↓ Skip to main content

A Registry of Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions: Goals, Outcomes, and Institutional Requisites

Overview of attention for article published in Ambio: A Journal of the Human Environment, February 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A Registry of Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions: Goals, Outcomes, and Institutional Requisites
Published in
Ambio: A Journal of the Human Environment, February 2012
DOI 10.1007/s13280-011-0241-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Björn-Ola Linnér, Neha Pahuja

Abstract

This article examines key issues in operationalizing a registry of nationally appropriate mitigation actions (NAMAs) undertaken by developing countries party to the United Nations framework convention on climate change. It analyzes goals, outcomes, and institutional prerequisites underlying various proposals to determine how a NAMA mechanism could work in international climate cooperation. The different proposals for how NAMA shall be designed relate to three basic effort-sharing arrangements in a future climate regime: binding commitments for all Parties, purely voluntary commitments for all, and legally binding commitments for Annex I countries but voluntary ones for others. We conclude that a NAMA registry could be designed so as initially to suit all three types of effort-sharing regimes. The article identifies three areas of potential common ground in a registry irrespective of effort-sharing type: the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities, the sustainable development objectives of the Convention, and the need for a systemic transition toward low-carbon energy technologies.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Peru 1 4%
Mexico 1 4%
Denmark 1 4%
Ireland 1 4%
Korea, Republic of 1 4%
Unknown 23 82%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 36%
Researcher 5 18%
Student > Master 4 14%
Unspecified 2 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Other 5 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 7 25%
Social Sciences 6 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 14%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 11%
Unspecified 3 11%
Other 5 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 February 2012.
All research outputs
#7,068,841
of 11,351,468 outputs
Outputs from Ambio: A Journal of the Human Environment
#570
of 725 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#136,529
of 264,692 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ambio: A Journal of the Human Environment
#19
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,351,468 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 725 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 264,692 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.