IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/tcpoxx/v13y2013i4p433-450.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Implications of international GHG offsets on global climate change mitigation

Author

Listed:
  • Peter A. Erickson
  • Michael Lazarus

Abstract

With the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Agreements reached in Cancún, Mexico, in December 2010, the future role of international GHG offsets in climate action has become particularly uncertain. One of the more vexing questions is: how offsets will be accounted for in reporting and reviewing progress toward meeting countries' emission-reduction pledges under the Cancún Agreements. This article quantifies the implications of double-counting international offsets by constructing and applying a model to analyse how potential offset supply and demand balances may evolve, based on specific assumptions about accounting rules, offset mechanisms, and country pledges for the year 2020. It is found that extensive use of international offsets, if counted both by the supplying (developing) and buying (developed) country, could effectively reduce the ambition of current pledges by up to 1.6 billion tonnes CO 2 e in 2020, suggesting that the current pledges could well fall even further short of the abatement needed to stay on a path consistent with limiting warming to 2 °C or 1.5 °C. If offsets do not represent additional reductions, then the dilution of pledges could be even greater. Possible remedies are described to address the risks of offset double-counting. Policy relevance This article finds that international GHG offsets could play a significant role in meeting developed-country pledges in 2020 - providing abatement to these countries exceeding 1 GtCO 2 e. Yet significant decisions remain that will substantially determine whether offsets will contribute productively to meeting a global mandate to reduce emissions on a pathway consistent with limiting warming to 1.5 °C or 2 °C. The prospect of double-counting is a loophole that could weaken the lower end of pledges by as much as 1.1 GtCO 2 e, and on the higher end of pledges by as much as 1.6 GtCO 2 e, significantly diluting the ambition of the Cancun Agreements. Coupled to this is the possibility of considerable non-additional credits, which could lead to the further weakening of pledges. Upcoming negotiations under the UNFCCC process will provide the opportunity to address these concerns directly.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter A. Erickson & Michael Lazarus, 2013. "Implications of international GHG offsets on global climate change mitigation," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(4), pages 433-450, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:tcpoxx:v:13:y:2013:i:4:p:433-450
    DOI: 10.1080/14693062.2013.777632
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/14693062.2013.777632
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/14693062.2013.777632?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. Alexandre Kossoy & Pierre Guigon, "undated". "State and Trends of the Carbon Market 2012," World Bank Publications - Reports 13336, The World Bank Group.
    2. repec:wbk:wboper:13335 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Dalia Streimikiene & Grigorios L. Kyriakopoulos & Vidas Lekavicius & Indre Siksnelyte-Butkiene, 2021. "Energy Poverty and Low Carbon Just Energy Transition: Comparative Study in Lithuania and Greece," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 158(1), pages 319-371, November.
    2. Lambert Schneider & Anja Kollmuss & Michael Lazarus, 2015. "Addressing the risk of double counting emission reductions under the UNFCCC," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 131(4), pages 473-486, August.

    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. 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.
    2. Zhong, Meirui & Zhang, Rui & Ren, Xiaohang, 2023. "The time-varying effects of liquidity and market efficiency of the European Union carbon market: Evidence from the TVP-SVAR-SV approach," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    3. Huang, Wenyang & Zhao, Jianyu & Wang, Xiaokang, 2024. "Model-driven multimodal LSTM-CNN for unbiased structural forecasting of European Union allowances open-high-low-close price," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    4. Till Neeff & Daniela G�hler & Francisco Ascui, 2014. "Finding a path for REDD+ between ODA and the CDM," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(2), pages 149-166, March.
    5. Hayashi, Daisuke & Huenteler, Joern & Lewis, Joanna I., 2018. "Gone with the wind: A learning curve analysis of China's wind power industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 38-51.
    6. Sheng, Jichuan & Qiu, Hong, 2018. "Governmentality within REDD+: Optimizing incentives and efforts to reduce emissions from deforestation and degradation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 611-622.
    7. Raphael Calel & Antoine Dechezleprêtre, 2016. "Environmental Policy and Directed Technological Change: Evidence from the European Carbon Market," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 98(1), pages 173-191, March.
    8. Rannou, Yves & Barneto, Pascal, 2016. "Futures trading with information asymmetry and OTC predominance: Another look at the volume/volatility relations in the European carbon markets," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 159-174.
    9. Olli-Pekka Kuuselaa & Gregory S. Amacher & Kwok Ping Tsang, 2013. "Intensity-Based Permit Quotas and the Business Cycle: Does Flexibility Pay Off?," Research Department Publications IDB-WP-450, Inter-American Development Bank, Research Department.
    10. Mazza, Paolo & Petitjean, Mikael, 2015. "How integrated is the European carbon derivatives market?," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 18-30.
    11. Zhang, Xi & Li, Jian, 2018. "Credit and market risks measurement in carbon financing for Chinese banks," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 549-557.
    12. Jinshan Zhu & Hui Yao & Yingkai Tang & Liyong Wang, 2015. "An econometric analysis of sub-national Clean Development Mechanism performance in China," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 20(7), pages 1137-1153, October.
    13. Jongmin Yu & Mindy L. Mallory, 2020. "Carbon price interaction between allocated permits and generated offsets," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 671-700, June.
    14. Coleman, Andrew, 2018. "Forest-based carbon sequestration, and the role of forward, futures, and carbon-lending markets: A comparative institutions approach," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 95-104.
    15. Ling Huang & Yishu Zhou, 2019. "Carbon Prices and Fuel Switching: A Quasi-experiment in Electricity Markets," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 74(1), pages 53-98, September.
    16. Daskalakis, George, 2013. "On the efficiency of the European carbon market: New evidence from Phase II," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 369-375.
    17. Chunguang Sheng & Guangyu Wang & Yude Geng & Lirong Chen, 2020. "The Correlation Analysis of Futures Pricing Mechanism in China’s Carbon Financial Market," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-20, September.
    18. Wolfgang Sterk & Hans Bolscher & Jeroen van der Laan & Jelmer Hoogzaad & Jos Sijm, 2015. "Developing a sectoral new market mechanism: insights from theoretical analysis and country showcases," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(4), pages 417-437, July.
    19. Khan, Irfan & Hou, Fujun & Le, Hoang Phong & Ali, Syed Ahtsham, 2021. "Do natural resources, urbanization, and value-adding manufacturing affect environmental quality? Evidence from the top ten manufacturing countries," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    20. Benjamin T. Wood & Susannah M. Sallu & Jouni Paavola, 2016. "Can CDM finance energy access in Least Developed Countries? Evidence from Tanzania," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(4), pages 456-473, 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:taf:tcpoxx:v:13:y:2013:i:4:p:433-450. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/tcpo20 .

    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.