본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기
국회도서관 홈으로 정보검색 소장정보 검색

목차보기

Title page 1

Contents 1

Abstract 3

1. Introduction 4

2. The Need for Climate Technologies 5

2.1. Mitigate Climate Change 6

2.2. Adaptation 9

2.3. Avoiding Ecological Overshoot 11

3. The Challenge: Climate Technology Gaps 13

3.1. The Energy Climate Tech Gap 16

3.2. The Overshoot Climate Tech Gap 21

3.3. The Resilience Climate Tech Gap 24

4. Policies for Climate Technology Entrepreneurship 32

4.1. Shortcomings of Entrepreneurial Ecosystems 34

4.2. Shortcomings of Mission-Oriented Policy for Climate Technology 40

5. Will AI Save Climate Technology Entrepreneurship? 45

5.1. How will AI will affect the nature and impact of entrepreneurship? 45

5.2. How will AI will affect the nature of technology and innovation? 47

6. Concluding Remarks 51

References 53

Tables 10

Table 1. Climate Changes Impacts on the Global South and Technology Solutions 10

Table 2. Climate Technology Challenge Matrix 15

Table 3. Critical Minerals in Renewable Energy Climate Technologies 19

Table 4. Determinants of Entrepreneurship and Concerns for Policy Support 33

Table 5. Energy Earthshots and Climate Technologies 44

Figures 7

Figure 1. Carbon Emissions and Global Warming, 1850-2022 7

Figure 2. World Ecological Footprint vs Bio-capacity (in gha), 1961-2022 12

Figure 3. World GDP and World Material Footprint (MF), 1974-2023 13

Figure 4. Fossil Fuel Consumption and World GDP 14

Figure 5. The Energy Climate Tech Gap 17

Figure 6. The Overshoot Climate Tech Gap 22

Figure 7. The Resilience Climate Tech Gap 25

Figure 8. Vulnerability to Climate Change: The Global South vs the Global North, 2002-2020 26

Figure 9. Share of Electricity by Source, World, 2023 29

Figure 10. Countries that score higher in terms of their entrepreneurial ecosystems have a higher material footprint 36

Figure 11. Countries that score higher in terms of entrepreneurial ecosystems have higher primary energy consumption 37

Figure 12. Countries that score higher in terms of entrepreneurial ecosystems have higher ecological deficits 38

Figure 13. The Mission-Orientation Innovation Approach Illustrated 41