Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34594401›Full record

ReviewWiley interdisciplinary reviews. Climate change

Climate mitigation policies and the potential pathways to conflict: Outlining a research agenda.

Elisabeth A Gilmore, Halvard Buhaug

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Climate change. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
11.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Elisabeth A GilmoreDepartment of International Development, Community, and Environment Clark University Worcester Massachusetts USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9037-6751
Halvard BuhaugPeace Research Institute Oslo Oslo Norway.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6432-5985
Clark University · USPeace Research Institute Oslo · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Climate policies will need to incentivize transformative societal changes if they are to achieve emission reductions consistent with 1.5°C temperature targets. To contribute to efforts for aligning climate policy with broader societal goals, specifically those related to sustainable development, we identify the effects of climate mitigation policy on aspects of socioeconomic development that are known determinants of conflict and evaluate the plausibility and importance of potential pathways to armed conflict and political violence. Conditional on preexisting societal tensions and socioeconomic vulnerabilities, we isolate effects on economic performance, income and livelihood, food and energy prices, and land tenure as most likely to increase conflict risks. Climate policy designs may be critical to moderate these risks as different designs can promote more favorable societal outcomes such as equity and inclusion. Coupling research with careful monitoring and evaluation of the intermediate societal effects at early stages of policy implementation will be a critical part of learning and moderating potential conflict risks. Importantly, better characterizing the future conflict risks under climate policy allows for a more comprehensive comparison to the conflict risk if mitigation is not implemented and graver climate damages are experienced. This article is categorized under:The Carbon Economy and Climate Mitigation > Benefits of Mitigation.

Indexed as

armed conflictclimate mitigationsustainable development

Identifiers

PMID34594401
PMCPMC8459245
OpenAlexW3173352658

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.