Natural resources and climate

Norges klimaomdømme på Twitter

In this article we explore whether oil and gas industry negatively affects Norway’s climate reputation by analyzing tweets posted during the 26th UN Climate Change Conference of the Parties (COP26) in Glasgow. To make our findings more reliable, we compare tweets about Norway with tweets about Sweden. The results of our study reveal that there is no significant difference in negative sentiment between tweets about Norway compared with tweets about Sweden. However, we find that tweets about the two states differ thematically. While dominant topics in tweets mentioning Sweden are about promotion of the green transition and climate activism, tweets about Norway are mostly about climate financing and the need to phase out fossil fuel production. Furthermore, negative tweets about Sweden are of a more general nature, similar to criticism of all countries not meeting their climate goals, while negative tweets about Norway are specific and related to fossil fuel industry.

Net-zero or phase out? Stakeholder views on just transitions pathways for oil and gas in Norway

In this policy brief, authors David Jordhus-Lier, Camilla Houeland, Heikki Eidsvoll Holmås, Kacper Szulecki, Peder Ressem Østring and Kendra Dupuy document how policy makers and representatives of businesses and civil society organisations (including trade unions and environmental groups) have outlined pathway scenarios towards net-zero carbon emissions and a phase-out vision for the Norwegian oil and gas industry. The authors have developed these two scenarios participating in a focus group based on a so-called ‘backcasting’ exercise. There is perceived acceptance for the notion of net-zero emissions by 2050 from social actors involved in the Norwegian oil and gas industry. If this goal is to be reached with a science-based approach, however, deep-seated transformations in the global energy system will be needed, as well as concerted efforts by the Norwegian government and from other social actors. Specific targets for the electrification of offshore installations, the roll-out of large-scale offshore wind power and technologies for capturing, using and storing carbon on the Norwegian Continental Shelf are key milestones in this scenario. The main actors required to take responsibility for this pathway are the Norwegian state, in close tripartite dialogue with labour and capital, but also with institutional mechanisms that ensure the participation of local communities and civil society organisations. The net-zero pathway faces a series of obstacles. Among them are popular resistance to new renewable energy projects, increasing electricity prices and the risk this poses to plans for the electrification of offshore installations.

Poland's belated energy transition: now or never

The Polish authorities were for years playing down the need for decarbonization, seeing it as a threat to domestic energy security. Following Russia's invasion of Ukraine, suddenly it is not climate but precisely security that may accelerate the phase out of fossil fuels.

Does security push democracy out of energy governance?

Climate, Peace and Security Fact Sheet: Central African Republic

In this new Fact Sheet from the joint NUPI and SIPRI Climate-related Peace and Security Risks Project (CPSR). The research team explore the nexus between climate change, peace and security.

Norway needs energy and security policy coherence

Prior to 2022, Norwegian policymakers have hardly considered coherence between energy and security, and the few coordinating elements in place are focused on emergency preparedness. • Keeping policy areas separate and energy de-securitized has helped improve Norway’s position in the old energy world. However, both the progressing European energy transition and new geopolitical threats from Russia increasingly challenge this arrangement. • Lack of policy coherence makes Norwegian governance less effective in dealing both with sudden shocks, like the Nord Stream sabotage, and long-term stress factors, like climatic change. • Formalized coordination mechanisms between ministries and agencies are necessary and will increase both governance effectiveness and accountability. • Existing agency level collaboration on emergency preparedness may be a starting point. • A transition requires significant institutional reorganization which may be difficult to achieve. Old structures and agencies may not support security issues connected to a new kind of energy system.