IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/tcpoxx/v16y2016i8p1029-1047.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparative assessment of Japan's long-term carbon budget under different effort-sharing principles

Author

Listed:
  • Takeshi Kuramochi
  • Jusen Asuka
  • Hanna Fekete
  • Kentaro Tamura
  • Niklas Höhne

Abstract

This article assesses Japan's carbon budgets up to 2100 in the global efforts to achieve the 2 °C target under different effort-sharing approaches based on long-term GHG mitigation scenarios published in 13 studies. The article also presents exemplary emission trajectories for Japan to stay within the calculated budget.The literature data allow for an in-depth analysis of four effort-sharing categories. For a 450 ppm CO2e stabilization level, the remaining carbon budgets for 2014–2100 were negative for the effort-sharing category that emphasizes historical responsibility and capability. For the other three, including the reference ‘Cost-effectiveness’ category, which showed the highest budget range among all categories, the calculated remaining budgets (20th and 80th percentile ranges) would run out in 21–29 years if the current emission levels were to continue. A 550 ppm CO2e stabilization level increases the budgets by 6–17 years-equivalent of the current emissions, depending on the effort-sharing category. Exemplary emissions trajectories staying within the calculated budgets were also analysed for ‘Equality’, ‘Staged’ and ‘Cost-effectiveness’ categories. For a 450 ppm CO2e stabilization level, Japan's GHG emissions would need to phase out sometime between 2045 and 2080, and the emission reductions in 2030 would be at least 16–29% below 1990 levels even for the most lenient ‘Cost-effectiveness’ category, and 29–36% for the ‘Equality’ category. The start year for accelerated emissions reductions and the emissions convergence level in the long term have major impact on the emissions reduction rates that need to be achieved, particularly in the case of smaller budgets.Policy relevanceIn previous climate mitigation target formulation processes for 2020 and 2030 in Japan, neither equity principles nor long-term management of cumulative GHG emissions was at the centre of discussion. This article quantitatively assesses how much more GHGs Japan can emit by 2100 to achieve the 2 °C target in light of different effort-sharing approaches, and how Japan's GHG emissions can be managed up to 2100. The long-term implications of recent energy policy developments following the Fukushima nuclear disaster for the calculated carbon budgets are also discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Takeshi Kuramochi & Jusen Asuka & Hanna Fekete & Kentaro Tamura & Niklas Höhne, 2016. "Comparative assessment of Japan's long-term carbon budget under different effort-sharing principles," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(8), pages 1029-1047, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:tcpoxx:v:16:y:2016:i:8:p:1029-1047
    DOI: 10.1080/14693062.2015.1064344
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/14693062.2015.1064344
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/14693062.2015.1064344?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. -, 2009. "The economics of climate change," Sede Subregional de la CEPAL para el Caribe (Estudios e Investigaciones) 38679, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    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. Sonam Sahu & Izuru Saizen, 2019. "Emissions Sharing Observations from a Diverse Range of Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-15, July.
    2. Ilaria Perissi & Sara Falsini & Ugo Bardi & Davide Natalini & Michael Green & Aled Jones & Jordi Solé, 2018. "Potential European Emissions Trajectories within the Global Carbon Budget," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-13, November.

    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. Strand, Jon, 2011. "Carbon offsets with endogenous environmental policy," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 371-378, March.
    2. Bosetti, Valentina & Carraro, Carlo & Duval, Romain & Tavoni, Massimo, 2011. "What should we expect from innovation? A model-based assessment of the environmental and mitigation cost implications of climate-related R&D," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 1313-1320.
    3. Fujii, Hidemichi & Managi, Shunsuke, 2013. "Which industry is greener? An empirical study of nine industries in OECD countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 381-388.
    4. Simon Levin & Anastasios Xepapadeas, 2021. "On the Coevolution of Economic and Ecological Systems," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 13(1), pages 355-377, October.
    5. Golub, Alexander (Голуб, Александр), 2018. "Methodological Issues of Assessing Investment Risks in Projects Weakening the Dependence of the Russian Economy on Natural Resources and Providing a Transition to Low-Carbon Development [Методологи," Working Papers 071802, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration.
    6. Steve Newbold & Charles Griffiths & Christopher C. Moore & Ann Wolverton & Elizabeth Kopits, 2010. "The "Social Cost of Carbon" Made Simple," NCEE Working Paper Series 201007, National Center for Environmental Economics, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, revised Aug 2010.
    7. Melissa Dell & Benjamin F. Jones & Benjamin A. Olken, 2014. "What Do We Learn from the Weather? The New Climate-Economy Literature," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 52(3), pages 740-798, September.
    8. Lawrence H. Goulder, 2013. "Markets for Pollution Allowances: What Are the (New) Lessons?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 27(1), pages 87-102, Winter.
    9. Merriam Haffar & Cory Searcy, 2018. "Target‐setting for ecological resilience: Are companies setting environmental sustainability targets in line with planetary thresholds?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(7), pages 1079-1092, November.
    10. Roos, Michael W. M., 2015. "The macroeconomics of radical uncertainty," Ruhr Economic Papers 592, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    11. Sam Fankhauser & Cameron Hepburn, 2009. "Carbon markets in space and time," GRI Working Papers 3, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
    12. Matthias Schmidt & Hermann Held & Elmar Kriegler & Alexander Lorenz, 2013. "Climate Policy Under Uncertain and Heterogeneous Climate Damages," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 54(1), pages 79-99, January.
    13. Patrick Criqui & Constantin Ilasca, 2011. "Les scénarios sur l'énergie et le climat. L'avant et l'après-Copenhague," Post-Print halshs-00582431, HAL.
    14. Hope Corman & Dhaval Dave & Nancy E. Reichman, 2018. "Evolution of the Infant Health Production Function," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 85(1), pages 6-47, July.
    15. Stefano Bartolini & Francesco Sarracino, 2021. "Happier and Sustainable. Possibilities for a post-growth society," Department of Economics University of Siena 855, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    16. Seth D. Baum & Timothy M. Maher & Jacob Haqq-Misra, 2013. "Double catastrophe: intermittent stratospheric geoengineering induced by societal collapse," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 168-180, March.
    17. Warwick J. McKibbin & Adele C. Morris & Peter J. Wilcoxen, 2014. "The Economic Consequences of Delay in US Climate Policy," CCEP Working Papers 1408, Centre for Climate & Energy Policy, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    18. Luca Gerotto & Paolo Pellizzari, 2021. "A replication of Pindyck’s willingness to pay: on the efforts required to obtain results," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 1(5), pages 1-25, May.
    19. Pye, Steve & Sabio, Nagore & Strachan, Neil, 2015. "An integrated systematic analysis of uncertainties in UK energy transition pathways," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 673-684.
    20. Veronesi, Marcella & Reutemann, Tim & Zabel, Astrid & Engel, Stefanie, 2015. "Designing REDD+ schemes when forest users are not forest landowners: Evidence from a survey-based experiment in Kenya," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 46-57.

    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:16:y:2016:i:8:p:1029-1047. 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.