Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain
the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in
Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles
and JavaScript.
Using food prices to assess climate change impacts on food security is misleading. Differential impacts on income require a broader measure of household well-being, such as changes in absolute poverty.
Policymakers seem ready to take new steps to tackle climate change. Research must draw on lessons from the past to find productive pathways for the future.
Rapid growth in global CO2 emissions from fossil fuels and industry ceased in the past two years, despite continued economic growth. Decreased coal use in China was largely responsible, coupled with slower global growth in petroleum and faster growth in renewables.
Policymakers have committed to tackling loss and damage as a result of climate change across three high-profile international processes. Framing post-2015 development as a means to address loss and damage can synergize these agendas.
A new climate agreement won't solve climate change, but it should nudge the world onto a lower-emissions path. Research must drive deeper transformations by translating proposed solutions into workable action.
Tropical forests could offset much of the carbon released from the declining use of fossil fuels, helping to stabilize and then reduce atmospheric CO2 concentrations, thereby providing a bridge to a low-fossil-fuel future.
More effort should be put into standardization as a route to achieving international consensus and action on climate change. Cities are a good example of what is being achieved through this arguably unfashionable mechanism.
