scholarly journals Country resolved combined emission and socio-economic pathways based on the RCP and SSP scenarios

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johannes Gütschow ◽  
M. Louise Jeffery ◽  
Annika Günther ◽  
Malte Meinshausen
Keyword(s):  
Policy Analysis ◽  
Climate Policy ◽  
Ghg Emissions ◽  
Single Model ◽  
Country Level ◽  
Current Trends ◽  
Climate Policies ◽  
Emissions Scenarios ◽  
Sres Scenarios ◽  
Country Specific

Abstract. Climate policy analysis needs reference scenarios to assess emissions targets and current trends. When presenting their national climate policies, countries often showcase their target trajectories against fictitious so-called baselines. These counterfactual scenarios are meant to present future Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions in the absence of climate policy. These so-called baselines presented by countries are often of limited use as they can be exaggerated and the methodology used to derive them is usually not transparent. Scenarios created by independent modeling groups using integrated assessment models (IAMs) can provide different interpretations of several socio-economic storylines and can provide a more realistic backdrop against which the projected target emission trajectory can be assessed. However, the IAMs are limited in regional resolution. This resolution is further reduced in intercomparison studies as data for a common set of regions are produced by aggregating the underlying smaller regions. Thus, the data are not readily available for country-specific policy analysis. This gap is closed by downscaling regional IAM scenarios to country-level. The last of such efforts has been performed for the SRES scenarios (Special Report on Emissions Scenarios), which are over a decade old by now. CMIP6 scenarios have been downscaled to a grid, however they cover only a few combinations of forcing levels and SSP storylines with only a single model per combination. Here, we provide up to date country scenarios, downscaled from the full RCP (Representative Concentration Pathways) and SSP (Shared Socio-Economic Pathways) scenario databases, using results from the SSP GDP (Gross Domestic Product) country model results as drivers for the downscaling process. The data is available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3638137 (Gütschow et al., 2020).

scholarly journals Country-resolved combined emission and socio-economic pathways based on the Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) and Shared Socio-Economic Pathway (SSP) scenarios

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 1005-1040
Author(s):  
Johannes Gütschow ◽  
M. Louise Jeffery ◽  
Annika Günther ◽  
Malte Meinshausen
Keyword(s):  
Policy Analysis ◽  
Climate Policy ◽  
Ghg Emissions ◽  
Coupled Model ◽  
Representative Concentration Pathway ◽  
Country Level ◽  
Current Trends ◽  
Climate Policies ◽  
Emissions Scenarios ◽  
Intercomparison Project

Abstract. Climate policy analysis needs reference scenarios to assess emission targets and current trends. When presenting their national climate policies, countries often showcase their target trajectories against fictitious so-called baselines. These counterfactual scenarios are meant to present future greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the absence of climate policy. These so-called baselines presented by countries are often of limited use, as they can be exaggerated and as the methodology used to derive them is usually not transparent. Scenarios created by independent modeling groups using integrated assessment models (IAMs) can provide different interpretations of several socio-economic storylines and can provide a more realistic backdrop against which the projected target emission trajectory can be assessed. However, the IAMs are limited in regional resolution. This resolution is further reduced in intercomparison studies, as data for a common set of regions are produced by aggregating the underlying smaller regions. Thus, the data are not readily available for country-specific policy analysis. This gap is closed by downscaling regional IAM scenarios to the country level. The last of such efforts has been performed for the SRES (“Special Report on Emissions Scenarios”) scenarios, which are over a decade old by now. CMIP6 (Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 6) scenarios have been downscaled to a grid; however they cover only a few combinations of forcing levels and SSP storylines with only a single model per combination. Here, we provide up-to-date country scenarios, downscaled from the full RCP (Representative Concentration Pathway) and SSP (Shared Socio-Economic Pathway) scenario databases, using results from the SSP GDP (gross domestic product) country model results as drivers for the downscaling process. The data are available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3638137 (Gütschow et al., 2020).

scholarly journals Is There a Link between Welfare Regime and Attitudes toward Climate Policy Instruments?

2021 ◽  
pp. 073112142199005
Author(s):  
Jukka Sivonen ◽  
Iida Kukkonen
Keyword(s):  
Climate Policy ◽  
Policy Instruments ◽  
Political Trust ◽  
European Social Survey ◽  
Welfare Regime ◽  
Climate Politics ◽  
Country Level ◽  
Climate Policies ◽  
Policy Attitudes ◽  
The Relationship

We explore the relationship between welfare regime and climate policy attitudes. The synergy hypothesis suggests that social and environmental policies can reinforce each other. Thus, more universal and generous welfare state model (i.e., welfare regime) is said to provide especially fertile ground for advancing climate policies. Using multilevel modeling and European Social Survey Round 8 data (including 23 countries in Europe and Israel), we test whether this hypothesis applies at the attitudinal level. Moreover, we hypothesize that country-level political trust predicts support for climate policy instruments. The study focuses on three instruments: fossil fuel taxation, subsidizing renewable energy, and banning energy-inefficient household appliances. The results indicate that welfare regime is significantly related to attitudes toward taxation, but less significantly toward subsidizing and banning. Political trust predicted support for all instruments, but the effect was particularly strong for taxation. The results highlight the importance of welfare structures in climate politics.

scholarly journals The EU ETS Top Ten Polluters List as a Policy Tool of Climate Action Organisations

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 201
Author(s):  
Andrei Zimakov
Keyword(s):  
Climate Policy ◽  
Ghg Emissions ◽  
Policy Instruments ◽  
Political Campaigns ◽  
Eu Ets ◽  
Common Reference ◽  
Policy Tool ◽  
Climate Policies ◽  
Climate Action ◽  
The Eu

The EU ETS is one of the most important EC instruments to curb CO2 emissions. Various climate action organisations use verified emissions data from EU ETS to calculate top EU polluters lists. These shortlists are actively used in their advocacy strategies as an evidence of national or EU-wide climate policies (under)performance to influence policymaking. However, there is no official EU ETS top ten list released by the EC what weakens the political power of this tool. Addressing possible reasons for EC’s reluctance the paper investigates the correlation between the presence of national enterprises in the EU ETS top ten list and the national climate policy actions over 2008-2019 timeframe. Despite different limitations, the EU ETS top ten is adequately reflecting main developments in national efforts to curb GHG emissions and is pointing out underperforming countries and industries covered by the EU ETS. In the variety of hard and soft EU climate policy instruments, the EU ETS top ten polluters list could feature as an information tool. It is especially important for climate action organizations, providing them with an officially released rating as a common reference point that they could use in their evaluations and political campaigns.

scholarly journals IPCC Sres Revisited: A Response

2003 ◽  
Vol 14 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 187-214 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nebojsa Nakicenovic ◽  
Arnulf Grübler ◽  
Stuard Gaffin ◽  
Tae Tong Jung ◽  
Tom Kram ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
Driving Forces ◽  
Ghg Emissions ◽  
Gdp Growth ◽  
Market Exchange ◽  
Output Section ◽  
Economic Output ◽  
Country Level ◽  
Sres Scenarios ◽  
Ipcc Sres

Mr. Castles and Mr. Henderson have criticized the Special Report on Emissions Scenarios (SRES) and other aspects of IPCC assessments. It is claimed that the methodology is “technically unsound” because market exchange rates (MER) are used instead of purchasing power parities (PPP) and that the scenarios themselves are flawed because the GDP growth in the developing regions is too high. The response is: The IPCC SRES reviews existing literature, most of which is MER based, including that from the World Bank, IEA and USDoE. Scenarios of GDP growth are typically expressed as MER (the preferred measure for GDP growth, as opposed to PPP which is a preferred measure for assessing differences in economic welfare). IPCC scenarios did include PPP-based scenarios, which Mr. Castles and Mr. Henderson have conveniently ignored. Contrary to what Mr. Castles and Mr. Henderson claim, IPCC scenarios are consistent with historical data, including that from 1990 to 2000, and with the most recent near term (up to 2020) projections of other agencies. Long-term emissions are based on multiple, interdependent driving forces, and not just economic growth. Mr. Castles and Mr. Henderson need to look beyond GDP. The IPCC scenarios provided information for only four world regions, and not for specific countries. Mr. Castles' and Mr. Henderson's critique is not of IPCC scenarios but of ongoing unpublished work in progress that is not part of SRES. We therefore show that Mr. Castles and Mr. Henderson have focused on constructing a “problem” that does not exist. SRES scenarios are sound and the IPCC has responded seriously and conscientiously. We detail our response below in nine sections. After an introduction (Section 1), we outline the SRES methodology for measuring economic output (Section 2). Section 3 compares SRES to long-historical economic development and provides five responses to the critics. Section 4 addresses the issue of country-level economic projections even if not part of SRES. Sections 5, 6 and 7 validate the SRES scenarios by comparing them with recent trends for economic and CO2 emission growth, as well as more recent scenarios available in the literature. Section 8 refutes the argument that lower economic growth in developing countries would lower GHG emissions correspondingly. Section 9 concludes.

scholarly journals A room with a view: a special issue with a special perspective

2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 205-210
Author(s):  
Simone Borghesi
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Developing Countries ◽  
Climate Policy ◽  
Present Article ◽  
Emerging Economies ◽  
Emissions Trading ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
Climate Policies

AbstractThe present article describes the main insights deriving from the papers collected in this special issue which jointly provide a ‘room with a view’ on some of the most relevant issues in climate policy such as: the role of uncertainty, the distributional implications of climate change, the drivers and applications of decarbonizing innovation, the role of emissions trading and its interactions with companion policies. While looking at different issues and from different angles, all papers share a similar attention to policy aspects and implications, especially in developing countries. This is particularly important to evaluate whether and to what extent the climate policies adopted thus far in developed countries can be replicated in emerging economies.

Three-Dimensional Decomposition Models for Chinese Manufacturing Subsector over 1996-2008

2013 ◽  
Vol 291-294 ◽  
pp. 3004-3013
Author(s):  
Ding Ma ◽  
Li Ning Wang ◽  
Wen Ying Chen
Keyword(s):  
Energy Intensity ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Ghg Emissions ◽  
Carbon Intensity ◽  
Emissions Reduction ◽  
Country Level ◽  
Rapid Economic Growth ◽  
Decomposition Models ◽  
Energy And Climate Policy ◽  
The Impact

At a time of increased international concern and negotiation for GHG emissions reduction, country studies on the underlying effects of GHG growth gain importance. China experienced continuous, rapid economic growth over the past. At the same time, energy consumption and CO2 emissions increased rapidly while the energy intensity and carbon intensity showed a downward trend at country level. What factors were driving this change? What measures can be adopted to ensure the continual decrease of energy intensity and carbon intensity? The refined IDA method is employed in this paper to identify the impact of each factor. A year-by-year decomposition is carried out at sector level, and various interesting results on the underlying effects are found. The results yield important hints for the planning of energy and climate policy.

Comments: Carbon Tariffs - Fair Incentives for Change?

2021 ◽  
Vol 73 (05) ◽  
pp. 8-8
Author(s):  
Pam Boschee
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Policy ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Carbon Price ◽  
Carbon Leakage ◽  
Carbon Taxes ◽  
Trading Systems ◽  
Climate Policies ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Carbon Tariff

Carbon credits, carbon taxes, and emissions trading systems are familiar terms in discussions about limiting global warming, the Paris Agreement, and net-zero emissions goals. A more recent addition to the glossary of climate policy is “carbon tariff.” While the concept is not new, it recently surfaced in nascent policymaking in the EU. In 2019, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen proposed a “carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM)” as part of a proposed green deal. In March, the European Parliament adopted a resolution on a World Trade Organization (WTO)-compatible CBAM. A carbon tariff, or the EU’s CBAM, is a tax applied to carbon-intensive imports. Countries that have pledged to be more ambitious in reducing emissions—and in some cases have implemented binding targets—may impose carbon costs on their own businesses. Being eyed now are cross-border or overseas businesses that make products in countries in which no costs are imposed for emissions, resulting in cheaper carbon-intensive goods. Those products are exported to the countries aiming for reduced emissions. The concern lies in the risk of locally made goods becoming unfairly disadvantaged against competitors that are not taking similar steps to deal with climate change. A carbon tariff is being considered to level the playing field: local businesses in countries applying a tariff can better compete as climate policies evolve and are adopted around the world. Complying with WTO rules to ensure fair treatment, the CBAM will be imposed only on high-emitting industries that compete directly with local industries paying a carbon price. In the short term, these are likely to be steel, chemicals, fertilizers, and cement. The Parliament’s statement introduced another term to the glossary of climate policy: carbon leakage. “To raise global climate ambition and prevent ‘carbon leakage,’ the EU must place a carbon price on imports from less climate-ambitious countries.” It refers to the situation that may occur if businesses were to transfer production to other countries with laxer emission constraints to avoid costs related to climate policies. This could lead to an increase in total emissions in the higher-emitting countries. “The resolution underlines that the EU’s increased ambition on climate change must not lead to carbon leakage as global climate efforts will not benefit if EU production is just moved to non-EU countries that have less ambitious emissions rules,” the Parliament said. It also emphasized the tariff “must not be misused to further protectionism.” A member of the environment committee, Yannick Jadot, said, “It is a major political and democratic test for the EU, which must stop being naïve and impose the same carbon price on products, whether they are produced in or outside the EU, to ensure the most polluting sectors also take part in fighting climate change and innovate towards zero carbon. This will give us the best chance of remaining below the 1.5°C warming limit, whilst also pushing our trading partners to be equally ambitious in order to enter the EU market.” The Commission is expected to present a legislative proposal on a CBAM in the second quarter of 2021 as part of the European Green Deal.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document