As governments all around the world prioritise climate change mitigation and adaptation, the mitigation hierarchy of climate change has emerged as a structured framework for companies planning climate action. Opportunity and capital costs are critical considerations in climate change mitigation as well, whilst businesses grapple with pressing consumer and investor demands for green credentials. Hence, this article delves directly into the mitigation hierarchy and its importance in the pursuit of climate change mitigation.
A mitigation hierarchy represents a top-level strategic approach that companies use to prioritise emission reductions. Just like a funnel, climate action at the level of business operation is widest at the top because of the availability of strategy, before tightening in scope and the number of solutions available. As companies go lower in the funnel, they too go deeper into building emissions reduction. The funnel is structured through prevention, reduction, substitution, neutralisation, and compensation. It thus guides a business’ Net Zero strategy towards selecting the most appropriate, efficient emissions reduction.
Beyond what the climate change mitigation hierarchy is composed of, what is more critical is what it represents. Indeed, the hierarchy codifies environmental consciousness, especially as emissions reductions are what guide its individual actions. To create operational resilience and comply with any potential regulations, businesses must recognise that environmental management is an integrated philosophy. Rethinking the materiality of businesses on the environment around them is what spreads the ethos of climate responsibility, and helps businesses achieve their climate goals.
Beyond efforts at the individual and company-level, international collaboration is critical in marshalling collective resources towards mitigating climate change. Beyond diplomatic dialogue and political boundaries, commitments have also been enshrined in international agreements. Global climate mitigation frameworks include:
The power of climate change mitigation is not solely vested in international agreements but also lies within the daily choices of individuals and the initiatives of companies of all sizes across industries. These micro-level efforts work towards building a culture of environmental accountability, driving change from the ground up.
When considering how best to prioritise decarbonisation, consider the following criteria to take, based on urgency, effectiveness, and cost.
When considering the urgency and duration of decarbonisation, account for specific schedules set by your organisation. Based on Terrascope’s predictions, there is a crucial three-year period where companies should develop reporting capabilities, especially when considering growing regulatory and stakeholder pressure, and the comparatively lower costs of measurement and material disclosure. Still, companies doing so may want to consider the following when considering the urgency of decarbonisation:
With global climate and weather patterns changing because of global warming, businesses looking to make concrete action can abide by the following criteria. For one,
For businesses, the carbon mitigation hierarchy serves as a structured approach to navigate the complex landscape of greenhouse gas reduction. Like a forward-thinking nutrition plan that adapts to evolving needs, the mitigation hierarchy empowers businesses to find the optimal blend of actions to achieve a sustainable future. The mitigation hierarchy is practical, reasoned guidance for structuring existing climate plans. It also charges companies with an added responsibility to take environmentally conscious business practices. Such mindfulness can illuminate future approaches and be instrumental in shaping a resilient and environmentally conscious tomorrow.
Still uncertain on how best to prioritise your climate mitigation strategies? Contact us below.