IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hhs/gunwpe/0491.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Common ground for effort sharing? Preferred principles for distributing climate mitigation efforts

Author

Listed:
  • Hjerpe, Mattias

    (Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research, Nya kåkenhus, Linköping University)

  • Löfgren, Åsa

    (Department of Economics, School of Business, Economics and Law, Göteborg University)

  • Linnér, Björn-Ola

    (Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research, Nya kåkenhus, Linköping University)

  • Hennlock, Magnus

    (Department of Economics, School of Business, Economics and Law, Göteborg University)

  • Sterner, Thomas

    (Department of Economics, School of Business, Economics and Law, Göteborg University)

  • Jagers, Sverker C.

    (Social Science Division, Luleå University of Technology and Department of Political Science, University of Gothenburg)

Abstract

This paper fills a gap in the current academic and policy literature concerning how parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change find common ground when distributing commitments and responsibilities to curb climate change. Preferred principles for sharing the effort to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions are compared among 170 delegates and more than 300 observers attending the UN Climate Conference in Copenhagen in December 2009. Respondents were asked to indicate their degree of support for eight effort-sharing principles for mitigation action. The survey results are analysed according to geographical region and party coalition affiliation. The results indicate that voluntary contribution, indicated as willingness to contribute, was the least preferred principle among both negotiators and observers. This could be seen as ironic, given that voluntary contribution is the guiding principle of the Copenhagen Accord. Across regions and party coalitions, agreement was strongest for basing a country’s mitigation level on its capacity to pay in terms of GDP per capita and on its historic greenhouse gas emissions since 1990.

Suggested Citation

  • Hjerpe, Mattias & Löfgren, Åsa & Linnér, Björn-Ola & Hennlock, Magnus & Sterner, Thomas & Jagers, Sverker C., 2011. "Common ground for effort sharing? Preferred principles for distributing climate mitigation efforts," Working Papers in Economics 491, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:hhs:gunwpe:0491
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://gupea.ub.gu.se/handle/2077/24706
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Raymond, Leigh, 2006. "Cutting the "Gordian knot" in climate change policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 655-658, April.
    2. Paavola, Jouni & Adger, W. Neil, 2006. "Fair adaptation to climate change," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(4), pages 594-609, April.
    3. Lasse Ringius & Asbjørn Torvanger & Arild Underdal, 2002. "Burden Sharing and Fairness Principles in International Climate Policy," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 1-22, March.
    4. Lange, Andreas & Vogt, Carsten & Ziegler, Andreas, 2007. "On the importance of equity in international climate policy: An empirical analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 545-562, May.
    5. Astrid Dannenberg & Bodo Sturm & Carsten Vogt, 2010. "Do Equity Preferences Matter for Climate Negotiators? An Experimental Investigation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 47(1), pages 91-109, September.
    6. Dana R. Fisher, 2010. "COP-15 in Copenhagen: How the Merging of Movements Left Civil Society Out in the Cold," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 10(2), pages 11-17, May.
    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. Martin Kesternich & Andreas Löschel & Andreas Ziegler, 2021. "Negotiating weights for burden sharing rules in international climate negotiations: an empirical analysis," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 23(2), pages 309-331, April.
    2. Andreas Lange & Claudia Schwirplies, 2017. "(Un)fair Delegation: Exploring the Strategic Use of Equity Rules in International Climate Negotiations," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 67(3), pages 505-533, July.
    3. Hannah Ritchie & David S. Reay, 2017. "Delivering the two degree global climate change target using a flexible ratchet framework," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(8), pages 1031-1045, November.
    4. Kesternich, Martin & Löschel, Andreas & Ziegler, Andreas, 2014. "Negotiating weights for burden sharing rules among heterogeneous parties: Empirical evidence from a survey among delegates in international climate negotiations," ZEW Discussion Papers 14-031, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.

    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. Yildiz, Özgür, 2014. "Lehren aus der Verhaltensökonomik für die Gestaltung umweltpolitischer Maßnahmen [Lessons from behavioral economics for the design of environmental policy measures]," MPRA Paper 59360, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Kverndokk, Snorre & Rose, Adam, 2008. "Equity and Justice in Global Warming Policy," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 2(2), pages 135-176, October.
    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. Carlsson, Fredrik & Kataria, Mitesh & Krupnick, Alan & Lampi, Elina & Löfgren, Åsa & Qin, Ping & Sterner, Thomas, 2013. "A fair share: Burden-sharing preferences in the United States and China," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 1-17.
    5. Rübbelke, Dirk T.G., 2011. "International support of climate change policies in developing countries: Strategic, moral and fairness aspects," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(8), pages 1470-1480, June.
    6. Brick, Kerri & Visser, Martine, 2015. "What is fair? An experimental guide to climate negotiations," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 79-95.
    7. Caspar Sauter & Jean-Marie Grether & Nicole A. Mathys, 2015. "Geographical Spread of Global Emissions: Within-country Inequalities Are Increasing," IRENE Working Papers 15-01, IRENE Institute of Economic Research.
    8. Sauter, Caspar & Grether, Jean-Marie & Mathys, Nicole A., 2016. "Geographical spread of global emissions: Within-country inequalities are large and increasing," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 138-149.
    9. Kempf, Hubert & Rossignol, Stéphane, 2013. "National politics and international agreements," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 93-105.
    10. Carlsson, Fredrik & Kataria, Mitesh & Lampi, Elina & Löfgren, Åsa & Sterner, Thomas, 2011. "Is fairness blind?--The effect of framing on preferences for effort-sharing rules," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(8), pages 1529-1535, June.
    11. Wolfgang Buchholz & Wolfgang Peters, 2008. "Equal sacrifice and fair burden-sharing in a public goods economy," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 15(4), pages 415-429, August.
    12. Lange, Andreas & Löschel, Andreas & Vogt, Carsten & Ziegler, Andreas, 2007. "On the Self-serving Use of Equity Principles in International Climate Negotiations," ZEW Discussion Papers 07-025, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    13. Wolfgang Buchholz & Cornelia Ohl & Aneta Ufert, 2012. "Ökonomische Blickwinkel auf Gerechtigkeitsfragen am Beispiel des globalen Klimaschutzes," Discussion Paper Series RECAP15 001, RECAP15, European University Viadrina, Frankfurt (Oder).
    14. Marco Vincenzi, 2023. "Mapping the empirical relationship between environmental performance and social preferences: Evidence from macro data," ECONOMICS AND POLICY OF ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2023(1), pages 85-102.
    15. Carsten Vogt, 2016. "Climate Coalition Formation When Players are Heterogeneous and Inequality Averse," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 65(1), pages 33-59, September.
    16. Dellink, Rob B. & den Elzen, Michel & Aiking, Harry & Bergsma, Emmy & Berkhout, Frans & Dekker, Thijs & Gupta, Joyeeta, 2009. "Sharing the Burden of Adaptation Financing: An Assessment of the Contributions of Countries," Sustainable Development Papers 52547, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    17. Don Fullerton & Erich Muehlegger, 2017. "Who Bears the Economic Costs of Environmental Regulations?," NBER Working Papers 23677, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Tobias Börger & Nick Hanley & Robert J. Johnston & Keila Meginnis & Tom Ndebele & Ghamz E. Ali Siyal & Frans de Vries, 2024. "Equity preferences and abatement cost sharing in international environmental agreements," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 106(1), pages 416-441, January.
    19. Leo Wangler & Juan-Carlos Altamirano-Cabrera & Hans-Peter Weikard, 2013. "The political economy of international environmental agreements: a survey," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 387-403, September.
    20. Clément, Valérie & Rey-Valette, Hélène & Rulleau, Bénédicte, 2015. "Perceptions on equity and responsibility in coastal zone policies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 284-291.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    burden sharing; equity; climate change mitigation; Copenhagen; negotiating capacity/process; post-2012 negotiations;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q54 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Climate; Natural Disasters and their Management; Global Warming
    • R50 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Regional Government Analysis - - - General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:hhs:gunwpe:0491. 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: Jessica Oscarsson (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/naiguse.html .

    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.