IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/ieaple/v18y2018i1d10.1007_s10784-017-9371-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fairly sharing 1.5: national fair shares of a 1.5 °C-compliant global mitigation effort

Author

Listed:
  • Ceecee Holz

    (Climate Equity Reference Project)

  • Sivan Kartha

    (Climate Equity Reference Project
    Stockholm Environment Institute)

  • Tom Athanasiou

    (Climate Equity Reference Project
    EcoEquity)

Abstract

The problem of fairly distributing the global mitigation effort is particularly important for the 1.5 °C temperature limitation objective, due to its rapidly depleting global carbon budget. Here, we present methodology and results of the first study examining national mitigation pledges presented at the 2015 Paris climate summit, relative to equity benchmarks and 1.5 °C-compliant global mitigation. Uniquely, pertinent ethical choices were made via deliberative processes of civil society organizations, resulting in an agreed range of effort-sharing parameters. Based on this, we quantified each country’s range of fair shares of 1.5 °C-compliant mitigation, using the Climate Equity Reference Project’s allocation framework. Contrasting this with national 2025/2030 mitigation pledges reveals a large global mitigation gap, within which wealthier countries’ mitigation pledges fall far short, while poorer countries’ pledges, collectively, meet their fair share. We also present results for individual countries (e.g. China exceeding; India meeting; EU, USA, Japan, and Brazil falling short). We outline ethical considerations and choices arising when deliberating fair effort sharing and discuss the importance of separating this choice making from the scholarly work of quantitative “equity modelling” itself. Second, we elaborate our approach for quantifying countries’ fair shares of a global mitigation effort, the Climate Equity Reference Framework. Third, we present and discuss the results of this analysis with emphasis on the role of mitigation support. In concluding, we identify twofold obligations for all countries in a justice-centred implementation of 1.5 °C-compliant mitigation: (1) unsupported domestic reductions and (2) engagement in deep international mitigation cooperation, through provision of international financial and other support, or through undertaking additional supported mitigation activities. Consequently, an equitable pathway to 1.5 °C can only be imagined with such large-scale international cooperation and support; otherwise, 1.5 °C-compliant mitigation will remain out of reach, impose undue suffering on the world’s poorest, or both.

Suggested Citation

  • Ceecee Holz & Sivan Kartha & Tom Athanasiou, 2018. "Fairly sharing 1.5: national fair shares of a 1.5 °C-compliant global mitigation effort," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 117-134, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:ieaple:v:18:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s10784-017-9371-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s10784-017-9371-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10784-017-9371-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10784-017-9371-z?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. Rae Kwon Chung, 2007. "A CER discounting scheme could save climate change regime after 2012," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(2), pages 171-176, March.
    2. Niklas H�hne & Michel den Elzen & Donovan Escalante, 2014. "Regional GHG reduction targets based on effort sharing: a comparison of studies," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(1), pages 122-147, January.
    3. Winkler, Harald & Baumert, Kevin & Blanchard, Odile & Burch, Sarah & Robinson, John, 2007. "What factors influence mitigative capacity?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 692-703, January.
    4. Niklas H�hne & Michel den Elzen & Martin Weiss, 2006. "Common but differentiated convergence (CDC): a new conceptual approach to long-term climate policy," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(2), pages 181-199, March.
    5. Harald Winkler & Lavanya Rajamani, 2014. "CBDR&RC in a regime applicable to all," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(1), pages 102-121, January.
    6. Lant Pritchett, 2003. "Who is not Poor? Proposing a Higher International Standard for Poverty," Working Papers 33, Center for Global Development.
    7. Narasimha Rao, 2014. "International and intranational equity in sharing climate change mitigation burdens," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 129-146, May.
    8. Lant Pritchett, 2006. "Who is Not Poor? Dreaming of a World Truly Free of Poverty," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 21(1), pages 1-23.
    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. Marcucci, Adriana & Panos, Evangelos & Kypreos, Socrates & Fragkos, Panagiotis, 2019. "Probabilistic assessment of realizing the 1.5 °C climate target," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 239(C), pages 239-251.
    2. Paula Castro, 2020. "Past and future of burden sharing in the climate regime: positions and ambition from a top-down to a bottom-up governance system," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 41-60, March.
    3. Manish Kumar Shrivastava & Saradindu Bhaduri, 2019. "Market-based mechanism and ‘climate justice’: reframing the debate for a way forward," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 497-513, October.
    4. Håkon Sælen, 2020. "Under What Conditions Will the Paris Process Produce a Cycle of Increasing Ambition Sufficient to Reach the 2°C Goal?," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 20(2), pages 83-104, May.
    5. Jose Rafael Núñez Collado & Han-Hsiang Wang & Tsung-Yi Tsai, 2019. "Urban Informality in the Paris Climate Agreement: Content Analysis of the Nationally Determined Contributions of Highly Urbanized Developing Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-17, September.
    6. Ceecee Holz & Guy Cunliffe & Kennedy Mbeva & Pieter W. Pauw & Harald Winkler, 2023. "Tempering and enabling ambition: how equity is considered in domestic processes preparing NDCs," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 271-292, September.
    7. Karl W. Steininger & Keith Williges & Lukas H. Meyer & Florian Maczek & Keywan Riahi, 2022. "Sharing the effort of the European Green Deal among countries," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-13, December.
    8. Joyeeta Gupta & Aarti Gupta & Courtney Vegelin, 2022. "Equity, justice and the SDGs: lessons learnt from two decades of INEA scholarship," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 393-409, June.
    9. Kyle S. Herman, 2024. "Doomed to fail? A call to reform global climate governance and greenhouse gas inventories," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 257-288, September.
    10. Robert B. Gibson & Karine Péloffy & Meinhard Doelle, 2018. "Challenges and Opportunities of a Forthcoming Strategic Assessment of the Implications of International Climate Change Mitigation Commitments for Individual Undertakings in Canada," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-21, October.
    11. Li, Mengyu & Duan, Maosheng, 2020. "Efforts-sharing to achieve the Paris goals: Ratcheting-up of NDCs and taking full advantage of international carbon market," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 280(C).
    12. Nicole J. Berg & Heleen L. Soest & Andries F. Hof & Michel G. J. Elzen & Detlef P. Vuuren & Wenying Chen & Laurent Drouet & Johannes Emmerling & Shinichiro Fujimori & Niklas Höhne & Alexandre C. Kõber, 2020. "Implications of various effort-sharing approaches for national carbon budgets and emission pathways," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 162(4), pages 1805-1822, October.
    13. Andrew L. Fanning & Jason Hickel, 2023. "Compensation for atmospheric appropriation," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 6(9), pages 1077-1086, September.
    14. Céline Guivarch & Nicolas Taconet, 2020. "Inégalités mondiales et changement climatique," Revue de l'OFCE, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 0(1), pages 35-70.
    15. Fanning, Andrew L. & Hickel, Jason, 2023. "Compensation for atmospheric appropriation," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 119717, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    16. Ploy Achakulwisut & Peter Erickson & Céline Guivarch & Roberto Schaeffer & Elina Brutschin & Steve Pye, 2023. "Global fossil fuel reduction pathways under different climate mitigation strategies and ambitions," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-15, December.

    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. Joseph E. Aldy & William A. Pizer & Keigo Akimoto, 2017. "Comparing emissions mitigation efforts across countries," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(4), pages 501-515, May.
    2. Li, Mengyu & Duan, Maosheng, 2020. "Efforts-sharing to achieve the Paris goals: Ratcheting-up of NDCs and taking full advantage of international carbon market," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 280(C).
    3. Schleich, Joachim & Dütschke, Elisabeth & Schwirplies, Claudia & Ziegler, Andreas, 2014. "Citizens' perceptions of justice in international climate policy: Empirical insights from China, Germany and the US," Working Papers "Sustainability and Innovation" S2/2014, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
    4. Axel Michaelowa & Katharina Michaelowa, 2015. "Do rapidly developing countries take up new responsibilities for climate change mitigation?," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 133(3), pages 499-510, December.
    5. Harald Winkler & Niklas Höhne & Guy Cunliffe & Takeshi Kuramochi & Amanda April & Maria Jose Villafranca Casas, 2018. "Countries start to explain how their climate contributions are fair: more rigour needed," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 99-115, February.
    6. Lining Wang & Wenying Chen & XunZhang Pan & Nan Li & Huan Wang & Danyang Li & Han Chen, 2018. "Scale and benefit of global carbon markets under the 2 °C goal: integrated modeling and an effort-sharing platform," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 23(8), pages 1207-1223, December.
    7. A. F. Hof & M. G. J. Elzen & A. Mendoza Beltran, 2016. "The EU 40 % greenhouse gas emission reduction target by 2030 in perspective," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 375-392, June.
    8. Weitzel, Matthias & Ghosh, Joydeep & Peterson, Sonja & Pradhan, Basanta K., 2015. "Effects of international climate policy for India: evidence from a national and global CGE model," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(4), pages 516-538, August.
    9. Joyeeta Gupta & Aarti Gupta & Courtney Vegelin, 2022. "Equity, justice and the SDGs: lessons learnt from two decades of INEA scholarship," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 393-409, June.
    10. Hongbo Duan & Gupeng Zhang & Shouyang Wang & Ying Fan, 2018. "Balancing China’s climate damage risk against emission control costs," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 387-403, March.
    11. Hennessey, Ryan & Pittman, Jeremy & Morand, Annette & Douglas, Allan, 2017. "Co-benefits of integrating climate change adaptation and mitigation in the Canadian energy sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 214-221.
    12. Peter Frumhoff & Richard Heede & Naomi Oreskes, 2015. "The climate responsibilities of industrial carbon producers," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 132(2), pages 157-171, September.
    13. Wakiyama, Takako & Zusman, Eric, 2021. "The impact of electricity market reform and subnational climate policy on carbon dioxide emissions across the United States: A path analysis," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    14. Barbara Schlomann & Wolfgang Eichhammer, 2014. "Interaction between Climate, Emissions Trading and Energy Efficiency Targets," Energy & Environment, , vol. 25(3-4), pages 709-731, April.
    15. Viktoras Kulionis & Andreas Froemelt & Stephan Pfister, 2024. "Multiscale Orientation Values for Biodiversity, Climate and Water: A Scientific Input for Science- Based Targets," Papers 2403.11680, arXiv.org.
    16. Zhu, Bangzhu & Jiang, Mingxing & He, Kaijian & Chevallier, Julien & Xie, Rui, 2018. "Allocating CO2 allowances to emitters in China: A multi-objective decision approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 441-451.
    17. David Pálenský & Antonín Lupíšek, 2019. "Carbon Benchmark for Czech Residential Buildings Based on Climate Goals Set by the Paris Agreement for 2030," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-13, November.
    18. Dean Jolliffe & Espen Beer Prydz, 2016. "Estimating international poverty lines from comparable national thresholds," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 14(2), pages 185-198, June.
    19. Hiroaki Sakamoto & Masako Ikefuji & Jan R. Magnus, 2020. "Adaptation for Mitigation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 75(3), pages 457-484, March.
    20. Weitzel, Matthias, 2014. "Worse off from reduced cost? The role of policy design under uncertain technological advancement," Kiel Working Papers 1926, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).

    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:spr:ieaple:v:18:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s10784-017-9371-z. 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.springer.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.