005)and an increase in US-climate finance to$5.7 billion per year by 2024(at the UN Assembly in September,Biden doubled this to$11.4 billion).The finance gap to reach the promised$100 billion of international climate finance per year from the industrialised states thereby decreased,but it is
18、still not closed.Further important climate events include the Petersberg Climate Dialogue in May(where Germany introduced its new reduction target,forced by a court ruling),vir-tual UN negotiations in June,the first V20 Climate Vulnerables Finance Summit,the G20 Ministerial Meeting on Environment,Cl
19、imate and Energy in July(where all G20 members agreed to keep 1.5C in reach),and the UN Assembly in September(where Turkey finally ratified the Paris Agreement and China announced its exit from coal financing abroad).As part of the Paris Agreement,states are urged to sub-mit new updated targets to c
20、lose the gap between NDCs agreed to in Paris and the 1.5C,or at least well-below-2C,limit,focusing on the 2030 targets.At the end of October 2021,114 countries and the EU had submitted their new NDCs,covering nearly 61%of global emissions.1 The Climate Action Tracker(CAT)analysed the new targets of
21、36 countries and concluded that 18 countries and the EU submitted stronger targets(including Argentina,Canada,Japan,Morocco,Norway,and the United Kingdom),while nine countries had not increased their ambition(includ-ing Australia,Brazil,Mexico,Russia,and Switzerland).Furthermore,China,South Korea,an
22、d Nigeria announced stronger NDC targets,while Indias government is expected to announce a new NDC at COP26 in Glasgow.The NDC Synthesis Report published by UN Climate Change at the end of September concluded that the updated NDCs are an important step for combating climate change,but there is still
23、 a wide ambition gap in the way of sufficient reduction of GHG emissions.2 The most recent addition of the NDC Synthesis Report confirms the ambition gap and the need,especially for the G20 countries,to raise their targets.3 Worldwide,states are committing to reach net zero by mid-century.If these t
24、argets are well-designed,backed by short-term targets and transparent measurements,they can serve as a powerful mechanism to keep 1.5C in reach.Without implementation strategies,however,the targets are nothing more than greenwashing(also see the net zero article in this brochure).Consequently,this m
25、ovement must be monitored critically,because even if implementa-tion occurs,there are several loopholes.Particularly,the net aspect has a scope of interpretation.Some countries actively refer to technologies such as Carbon Capture and Storage(CCS)or other carbon sequestration strategies that will pl
26、ay a certain role in fields where zero emissions are impossible,and this must be treated with caution.Even the emphasis on natural sinks such as forests should not be overstressed.As important as forest strategies are,there are spatial limitations,human rights concerns and increasing uncertainty on
27、which part of forests can serve as carbon sinks in a global warming world.The priority to reach net zero should,wherever politically better,be the actual reduction of emissions.The political developments are alongside the increasing-ly dramatic climate change impacts visible globally this year.China
28、,India,Russia,parts of the US,and Canada faced remarkable heatwaves and drought,with forest fires in California and Greece as well as a dramatic famine in Madagascar.In Germany,heavy rain and floods led to one of the largest-scale natural disasters in decades.This year saw the warmest July since wea
29、ther record-keeping be-gan in 1880.4 Before this backdrop,the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change(IPCC)published the first part of its Sixth Assessment Report in August.The report states that global emissions must be halved by 2030(com-pared with 2010)to keep global warming within the 1.5C rea
30、ch.5 Based on a new scenario introduced in May,the International Energy Agency(IEA)released its World Energy Outlook in October,underscoring the importance of renew-able energy sources for global energy supply,the need for dramatically faster expansion of renewables and energy efficiency worldwide,a
31、nd no new investments in fossil fuels,especially exploration of new sources.6 Positive developments can trigger an upward spiral for a sustainable and just transitionBy now,it is evident that the Paris Agreement can increas-ingly coordinate the expectations of different stakeholders relevant for inc
32、reasing dynamics.We therefore,globally in How civil society,litigation,and new business models can accelerate the transformation 5CCPI Results 2022Germanwatch,NewClimate Institute&Climate Action Networkdifferent fields,see positive activities that might jointly be able to trigger an upward spiral to
33、wards a sustainable and just world.Regarding climate action,governments world-wide are confronted with a series of pressure points,ex-ecuted by different actors.First,we see the financialmarket increasingly uses the Paris Agreement and 1.5C as key criteria for investments.Increasing numbers of regul
34、ators and financial market ac-tors see the need to overcome the tragedy of the horizon7 and prevent huge amounts of(fossil)stranded investments.In different parts of the world,future-oriented disclosure and sustainability taxonomies are being introduced as an important step to shift the finance stre
35、ams to support the Paris Agreements goals.Combined with the right frame-work for a real economy,the financial market is a key lever-age factor in the race to zero.There is no lack of money,but it must be used in the right way.We also see the voices and influences of civilsociety rising.The promises,
36、as well as the 1.5C limit of the Paris Agreement,are the foundations of most of these demands.The worldwide movement of Fridays for Future is just one example.Globally,voices from civil society,especially from frontline communities and Indigenous people,are rising and fighting for climate justice.Th
37、ey are protesting loudly and effectively against govern ments that are not doing enough to prevent dangerous climate change,which threa-tens the living environment.A recent example is the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initia tive,which more than 800 organisations,16 cities and sub-national go
38、vernments,and nearly 130,000 individuals support.8 The initiative de-mands non-proliferation of gas,oil,and coal by ending all new exploration and phasing out all production.The Paris Agreement is also a strong starting point for a global wave of litigationcases against governments and companies,adv
39、anced,for example,by towns,af-fected people,civil society,and youth organisations.Notable judgements are based on the Paris Agreement.The Federal Constitutional Court obligated the German government,challenged by youth and civil society,to adopt a new definition of freedom,taking the freedom of fu-t
40、ure generations into account.A first consequence was the robust improvement of the Federal Climate Protection Act from 2019.The German government announced new targets of a 65%reduction in GHG emissions by 2030(compared with 1990),88%by 2040,and climate neutrality as early as 2045.Another important
41、example is this past summers Shell Court Rule in the Netherlands,in which 17,000 Dutch citizens filed proceedings against the oil company.Consequently,Shell must based on the Paris 1.5C limit cut its CO2 emissions to 45%by 2030(com-pared with 2019).The Climate Change Litigation Database (https:/)lis
42、ts 1,433 cases in the US and 481 in other countries.Apart from the US and from European countries such as Turkey,Portugal,and Ukraine,there are court cases from Chile,Brazil,Colombia,and many other places.Emerging climate litigation processes are a good example of how individual actions can lead to
43、global transformation,change narratives,and create reference points for other developments.New business models apply,and they are pushing economic actionIncreasing numbers of businesses are developing their business cases in line with GHG neutrality achieved no later than 2050.Increasingly,finance m
44、arket actors are also asking them to consider,in addition to a stress test,how they can reach GHG neutrality by 2035.A deep transfor-mation requires the engagement of businesses,companies,and industries to reach carbon neutrality by mid-century.Initiatives such as the Race to Zero Campaign launched
45、by the UNFCCC has,among other things,the support of more than 3,000 businesses and 120 countries committed to net zero targets.9 For high-emitting producers,such as the chemical and cement industries,it is more difficult to switch to climate-compatible alternatives.Such industries need to develop ne
46、w technologies and business models to balance their activities with climate mitigation.Stable and affordable price development of renewables in the past years,and growing energy efficiency,are what support this transformation.Inventions and innovations by frontrunners can be affordable and provide i
47、mportant motivation for other players in this sector.Net zero-oriented business models and technologies can potentially create economic value and reduce costs as well as risks.All this can only lead to a 1.5C world if it is the starting phase of exponential development Although there are several pos
48、itive developments that vi-talise themselves and create more political space,far from all signs are pointing towards change.The world energy supply still heavily depends on coal,oil,and gas.There are powerful actors in different countries blocking sustainable and just transformation,and the current
49、financial com-mitments are insufficient for supporting countries of the Global South.This is the decade of implementation.Only if the emissions are halved by 2030 there is a chance to keep 1.5C within reach.Every 0.1C increases the probability of irretrievable climate tipping points with runaway ten
50、dencies and far more dangerous climate change.We are now at a crossroads with little time left for decision-making,and of extreme relevance for the future of human-kind and nature.6CCPI Results 2022Germanwatch,NewClimate Institute&Climate Action NetworkGermanwatch 2021Very HighHighMediumLowVery LowN
51、ot included in assessmentRating2.Overall Results CCPI 2022Still no countries are ranked in the top three overall positionsKey results:The world map shows the aggregated results and overall performance for the evaluated countries.The table shows the overall ranking and indicates how the countries per
52、form in the four index categories.No country performs well enough in all index catego-ries to achieve an overall very high rating in the CCPI.Therefore,once again,the top three places in the over-all ranking remain empty.Denmark is the highest ranked country in CCPI 2022,but it does not perform well
53、 enough to achieve an over-all very high rating.G20 performance:With the United Kingdom(7th),India(10th),Germany(13th),and France(17th),four G20 countries are among the high-performing countries in CCPI 2022.Eleven countries receive a low or very low overall rating;the G20 are responsible for about
54、75%of the worlds greenhouse gas emissions.Saudi Arabia is the worst-performing country among the G20,ranked 63rd.EU performance:Overall,the EU drops six places from last year,to now rank 22nd,and no longer is among the high performers.Notably,because of the CCPI indicators,the EU and its 27 member s
55、tates are responsible for the EUs outcome.Denmark and Sweden are the best-performing EU-countries,at a respective 4th and 5th.A further five countries are high performers.Up 10 ranks,the Netherlands is one of the most im-proved countries since last years CCPI,though still performing at a medium leve
56、l.Slovenia,Czech Republic,Poland,and Hungary are among the worst-performing countries,each receiving a very low rating.The following sections look into the results for the index categories:GHG Emissions(2.1),Renewable Energy(2.2),Energy Use(2.3),and Climate Policy(2.4).Germanwatch 20217CCPI Results
57、2022Germanwatch,NewClimate Institute&Climate Action NetworkClimate Change Performance Index 2022 Rating tableRankRank changeCountryScore*Categories 1.*2.3.4.2 Denmark76.675.-1 Sweden74.226.2 Norway73.297.-2 United Kingdom73.098.-1 Morocco71.609.0 Chile69.5110.0 India69.2011.4 Lithuania64.8912.0 Malt
58、a64.1813.6 Germany63.5314.-3 Finland62.4115.-1 Switzerland61.7016.1 Portugal61.1117.6 France61.0118.3 Luxembourg60.8019.10 Netherlands60.4420.0 Ukraine60.4021.1 Egypt59.7422.-6 European Union(27)59.2123.newPhilippines58.9824.10 Greece58.2225.newColombia57.8726.-13 Latvia57.7327.-3 Indonesia57.1728.4
59、 Mexico56.0529.-11 Croatia55.9630.-3 Italy55.3931.-5 Thailand55.0132.6 Estonia54.9833.-8 Brazil54.8634.7 Spain54.3535.-7 New Zealand54.0336.-6 Romania52.4337.-2 Austria52.3538.-5 China52.2039.-2 South Africa51.1340.-9 Slovak Republic50.6741.1 Turkey50.5342.7 Cyprus50.5243.newViet Nam49.2144.0 Bulgar
60、ia48.7145.0 Japan48.5346.-7 Ireland47.8647.-1 Argentina47.0848.-12 Belarus46.6649.-9 Belgium45.9050.1 Slovenia43.2851.-4 Czech Republic42.1552.-4 Poland40.6353.-3 Hungary40.4154.-11 Algeria39.9155.6 United States37.3956.-4 Russian Federation34.7357.-1 Malaysia33.7458.-1 Chinese Taipei30.7059.-5 Aust
61、ralia30.0660.-7 Korea26.7461.-3 Canada26.0362.-3 Islamic Republic of Iran25.6663.-3 Saudi Arabia24.2564.-9 Kazakhstan19.23Very HighHighMediumLowVery LowRatingIndexCategoriesClimate Policy (20%weighting)Renewable Energy(20%weighting)Energy Use (20%weighting)GHG Emissions (40%weighting)Germanwatch 202
62、1*None of the countries achieved positions one to three.No country is doing enough to prevent dangerous climate change.*rounded8CCPI Results 2022Germanwatch,NewClimate Institute&Climate Action NetworkGermanwatch 2021HighMediumLowVery LowNot included in assessmentRating*Greenhouse Gas Emissions2.1 Ca
63、tegory ResultsGHG*EmissionsGermanwatch 2021A strong COVID-19 rebound effect is seen for GHG emissionsKey developments:The COVID-19 pandemic triggered a sharp,globally unrep-resented 5.4%drop in CO2 emissions.A strong rebound effect of greenhouse gas(GHG)emissions has,however,been expected for 2021.T
64、he International Energy Agency estimated,for the period of JanuaryJuly 2021,CO2 emis-sions would rise 4.8%.CO2 emissions in 2021 will in fact near the record high from 2019(UNEP and IEA).10,11 For a 1.5C world,it would have been necessary for emissions to fall at their 2020 rate.Nevertheless,the CCP
65、I 2022 results for GHG Emissions still do not reflect the pandemics influence;as mentioned,comparable data are only available up to 2019.Key results:The table on the right provides details on the performance of all countries listed in the CCPI in the four indicators comprising the GHG Emissions cate
66、gory.Among the newly included countries in this years CCPI,only the Philippines performs high in this category;Colombia rates medium,and due to a very low rating in the current trend indicator,Viet Nam receives a low.G20 performance:Still,no country rates very high in the GHG Emissions category,but
67、with the United Kingdom,Mexico,India,and Germany,two more G20 countries than in last years edition receive an overall high rating.Seven G20 countries receive a very low rating for their performance,including the Russian Federation,Australia,the United States,and Canada.All other G20 countries genera
68、lly are equally divided into medium and low ratings.Like last year,Saudi Arabia remains the worst-perform-ing G20 country in this category.EU performance:As it did last year,the EU rates medium for its overall performance and in all indicators in the GHG Emissions category.The best performing EU cou
69、ntry is Sweden at 5th,though Malta,Denmark,and Germany are rated high in this category.Among the EU countries that received a very low for their performance are Czech Republic,Poland,Ireland,and Slovenia.9CCPI Results 2022Germanwatch,NewClimate Institute&Climate Action NetworkGreenhouse Gas Emission
70、s Rating tableRankCountryScore*Overall RatingGHG per Capita current level(including LULUCF)*GHG per Capita current trend(excluding LULUCF)*GHG per Capita compared to a well-below-2C benchmarkGHG 2030 Target compared to a well-below-2C benchmark4.United Kingdom33.79HighMediumHighHighVery high5.Sweden
71、33.70HighVery highHighHighMedium6.Mexico32.77HighHighMediumHighHigh7.Chile32.67HighHighVery LowVery highVery high8.Egypt31.73HighHighLowHighVery high9.India31.42HighVery highVery LowVery highVery high10.Malta31.38HighHighVery highMediumLow11.Denmark31.04HighLowHighMediumVery high12.Morocco30.67HighH
72、ighVery LowVery highVery high13.Norway30.29HighMediumHighMediumHigh14.Switzerland29.82HighHighHighMediumMedium15.Germany28.90HighLowHighMediumHigh16.Philippines28.79HighVery highVery LowVery highVery high17.Ukraine27.27MediumMediumMediumHighMedium18.Romania27.24MediumHighLowHighMedium19.Finland27.01
73、MediumMediumHighMediumLow20.France26.75MediumMediumMediumMediumMedium21.Slovak Republic26.24MediumMediumLowHighMedium22.Thailand25.98MediumMediumMediumMediumLow23.European Union(27)25.98MediumMediumMediumMediumMedium24.Greece25.70MediumMediumHighLowLow25.Spain25.62MediumMediumMediumLowLow26.Lithuani
74、a25.56MediumHighVery LowHighMedium27.Belarus25.56MediumMediumLowMediumMedium28.Italy24.98MediumMediumMediumMediumLow29.Colombia24.71MediumHighLowMediumLow30.Estonia24.59MediumVery LowHighMediumLow31.Luxembourg24.52MediumVery LowHighHighMedium32.Brazil24.45LowMediumHighLowVery Low33.Indonesia24.36Low
75、MediumVery LowMediumMedium34.Turkey24.11LowHighLowHighVery Low35.Netherlands24.09LowLowMediumLowMedium36.Bulgaria24.04LowMediumMediumMediumLow37.Portugal23.40LowHighLowLowLow38.South Africa23.28LowLowHighVery LowLow39.Japan23.25LowLowHighVery LowLow40.Viet Nam23.06LowHighVery LowHighLow41.Croatia23.
76、05LowHighLowMediumLow42.Algeria22.92LowMediumLowLowLow43.Cyprus22.01LowMediumLowLowLow44.Belgium21.81LowLowMediumLowLow45.Hungary21.33LowMediumVery LowMediumLow46.New Zealand21.16LowVery LowHighVery LowLow47.Austria21.12LowLowMediumLowLow48.Argentina20.75LowLowMediumVery LowLow49.Czech Republic20.37
77、Very LowVery LowMediumLowLow50.China19.73Very LowLowLowLowVery Low51.Poland19.65Very LowLowLowLowLow52.Russian Federation19.09Very LowVery LowLowMediumVery Low53.Latvia19.06Very LowHighVery LowLowVery Low54.Slovenia17.82Very LowLowLowVery LowVery Low55.Ireland17.81Very LowVery LowMediumVery LowVery
78、Low56.Australia17.22Very LowVery LowMediumMediumLow57.United States17.00Very LowVery LowMediumVery LowLow58.Malaysia11.60Very LowVery LowLowVery LowVery Low59.Canada11.16Very LowVery LowMediumVery LowVery Low60.Chinese Taipei11.15Very LowVery LowLowVery LowVery Low61.Saudi Arabia10.19Very LowVery Lo
79、wHighVery LowVery Low62.Korea10.08Very LowVery LowLowVery LowVery Low63.Kazakhstan6.70Very LowVery LowLowVery LowVery Low64.Islamic Republic of Iran6.20Very LowVery LowVery LowVery LowVery Low*weighted and rounded *Land Use,Land-Use Change and ForestryGermanwatch 202110CCPI Results 2022Germanwatch,N
80、ewClimate Institute&Climate Action NetworkVery HighHighMediumLowVery LowNot included in assessmentRating2.2 Category ResultsRenewable EnergyRenewable energy is expanding,despite worldwide economic declineKey developments:Renewable energy capacity continues to growth at a re-cord pace,despite the eff
81、ects of the COVID-19 pandemic.In 2020,260 GW of renewable energy capacity was in-stalled globally,which accounted for 81%of the total elec-tricity capacity added.12 In most of the world,wind and solar power were also the cheapest sources of new elec-tricity generation in.13 Even the cheapest climate
82、-damaging coal-fired power plants are increasingly more expensive than solar and wind power.Key results:The table gives details on the performance of all countries listed in the CCPI in the four indicators comprising the Renewable Energy category.As the energy sector greatly contributes to a country
83、s greenhouse gas emissions,the results of the Renewable Energy rating indicate substantial room for improvement in mitigating emissions by accelerating deployment of renew-able energy.Norway is the first country,receiving a very high rating in this category.G20-performance:The majority of G20 countr
84、ies rank low or very low,with Mexico and the Russian Federation as the worst performers among them.India joins Brazil,Indonesia,and Turkey as the only G20 countries rating high in the Renewable Energy category.The United Kingdoms performance however falls from high to medium.EU performance:The EUs p
85、erformance in the Renewable Energy cat-egory shows no improvements from last years CCPI,as it rates medium.With Denmark,Sweden,Finland,Latvia,Croatia,and Turkey,six countries are under the top 10 performers in the Renewable Energy category another four EU countries rate high.Like last year,no EU cou
86、ntry performs very low.Czech Republic,Poland and France remain the worst-perform-ing EU countries in this category.Germanwatch 2021Germanwatch 202111CCPI Results 2022Germanwatch,NewClimate Institute&Climate Action NetworkRenewable Energy(RE)Rating tableRankCountryScore*Overall RatingShare of RE in E
87、nergy Use(TPES)*current level(incl.hydro)RE current trend (excl.hydro)Share of RE in Energy Use(TPES)(incl.hydro)compared to a well-below-2C benchmark RE 2030 Target(incl.hydro)compared to a well-below-2C benchmark3.Norway19.21Very HighVery highVery highVery HighHigh4.Denmark14.93HighHighHighHighMed
88、ium5.Sweden14.72HighVery highMediumHighHigh6.Finland14.04HighHighMediumHighMedium7.Latvia13.79HighHighHighHighMedium8.New Zealand13.05HighVery highLowHighMedium9.Brazil12.70HighVery highLowMediumMedium10.Chile12.62HighHighHighHighMedium11.Croatia11.32HighMediumVery highLowMedium12.Turkey11.30HighMed
89、iumVery highMediumLow13.Lithuania10.95HighMediumHighMediumMedium14.Bulgaria10.63HighLowVery highLowMedium15.Estonia10.53HighMediumHighMediumMedium16.Austria10.17HighHighVery LowMediumMedium17.Indonesia10.08HighMediumHighMediumLow18.Ireland9.85HighMediumHighMediumMedium19.Portugal9.54HighHighLowLowMe
90、dium20.Malta9.38MediumLowVery highVery LowLow21.Luxembourg9.34MediumLowHighLowLow22.Switzerland9.20MediumHighHighMediumLow23.China9.17MediumLowVery highVery LowLow24.India9.10MediumMediumHighLowMedium25.Philippines9.00MediumHighLowVery LowMedium26.European Union(27)8.98MediumMediumMediumLowMedium27.
91、United Kingdom8.48MediumMediumHighMediumVery Low28.Germany8.13MediumMediumMediumMediumLow29.Morocco8.05MediumVery LowVery highVery LowLow30.Netherlands7.79MediumLowHighVery LowLow31.Greece7.52MediumMediumMediumLowMedium32.Viet Nam7.48MediumMediumHighLowLow33.Italy7.43MediumMediumLowMediumLow34.Spain
92、7.30MediumMediumLowLowMedium35.Cyprus7.20MediumLowHighVery LowLow36.Ukraine7.13MediumVery LowHighVery LowLow37.Thailand7.05MediumHighLowLowVery Low38.Slovenia6.68LowMediumMediumVery LowLow39.Belgium6.60LowLowMediumVery LowLow40.Slovak Republic6.48LowLowLowVery LowMedium41.Romania6.30LowLowLowVery Lo
93、wMedium42.France6.18LowLowHighVery LowLow43.Poland5.98LowLowLowVery LowLow44.Hungary5.84LowLowMediumVery LowLow45.Japan5.69LowLowHighVery LowVery Low46.Czech Republic5.66LowLowLowVery LowLow47.Argentina5.49LowLowHighVery LowVery Low48.Colombia4.92LowMediumVery LowVery LowLow49.Korea4.31LowVery LowHi
94、ghVery LowVery Low50.South Africa4.19LowVery LowMediumVery LowVery Low51.Malaysia4.04LowVery LowHighVery LowVery Low52.Australia3.49Very LowLowHighVery LowVery Low53.United States3.20Very LowLowMediumVery LowVery Low54.Canada3.12Very LowMediumVery LowVery LowVery Low55.Saudi Arabia3.09Very LowVery L
95、owMediumVery LowVery Low56.Egypt3.07Very LowLowLowVery LowVery Low57.Belarus2.92Very LowLowMediumVery LowVery Low58.Chinese Taipei2.79Very LowVery LowMediumVery LowVery Low59.Kazakhstan2.54Very LowVery LowMediumVery LowVery Low60.Algeria2.43Very LowVery LowMediumVery LowVery Low61.Mexico2.21Very Low
96、LowMediumVery LowVery Low62.Russian Federation1.95Very LowVery LowLowVery LowVery Low63.Islamic Republic of Iran1.90Very LowVery LowMediumVery LowVery Low*weighted and rounded *Total Primary Energy SupplyGermanwatch 202112CCPI Results 2022Germanwatch,NewClimate Institute&Climate Action NetworkGerman
97、watch 2021*Increases in energy efficiency,strictly speaking,are complex to measure and would require a sector-by-sector approach.As there are no comparable data sources across all countries available,the CCPI evaluates the per capita energy use of a country to measure improvements in this category.2
98、.3 Category ResultsEnergy Use*HighMediumLowVery LowNot included in assessmentRatingEnergy consumption continues to riseKey developments:Last years Energy Efficiency Report from the IEA showed that primary energy consumption was on the rise in 2019,and many countries were falling short of their own t
99、ar-gets.14 Despite the COVID-19 pandemic and a subsequent 1.9%drop in final energy consumption,the EU overshot its energy consumption target for 2020 and is thus still not on track to meet its 2030 pledge.15Key results:The table provides details on the performance of all coun-tries listed in the CCP
100、I in the four indicators comprising the Energy Use category.G20-performance:Of the G20 members,seven perform very low in the Energy Use category,with Canada last among them;Nearly all G20 countries show worse performance than in last years CCPI.Mexico,Brazil,United Kingdom,Argentina,and India receiv
101、e a high rating.EU performance:As in previous years,the EU rates medium for its per-formance in the Energy Use category.Malta and Greece are the only two EU countries that rank high;while Belgium,Luxembourg,and Finland per-form very low in this category.Germanwatch 202113CCPI Results 2022Germanwatch
102、,NewClimate Institute&Climate Action NetworkEnergy Use Rating tableRankCountryScore*Overall RatingEnergy Use(TPES)*per Capita current levelEnergy Use (TPES)per Capita current trendEnergy Use(TPES)per Capita compared to a well-below-2C benchmarkEnergy Use 2030 Target compared to a well-below-2C bench
103、mark4.Ukraine18.32HighHighHighVery highVery high5.Colombia17.36HighVery highMediumVery highHigh6.Malta16.52HighVery highVery highHighLow7.Mexico16.23HighVery highHighHighHigh8.Morocco15.66HighVery highLowVery highVery high9.Brazil15.61HighVery highHighHighMedium10.United Kingdom15.53HighMediumHighHi
104、ghHigh11.Egypt14.87HighVery highLowHighVery high12.Argentina14.86HighHighHighMediumLow13.Belarus14.76HighMediumLowHighVery high14.India14.68HighVery highVery LowVery highHigh15.Philippines14.56HighVery highVery LowVery highVery high16.Greece14.48HighHighMediumHighMedium17.Switzerland14.39HighMediumH
105、ighMediumHigh18.Germany13.55MediumLowHighMediumMedium19.South Africa13.47MediumMediumMediumMediumLow20.Romania13.40MediumHighVery LowHighHigh21.Algeria13.26MediumVery highLowMediumHigh22.Thailand13.09MediumHighMediumLowLow23.Indonesia12.99MediumVery highVery LowHighLow24.Denmark12.82MediumMediumMedi
106、umMediumLow25.Malaysia12.80MediumMediumHighVery LowLow26.Italy12.70MediumMediumLowMediumMedium27.Ireland12.44MediumMediumLowLowMedium28.Japan12.38MediumLowMediumLowLow29.European Union(27)12.25MediumLowLowLowMedium30.Cyprus12.12MediumHighLowMediumMedium31.Netherlands12.03MediumLowMediumLowMedium32.F
107、rance12.02MediumLowMediumLowLow33.New Zealand11.98MediumVery LowHighVery LowLow34.Lithuania11.90MediumMediumVery LowHighHigh35.Portugal11.90MediumHighLowLowMedium36.Estonia11.78LowVery LowMediumHighVery Low37.Spain11.56LowMediumLowLowMedium38.Latvia11.52LowMediumVery LowHighMedium39.Viet Nam11.47Low
108、Very highVery LowHighLow40.Croatia11.38LowHighVery LowMediumMedium41.Bulgaria11.32LowMediumLowMediumLow42.Slovak Republic11.09LowLowLowMediumLow43.Norway10.62LowVery LowHighVery LowLow44.Czech Republic10.50LowLowLowLowVery Low45.Slovenia10.34LowLowLowVery LowLow46.Austria10.22LowLowMediumVery LowLow
109、47.Poland10.20LowMediumVery LowLowLow48.Sweden10.09LowVery LowMediumLowLow49.Russian Federation9.98LowVery LowLowLowVery high50.Chile9.84Very LowHighLowVery LowLow51.Hungary9.63Very LowMediumVery LowLowVery Low52.Belgium9.58Very LowVery LowLowLowLow53.Turkey9.45Very LowHighVery LowLowLow54.Australia
110、9.35Very LowVery LowHighVery LowVery Low55.Chinese Taipei9.18Very LowLowMediumVery LowLow56.Luxembourg8.84Very LowVery LowHighLowVery Low57.China7.62Very LowMediumVery LowVery LowVery Low58.United States7.06Very LowVery LowMediumVery LowVery Low59.Saudi Arabia7.03Very LowVery LowHighVery LowVery Low
111、60.Islamic Republic of Iran6.70Very LowLowLowVery LowVery Low61.Korea5.87Very LowVery LowLowVery LowVery Low62.Finland5.37Very LowVery LowMediumVery LowVery Low63.Kazakhstan4.96Very LowVery LowVery LowLowVery Low64.Canada3.33Very LowVery LowLowVery LowVery Low*weighted and rounded *Total Primary Ene
112、rgy SupplyGermanwatch 202114CCPI Results 2022Germanwatch,NewClimate Institute&Climate Action NetworkGermanwatch 2021HighMediumLowVery LowNot included in assessmentRating2.4 Category ResultsClimate PolicyGermanwatch 2021Climate policies increasing but still have insufficient ambitionKey developments:
113、The Emissions Gap Report 2021 states that the current national targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions are not ambitious enough for a 1.5C world,despite higher reduction pledges in the latest updated Nationally Determined Contributions(NDC).16 The current(condi-tional)targets will lead to 50 G
114、tCO2e emissions in 2030.To be 1.5C-compatible,emissions should be halved.The 25 gtCO2e gap needs to be closed as soon as possible.In the Climate Policy indicators in CCPI 2022,not only are the national emissions targets assessed,but also sectoral targets and their specific implementation.Key results
115、:The table on the right gives details on the performance of all 60 countries and the EU in the two indicators comprising the Climate Policy category.G20-performance:France,China,the United Kingdom,and India are under the 18 countries earning a high rating in the Climate Policy category.Ten of the G2
116、0 countries rate low or very low in this category,up one from last years CCPI.EU performance:With Luxembourg and Denmark,two EU countries lead the Climate Policy ranking,owing to their national and international climate performance.Another seven EU countries are also high performers.Mostly Eastern E
117、uropean are under the EU countries rated very low.15CCPI Results 2022Germanwatch,NewClimate Institute&Climate Action NetworkClimate Policy Rating tableRankCountryScore*Overall RatingNational Climate Policy PerformanceInternational Climate Policy Performance4.Luxembourg18.11HighHighHigh5.Denmark17.87
118、HighMediumHigh6.Morocco17.23HighHighMedium7.Netherlands16.53HighMediumHigh8.Lithuania16.48HighHighHigh9.Portugal16.27HighMediumHigh10.France16.06HighMediumHigh11.Finland15.98HighMediumHigh12.Sweden15.72HighMediumHigh13.China15.68HighMediumMedium14.United Kingdom15.30HighMediumHigh15.Chile14.38HighMe
119、diumMedium16.India14.00HighMediumMedium17.Latvia13.36HighMediumHigh18.Norway13.17HighMediumHigh19.Germany12.95MediumLowHigh20.European Union(27)12.00MediumMediumMedium21.Colombia10.89MediumMediumMedium22.Islamic Republic of Iran10.86MediumMediumMedium23.Austria10.85MediumMediumMedium24.Greece10.52Me
120、diumMediumMedium25.Italy10.29MediumLowMedium26.Croatia10.21MediumMediumLow27.South Africa10.20MediumLowMedium28.United States10.13MediumLowMedium29.Egypt10.07MediumMediumMedium30.Spain9.86MediumLowMedium31.Indonesia9.74MediumLowMedium32.Cyprus9.19MediumLowMedium33.Thailand8.89MediumMediumMedium34.Sl
121、ovenia8.44MediumMediumLow35.Canada8.42LowLowMedium36.Switzerland8.29LowLowMedium37.Estonia8.08LowMediumLow38.Belgium7.90LowLowMedium39.New Zealand7.84LowLowMedium40.Ireland7.76LowLowMedium41.Ukraine7.68LowLowLow42.Chinese Taipei7.58LowLowMedium43.Japan7.21LowLowLow44.Viet Nam7.20LowLowMedium45.Malta
122、6.90LowLowLow46.Slovak Republic6.87LowLowLow47.Philippines6.62LowLowLow48.Korea6.48LowLowLow49.Argentina5.98LowLowLow50.Turkey5.68Very LowLowLow51.Czech Republic5.63Very LowLowLow52.Romania5.49Very LowLowLow53.Malaysia5.29Very LowLowLow54.Kazakhstan5.03Very LowLowLow55.Mexico4.85Very LowLowLow56.Pol
123、and4.81Very LowLowLow57.Saudi Arabia3.94Very LowLowVery Low58.Russian Federation3.72Very LowVery LowLow59.Hungary3.61Very LowLowLow60.Belarus3.42Very LowLowLow61.Bulgaria2.73Very LowLowVery Low62.Brazil2.11Very LowLowVery Low63.Algeria1.30Very LowVery LowLow64.Australia0.00Very LowVery LowVery Low*w
124、eighted and roundedGermanwatch 202116CCPI Results 2022Germanwatch,NewClimate Institute&Climate Action NetworkThe following overview provides a brief summary on the performance of 19 selected countries and the EU.The col-oured boxes indicate a countrys rank in this years CCPI,while the grey boxes ref
125、er to its rank last year.When di-rectly comparing the ranks between the CCPI 2021 and 2022 editions,please note that ranks from last year are unadjusted throughout the publication.Denmark 46 Denmarkranks4thandbecomesthefrontrunnerinthisyearsCCPI.Thecountrymarksanoverallhighperfor-mance.As in the las
126、t years CCPI,Denmark has high ratings in the GHG Emissions,Renewable Energy,and Climate Policy cat-egories;it ranks in the top 10 for each.In GHG Emissions and Renewable Energy,Denmark is up two spots,and in Climate Policy it is up three from last year.It marks a medium rating in the Energy Use cate
127、gory.Notably,its performance in the indicator for a Renewable Energy 2030 Target compared to a well-below-2C benchmark is low.In 2020,Denmark committed to a 2030 target of a 70%emissions reduction compared with 1990 levels and it aims at climate neutrality by 2050.The CCPI experts note that Denmarks
128、 climate target is in line with the Paris Agreement.The independent Danish Council on Climate Change(DCCC),under the Danish Climate Act,charged with assessing whether government policies sufficiently match the target.After the first year with the 70%tar-get,the DCCC assessment concluded that the ini
129、tiatives and measures were inadequate and needed improvement.Potential areas for improvement are notes in the agriculture and transport sectors.The CCPI experts see shortcom-ings in policies addressing electric vehicles and policies to move Denmark away from biomass.Denmark relies heavily on biomass
130、 as an energy source and the Danish experts see a need for a wood biomass phase-out.In partnership with Costa Rica,Denmark launched the Beyond Oil&Gas Alliance this year,aimed at moving more countries away from extracting fossil fuel.Denmark is among the progressive players in climate policy.Domesti
131、cally,the experts consider Denmarks climate neu-trality goal should be brought forward from the current 2050 to reach neutrality by 2040.Sweden 54 Forthefirsttimein5years,Swedenisnolongerthetop-performingcountryintheCCPIrankings.Afterdroppingonespot,thecountryisnow5th,butstillearnsanoverallhighperfo
132、rmance.3.Key Country ResultsAs in previous years,Sweden performs highly in the GHG Emissions,Renewable Energy,and Climate Policy catego-ries.The country does,however,remain unable to improve on its low performance in Energy Use.CCPI experts give Sweden a medium rating for climate policy efforts at t
133、he national level and a high rating interna-tionally.The latter reflects highlights including the countrys progressive role at the international level,notably for its contributions to the Green Climate Fund,in which it is a leading funder.At the national level,experts recognise Swedens climate ambit
134、ions,reflected in its commitment to achieving net-zero emissions by 2045,and its policies,anchored in the countrys Climate Act of 2018.The experts,however,also see substantial room and need for further improvement,such as towards burgeoning emissions from waste incin-eration,an unaffordable public t
135、ransport system,and low requirements for building efficiency.Another big point of criticism,noted by the experts,is mas-sive deforestation in the country.This is occurring because the government wants to reach its climate neutrality goals not only with reduced use of fossil fuels,but also with in-cr
136、eased use of biomass.Overall,experts see capacity for Sweden to reach a net zero target by 2030.United Kingdom 75 TheUnitedKingdomremainsinthetop10,thoughitdropstwoplaces,to7th,fromlastyearsCCPI.The UK receives high ratings in three CCPI categories GHG Emissions,Energy Use,and Climate Policy though
137、its rating for Renewable Energy falls from high last year to medium this year.The CCPI experts still regard the UK as a leading country for climate policy,despite its slight downgrade in the rank-ings.The country has substantial political and financial support to deliver its net zero 2050 target and
138、 the new interim target for a net zero power system by 2035,and to ensure that progress is made at this years rescheduled COP26.The government has also created policies to sup-port development of hydrogen,Carbon Capture Usage and Storage(CCUS),carbon removal,and greater take-up of electric vehicles.
139、The UK is rated high for the trend in renewable energy share,primarily owing to its offshore wind sector and phasing out of coal-fired power genera-tion,with its power sector decarbonisation accounting for most of the emissions reductions in the economy.Despite the above,policy efforts are still nee
140、ded to en-sure total energy use and the share of renewable energy become aligned with a well-below-2C trajectory,and 17CCPI Results 2022Germanwatch,NewClimate Institute&Climate Action Networkto be sure that overall GHG emissions per capita are re-duced.Although the government has announced support s
141、chemes for take-up of low-carbon heating and a future phasing out of fossil fuel heating,policies on energy ef-ficiency are lacking and the heating sector remains a con-siderable source of carbon emissions.The UK,following its exit from the European Union,has created its own ETS,based on the EU ETS
142、but with a lower cap for total emis-sions.Whether the UK ETS will be linked to the EU ETS has yet to be confirmed.Using carbon credits to achieve the net zero target is also problematic,along with insufficient consideration of offshored emissions in supply chains,and continued subsidies for fossil p
143、roduction.The experts highlight a farm subsidy reform,which has yet to be pub-lished in a policy but has the potential to restore nature and sequester carbon with land.Morocco 87 Moroccofallsonespotto8thbutremainsinthetop10ofthisyearsCCPIandamongthehigh-performingcoun-tries.As in previous years,Moro
144、cco has a high ranking in most categories:GHG Emissions,Energy Use,and Climate Policy.The countrys Renewable Energy trend is rated high,but the very low rating in the Share of Renewable Energy in Energy Use and low-rated 2030 targets are responsible for an overall medium rating in this category.Moro
145、cco updated its Nationally Determined Contribution in 2021.Its goal is now slightly improved,from 42%to a 45.5%reduction of GHG emissions by 2030,and rates as very high.Moroccos energy sector is carbon-intensive.Fossil fuels maintain a high share of the total primary en-ergy supply.The country,howev
146、er,has a fossil fuel subsidy phase-out plan and is already actively cutting these subsi-dies.The CCPI experts see excellent potential for renew-able energy production in Morocco,as many large-scale renewable energy projects are currently being realised under the Moroccan Solar Plan.The Plan aims to
147、increase the installed solar power capacity from photovoltaic and from concentrated solar power to a total of 20%of installed capacity by 2030.The Moroccan Integrated Wind Program aims to increase installed wind power capacity to 20%of all installed capacity by 2030.Aside from the utility-scale proj
148、ects,the experts indicate there is also an opportunity for a decentralised energy transition.There are some initial experiences with this:Moroccan officials inaugurated the first fully solar-pow-ered,grid-autonomous village in Africa in October 2019.The country has set the goal of producing 52%of it
149、s elec-tricity needs with renewable energy by 2030.Combined with this is Moroccos goal of reducing energy consumption by 15%by 2030,through enhancing energy efficiency.The experts see progress with investments in the public trans-port sector and energy efficiency regulations.Weak points are expresse
150、d in the agricultural and building sectors,and the experts demand better long-term strategies and more finance for the planned climate actions.In international climate policy,Morocco is recognised as an ambitious lead-er in negotiations and shows a commendable commitment to the Paris Agreement.India
151、 1010 IndiamaintainsitsstrongperformancefromlastyearsCCPI,holding10thplace.Indias performance was rated high in the GHG Emissions,Energy Use,and Climate Policy categories,and medium in Renewable Energy.The subcontinent is already on track to meet its 2030 emissions target(which is compatible with a
152、well-below-2C scenario),close to achieving its Nationally Determined Contribution(NDC)target of a 40%share for non-fossil fuel installed power capacity by 2030,and on course for a targeted 3335%reduction in energy intensity by the same year.Contributing to Indias strong performance this year,the CCP
153、I country experts highlight the considerable improve-ment of renewables targets and the focus on implementa-tion and achievement of NDC targets.The experts also stress Indias ambitious renewable energy policies,such as its targets of renewable electricity capacity of 450 GW and a 30%electric vehicle
154、 share by 2030.The ex-perts do,however,believe some policies are disjointed and missing detail on implementation and long-term tar-gets.Meanwhile,considerably more can be done to pro-mote growth of solar(notably,as mentioned,Renewable Energy was the only category not rated high).No Indian states hav
155、e announced a clear coal phase-out.In fact,the pipeline of proposed coal power plant development is the worlds second largest and one of the few that have increased since 2015.There have been initiatives to pro-mote more electric vehicles in the transport sector,and the experts demand expansion and
156、better infrastructure of such vehicles.Although India receives an overall high performance,the experts argue that the country should set an explicit net zero target for 2050 and leverage its domestic success on renewables and emissions intensity into international initiatives.Additionally,more could
157、 be done to strengthen policies on climate vulnerability,adaptation,and resilience building.Equity and social development should also feature more strongly in the energy transition.Germany 1319 Germanyrisessixspotstorank13thandsitsamongthehigh-performingcountriesinthisyearsCCPI.In contrast with last
158、 year,Germany receives a high rating in the highest weighted category,GHG Emissions.There it shows relatively high performance in the GHG per Capita current trend indicator,as emissions decreased in 2019.18CCPI Results 2022Germanwatch,NewClimate Institute&Climate Action NetworkIt receives a medium i
159、n the remaining Renewable Energy,Energy Use,and Climate Policy categories.In 2021,Germany decided on more ambitious climate targets because of a ruling by Germanys Federal Constitu-tional Court.After this,the government set the goal of reducing emissions 65%by 2030 compared with the 1990 level,and i
160、t set its net zero target for 2045.The CCPI ex-perts welcome the new climate ambition but call for more ambitious measures to achieve the target.Studies from the government itself clearly shows that Germany will miss the targets with its existing policies,and it will even miss the older 55%reduction
161、 target.The new government should act quickly to fix past failures.The experts ask for a quicker coal phase out and to phase-out harmful fossil fuel subsidies as soon as possible.Many bureaucratic and legislative obstacles,especially for on-shore wind,will need to be removed to greatly increase rene
162、wable energies.Particularly,decarbonisation of the transport sector must be accelerated.Massive investment in fossil-free infrastructure for rail and bikes is demanded.The experts also see the need to reduce buildings emis-sions and to invest in building modernisation to enhance energy efficiency.Ge
163、rmany is a progressive player in climate negotiations;it receives a high rating the in International Climate Policy indicator.Despite this,the experts wish the country would take an ambitious frontrunner role in climate policy in the future.In 2021s federal election campaign,almost all par-ties comm
164、itted to climate action and the Paris Agreement.The experts expect the parties to maintain these promises in the new government.EU 2216 TheEuropeanUnion(EU)dropssixplacesto22ndinthisyearsCCPI.The EU receives medium ratings for all four CCPI catego-ries:GHG Emissions,Renewable Energy,Energy Use,and C
165、limate Policy.The CCPI experts regard the EU as having a strong pack-age of policy and legislative approaches to climate and en-ergy,across a range of emitting sectors,such as transport,buildings,and energy.Discussions are also underway on strengthening land use,forestry,and agriculture policies,and
166、 on improving the Emissions Trading System.Promotion of renewable energy has led to a rising share of renewa-bles in total primary energy supply,along with policies to reduce overall energy demand.The absence of phase-out dates for the use of fossil fuels(especially coal and gas),however,are problem
167、atic.Neither the current renewables share nor the 2030 renewable energy target are in line with a Paris Agreement-compatible trajectory(with respec-tive ratings of low and medium for these indicators in this years CCPI).The EU increased its Nationally Determined Contribution to a domestic net emissi
168、ons reduction target of at least 55%,up from at least 40%.Though this is not yet compatible with a Paris Agreement-compatible trajectory pathway,it does reflect the EUs substantial effort to deal with its emissions gap.Proposed reforms under the Fit for 55 policy package,to ensure a 55%emissions red
169、uction by 2030,will be important for addressing this misalignment and for achieving the 2050 climate neutrality target.They will also be important towards increasing renewables and reducing energy use.The experts view the EUs climate diplomacy as insufficient,although the EU is seen as one of the ke
170、y actors for effective international climate policy(rated medium in this indicator).Re-engaging on the inter-national stage should be a priority for the EU,especially in the COP process and the former High Ambition Coalition,with EU international diplomacy of particular importance to the roles of Ch
171、ina and the US.The lack of ownership and implementation in the member states can explain the six-place drop for the EU.Philippines 23new ThePhilippines,asoneofthreenewentrantsinthisyearsCCPI,ranks23rd,withamediumrating.In the four main CCPI categories,the Philippines rates low in Climate Policy,medi
172、um in Renewable Energy,and high in GHG Emissions and Energy Use.The Philippines receives a low rating in the National Climate Policy indicator.In 2021,the Department of Energy has,however,defined some new regulations for reducing GHG emissions.It seeks a renewable energy target of a 35%share by 2030
173、,a higher renewable portfolio stand-ard,and a moratorium on coal power plant development.Nevertheless,the moratorium will not affect coal pro-jects over 7 MW that are committed to be built by 2030.Additionally,no policy on coal phase-out is in place.Regarding energy use,the National Economic Develop
174、ment Authority approved the Philippine Urban Mobility Program in 2020,which prioritises multi-modal low-carbon pub-lic transport in urban cities.In April 2021,the Philippines finally submitted its first Nationally Determined Contribu-tion,with a 75%GHG emissions reduction sought by 2030 compared wit
175、h 2010 levels.CCPI experts note this target is ambitious,as is the governments plan to reduce abso-lute GHG emissions from there forward.Criticism does,however,remain regarding this target.First,there is no clear plan for how to achieve the goal.The current climate policies are in fact not ambitious
176、 enough to reach the NDC target.Furthermore,the experts criticise that only 2.71%of the NDC target remains unconditional.The rest will be pursued in the case of international finance support.Overall,the main problems concerning climate policy per-formance in the Philippines are,according to the expe
177、rts,not just ambition,but apparently the delayed or non-im-19CCPI Results 2022Germanwatch,NewClimate Institute&Climate Action Networkplemented provisions.Additional to the presence of more ambitious climate policies,they demand strong and swift implementation.Colombia 25newColombiaisamongthreenewcou
178、ntriesaddedinthisyearsCCPI.Itdebutsat25th,withanoverallmediumrating.Colombia shows mixed ratings among the four main CCPI categories.In Energy Use,it earns a high rating,while it receives a medium for GHG Emissions and Climate Policy.In the Renewable Energy category,it ranks as low.Colombias current
179、 Nationally Determined Contribution aims to reduce GHG emissions by 51%in 2030 compared to 2014 levels.The Colombian experts welcome this ambi-tious goal,though they criticize the lack of a financing plan and implementation.Colombias national climate policy has made progress in electric mobility pol
180、icies and initiatives for energy effi-ciency in the industry and building sectors.Energy tran-sition towards renewable energy is underway and there is great potential for wind and solar energy.The country is a big coal producer,and the climate experts demanded a concrete coal phase-out plan.The expe
181、rts also expres-sed the need for an energy efficiency standard for vehi-cles,and for regulation of GHG emissions in the industry sector.Indonesia 2724 Indonesiafallsthreeranksfromlastyear,to27thinthisyearsCCPI.Indonesia shows high performance in the Renewable Energy category.In the Energy Use and Cl
182、imate Policy categories,the country ranks as medium,while it earns a low for GHG Emissions.This gives Indonesia an overall medium performance.In 2021,Indonesia updated its Nationally Determined Contribution,and aims to reach its net zero target by 2060.The CCPI national experts see these targets as
183、insufficient and not Paris Agreement-compatible.Indonesias energy supply still highly relies on coal,while there are also fos-sil fuel subsidies in place.There is no concrete plan for a coal phase-out,though the country has set the goal of a 23%share of renewable energy by 2025.The experts demanded
184、greater support for development of solar and wind power.The existing palm oil moratorium expired in September 2021,and the experts demanded the govern-ment extend this regulation.At the international level,there is ambition for greater involvement in international negotia-tions and dialogue.The expe
185、rts also see need for a more ambitious NDC goal.Brazil 3325Brazilranks33rdinthisyearsCCPI,droppingeightplacesfromlastyearsCCPI,whenitwasjustwithinthetop25.The country shows a mixed performance across the CCPI categories,with ratings of high for Renewable Energy and Energy Use,medium for GHG Emission
186、s,and very low for Climate Policy.Brazil announced a long-term goal of hitting net zero emis-sions by 2050,but there are no concrete policies towards implementing what it takes to reach this.In fact,no long-term strategy has even been designed.Institutions that play a major role in environmental pol
187、icy suffered attacks by and funding cuts from the federal gov-ernment(National Climate Policy rates low as a result).Key issues such as reducing emissions from fossil fuel use,land use change,and creating a carbon price have no clear backing policies,with Brazils GHG per capita(rated low)and 2030 ta
188、rget(very low)consequently not aligned with a well-below-2C trajectory.Renewables are grow-ing in Brazil,thanks to increased wind and solar(on top of substantial existing hydro),but their potential remains underutilised.Less than 6%of Brazils electricity produc-tion comes from renewable sources.The
189、high levels of hydro lead to a very high rating for renewables in the coun-trys primary energy share,but this dependence makes the country vulnerable to droughts,which in turn brings increased use of fossil electricity.Though agriculture and land-use/forestry are Brazils two biggest sources of GHG e
190、missions,the CCPI country ex-perts note an absence of policies for reducing emissions at the national level.What policies do exist are underfunded and poorly monitored.Experts recognise widespread de-forestation as one of the biggest problems in the country.This is also a factor in Brazils poor Inte
191、rnational Climate Policy(rated very low),in which there have been almost no progressive actions.The updated Nationally Determined Contribution,submitted last year,leads to increased emis-sions;this,according to our experts,goes against the prin-ciples of the Paris Agreement and sends the wrong signa
192、l to the international community.China 3833 Chinafallsfiveplacesto38thinthisyearsCCPI.The country receives a low rating overall,but with mixed ratings across categories:very low for GHG Emissions and Energy Use,medium for Renewable Energy,and high for Climate Policy.China is the worlds largest terri
193、torial emitter,but the CCPI country experts regard its climate policy as ambitious,with clear policies and timelines(with breakdowns into local and sectoral plans in some areas).It advanced its long-term strategy in 2020 with a target of peaking carbon emissions 20CCPI Results 2022Germanwatch,NewCli
194、mate Institute&Climate Action Networkby 2030 and achieving carbon neutrality by 2060(although its current GHG per capita and 2030 target are not aligned with a well-below-2C trajectory).Its 14th Five-Year Plan,published in March 2021,included energy and carbon intensity reduction targets,and it has
195、since declared that fossil fuels will be less than 20%of the energy mix by 2060.China continues to develop renew-able energy(its current renewables trend was rated very high),with support for biomass,2030 targets for renewable generation and electric vehicles,and policies on green electricity purcha
196、se and trading.The experts,however,re-gard its coal phase-out as too slow,with plans to continue building coal-fired power stations because of energy sup-ply concerns.China will only be able to climb in the CCPI rankings if the well-regarded policies work and emissions decline.Chinas international c
197、limate policy was rated medium,as its growing domestic ambition is beginning to shape its international policies such as the decision to stop fund-ing overseas coal-fired power stations.Continuing to build domestic coal power stations,however,undermines the key aim of ending coal at COP26.Engagement
198、 between China and the US remains crucial for COP,but the coun-tries complex trade and geopolitical relationship suggest a positive climate policy outcome is uncertain.The new climate pledge released the week before COP26 fell short of expectations,as it is not in line with 1.5C.South Africa 3937 So
199、uthAfricaslipstwoplacesinthisyearsCCPI,to39th.The country receives medium ratings in the Energy Use and Climate Policy categories,but low in Renewable Energy and GHG Emissions.South Africa submitted an updated Nationally Determined Contribution ahead of COP26,but its 2030 target for emis-sions reduc
200、tions falls short of a 1.5C target.The upper limit of the reduction target is also inadequate for even a 2C target.Despite the more ambitious target,the CCPI country experts note continued misalignment across sec-tor government policies,with a lack of both guidance and political will for implementat
201、ion of national climate policies(rated low in this years CCPI).The countrys energy policy framework also limits penetra-tion of renewables because policy creation still strongly focuses on coal(with renewables share in primary en-ergy rated very low).As a result,GHG per capita is not aligned with a
202、well-below-2C benchmark(thus rated very low).The experts highlight how the Department of Mineral Resources and Energy is structured towards continuing reliance on coal in the energy mix,with no real focus on sustainability.Poor policy making leads to an imbalance in favour of coal and centralised po
203、wer generation,rather than decentralised(sub-national)and renewable energy initiatives.South Africa has called for more international green finance,which would help the domestic transition of its energy sec-tor,and public utility Eskom,from fossil fuels to renewables.Japan 4545 Japanretainsitsrankof
204、45thinthisyearsCCPI.The country receives low ratings in the GHG Emissions,Renewable Energy,and Climate Policy categories,but medium for Energy Use.The CCPI experts welcomed Japans goal of reducing emissions by 46%by 2030(compared to 2013)and the long-term target of carbon neutrality by 2050.The ab-s
205、ence of a clear plan for delivering these goals,however,is an issue,with few concrete policies in place for meeting either target.Neither Japans GHG per capita nor its 2030 GHG target are aligned with a well-below-2C benchmark,and the expected power generation mix in 2030 would still contain coal.Th
206、e country plans to increase consumption of natural gas and create new hydrogen demand sectors,while meeting the targets may require continued use of nuclear power generation.Despite government support for renewable electricity,the share of renewables in Japans total primary energy supply is very low
207、(and received a low rating for renewables).For Japan to meet its medium-and long-term climate goals,the experts recommended the country must introduce measures such as carbon pricing,increased investments in renewable electricity and grids,halting plans to build more coal power stations,and setting
208、a coal phase-out date.Japans international climate policy(rated low)is shaped by its continued domestic policies,particularly on coal and natural gas.Japan is a major economic actor,but on climate policy it is typically influenced by other nations engagement,especially the US and UK.Although Japan c
209、ommitted to net zero by 2050 before the United States Biden administration re-joined the Paris Agreement,Japan has pushed back on international efforts to phase out coal development and financing.USA 5561 TheUnitedStatesedgeshigher,to55th,inthisyearsCCPI,butitremainslowerthanmostdevelopedecono-mies.
210、The US receives ratings of very low for the GHG Emissions,Renewable Energy,and Energy Use categories,with a me-dium for Climate Policy.US climate policies and perfor-mance have been in flux because of the changing adminis-tration in early 2021,with incoming President Biden vowing to position counter
211、ing climate change as a pillar of his administration,and a pledge to by 2030 reduce US green-house gas emissions by at least 50%below 2005 levels.Despite this,the CCPI experts believe the political divisions in Congress remain a substantial barrier to implementing 21CCPI Results 2022Germanwatch,NewC
212、limate Institute&Climate Action Networkany ambitious national policies in the US.Moreover,the current patchwork of policies is insufficient for delivering necessary emissions reductions.Neither the US GHG per capita nor the measures to achieve the 2030 GHG target are aligned with a well-below-2C ben
213、chmark,and conse-quently receive ratings of very low and low,respectively.The growth of renewable energy(currently rated very low)is held back by insufficient policies on low-carbon infra-structure and electricity networks,though there has been some growth in offshore wind.Despite government plans t
214、o cut fossil fuel subsidies,the absence of a phase-out date for coal is a major barrier to achieving a zero-emis-sions power grid by 2035,net zero economy by 2050,and cutting GHG emissions per capita(rated very low).Bidens decision to re-join the Paris Agreement was vital for the USs international c
215、limate policy(rated medium the highest rating of any category for the country this year),and his efforts constitute clear acknowledgment of the danger of climate change as a substantive change from the previous administration.Nevertheless,most decisions and plans have not yet been finalised,and they
216、 still require Congress approval,which carries the risk that any progres-sive climate protection policies could still be weakened.The US submitted a new and stronger target to the COP,and it pledged to implement a range of policies to deliver it,but domestic politics remain a barrier.Re-joining the
217、Paris Agreement and improved climate diplomacy will also be important for how China and the EU approach the COP process.Australia 5954 Australiaslipsfiveplacesto59thinthisyearsCCPI,trail-ingmanydevelopedeconomies.The country receives ratings of very low for its perfor-mance in every CCPI category:GH
218、G Emissions,Renewable Energy,Energy Use,and Climate Policy.Australias federal climate policies are based on its Technology Investment Roadmap(TIR),aimed at support-ing technologies intended to help reduce emissions by 2040,yet with continuation of fossil fuel-based energy consumption.In October 2021
219、,the government confirmed its long-term emissions reduction plan aiming for net zero by 2050.No new policies and plans were announced to go along with this announcement.The CCPI national experts regard the TIR as insufficient for decarbonising the econ-omy,reducing the use of fossil fuels,promoting
220、renewable energy,and setting out how national GHG emissions will be reduced(with a rating of very low for Climate Policy).The government does not have any policies on phasing out coal or gas,but CCUS and hydrogen are being promoted as low emissions technologies.Even though the renewables electricity
221、 is growing,the experts believe that Australia has failed to take advantage of its potential,and other coun-tries have outpaced it.This failure to promote renewables(leading to a low rating for the Share of Renewable Energy in Energy Use indicator),is exacerbated by inadequate infrastructure investm
222、ent,despite subsidies for fossil fuel production and promotion of a gas-led economic recovery following COVID-19.Despite public support for a net zero target,there is currently no national plan for transitioning to renewable energy(a backdrop for the very low rating for the National Climate Policy i
223、ndicator),with the policy uncertainty undermining investment and causing energy supply concerns.The countrys lack of domestic ambition and action has made its way to the international stage.The experts de-scribe that the countrys international standing has been damaged by climate denialism by politi
224、cians,refusal to increase ambition,and refusal to recommit to international green finance mechanisms(accompanying a very low rat-ing for the International Climate Policy indicator).Australia has fallen behind its allies and its inaction even attracted public criticism in the run-up to COP26.Korea 60
225、53InthisyearsCCPI,theRepublicofKorea(ROK;SouthKorea)dropssevenspotsto60thandisthusstillaverylowperformer.Like in last years CCPI,Korea receives very low ratings in the GHG Emissions and Energy Use categories and a low in Renewable Energy.In Climate Policy,the country plum-mets 27 ranks and is now ra
226、ted low.Both the National and International Climate Policy indicators receive a low rating.In April 2021,President Moon Jae-in announced an im-mediate end to state-backed financing of new overseas coal plants.Environmental NGOs worldwide celebrated the decision because Korea is the third-largest pro
227、vider of public finance for overseas coal.With the Framework Act on Carbon Neutrality and Green Growth of August 2021,South Korea set itself the target of at least a 35%GHG emissions reduction by 2030(compared to 2018 levels).Experts note this is incompatible with the global 1.5C tar-get.As a market
228、-based mitigation tool,the Korea Emissions Trading Scheme was launched in January 2015,and it is currently in its third phase(20212025),wherein the annual allocation is reduced by about 10%.Experts criticise this tool for being ineffective at reducing domestic GHG emis-sions in line with Koreas dome
229、stic 2030 target.The country still has not announced a date for coal phase-out and still has new coal power plants under construction.Considering this,and the national 2050 net zero target,experts ask that coal-fired power generation be halted no later than 2030,followed by a net zero power sector i
230、n 2035.Complicated permit schemes and grid access challenges currently hinder necessary expansion of renew-able energy.Despite the governments efforts,the majority state-owned utility company KEPCO and its subsidiaries protection of legacy assets underlies many of these prob-lems,preventing faster d
231、ecarbonisation of Koreas power sector and enhancement of climate targets.22CCPI Results 2022Germanwatch,NewClimate Institute&Climate Action Network Canada 6158CanadadropsthreeplacesinthisyearsCCPI,ranking61st.Its performance rates very low overall,with very low in the GHG Emissions,Renewable Energy,
232、and Energy Use cat-egories,and low for Climate Policy.The CCPI country experts regard the entering into law of Canadas 2050 net zero target in 2021 as fundamental for the countrys long-term climate ambition.It also signals a significant shift in climate ambition.While policy still lacks coherence fo
233、r delivery and for achieving the target,detailed plans are on the way.Carbon pricing,the need for which there is general consensus,should be complemented by enhanced ambition across all other policy areas for emis-sions to decline.Canada has committed to reducing fossil fuel subsidies and emissions
234、from oil extraction,but these remain an issue(with neither GHG per capita nor the GHG 2030 target aligned with a well-below-2C benchmark).The experts emphasise the oil and gas industry as the major block to more ambitious climate policy.The crosscut-ting nature of energy policy in federal and provin
235、cial poli-tics serves as a barrier to better policy making.Although Canada is working to phase out coal(and will not approve new thermal coal mines),it plans to support and encour-age deployment of fossil fuel-based carbon capture and storage and hydrogen.The experts believe more should be done to p
236、romote renewables,deep energy retrofits for buildings,and electrification of transport,with a shorter-term commitment to decarbonising the electricity grid in the 2030s(the Share of Renewable Energy in Energy Use indicator was rated medium,and rated very low compared to a well-below-2C benchmark).Ca
237、nada continues to play an important role in international climate policy(rated medium this year for that indicator).Its membership in the Powering Past Coal Alliance is impor-tant for wider climate diplomacy,and the experts highlight its constructive contributions in the G7 and G20 on higher climate
238、 ambition,targets for limiting global warming to 1.5C,and increasing climate finance contributions.Canada also used the 2021 G7 in the UK to announce a doubling of its climate finance contribution.Saudi Arabia 6360 SaudiArabiadropsthreeplaces,to63rd,intheCCPIthisyear,from60thinlastyearsCCPI,nowmakin
239、gitthesecondlowestrankedperformer.The countrys fall in rank owes to ratings of very low for all four CCPI categories:GHG Emissions,Renewable Energy,Energy Use,and Climate Policy.Saudi Arabia announced a new target of net zero by 2060 in the run-up to COP26,building on its previous Vision 2030 and Sa
240、udi Green Initiative(SGI),which looked at re-ducing the countrys dependence on oil production and at increasing renewables.The CCPI experts welcomed these More country texts can be found at:www.ccpi.org/countriesnew ambitions and if these initiatives show success,the country may increase its CCPI st
241、anding in future editions.Under the new SGI,the emissions reductions target for 2030 will also more than double the previous one,but the delivery of net zero relies on the circular carbon economy,with carbon removals,tree planting,hydrogen,and carbon capture and storage.Under this new plan,emissions
242、 would continue rising during the 2020s and state-owned Saudi Aramco would increase its oil and gas production,despite its also having a net zero 2050 target.Saudi Arabias share of renewable energy in the total energy supply was rated very low,with the countrys first wind farm not opening until 2021
243、.Almost half the countrys emissions derive from power generation.Although Saudi Arabias new Nationally Determined Contribution has a more ambitious emissions reduction tar-get than the previous one,neither its 2030 GHG target nor its GHG per capita are aligned with a well-below-2C path-way(as it has
244、 the highest per capita GHG emissions of the G20 nations).The countrys climate targets and policies are also not consistent with the Paris Agreements 1.5C tem-perature limit.Kazakhstan 6455 Kazakhstanisthebottom-rankedcountryinthisyearsCCPI.Thecountrydropsninerankstothelowestspot,64th.Kazakhstan mar
245、ks a very low rating among all CCPI catego-ries.The country sees a large decline in the Energy Use,Climate Policy and Renewable Energy categories,falling 1925 spots in these categories compared to last years CCPI.Last year,Kazakhstan announced a carbon neutrality com-mitment for 2060.Also,this May(2
246、021),the government set the target of having a 15%renewable energies share by 2030.Planned renewable energy production seems to be for foreign investors and there is a lack of support for individual renewable energy stations for the domestic population.The CCPI experts see far greater potential for
247、renewable energies,owing to the weather conditions and expansive territory in the country.Many shortcomings were expressed about Kazakhstans climate policy.Energy efficiency measures are lacking,energy prices and coal are heavily subsidised,and there are high emissions in the transport sector due to
248、 old vehi-cles being imported into the country.Overall,the Kazakh climate experts demanded a more ambitious Nationally Determined Contribution,a carbon tax,and that the gov-ernment attracts international assistance and funding for climate action.The experts also urge Kazakhstan to de-velop a functio
249、ning emissions trading system.23CCPI Results 2022Germanwatch,NewClimate Institute&Climate Action Network4.Net zero targets gain substantial global supportIn a nutshell Net zero targets encompass most greenhouse gas emissions.If implemented,they would put the Paris Agreement goals within striking dis
250、tance.Net zero targets gained support in the past year.Over 80%of the countries analysed perceive net zero targets as helpful tools for realising emissions reductions.There are,however,some concerns surrounding adop-tion of these targets.These concerns are often centred on lack of clarity about shor
251、t-term implementation,fea-sibility,and over-reliance on carbon dioxide removal and/or offsets.Despite these concerns,in the countries analysed,sup-port outweighs opposition regarding net zero targets.In several cases,the conversation has shifted from whether it is relevant to adopt such targets to h
252、ow they can be implemented.To seize the opportunity presented by the wave of net zero targets,policy makers must carefully consider the pitfalls and engage with relevant stakeholders to ensure that real emissions reductions are the outcome.IntroductionOver the past year,a global wave of national net
253、 zero tar-gets was set into motion.Recent targets establish the year when countries expect to balance out their anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions and removals.If fully imple-mented,the targets could put the Paris Agreement goals within reach and lower the best estimates of global tem-perature t
254、o between 2.0C and 2.4C warming by 2100.17Well-designed and ambitious net zero targets may be a step in the right direction,but they need to be continu-ally backed by short-term commitments and policies to demon strate real improvement.Meaningful targets de-tail their scope,architecture,and transpar
255、ency,such as by elaborating on the implementation plans specifics for achieving net zero emissions.18,19 Net zero targets can,however,be counterproductive re-garding meaningful climate action;they can be used to de-lay short-and medium-term actions,shifting action further into an uncertain future.Ot
256、her ambitious targets,such as short-term,enhanced Nationally Determined Contributions(NDCs)or other long-term deep emissions reductions tar-gets,may be more appropriate in specific contexts.An un-necessary focus on net zero may shift attention away from other important strategies,especially because
257、of these tar-gets implicit reliance on carbon dioxide removal or offset.20 As of October 2021,a total of 59 countries had adopted21 net zero targets.22 These countries account for about 63%of global emissions.23,24 We asked CCPI policy expert network contributors about their perspectives on net zero
258、 targets.We sought to under-stand whether these targets are considered helpful and if there is support for their adoption.The 205 responses we received concern 60 of the 61 countries and regions cov-ered in the CCPI.Each respondent a team,organisation,or individual supporting climate policy analysis
259、 and adop-tion provided insights about their own country.Main findingsNet zero targets have gained considerable support in the countries analysed(Figure 1).We compared country responses containing information about perceived sup-port and opposition concerning net zero targets(see Methodology).Respon
260、dents in 60%of the countries per-ceived greater support than opposition in their context.The dynamics explaining cross-country variations are com-plex.Stakeholder groups have distinct views on adopt-ing and subsequently implementing the net zero targets.A transition that requires deep emissions redu
261、ctions will face strong domestic opposition from affected fossil explo-ration groups in countries such as Russia.Other countries with high emissions per capita,such as the United States and Canada,also show considerable opposition.In these countries,however,overall support for the targets is also hi
262、gher.Support for the targets can be explained by their role in driving higher ambitions.Despite the targets long-term na-ture,they have informed more ambitious NDC updates for several large-scale emitters,including the European Union(EU),United States,and United Kingdom.In Germany,the long-term pros
263、pect of reducing emissions to net zero con-tributed to a court order ruling to increase the nations 2030 target.25 In most of the countries analysed(85%),net zero targets are considered helpful tools for realising emis-sions reductions(Figure 2).Governments in several countries have already inserted
264、 net zero targets in legislation.The EU,for example,legislated its net zero target in 2021 as part of its Climate Law.The target sets a goal of reaching climate neutrality by 2050.As part of the European Green Deal,the EU has prepared a comprehensive policy package that is expected to lead it toward
265、s its objectives.Some EU member states have also legislated individual net zero targets.Denmarks parliament,for example,almost unanimously adopted a target in 2020.24CCPI Results 2022Germanwatch,NewClimate Institute&Climate Action NetworkSouth Korea,Canada,Japan,and New Zealand have all already form
266、alised their net zero commitments.Over the past year,general support for net zero targets has increased in the countries analysed.Respondents in 73%of the countries surveyed agreed or strongly agreed that support for the targets has grown.Though not all countries covered in the CCPI have adopted a n
267、et zero target,sup-port for the targets adoption is present in most countries surveyed.In many countries,the discussion has shifted from whether it is relevant to adopt a net zero target to how such a target can be implemented.The opposition to net zero targets is not only driven by actors that oppo
268、se a low-carbon transition.In India,for example,general concerns about net zero targets are ex-acerbated by the contrast with current mitigation efforts in the country.Indias climate mitigation efforts have been pri-marily supported by a narrative centred on co-benefits and development,rather than l
269、ong-term,climate-driven plan-ning.26 CCPI contributors reported that opposition to net zero exists in nearly half of the countries surveyed(47%).Respondents also emphasised that the focus on net zero may shift the focus to long-term target setting instead of short-term policy adoption.They indicated
270、 that the targets are sometimes built on overly optimistic assumptions and are not grounded in realistic options for decarbonising all economic sectors,especially in countries highly dependent on hard-to-abate sectors,such as the agriculture sector in Argentina.Overreliance on emissions sinks and of
271、fsets was mentioned as an additional point of strong concern.In Norway,the fossil fuel exploration sector casts doubt on the countrys net zero targets,as new oil and gas fields are expected to remain active beyond 2050.The international momentum towards net zero represents an important aspect of the
272、 global effort to achieve the Paris Agreements goals.To seize this opportunity,policy mak-ers should carefully consider the pitfalls in setting net zero targets,and they should engage with relevant stakehold-ers to ensure the targets lead to real emissions reductions over time.Figure 1:Comparison of
273、 support and opposition of distinct stakeholders for net zero targetsSupport for net zero targetGermanwatch 2021More supportMore opposition25CCPI Results 2022Germanwatch,NewClimate Institute&Climate Action NetworkMethodologyOur method was based on a survey of national experts,most of whom are part o
274、f the Climate Action Network or scholars working in climate-related fields.The survey took place in SeptemberOctober 2021.Experts may have diverging perspectives on the level of adoption of a target and on perceived support or oppo-sition regarding net zero targets.We accounted for the degree of agr
275、eement between experts by averaging the answers for each country and question.Contradicting an-swers from two experts for the same answer and country offset one another.The country results tend to the an-swer of the majority.The results are based on averaged results per country,not on averaged respo
276、nses across all respondents.The definitions of support and opposition are broad and not restricted to specific stakeholder groups.Distinct groups may have varying perspectives on net zero targets.Respondents were asked to indicate their levels of agree-ment with the following statements:Distinct sta
277、keholder groups in my country oppose the adoption of a net zero target Distinct stakeholder groups in my country support the adoption of a net zero targetThe level indicates the overall perception of the balance between these opposing ideas within the country.Figure 2:Experts level of agreement with
278、 the respective statementsNet zero supportStrongly disagreeStrongly agreeDisagreeNeutralAgreeGermanwatch 2021Distinct stakeholder groups(e.g.government/industry/civil society)in my country support the adoption of a net zero targetDistinct stakeholder groups in my country oppose the adoption of a net
279、 zero targetSupport for net zero has increased in the past yearA net zero target is a helpful tool to reduce emissions in my country15%60%21%23%33%33%8%25%50%21%15%50%33%0%20%40%60%80%100%26CCPI Results 2022Germanwatch,NewClimate Institute&Climate Action Network5.About the CCPICountry coverage:cover
280、ing more than 90%of global GHG emissions On the basis of standardised criteria,the CCPI currently evaluates and compares the climate protection perfor-mance of 60 countries and of the European Union(EU),which are together responsible for more than 90%of global greenhouse gas(GHG)emissions.For the CC
281、PI 2022 the Philippines,Viet Nam and Colombia were added.Methodological approach and data sources The CCPI assesses countries performance in four categories:“GHGEmissions”(40%of overall score),“RenewableEnergy”(20%of overall score),“EnergyUse”(20%of overall score)and“ClimatePolicy”(20%of overall sco
282、re).Aiming to provide a comprehensive and balanced evalua-tion of the diverse countries evaluated,a total of 14 indi-cators are taken into account(see figure below).Around 80%of the assessment of countries performance is based on quantitative data taken from the International Energy Agency(IEA),PRIM
283、AP,the Food and Agriculture Organization(FAO)and the national GHG inventories(sub-mitted to the UNFCCC).27 The categories“GHG Emissions”,“Renewable Energy”and“Energy Use”are each defined by four indicators:(1)Current Level;(2)Past Trend;28(3)well-below 2C Compatibility of the Current Level;and(4)wel
284、l-below 2C Compatibility of the Countries 2030 Target.The remaining 20%of the assessment is based on the glob-ally unique climate policy section of the CCPI.The index category“Climate Policy”considers the fact that climate protection measures taken by governments often take sev-eral years to have an
285、 effect on the emissions,renewable energy and energy use indicators.This category thereby covers the most recent developments in national climate policy frameworks,which are otherwise not projected in the quantitative data.This categorys indicators are(1)National Climate Policy and(2)International C
286、limate Policy,and the qualitative data for these is assessed annually in a comprehensive research study.Its basis is the performance rating provided by climate and energy policy experts from non-governmental organisations(NGOs),universities and think tanks within the countries that are evaluated.29C
287、ompatibility of countries performance with well-below-2C pathway and NDC analysisIn 2017,the methodology of the CCPI was revised to fully incorporate the 2015 Paris Agreement,a milestone in inter-national climate negotiations with the goal to limit global warming to well below 2C or even to 1.5C.Sin
288、ce then,the CCPI includes an assessment of the well-below 2C compatibility of countries current performances and their own targets(as formulated in their Nationally Determined Contributions,or NDCs).Within the quantitative index cate-gories “GHG Emissions”,“Renewable Energy”and“Energy Use”current pe
289、rformance and the respective 2030 target are evaluated in relation to their country-specific well-below-2C pathway.For the well-below-2C pathways,ambitious benchmarks are set for each category,guided by the long-term goals of the Paris Agreement.The three benchmarks are:nearly zero GHG emissions(tak
290、ing into account country-specific pathways,which give develop-ing countries more time to reach this goal);100%energy from renewable sources;and keeping to todays average global energy use per capita levels and not increasing beyond.The CCPI compares where countries actually are today with where they
291、 should be to meet the ambitious benchmarks.Following a similar logic,the CCPI evaluates the countries own 2030 targets by comparing these to the same benchmarks.Interpretation of results In interpreting the results,it is important to note that the CCPI is calculated using production-based emissions
292、 only.Thereby the CCPI follows the currently prevailing method of accounting for national emissions and the logic that the nation producing the emissions is also the one held accountable for them.Further,it is important to note that more than half of the CCPI ranking indicators are quali-fied in rel
293、ative terms(better/worse)rather than absolute.Therefore even those countries with high rankings have no reason to sit back and relax.On the contrary,the results illustrate that even if all countries were as committed as the current frontrunners,efforts would still not be sufficient to prevent danger
294、ous climate change.More detailed information on the CCPI methodology and its calculation can be found in the“Background and Methodology”brochure,available for download at:www.ccpi.org/methodology27CCPI Results 2022Germanwatch,NewClimate Institute&Climate Action NetworkThe CCPI 2022(for 60 selected c
295、ountries and the EU)is based on the methodological design introduced in 2017 covering all greenhouse gas(GHG)emissions*and evalu-ates the 2030 targets and the well-below-2C compatibil-ity of countries current levels and targets in the categories“GHG Emissions”,“Renewable Energies”and“Energy Use”.The
296、refore,there is only limited comparability between this years results and versions of the index prior to the CCPI 2018.However,this years results are comparable to the CCPI G20 Edition as well as to the CCPI 2018 to CCPI 2021.Please note that there have been slight methodological changes compared to
297、 last years edition.In the categories“GHG emissions”and“Energy Use”the 2030 target indica-tors are now calculated using an absolute difference to the 2C-pathway rather than a relative difference.Disclaimer on comparability to previous CCPI editionsThe CCPI 2022 uses data from 2019 and thus does not
298、take into account the most recent developments and effects caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.Disclaimer Data from before COVID-19The depictions of territorial boundaries on maps displayed in the CCPI do not imply a political opinion or judgement on the legal status of any state territory.The state bou
299、ndaries shown are aligned with the official stance of the United Nations(UN)on said matter.We apologize if any names used/borders depicted are in conflict with your national identity or your general beliefs.We would like to point out that the CCPI,focusing solely on the global goal of climate protec
300、tion,in no way intends to spark geopolitical controversy.Disclaimer on maps*All Kyoto gases(CO2,CH4,N2O,HFKW,PFKW and SF6)including the emissions coming from Land Use,Land Use Change and Forestry(LULUCF).Current Level of GHG Emissions per CapitaGHG Emissions Reduction 2030 Target compared to a well-
301、below-2C compatible pathwayCurrent Level of GHG Emissions per Capita compared to a well-below-2C compatible pathway Current Share of Renewables per TPESPast Trend of GHG Emissions per CapitaDevelopment of Energy Supply from Renewable Energy Sources10%10%10%5%Current Share of Renewables per TPES comp
302、ared to a well-below-2C compatible pathwayRenewable Energy 2030 Target compared to a well-below-2C compatible pathwayCurrent Level of Energy Use(TPES/Capita)Past Trend of TPES/CapitaInternational Climate PolicyNational Climate PolicyTPES/Capita 2030 Target compared to a well-below-2C compatible path
303、wayCurrent Level of TPES/Capita compared to a well-below-2C compatible pathway10%10%5%5%40%GHG Emissions20%Energy Use20%Renewable Energy20%Climate Policy10%5%5%5%5%5%Germanwatch 2021GHG=Greenhouse Gases|TPES=Total Primary Energy SupplyComponents of the CCPI28CCPI Results 2022Germanwatch,NewClimate I
304、nstitute&Climate Action NetworkCopyrightThe content and works on these pages created by the operators of these pages are subject to German copyright law.The reproduction,processing,dissemination and all kinds of use outside the limits of copyright require the writ-ten consent of each author or creat
305、or.Downloads or copies of this site are for private,non-commercial use only.If the content on this site was not created by the operator,the rights in copyright of third parties were respected.In particular,content of third parties is marked as such.Nevertheless,should you notice a breach of copyrigh
306、t,you are requested to let us know.If we become aware of a breach of the law,we will remove this content immediately.6.Endnotes1 ClimateActionTracker(2021)CAT Climate Target Update Tracker.Available at:https:/climateactiontracker.org/climate-target-update-tracker/.2 UNFCCC(2021)Full NDC Synthesis Re
307、port:Some Progress,but Still a Big Concern.Available at:https:/unfccc.int/news/full-ndc-synthesis-report-some-progress-but-still-a-big-concern.3 UNFCCC(2021)Nationally determined contributions under the Paris Agreement.Revises synthesis report by the secretariat.Available at:https:/unfccc.int/sites/
308、default/files/resource/cma2021_08rev01_adv.pdf.4 NOAA(2021)Its official:July was Earths hottest month on record.Available at:https:/www.noaa.gov/news/its-official-july-2021-was-earths-hottest-month-on-record.5 IPCC(2021)AR 6 Climate Change 2021:The Physical Science Basis.Available at:https:/www.ipcc
309、.ch/report/ar6/wg1/.6 IEA(2021)World Energy Outlook 2021.Available at:https:/www.iea.org/reports/world-energy-outlook-2021.7 Carney,M.(2015)Breaking the tragedy of the horizon climate change and financial stability.Available at:https:/www.bis.org/review/r151009a.pdf.8 FossilFuelTreaty(2021)Endorseme
310、nts.Available at:https:/fossilfueltreaty.org/endorsements.9 UNFCCC(2021)Race To Zero Campaign.Available at:https:/unfccc.int/climate-action/race-to-zero-campaign.10 UNEP(2021)Emissions Gap Report 2021:The Heat Is On A World of Climate Promises Not Yet Delivered.Available at:https:/www.unep.org/resou
311、rces/emissions-gap-report-2021.11 IEA(2021)Global Energy Review 2021.Available at:https:/www.iea.org/reports/global-energy-review-2021.12 IRENA(2021)Renewable Capacity Statistics 2021.Available at:https:/www.irena.org/publications/2021/March/Renewable-Capacity-Statistics-2021.13 IRENA(2021)Renewable
312、 Power Generation Costs in 2020.Available at:https:/www.irena.org/publications/2021/Jun/Renewable-Power-Costs-in-2020.14 IEA(2020)Energy Efficiency Report 2020.Available at:https:/www.iea.org/reports/energy-efficiency-2020.15 EC(2021)State of the Energy Union 2021:Renewables overtake fossil fuels as
313、 the EUs main power source.Available at:https:/ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_21_5554.16 See note 10 above.17 Hhne,N.etal.(2021)Wave of net zero emission targets opens window to meeting the Paris Agreement,Nature Climate Change,11(10),pp.820822.doi:10.1038/s41558-021-01142-2.18 Cli
314、mateActionTracker(2020)Paris Agreement turning point:Wave of net zero targets reduces warming estimate to 2.1C in 2100-All eyes on 2030 targets.Climate Action Tracker(CAT).Available at:https:/climateactiontracker.org/documents/829/CAT_2020-12-01_Briefing_Global-Update_Paris5Years_Dec2020.pdf?fbclid=
315、IwAR2e_SHEJes6bml9Y1l8I_dM1KEqrLTtSyfXxWB3QbPi5e3TCZ7XH0ph2Co.19 Rogelj,J.etal.(2021)Net-zero emissions targets are vague:three ways to fix,Nature 2021 591:7850,591(7850),pp.365368.doi:10.1038/d41586-021-00662-3.20 Smith,S.M.(2021)A case for transparent net-zero carbon targets,Communications Earth&E
316、nvironment,2(1).doi:10.1038/s43247-021-00095-w.21 In a policy document or law.22 Hale,T.etal.(2021)Net Zero Tracker.Available at:https:/ Olivier,J.G.J.andPeters,J.A.H.W.(2020)Trends in global CO2 and total greenhouse gas emissions:2019 report.The Hague,Netherlands:PBL Netherlands Environmental Asses
317、sment Agency.Available at:https:/www.pbl.nl/sites/default/files/downloads/pbl-2020-trends-in-glob-al-co2-and-total-greenhouse-gas-emissions-2019-report_4068.pdf.24 FAOSTAT(2021)Land use emissions.Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.Available at:http:/www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/
318、GL(Accessed:10 May 2021).25 Black,R.,Smith,S.andHale,T.(2021)Net zero:despite the greenwash,its vital for tackling climate change,The Conversation,10 May.Available at:https:/ Dubash,N.K.(2021)Should India consider a“net-zero”climate pledge?,Environmentality,Centre for Policy Research,17 February.Ava
319、ilable at:https:/environmentality.cprindia.org/blog/should-india-consider-a-net-zero-climate-pledge.27 The latest available data,which allows for comparison of all 60 countries plus the EU included in the CCPI 2022,dates back to 2019 for the quantitative index categories.28 The CCPI takes into accou
320、nt a five-year linear trend(for CCPI 2022,the period 20142019).29 The survey for the CCPI 2022 was carried out between September and October 2021.The results therefore cover recent policy developments until mid of October.29CCPI Results 2022Germanwatch,NewClimate Institute&Climate Action NetworkCoun
321、tryNameOrganisationAlgeriaBenadjilaArgentinaMiguel Angel Rementeria&Roque PedaceForo del Buen Ayre CIMACarlos TanidesFundacin Vida Silvestre ArgentinaAustraliaAndrew PetersenSustainable Business AustraliaRichie Merzian&Alia ArmisteadThe Australian InstituteSuzanne Harter&Gavan McFadzeanAustralian Co
322、nservation FoundationGraeme McLeay&Dr.John IserDoctors for the Environment AustraliaAustriaKlara Schenk,Jasmin Duregger,Christian SteinerGreenpeace sterreichForum Wissenschaft und UmweltKarl SchellmannWWF AustriaBelarusMaria FalaleevaEcoprojectBelgiumGreenpeace,Bond Beter Leefmilieu,Inter Environnem
323、ent Wallonie,WWF,Coalition ClimatBrazilAndre FerrettiFundacao O Boticario/Observatorio do ClimaCarlos NobreInstitute of Advanced StudiesBulgariaRadostina SlavkovaZa ZemiataGreenpeace CEE BulgariaCanadaAlain BrunelAQLPAEddy PerezClimate Action NetworkMitchell BeerThe Energy MixChileNuria HartmannHini
324、cio ChileSam LeivaFundacin Heinrich Bll Stiftung Cono Sur.Teresita AlcntaraMunicipios ante el Cambio ClimaticoChinaLin JiaqiaoRock Environment and Energy Institute(REEI)Patrick SchrderChatham HouseChinese TaipeiGloria K.-J.HSUMom Loves Taiwan AssociationRobin WinklerWild at Heart Legal Defense Assoc
325、iationDr.Ying-Shih HsiehEnvironmental Quality Protection FoundationColumbiaMaria Laura Rojas&Giovanni PabnTRANSFORMA GLOBALCroatiaSociety For Sustainable Development DesignCzech RepublicJiri JerabekGreenpeace Czech RepublicKarel PolaneckHnut DUHAEgyptMostafa MedhatRiham HelmyEnvarious for developmen
326、tEUSam Van den PlasCarbon Market Watch Dora Petroula&Klaus RohrigClimate Action Network(CAN)EuropeFinlandThird Rock Finland OyFranceNicolas BerhmansIDDRIGermanyBjrn Ecklundt&Malte HentschkeKlima-AllianzSebastian ScholzNABUEva Schmid&Manfred Treber GermanwatchAnnexAbout 450 climate and energy experts
327、 contributed to this years edition of the Climate Change Performance Index with their evaluation of national climate policies and international climate policy performance.The following national experts agreed to be mentioned as contributors to the policy evaluation of this years CCPI:List of contrib
328、utors to the climate policy evaluation30CCPI Results 2022Germanwatch,NewClimate Institute&Climate Action NetworkCountryNameOrganisationGreeceDimitris IbrahimWWF GreeceNikos MantzarisThe Green TankHungaryAdam HarmatWWFDr.Bla MunkcsyELTE UniversityAndrs LukcsClean Air Action GroupJudit SzegIndiaRanjan
329、 PandaCombat Climate Change NetworkSanjay VashistCAN South AsiaShruti NeelakantanDublin City UniversitySrinivas KrishnaswamyVasudha FoundationIndonesiaDicky Edwin HindartoGreen Partner FoundationSatrio Swandiko PrilliantoGreenpeace IndonesiaFabby Tumiwa&Erina MursantiIESRItalyMauro AlbrizioLegambien
330、teGianni SilvestriniKyoto ClubJapanKimiko HirataKiko NetworkTetsu IidaISEPYuri OkuboRenewable Energy InstituteKazakhstanRustam NassirkhanZhasyl DamuTsoy SergeyEICONKoreaJieon LeeKorea Federation for Environmental MovementsGahee HanSFOCLatviaLaura Treimane WWF LatviaJanis BrizgaGreen Liberty(Za brvba
331、)MalaysiaAnthony Tan Kee HuatMalaysian CSO SDG AllianceMaltaEdward MalliaFriends of the EarthMexicoJos Mara ValenzuelaInstitute for Science,Innovation and SocietyPablo RamrezGreenpeace MxicoMariana Gutirrez Grados&Analuz Presbtero GarcaIniciativa Climtica de MxicoMoroccoHajar KhamlichiMoroccan Allia
332、nce for Climate and Sustain-able Development&CAN InternationalDr.Mohammed-Sad KarroukUniversit Hassan II de CasablancaDr.Saddik MohammedAssociation Homme&EnvironnementYossef Ben MeirHigh Atlas FoundationAssociation Ecologia pour lducation lenvironnementNetherlandsDr.Robert KoelemeijerNetherlands Env
333、ironmental Assessment AgencySible SchneHIERNew ZealandAmanda Larsson&Genevieve ToopGreenpeace NZWWF-NZDavid TongOil Change InternationalLawyers for Climate Action New Zealand IncNorwayAled Dilwyn FisherFriends of the Earth Norway(Naturvernfor-bundet)Christoffer Klyve,Johan Reinertsen,Ida ThomassonFIOH31CCPI Results 2022Germanwatch,NewClimate Institute&Climate Action NetworkCountryNameOrganisationP