IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/natcli/v13y2023i2d10.1038_s41558-022-01570-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Coal-exit alliance must confront freeriding sectors to propel Paris-aligned momentum

Author

Listed:
  • Stephen L. Bi

    (Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK)
    Technical University of Berlin)

  • Nico Bauer

    (Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK))

  • Jessica Jewell

    (Chalmers University of Technology
    University of Bergen
    International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis)

Abstract

The global phase-out of coal by mid-century is considered vital to the Paris Agreement to limit warming well-below 2 °C above pre-industrial levels. Since the inception of the Powering Past Coal Alliance (PPCA) at COP23, political ambitions to accelerate the decline of coal have mounted to become the foremost priority at COP26. However, mitigation research lacks the tools to assess whether this bottom-up momentum can self-propagate toward Paris alignment. Here, we introduce dynamic policy evaluation (DPE), an evidence-based approach for emulating real-world policy-making. Given empirical relationships established between energy-economic developments and policy adoption, we endogenize national political decision-making into the integrated assessment model REMIND via multistage feedback loops with a probabilistic coalition accession model. DPE finds global PPCA participation

Suggested Citation

  • Stephen L. Bi & Nico Bauer & Jessica Jewell, 2023. "Coal-exit alliance must confront freeriding sectors to propel Paris-aligned momentum," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 13(2), pages 130-139, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:nat:natcli:v:13:y:2023:i:2:d:10.1038_s41558-022-01570-8
    DOI: 10.1038/s41558-022-01570-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-022-01570-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/s41558-022-01570-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Unruh, Gregory C., 2000. "Understanding carbon lock-in," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(12), pages 817-830, October.
    2. Roger Fouquet, 2016. "Path dependence in energy systems and economic development," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 1(8), pages 1-5, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chen Chris Gong & Falko Ueckerdt & Christoph Bertram & Yuxin Yin & David Bantje & Robert Pietzcker & Johanna Hoppe & Robin Hasse & Michaja Pehl & Sim'on Moreno-Leiva & Jakob Duerrwaechter & Jarusch Mu, 2023. "Multi-level emission impacts of electrification and coal pathways in China's netzero transition," Papers 2312.04332, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2024.
    2. Lola Nacke & Vadim Vinichenko & Aleh Cherp & Avi Jakhmola & Jessica Jewell, 2024. "Compensating affected parties necessary for rapid coal phase-out but expensive if extended to major emitters," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-16, December.
    3. Du, Binglin & Liu, Pei & Li, Zheng, 2023. "Coal power plants transition based on joint planning of power and central heating sectors: A case study of China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 283(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gregor Semieniuk & Emanuele Campiglio & Jean‐Francois Mercure & Ulrich Volz & Neil R. Edwards, 2021. "Low‐carbon transition risks for finance," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(1), January.
    2. Sofia Teives Henriques & Paul Sharp, 2021. "Without coal in the age of steam and dams in the age of electricity: an explanation for the failure of Portugal to industrialize before the Second World War," European Review of Economic History, European Historical Economics Society, vol. 25(1), pages 85-105.
    3. Csereklyei, Zsuzsanna & Anantharama, Nandini & Kallies, Anne, 2021. "Electricity market transitions in Australia: Evidence using model-based clustering," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    4. Wei Jin & ZhongXiang Zhang, 2018. "Capital Accumulation, Green Paradox, and Stranded Assets: An Endogenous Growth Perspective," Working Papers 2018.33, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    5. Kirsi Kotilainen & Pami Aalto & Jussi Valta & Antti Rautiainen & Matti Kojo & Benjamin K. Sovacool, 2019. "From path dependence to policy mixes for Nordic electric mobility: Lessons for accelerating future transport transitions," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 52(4), pages 573-600, December.
    6. Millot, Ariane & Maïzi, Nadia, 2021. "From open-loop energy revolutions to closed-loop transition: What drives carbon neutrality?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    7. Jin, Wei, 2021. "Path dependence, self-fulfilling expectations, and carbon lock-in," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    8. Foxon, T. J. & Gross, R. & Chase, A. & Howes, J. & Arnall, A. & Anderson, D., 2005. "UK innovation systems for new and renewable energy technologies: drivers, barriers and systems failures," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(16), pages 2123-2137, November.
    9. Rohan Best & Paul J. Burke, 2020. "Energy mix persistence and the effect of carbon pricing," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 64(3), pages 555-574, July.
    10. Curci, Ylenia & Mongeau Ospina, Christian A., 2016. "Investigating biofuels through network analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 60-72.
    11. Zhang, Hui & Cao, Libin & Zhang, Bing, 2017. "Emissions trading and technology adoption: An adaptive agent-based analysis of thermal power plants in China," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 23-32.
    12. Hellsmark, Hans & Hansen, Teis, 2020. "A new dawn for (oil) incumbents within the bioeconomy? Trade-offs and lessons for policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    13. Monica Santillan Vera & Lilia Garcia Manrique & Isabel Rodriguez Pena & Angel de la Vega Navarro, 2021. "Drivers of Electricity GHG Emissions and the Role of Natural Gas in Mexican Energy Transition," Working Paper Series 1021, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.
    14. Marzieh Ronaghi & Michael Reed & Sayed Saghaian, 2020. "The impact of economic factors and governance on greenhouse gas emission," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 22(2), pages 153-172, April.
    15. Marletto, Gerardo, 2011. "Structure, agency and change in the car regime. A review of the literature," European Transport \ Trasporti Europei, ISTIEE, Institute for the Study of Transport within the European Economic Integration, issue 47, pages 71-88.
    16. Valeria Costantini & Francesco Crespi, 2013. "Public policies for a sustainable energy sector: regulation, diversity and fostering of innovation," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 401-429, April.
    17. Li, Aitong & Xu, Yuan & Shiroyama, Hideaki, 2019. "Solar lobby and energy transition in Japan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    18. Aalbers, Rob & Shestalova, Victoria & Kocsis, Viktória, 2013. "Innovation policy for directing technical change in the power sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 1240-1250.
    19. Karlsson, Rasmus, 2012. "Carbon lock-in, rebound effects and China at the limits of statism," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 939-945.
    20. Nill, Jan & Kemp, Ren, 2009. "Evolutionary approaches for sustainable innovation policies: From niche to paradigm?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 668-680, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nat:natcli:v:13:y:2023:i:2:d:10.1038_s41558-022-01570-8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.