Post-2020 climate agreements in the major economies assessed in the light of global models (original) (raw)

References

1. Blanford, G., Kriegler, E. & Tavoni, M. Harmonization vs. fragmentation: overview of climate policy scenarios in EMF27. Clim. Change 123, 383–396 (2014).
   Article CAS Google Scholar
2. UNFCCC. Establishment of an Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action. Draft decision -/CP.17 (UNFCCC, 2011).
3. Pachauri, S. et al. Pathways to achieve universal household access to modern energy by 2030. Environ. Res. Lett. 8, 024015 (2013).
   Article Google Scholar
4. McCollum, D. L., Krey, V. & Riahi, K. An integrated approach to energy sustainability. Nature Clim. Change 1, 428–429 (2011).
   Article Google Scholar
5. Rogelj, J., McCollum, D. L., Reisinger, A., Meinshausen, M. & Riahi, K. Probabilistic cost estimates for climate change mitigation. Nature 493, 79–83 (2013). This paper quantifies the uncertainties surrounding climate mitigation costs using an IAM.
   Article CAS Google Scholar
6. Rogelj, J., McCollum, D. L., O'Neill, B. C. & Riahi, K. 2020 emissions levels required to limit warming to below 2 degrees. Nature Clim. Change 3, 405–412 (2013).
   Article CAS Google Scholar
7. Rogelj, J., McCollum, D. L. & Riahi, K. The UN's 'Sustainable Energy for All' initiative is compatible with a warming limit of 2 °C. Nature Clim. Change 3, 545–551 (2013).
   Article Google Scholar
8. Luderer, G. et al. Economic mitigation challenges: how further delay closes the door for achieving climate targets. Environ. Res. Lett. 8, 034033 (2013).
   Article Google Scholar
9. Den Elzen, M. G. J. & van Vuuren, D. Peaking profiles for achieving long-term temperature targets with more likelihood at lower costs. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 104, 17931–17936 (2007).
   Article CAS Google Scholar
10. Rogelj, J. et al. Emission pathways consistent with a 2 °C global temperature limit. Nature Clim. Change 1, 413–418 (2011).
    Article Google Scholar
11. Riahi, K. et al. Locked into Copenhagen pledges − Implications of short-term emission targets for the cost and feasibility of long-term climate goals. Technol. Forecast. Social Change http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2013.09.016 (2014).
12. Kriegler, E. et al. The role of technology for achieving climate policy objectives: Overview of the EMF 27 study on global technology and climate policy strategies. Clim. Change 123, 353–367 (2014). This is one of the latest and largest MIP projects, with a focus on the role of technology for mitigation.
    Article Google Scholar
13. Kriegler, E. et al. What does the 2 °C target imply for a global climate agreement in 2020? The LIMITS study on Durban platform scenarios. Clim. Change Econ. 4, 1340008 (2013).
    Article Google Scholar
14. Tavoni, M. et al. The distribution of the major economies' effort in the Durban platform scenarios. Clim. Change Econ. 4, 1340009 (2013).
    Article Google Scholar
15. Kriegler, E., Tavoni, M., Riahi, K. & van Vuuren, D. P. Introducing the LIMITS special issue. Clim. Change Econ. 4, 1302002 (2013). This paper introduces the special issue of the LIMITS MIP.
    Article Google Scholar
16. Clarke, L. et al. International climate policy architectures: Overview of the EMF 22 International Scenarios. Energy Econ. 31, S64–S81 (2009). This is one of the first MIP papers that looked into climate agreements, and its public data set has been used widely.
    Article Google Scholar
17. Kriegler, E. et al. Making or breaking climate targets: The AMPERE study on staged accession scenarios for climate policy. Technol. Forecast. Social Change. (in the press); available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2013.09.021 (2014).
18. Jakob, M., Luderer, G., Steckel, J., Tavoni, M. & Monjon, S. Time to act now? Assessing the costs of delaying climate measures and benefits of early action. Clim. Change 114, 79–99 (2012).
    Article Google Scholar
19. Luderer, G., Bertram, C., Calvin, K., Cian, E. & Kriegler, E. Implications of weak near-term climate policies on long-term mitigation pathways. Clim. Change http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10584-013-0899-9 (2013).
20. Luderer, G. et al. On the regional distribution of mitigation costs in a global cap-and-trade regime. Clim. Change 114, 59–78 (2012).
    Article Google Scholar
21. Aldy, J. E. & Stavins, R. N. Climate negotiators create an opportunity for scholars. Science 337, 1043–1044 (2012).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
22. Edenhofer, O. et al. Identifying Options for a New International Climate Regime Arising from the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action (Harvard Project on Climate Agreements/Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change, 2013).
    Google Scholar
23. Ranson, M. & Stavins, R. N. Linkage as a foundation for post-Durban climate policy architecture. Ethics Policy Environ. 15, 272–275 (2012).
    Article Google Scholar
24. Aldy, J. E. & Stavins, R. N. Designing the Post-Kyoto Climate Regime: Lessons from the Harvard Project on International Climate Agreements. http://belfercenter.hks.harvard.edu/publication/18686/designing_the_postkyoto_climate_regime.html (2008). This paper discusses a variety of issues regarding post Kyoto climate policies.
    Google Scholar
25. Den Elzen, M. G. J., Lucas, P. L. & van Vuuren, D. Regional abatement action and costs under allocation schemes for emission allowances for achieving low CO2-equivalent concentrations. Clim. Change 90, 243–268 (2008).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
26. Den Elzen, M. & Höhne, N. Sharing the reduction effort to limit global warming to 2 °C. Clim. Policy 10, 247–260 (2010).
    Article Google Scholar
27. Ekholm, T. et al. Effort sharing in ambitious, global climate change mitigation scenarios. Energy Policy 38, 1797–1810 (2010).
    Article Google Scholar
28. UNFCCC. The Cancun agreements: Outcome of the work of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention. http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2010/cop16/eng/07a01.pdf#page=2 (2010).
29. Blanford, G. J., Rose, S. K. & Tavoni, M. Baseline projections of energy and emissions in Asia. Energy Econ. 34, S284–S292 (2012).
    Article Google Scholar
30. Allen, M. et al. Warming caused by cumulative carbon emissions towards the trillionth tonne. Nature 458, 1163–1166 (2009).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
31. Meinshausen, M. et al. Greenhouse-gas emission targets for limiting global warming to 2 degrees C. Nature 458, 1158–1162 (2009).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
32. Zickfeld, K., Eby, M., Matthews, H. D. & Weaver, A. J. Setting cumulative emissions targets to reduce the risk of dangerous climate change. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106, 16129–16134 (2009).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
33. Chen, W., Yin, X. & Zhang, H. Towards low carbon development in China: a comparison of national and global models. Clim. Change http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10584-013-0937–7 (2013).
34. Hoogwijk, M. et al. Assessment of bottom-up sectoral and regional mitigation potentials. Energy Policy 38, 3044–3057 (2010).
    Article Google Scholar
35. van der Zwaan, B. C. C. et al. A cross-model comparison of global long-term technology diffusion under a 2 °C climate change control target. Clim. Change Econ., 4, 1340013: 1–24 (2013).
    Google Scholar
36. Krey, V., Luderer, G., Clarke, L. & Kriegler, E. Getting from here to there — energy technology transformation pathways in the EMF27 scenarios. Clim. Change 123, 369–382 (2014).
    Article Google Scholar
37. Fischedick, M. et al. in IPCC Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation (eds Edenhofer, O. et al.) 74 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2011).
    Google Scholar
38. Clarke, L., Krey, V., Weyant, J. & Chaturvedi, V. Regional energy system variation in global models: Results from the Asian Modeling Exercise scenarios. Energy Econ. 34, S293–S305 (2012).
    Article Google Scholar
39. Popp, A. et al. Land-use transition for bioenergy and climate stabilization: model comparison of drivers, impacts and interactions with other land use based mitigation options. Clim. Change http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10584-013-0926-x (2013).
40. Rose, S. K. et al. Bioenergy in energy transformation and climate management. Clim. Change 123, 477–493 (2014).
    Article Google Scholar
41. Lucas, P. L., van Vuuren, D., Olivier, J. G. J. & den Elzen, M. G. J. Long-term reduction potential of non-CO2 greenhouse gases. Environ. Sci. Policy 10, 85–103 (2007).
    Article Google Scholar
42. Calvin, K., Clarke, L., Krey, V. & Blanford, G. The role of Asia in mitigating climate change: Results from the Asia Modeling Exercise. Energy Econ. (2012).
43. Riahi, K. et al. in The Global Energy Assessment: Toward a Sustainable Future (IIASA/Cambridge Univ. Press, 2012).
    Google Scholar
44. Kunreuther, H. et al. Risk management and climate change. Nature Clim. Change 3, 447–450 (2013).
    Article Google Scholar
45. Millner, A., Dietz, S. & Heal, G. Ambiguity and climate policy. Natl Bur. Econ. Res. Working Pap. 16050 (2010).
46. Edenhofer, O. et al. The economics of low stabilization: Model comparison of mitigation strategies and costs. Energy J. 31, 11–48 (2010).
    Google Scholar
47. Staub-Kaminski, I., Zimmer, A., Jakob, M. & Marschinski, R. Climate policy in practice: A Typology of obstacles and implications for integrated assessment modeling. Clim. Change Econ. 5, http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/S2010007814400041 (2014).
48. Höhne, N., Den Elzen, M. G. J. & Escalante, D. Regional greenhouse gas mitigation targets based on effort sharing: A comparison of studies. Clim. Policy 14, 122–147 (2014).
    Article Google Scholar
49. Den Elzen, M. & Höhne, N. Reductions of greenhouse gas emissions in Annex I and non-Annex I countries for meeting concentration stabilisation targets. Clim. Change 91, 249–274 (2008).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
50. Johansson, D. J. et al. Multi-model Analyses of the Economic and Energy Implications for China and India in a Post-Kyoto Climate Regime. Kiel Working Paper 1808 (Kiel Institute, 2012).
    Google Scholar
51. Jiahua, P. Carbon budget for basic needs satisfaction: Implications for international equity and sustainability. World Econ. Polit. 1, 003 (2008).
    Google Scholar
52. Ding, Z. L., Duan, X. N., Ge, Q. S. & Zhang, Z. Q. Control of atmospheric CO2 concentrations by 2050: A calculation on the emission rights of different countries. Sci. China Ser. D Earth Sci. 52, 1447–1469 (2009).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
53. Jewell, J., Cherp, A. & Riahi, K. Energy security under de-carbonization scenarios: An assessment framework and evaluation under different technology and policy choices. Energy Policy 65, 743–760 (2014).
    Article Google Scholar
54. Hof, A. F., Den Elzen, M. G. J. & Van Vuuren, D. P. Environmental effectiveness and economic consequences of fragmented versus universal regimes: what can we learn from model studies? Int. Environ. Agreem. Polit. Law Econ. 9, 39–62 (2009).
    Google Scholar
55. Clarke, L. et al. International climate policy architectures: Overview of the EMF 22 International Scenarios. Energy Econ. 31 (Suppl. 2), S64–S81 (2009).
    Article Google Scholar
56. Edenhofer, O. et al. The economics of low stabilization: Model comparison of mitigation strategies and costs. Energy J. 31, 11–48 (2010).
    Google Scholar
57. Lüken, M. et al. The role of technological availability for the distributive impacts of climate change mitigation policy. Energy Policy 39, 6030–6039 (2011).
    Article Google Scholar
58. Aboumahboub, T. et al. On the regional distribution of climate mitigation costs: the impact of delayed cooperative action. Clim. Change Econ. 05, 1440002 (2014).
    Article Google Scholar
59. OECD. OECD Environmental Outlook to 2030 (OECD, 2008).
60. Massetti, E. & Tavoni, M. The cost of climate change mitigation policy in eastern Europe and former Soviet Union. Clim. Change Econ. 2, 341–370 (2011).
    Article Google Scholar
61. Van Vuuren, D. et al. Comparison of top-down and bottom-up estimates of sectoral and regional greenhouse gas emission reduction potentials. Energy Policy 37, 5125–5139 (2009).
    Article Google Scholar
62. Stern, D. I., Pezzey, J. C. V. & Lambie, N. R. Where in the world is it cheapest to cut carbon emissions? Aust. J. Agric. Resource Econ. 56, 315–331 (2012).
    Article Google Scholar
63. Paltsev, S., Reilly, J., Jacoby, H. D. & Tay, K. H. in Human-Induced Climate Change (Schlesinger, M. E. et al.) 282–293 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2007).
    Book Google Scholar
64. Kober, T., van der Zwaan, B. C. C. & Rosler, H. Emission certificate trade and costs under regional burden-sharing regimes for a 2 °C climate change control target. Clim. Change Econ. 5, 1440001 (2014).
    Article Google Scholar
65. Tavoni, M., Chakravarty, S. & Socolow, R. Safe vs. fair: a formidable trade-off in tackling climate change. Sustainability 4, 210–226 (2012).
    Article Google Scholar
66. IEA. Energy Technology Perspectives 2012 (OECD/IEA, 2012).
67. Carraro, C., Favero, A. & Massetti, E. Investments and public finance in a green, low carbon, economy. Energy Econ. 34 (Suppl. 1), S15–S28 (2012).
    Article Google Scholar
68. McCollum, D. et al. Energy investments under climate policy: A comparison of global models. Clim. Change Econ. 4, 1340010 (2013).
    Article Google Scholar
69. Bosetti, V., Carraro, C., Massetti, E., Sgobbi, A. & Tavoni, M. Optimal energy investment and R&D strategies to stabilize atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations. Resource Energy Econ. 31, 123–137 (2009).
    Article Google Scholar
70. IEA. Global Gaps in Clean Energy RD&D: Updates and Recommendations for International Collaboration (IEA, 2010). Available at http://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/global_gaps.pdf.
71. Marangoni, G. & M. Tavoni. The clean energy R&D strategy for 2 °C. Clim. Change Econ. 5, 1440003 (2014).
    Article Google Scholar
72. Nemet, G. F. & Kammen, D. M. US energy research and development: Declining investment, increasing need, and the feasibility of expansion. Energy Policy 35, 746–755 (2007).
    Article Google Scholar
73. Popp, D. ENTICE-BR: The effects of backstop technology R&D on climate policy models. Energy Econ. 28, 188–222 (2006).
    Article Google Scholar
74. IMF. Energy Subsidy reform: Lessons and implications. Available at https://www.imf.org/external/np/pp/eng/2013/012813.pdf (2013).
75. IEA. World Energy Outlook 2012 (OECD/IEA, 2012).
76. Bowen, A., Campiglio, E. & Tavoni, M. A macroeconomic perspective on climate change mitigation: Meeting the financing challenge. Clim. Change Econ. 5, 1440005 (2014).
    Article Google Scholar
77. Wara, M. Is the global carbon market working? Nature 445, 595–596 (2007).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
78. Jewell, J. et al. Energy security of China, India, the E.U. and the U.S. under long-term scenarios: Results from six IAMs. Clim. Change Econ. 4, 1340011 (2013).
    Article Google Scholar
79. Cherp, A., Jewell, J., Vinichenko, V., Bauer, N. & De Cian, E. Global energy security under different climate policies, GDP growth rates and fossil resource availabilities. Clim. Change (in the press). Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10584-013-0950-x (2013).
80. Rose, S. K. et al. Non-Kyoto radiative forcing in long-run greenhouse gas emissions and climate change scenarios. Clim. Change 123, 511–525 (2014).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
81. Bollen, J., van der Zwaan, B. C. C., Brink, C. & Eerens, H. Local air pollution and global climate change: A combined cost-benefit analysis. Resource Energy Econ. 31, 161–181 (2009).
    Article Google Scholar
82. Rafaj, P., Schöpp, W., Russ, P., Heyes, C. & Amann, M. Co-benefits of post-2012 global climate mitigation policies. Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Change 18, 801–824 (2013).
    Article Google Scholar
83. Rao, S. et al. Better air for better health: Forging synergies in policies for energy access, climate change and air pollution. Glob. Environ. Change 23, 1122–1130 (2013).
    Article Google Scholar
84. Nemet, G. F., Holloway, T. & Meier, P. Implications of incorporating air-quality co-benefits into climate change policymaking. Environ. Res. Lett. 5, 014007 (2010).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
85. Barrett, S. Self-enforcing international environmental agreements. Oxf. Econ. Pap. 46, 878–894 (1994). This provides a classic introduction to the issue of stability of climate agreements.
    Article Google Scholar
86. Carraro, C. & Siniscalco, D. Strategies for the international protection of the environment. J. Public Econ. 52, 309–328 (1993).
    Article Google Scholar
87. Tulkens, H. & Chander, P. The core of an economy with multilateral environmental externalities. Int. J. Game Theory 26, 379–401 (1997).
    Article Google Scholar
88. Finus, M., Van Ierland, E. & Dellink, R. Stability of Climate Coalitions in a Cartel Formation Game. Available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=447461 (Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei, 2003).
    Book Google Scholar
89. Fuentes-Albero, C. & Rubio, S. J. Can international environmental cooperation be bought? Eur. J. Operat. Res. 202, 255–264 (2010).
    Article Google Scholar
90. Barrett, S. & Dannenberg, A. Sensitivity of collective action to uncertainty about climate tipping points. Nature Clim. Change 4, 36–39 (2013).
    Article Google Scholar
91. Bosetti, V., Carraro, C., De Cian, E., Massetti, E. & Tavoni, M. Incentives and stability of international climate coalitions: An integrated assessment. Energy Policy 55, 44–56 (2013).
    Article Google Scholar
92. Nagashima, M., Dellink, R., van Ierland, E. & Weikard, H-P. Stability of international climate coalitions: A comparison of transfer schemes. Ecol. Econ. 68, 1476–1487 (2009).
    Article Google Scholar
93. Bréchet, T., Gerard, F. & Tulkens, H. Efficiency vs. stability in climate coalitions: a conceptual and computational appraisal. Energy J. 32, 49 (2011).
    Article Google Scholar
94. Carbone, J. C., Helm, C. & Rutherford, T. F. The case for international emission trade in the absence of cooperative climate policy. J. Environ. Econ. Managem. 58, 266–280 (2009).
    Article Google Scholar
95. Tol, R. S. Climate coalitions in an integrated assessment model. Comput. Econ. 18, 159–172 (2001).
    Article Google Scholar
96. Lessmann, K. et al. The stability and effectiveness of climate coalitions: A comparative analysis of multiple integrated assessment models. FEEM Working Pap. 2014.005 Available at http://services.bepress.com/feem/paper868/ (2014).
    Google Scholar

Download references