Determinants of emissions pathways in the coupled climate–social system (original) (raw)

References

1. Collins, M. et al. in Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group 1 to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (eds Stocker, T. F. et al.) 1029–1136 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2013).
2. Beckage, B. et al. Linking models of human behaviour and climate alters projected climate change. Nat. Clim. Change 8, 79–84 (2018).
   Article ADS Google Scholar
3. Beckage, B. et al. The Earth has humans, so why don’t our climate models? Clim. Change 163, 181–188 (2020).
   Article ADS Google Scholar
4. Peng, W. et al. Climate policy models need to get real about people—here’s how. Nature 594, 174–176 (2021).
   Article ADS CAS PubMed Google Scholar
5. Geels, F. W., Sovacool, B., Schwanen, T. & Sorrell, S. Sociotechnical transitions for deep decarbonization. Science 357, 1242–1244 (2017).
   Article ADS CAS PubMed Google Scholar
6. Farmer, J. D. et al. Sensitive intervention points in the post-carbon transition. Science 364, 132–134 (2019).
   Article ADS CAS PubMed Google Scholar
7. Otto, I. M. et al. Social tipping dynamics for stabilizing Earth’s climate by 2050. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 117, 2354–2365 (2020).
   Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
8. Woodard, D. L., Davis, S. J. & Randerson, J. T. Economic carbon cycle feedbacks may offset additional warming from natural feedbacks. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 759–764 (2019).
   Article ADS CAS PubMed Google Scholar
9. Howard, P. & Livermore, M. A. Sociopolitical feedbacks and climate change. Harvard Environ. Law Rev. 43, 119–174 (2019).
   Google Scholar
10. Friedlingstein, P. et al. Global carbon budget 2020. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 12, 3269–3340 (2020).
    Article ADS Google Scholar
11. Sognnaes, I. et al. A multi-model analysis of long-term emissions and warming. Nat. Clim. Change 8, 493 (2021).
    Google Scholar
12. Victor, D. G. et al. Prove Paris was more than paper promises. Nature 548, 25–27 (2017).
    Article ADS CAS PubMed Google Scholar
13. Field, C. B. & Mach, K. J. Climate: rightsizing carbon dioxide removal. Science 356, 706–707 (2017).
    Article ADS CAS PubMed Google Scholar
14. Tong, D. et al. Committed emissions from existing energy infrastructure jeopardize 1.5 °C climate target. Nature 572, 373–377 (2019).
    Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
15. Smith, S. M. A case for transparent net-zero carbon targets. Commun. Earth Environ. 2, 24 (2021).
    Article ADS Google Scholar
16. IPCC. in Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 °C (eds Masson-Delmotte, V. et al.) p15 (WMO, 2018).
17. Strauch, Y. Beyond the low-carbon niche: global tipping points in the rise of wind, solar, and electric vehicles to regime scale systems. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 62, 101364 (2020).
    Article Google Scholar
18. Fiddaman, T. S. Exploring policy options with a behavioral climate-economy model. Syst. Dyn. Rev. 18, 243–267 (2002).
    Article Google Scholar
19. Brauers, H., Oei, P.-Y. & Walk, P. Comparing coal phase-out pathways: the United Kingdom’s and Germany’s diverging transitions. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transitions 37, 238–253 (2020).
    Article Google Scholar
20. Sperling, D. Electric vehicles: approaching the tipping point. Bull. At. Sci. 74, 11–18 (2018).
    Article Google Scholar
21. Hoekstra, A., Steinbuch, M. & Verbong, G. Creating agent-based energy transition management models that can uncover profitable pathways to climate change mitigation. Complexity 2017, 1967645 (2017).
    Article MATH Google Scholar
22. Vinichenko, V., Cherp, A. & Jewell, J. Historical precedents and feasibility of rapid coal and gas decline required for the 1.5 °C target. One Earth 4, 1477–1490 (2021).
    Article Google Scholar
23. Fouquet, R. Historical energy transitions: speed, prices and system transformation. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 22, 7–12 (2016).
    Article Google Scholar
24. Centola, D., Becker, J., Brackbill, D. & Baronchelli, A. Experimental evidence for tipping points in social convention. Science 360, 1116–1119 (2018).
    Article ADS CAS PubMed Google Scholar
25. Hacker, J. S. & Pierson, P. Policy feedback in an age of polarization. Ann. Am. Acad. Pol. Soc. Sci. 685, 8–28 (2019).
    Article Google Scholar
26. Pierson, P. When effect becomes cause: policy feedback and political change. World Polit. 45, 595–628 (1993).
    Article Google Scholar
27. Stokes, L. C. Short Circuiting Policy: Interest Groups and the Battle Over Clearn Energy and Climate Policy in the American States (Oxford Univ. Press, 2020).
28. Berglund, C. & Söderholm, P. Modeling technical change in energy system analysis: analyzing the introduction of learning-by-doing in bottom-up energy models. Energy Policy 34, 1344–1356 (2006).
    Article Google Scholar
29. EN-ROADS, https://en-roads.climateinteractive.org/scenario.html (Climate Interactive, accessed 16 November 2021).
30. Latané, B. The psychology of social impact. Am. Psychol. 36, 343–356 (1981).
    Article Google Scholar
31. Mason, W. A., Conrey, F. R. & Smith, E. R. Situating social influence processes: dynamic, multidirectional flows of influence within social networks. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 11, 279–300 (2007).
    Article Google Scholar
32. Bénabou, R. & Tirole, J. Incentives and prosocial behavior. Am. Econ. Rev. 96, 1652–1678 (2006).
    Article Google Scholar
33. McDonald, R. I. & Crandall, C. S. Social norms and social influence. Curr. Opin. Behav. Sci. 3, 147–151 (2015).
    Article Google Scholar
34. Goldberg, M. H., van der Linden, S., Leiserowitz, A. & Maibach, E. Perceived social consensus can reduce ideological biases on climate change. Environ. Behav. 52, 495–517 (2020).
    Article Google Scholar
35. Bamberg, S. & Moser, G. Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford and Tomera: a new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental behavior. J. Environ. Psychol. 27, 14–25 (2007).
    Article Google Scholar
36. Schultz, P. W., Nolan, J. M. & Cialdini, R. B. The constructive, destructive, and reconstructive power of social norms. Psychol. Sci. 10, 429–434 (2007).
    Article Google Scholar
37. Bollinger, B. & Gillingham, K. Peer-effects in the diffusion of solar photovoltaics. Mark. Sci. 31, 900–912 (2012).
    Article Google Scholar
38. Andreoni, J., Nikiforakis, N. & Siegenthaler, S. Predicting social tipping and norm change in controlled experiments. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118, e2014893118 (2021).
    Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
39. Santer, B. D. et al. Identifying human influences on atmospheric temperature. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 26–33 (2013).
    Article ADS CAS PubMed Google Scholar
40. Marvel, K. & Bonfils, C. Identifying external influences on global precipitation. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 19301–19306 (2013).
    Article ADS CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
41. Parmesan, C. & Yohe, G. A globally coherent fingerprint of climate change impacts across natural systems. Nature 421, 37–42 (2003).
    Article ADS CAS PubMed Google Scholar
42. Diffenbaugh, N. S. et al. Quantifying the influence of global warming on unprecedented extreme climate events. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, 4881–4886 (2017).
    Article ADS CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
43. Ricke K. L. & Caldeira K. Natural climate variability and future climate policy. Nat. Clim. Chang. 4, 333–338 (2014).
44. Howe, P. D., Markowitz, E. M., Lee, T. M., Ko, C.-Y. & Leiserowitz, A. Global perceptions of local temperature change. Nat. Clim. Change 3, 352–356 (2012).
    Article ADS Google Scholar
45. Howe, P. D. & Leiserowitz, A. Who remembers a hot summer or a cold winter? The asymmetric effect of beliefs about global warming on perceptions of local climate conditions in the U.S. Glob. Environ. Change 23, 1488–1500 (2013).
    Article Google Scholar
46. Deryugina, T. How do people update? The effects of local weather fluctuations on beliefs about global warming. Clim. Change 118, 397–416 (2013).
    Article ADS Google Scholar
47. Kaufmann, R. K. et al. Spatial heterogeneity of climate change as an experiential basis for skepticism. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, 67–71 (2017).
    Article ADS CAS PubMed Google Scholar
48. Hamilton, L. C. & Stampone, M. D. Blowin’ in the wind: short-term weather and belief in anthropogenic climate change. Weather Clim. Soc. 5, 112–119 (2013).
    Article Google Scholar
49. Zaval, L., Keenan, E. A., Johnson, E. J. & Weber, E. U. How warm days increase belief in global warming. Nat. Clim. Change 4, 143–147 (2014).
    Article ADS Google Scholar
50. Howe, P. D., Marlon, J. R., Mildenberger, M. & Shield, B. S. How will climate change shape climate opinion? Environ. Res. Lett. 14, 113001 (2019).
    Article ADS Google Scholar
51. McCright, A. M., Dunlap, R. E. & Xiao, C. The impacts of temperature anomalies and political orientation on perceived winter warming. Nat. Clim. Change 4, 1077–1081 (2014).
    Article ADS Google Scholar
52. Hazlett, C. & Mildenberger, M. Wildfire exposure increases pro-environment voting within Democratic but not Republican areas. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 114, 1359–1365 (2020).
    Article Google Scholar
53. Druckman, J. N. & McGrath, M. C. The evidence for motivated reasoning in climate change preference formation. Nat. Clim. Change 9, 111–119 (2019).
    Article ADS Google Scholar
54. Kahan, D. M., Jenkins‐Smith, H. & Braman, D. Cultural cognition of scientific consensus. J. Risk Res. 14, 147–174 (2011).
    Article Google Scholar
55. Moore, F. C., Obradovich, N., Lehner, F. & Baylis, P. Rapidly declining remarkability of temperature anomalies may obscure public perception of climate change. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 4905–4910 (2019).
    Article ADS CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
56. Mildenberger, M. Carbon Captured: How Business and Labor Control Climate Politics (MIT Press, 2020).
57. Hertel-Fernandez, A., Mildenberger, M. & Stokes, L. C. Legislative staff and representation in Congress. Am. Polit. Sci. Rev. 113, 1–18 (2018).
    Article Google Scholar
58. Jenkins, J. D. Political economy constraints on carbon pricing policies: what are the implications for economic efficiency, environmental efficacy, and climate policy design? Energy Policy 69, 467–477 (2014).
    Article Google Scholar
59. Truelove, H. B., Carrico, A. R., Weber, E. U., Raimi, K. T. & Vandenbergh, M. P. Positive and negative spillover of pro-environmental behavior: an integrative review and theoretical framework. Glob. Environ. Change 29, 127–138 (2014).
    Article Google Scholar
60. Sparkman, G. & Walton, G. M. Dynamic norms promote sustainable behavior, even if it is counternormative. Psychol. Sci. 28, 1663–1674 (2017).
    Article PubMed Google Scholar
61. Kraft-Todd, G. T., Bollinger, B., Gillingham, K., Lamp, S. & Rand, D. G. Credibility-enhancing displays promote the provision of non-normative public goods. Nature 563, 245–248 (2018).
    Article ADS CAS PubMed Google Scholar
62. Attari, S. Z., Krantz, D. H. & Weber, E. U. Statements about climate researchers’ carbon footprints affect their credibility and the impact of their advice. Clim. Change 138, 325–338 (2016).
    Article ADS Google Scholar
63. Attari, S. Z., Krantz, D. H. & Weber, E. U. Climate change communicators’ carbon footprints affect their audience’s policy support. Clim. Change 154, 529–545 (2019).
    Article ADS CAS Google Scholar
64. Tankard, M. E. & Paluck, E. L. Norm perception as a vehicle for social change. Soc. Issues Policy Rev. 10, 181–211 (2016).
    Article Google Scholar
65. Kahan, D. M. What do alternative sanctions mean? Univ. Chicago Law Rev. 63, 591–653 (1996).
    Article ADS Google Scholar
66. Sunstein, C. R. On the expressive function of law. Univ. PA Law Rev. 281, 2021–2054 (1996).
    Article Google Scholar
67. McAdams, R. H. An attitudinal theory of expressive law. Oregon Law Rev. 79, 339–390 (2000).
    Google Scholar
68. Posner, E. A. Symbols, signals, and social norms in politics and the law. J. Legal Stud. 27, 765–797 (1998).
    Article Google Scholar
69. Ofosu, E. K., Chambers, M. K., Chen, J. M. & Hehman, E. Same-sex marriage legalization associated with reduced implicit and explicit antigay bias. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 8846–8851 (2019).
    Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
70. Tankard, M. E. & Paluck, E. L. The effect of a supreme court decision regarding gay marriage on social norms and personal attitudes. Psychol. Sci. 28, 1334–1344 (2017).
    Article PubMed Google Scholar
71. Orbell, S. et al. Social–cognitive beliefs, alcohol, and tobacco use: a prospective community study of change following a ban on smoking in public places. Health Psychol. 28, 753–761 (2009).
    Article PubMed Google Scholar
72. Galbiati, R., Henry, E., Jacquemet, N. & Lobeck, M. How laws affect the perception of norms: empirical evidence from the lockdown. PLoS ONE 16, e0256624 (2021).
73. Trancik, J. E. Scale and innovation in the energy sector: a focus on photovoltaics and nuclear fission. Environ. Res. Lett. 1, 014009 (2006).
    Article ADS Google Scholar
74. Yeh, S. & Rubin, E. S. A review of uncertainties in technology experience curves. Energy Econ. 34, 762–771 (2012).
    Article Google Scholar
75. Rubin, E. S., Azevedo, I. M. L., Jaramillo, P. & Yeh, S. A review of learning rates for electricity supply technologies. Energy Policy 86, 198–218 (2015).
    Article Google Scholar
76. Dell, M., Jones, B. F. & Olken, B. A. Temperature shocks and economic growth: evidence from the last half century. Am. Econ. J. Macroecon. 4, 66–95 (2012).
    Article Google Scholar
77. Burke, M., Hsiang, S. M. & Miguel, E. Global non-linear effect of temperature on economic production. Nature 527, 235–239 (2015).
    Article ADS CAS PubMed Google Scholar
78. Rode, A. et al. Estimating a social cost of carbon for global energy consumption. Nature 598, 308–314 (2021).
    Article ADS CAS PubMed Google Scholar
79. Hardin, E. et al. California drought increases CO2 footprint of energy. Sustain. Cities Soc. 28, 450–452 (2017).
    Article Google Scholar
80. Mideksa, T. K. & Kallbekken, S. The impact of climate change on the electricity market: a review. Energy Policy 38, 3579–3585 (2010).
    Article Google Scholar
81. Le Quéré, C. et al. Temporary reduction in daily global CO2 emissions during the COVID-19 forced confinement. Nat. Clim. Change 10, 647–653 (2020).
    Article ADS Google Scholar
82. Liu, Z. et al. Near-real-time monitoring of global CO2 emissions reveals the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. Nat. Commun. 11, 5172 (2020).
    Article ADS CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
83. Fagan, M. & Huang, C. Many Globally are as Concerned About Climate Change as About the Spread of Infections Diseases, https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/10/16/many-globally-are-as-concerned-about-climate-change-as-about-the-spread-of-infectious-diseases/ (Pew Research Center, 2020).
84. World Bank. Carbon Pricing Dashboard https://carbonpricingdashboard.worldbank.org/ (World Bank, 2021).
85. Andersson, J. J. Carbon taxes and CO2 emissions: Sweden as a case study. Am. Econ. J. Econ. Policy 11, 1–30 (2019).
    Article Google Scholar
86. Hilaire, J. et al. Negative emissions and international climate goals—learning from and about mitigation scenarios. Clim. Change 157, 189–219 (2019).
    Article ADS Google Scholar
87. Leiserowitz, A. A. et al. Politics & Global Warming, March 2018 (Yale Univ. & George Mason Univ., 2018).
88. Jurkowitz, M., Mitchell, A., Shearer, E. & Walker, M. U.S. Media Polarization and the 2020 Election: A Nation Divided (Pew Research Center, 2020).
89. Lang, C. & Pearson-Merkowitz, S. Partisan sorting in the United States, 1972–2012: new evidence from a dynamic analysis. Polit. Geogr. 48, 119–129 (2015).
    Article Google Scholar
90. Fernandez, B. R. & Rodrik, D. Resistance to reform: status quo bias in the presence of individual-specific uncertainty. Am. Econ. Rev. 81, 1146–1155 (1991).
    Google Scholar
91. Hausfather, Z. & Peters, G. P. Emissions—the ‘business as usual’ story is misleading. Nature 577, 618–620 (2020).
    Article ADS CAS PubMed Google Scholar
92. Nordhaus, W. D. A Question of Balance: Weighing the Options on Global Warming Policy (Yale Univ. Press, 2008).
93. Cai, Y. & Lontzek, T. S. The social cost of carbon with economic and climate risks. J. Polit. Econ. 127, 2684–2734 (2019).
    Article Google Scholar
94. Meinshausen, M. et al. The shared socio-economic pathway (SSP) greenhouse gas concentrations and their extensions to 2500. Geosci. Model Dev. 13, 3571–3605 (2020).
    Article ADS CAS Google Scholar
95. Rogers, E. M. Diffusion of Innovations (Free Press, 2003).
96. UN Population Division. World Population Prospects 2019, https://population.un.org/wpp/Download/Standard/Population/ (UN, 2019).
97. Halberstam, Y. & Knight, B. Homophily, group size, and the diffusion of political information in social networks: evidence from Twitter. J. Public Econ. 143, 73–88 (2016).
    Article Google Scholar
98. Huber, G. A. & Malhotra, N. Political homophily in social relationships: evidence from online dating behavior. J. Polit. 79, 269–283 (2017).
    Article Google Scholar
99. Nordhaus, W. D. Revisiting the social cost of carbon. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, 1518–1523 (2017).
    Article ADS CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
100. SSP Public Database—Version 2.0, https://tntcat.iiasa.ac.at/SspDb, accessed 24 November 2021 (IIASA, 2018).
101. Dietz, S., van der Ploeg, F., Rezai, A. & Venmans, F. Are economists getting climate dynamics right and does it matter? J. Assoc. Environ. Resour. Econ. 8, 895–921 (2021).
     Google Scholar
102. Meinshausen, M., Raper, S. C. B. & Wigley, T. M. L. Emulating coupled atmosphere-ocean and carbon cycle models with a simpler model, MAGICC6—part 1: model description and calibration. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 11, 1417–1456 (2011).
     Article ADS CAS Google Scholar
103. Meinshausen, M. et al. The RCP greenhouse gas concentrations and their extensions from 1765 to 2300. Clim. Change 109, 213–241 (2011).
     Article ADS CAS Google Scholar
104. MAGICC, https://live.magicc.org (Climate Resource, accessed 10 December 2021).

Download references