Author
Abstract
A considerable body of academic literature has emerged that addresses methods for consumption-based accounting of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions as opposed to the territorial approach used under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The consumption-based approach attributes emissions to consumers of final goods and services by accounting for the GHG emissions 'embedded' in raw materials and intermediate goods and services. Many authors have advocated the wider adoption of a consumption-based approach. This article does not take one side or another in the consumption-based versus territorial debate. Instead, it explores the extent to which consumption-based thinking has already found practical application by companies and public authorities and assesses the potential for further adoption. The methodologies underlying consumption-based approaches are critically reviewed to note criteria such as accuracy and the timeliness of data generation, which suggest the potential for practical application. A typology of applications is then developed and each category of application is systematically explored citing real-world examples where possible. The article concludes with a discussion of the potential for the wider application of consumption-based approaches and identifies further research needs. Policy relevance Consumption-based approaches to accounting for GHG emissions are gradually being adopted in the policy domain, albeit in a haphazard way. This article (1) identifies the strengths and weaknesses associated with top-down input-output approaches and bottom-up life cycle assessment approaches to consumption-based accounting in terms of criteria such as accuracy and timeliness of data generation; (2) provides a comprehensive review of actual and proposed applications to date; (3) constructs a taxonomy of applications drawing on the analysis of strengths and weaknesses; and (4) considers the prospects for further application. The article will help policy makers and policy analysts to assess the feasibility and desirability of future applications of consumption-based approaches and address implementation barriers.
Suggested Citation
Sophia Kokoni & Jim Skea, 2014.
"Input-output and life-cycle emissions accounting: applications in the real world,"
Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(3), pages 372-396, May.
Handle:
RePEc:taf:tcpoxx:v:14:y:2014:i:3:p:372-396
DOI: 10.1080/14693062.2014.864190
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
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:14:y:2014:i:3:p:372-396. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.