Building bridges to 2020 and beyond: the road from Bali

What would the shape of a realistic, yet ambitious, package for the climate regime after 2012 look like? How do we obtain a package deal starting in Bali but building bridges to a post-2020 climate regime? A fair, effective, flexible and inclusive package deal has to strike a core balance between development and climate imperatives (mitigation, adaptation, dealing with the impacts of response measures, technology transfer, investment and finance) to create bargaining space and establish a conceptual contract zone. Within a continuum of possible packages, two packages in the contract zone are identified: ‘multi-stage’ and ‘ambitious transitional’. The latter is ambitious, combining domestic cap-and-trade for the USA, deeper cuts for Annex B countries, and quantifiable mitigation actions by developing countries. It is transitional as a possible bridge to a more inclusive regime beyond 2020. Multi-stage is defined around mechanisms by which countries move through increasingly stringent levels of participation, and must be based upon agreed triggers. Our assessment of political dynamics is that multi-stage is not yet in the political contract zone. Key to this is the absence of a ‘trigger from the North’, in that the largest historical emitter must act earlier and most decisively. But progress will also depend on continued leadership from Annex B countries, as well as more proactive, incentivized leadership in the South. Agreeing on the transitional stage is the critical next step in the evolution of the climate regime. Negotiating any package will require an institutional space for bargaining, political leadership and trust, and a clear time-frame.     

Role of renewable energy in climate mitigation: a synthesis of recent scenarios

The role of renewable energy in climate change mitigation is explored through a review of 162 recent medium- to long-term scenarios from 15 large-scale, energy-economic and integrated assessment models. The current state of knowledge from this community is assessed and its implications drawn for the strategic context in which policymakers and other decision-makers might consider renewable energy. The scenario set is distinguished from previous ones in that it contains more detailed information on renewable deployment levels. All the scenarios in this study were published during or after 2006. Within the context of a large-scale assessment, the analysis is guided primarily by four questions. What sorts of future levels of renewable energy deployment are consistent with different CO₂ concentration goals? Which classes of renewable energy will be the most prominent energy producers and how quickly might they expand production? Where might an expansion in renewable energy occur? What is the linkage between the costs of mitigation and an expansion of renewable energy?     

Russia's 2020 GHG emissions target: Emission trends and implementation

This article provides an overview of the recent modelling results on Russia's GHG emission trends, and reviews the success of mitigation policies in order to establish whether Russia's domestic target seems feasible. Various Russian GHG emission scenarios indicate that Russia's domestic target – emissions 25% below the 1990 level by 2020 – is not far from the business-as-usual emissions trajectory. In particular, two factors could deliver the required emissions reductions: the currently declining gross domestic product (GDP) growth and ongoing domestic mitigation policies. The former is more likely to secure the target level of emissions, because GDP growth has been contracting significantly in comparison to earlier forecasts of 3–5% annual growth, and this trend is expected to continue. The latter option – success with domestic mitigation measures – seems less likely, given the various meta-barriers to policy implementation, and the marginality of mitigation policies, problems with law-making processes, bureaucratic tradition, and informality of legislative and implementation systems.

Policy relevance

This article provides an assessment of the stringency of Russia's domestically set emissions limitation target by 2020 and the chances of Russia, the fourth largest GHG emitter in the world, achieving it. We base our assessment on a number of recent key sources that analyse Russia's GHG emission paths by applying socio-economic models, which have only been available in the Russian language prior to this publication. This knowledge is applicable for use by other negotiation parties to compare Russia's efforts to mitigate climate change to their own, and thus makes a contribution to facilitating a more equal burden-sharing of climate commitments under the future climate change agreement.     

EU 20-20-20 energy policy as a model for global climate mitigation

The EU has established an aggressive portfolio with explicit near-term targets for 2020 – to reduce GHG emissions by 20%, rising to 30% if the conditions are right, to increase the share of renewable energy to 20%, and to make a 20% improvement in energy efficiency – intended to be the first step in a long-term strategy to limit climate forcing. The effectiveness and cost of extending these measures in time are considered along with the ambition and propagation to the rest of the world. Numerical results are reported and analysed for the contribution of the portfolio's various elements through a set of sensitivity experiments. It is found that the hypothetical programme leads to very substantial reductions in GHG emissions, dramatic increases in use of electricity, and substantial changes in land-use including reduced deforestation, but at the expense of higher food prices. The GHG emissions reductions are driven primarily by the direct limits. Although the carbon price is lower under the hypothetical protocol than it would be under the emissions cap alone, the economic cost of the portfolio is higher, between 13% and 22%.     

Integrating agriculture and energy to assess GHG emissions reduction: a methodological approach

Agriculture is responsible for approximately 25% of anthropogenic global GHG emissions. This significant share highlights the fundamental importance of the agricultural sector in the global GHG emissions reduction challenge. This article develops and tests a methodology for the integration of agricultural and energy systems modelling. The goal of the research is to extend an energy systems modelling approach to agriculture in order to provide richer insights into the dynamics and interactions between the two (e.g. in competition for land-use). We build Agri-TIMES, an agricultural systems module using the TIMES energy systems modelling framework, to model the effect of livestock emissions and explore emissions reduction options. The research focuses on Ireland, which is an interesting test case for two reasons: first, agriculture currently accounts for about 30% of Ireland's GHG emissions, significantly higher than other industrialized countries yet comparable with global levels (here including emissions associated with other land-use change and forestation); second, Ireland is both a complete and reasonably sized agricultural system to act as a test case for this new approach. This article describes the methodology used, the data requirements, and technical assumptions made to facilitate the modelling. It also presents results to illustrate the approach and provide associated initial insights.

Policy relevance

Most of the policy focus with regard to climate mitigation targets has been on reducing energy-related CO₂ emissions, which is understandable as they represent by far the largest source of emissions. Non-energy-related GHG emissions – largely from agriculture, industrial processes, and waste – have received significantly less attention in policy discourse. Going forward, however, if significant cuts are made in energy-related CO₂ emissions, the role of non-energy-related GHG emissions will grow in importance. It is therefore crucial that climate mitigation analyses and strategies are not limited to the energy system. This article shows the value of using integrated energy and agriculture techno-economic modelling techniques to draw evidence for new comprehensive climate policy strategies able to discern between the full range of technical solutions available. It enables the production of economy-wide least-cost climate mitigation pathways.     

Marginal abatement cost curves and the quality of emission reductions: a case study on Brazil

Decision makers facing emission-reduction targets need to decide which abatement measures to implement, and in which order. This article investigates how marginal abatement cost (MAC) curves can inform such a decision. We re-analyse a MAC curve built for Brazil by 2030, and show that misinterpreting MAC curves as abatement supply curves can lead to suboptimal strategies. It would lead to (1) under-investment in expensive, long-to-implement and large-potential options, such as clean transportation infrastructure, and (2) over-investment in cheap but limited-potential options such as energy-efficiency improvement in refineries. To mitigate this issue, the article proposes a new graphical representation of MAC curves that explicitly renders the time required to implement each measure.

Policy relevance

In addition to the cost and potential of available options, designing optimal short-term policies requires information on long-term targets (e.g. halving emissions by 2050) and on the speed at which measures can deliver emission reductions. Mitigation policies are thus best investigated in a dynamic framework, building on sector-scale pathways to long-term targets. Climate policies should seek both quantity and quality of abatement, by combining two approaches: a ‘synergy approach’ that focuses on the cheapest mitigation options and maximizes co-benefits, and an ‘urgency approach’ that starts from a long-term objective and works backward to identify actions that need to be implemented early. Accordingly, sector-specific policies may be used (1) to remove implementation barriers on negative- and low-cost options and (2) to ensure short-term targets are met with abatement of sufficient quality. Indeed, such policies can avoid under-investment in the long-to-implement options required to reach long-term targets, which are otherwise difficult to enforce.     

Climate change,innovation and jobs

The employment effect of climate policy has emerged as an important concern of policy makers, not least in the USA. Yet the impact of climate policy on jobs is complex. In the short term, jobs will shift from high-carbon activities to low-carbon activities. The net effect could be job creation, as low-carbon technologies tend to be more labour-intensive, at least in the short term until efficiency gains bring down costs. In the medium term, the effect will be felt economy-wide as value chains and production patterns adjust. This effect is more difficult to gauge, particularly if climate policy is unilateral and trade effects have to be taken into account. However, the biggest effect is expected to be long term, when climate policy will trigger widespread structural adjustment. Such episodes of ‘creative destruction’ are often associated with innovation, job creation and growth.     

Achieving development and mitigation objectives through a decarbonization development pathway in South Africa

Achieving the international 2 °C limit climate policy requires stringent reductions in GHG emissions by mid-century, with some countries simultaneously facing development-related challenges. South Africa is a middle-income developing country with high rates of unemployment and high levels of poverty, as well as an emissions-intensive economy. South Africa takes into account an assessment of what a fair contribution to reducing global emissions might be, and is committed to a ‘peak, plateau and decline' emissions trajectory with absolute emissions specified for 2025 and 2030, while noting the need to address development imperatives. This work utilizes an economy-wide computable general equilibrium model (e-SAGE) linked to an energy-system optimization model (TIMES) to explore improving development metrics within a 14 GtCO₂e cumulative energy sector carbon constraint through to 2050 for South Africa. The electricity sector decarbonizes by retiring coal-fired power plants or replacing with concentrated solar power, solar photovoltaics and wind generation. Industry and tertiary-sector growth remains strong throughout the time period, with reduced energy intensity via fuel-switching and efficiency improvements. From 2010 to 2050, the model results in the unemployment rate decreasing from 25% to 12%, and the percentage of people living below the poverty line decreasing from 49% to 18%. Total energy GHG emissions were reduced by 39% and per capita emissions decreased by 62%.

Policy relevance

Lower poverty and inequality are goals that cannot be subordinated to lower GHG emissions. Policy documents in South Africa outline objectives such as reducing poverty and inequality with a key focus on education and employment. In its climate policy and Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC), South Africa is committed to a peak, plateau and decline GHG emissions trajectory. As in many developing countries, these policy goals require major transformations in the energy system while simultaneously increasing affordable access to safe and convenient energy services for those living in energy poverty. The modelled scenario in this work focuses on employment and poverty reduction under a carbon constraint, a novel combination with results that can provide information for a holistic climate and development policy framework. This study has focused on the long term, which is important in generating clear policy signals for the necessary large-scale investments.     

IPCC第五次评估报告历史排放趋势和未来减缓情景相关核心结论解读分析

IPCC历次评估报告是国际社会和各国决策者制定相关政策的重要依据。2014年4月发布的第五次评估报告第三工作组报告中有关排放历史趋势和未来减缓情景的相关内容是历次评估报告的核心内容,对国际谈判中有关各主要缔约方定位、减排责任划分、国别分组以及未来全球和国别中长期减缓目标确定、全球排放空间分配等问题产生重要影响,也是各国确定低碳发展目标和制定相关政策的重要参考依据。在综述分析报告有关排放趋势,驱动因子,2℃温控目标下的排放空间、路径、成本、技术选择和减排责任分摊等关键结论的基础上,探讨了相关结论对国际气候谈判和国内低碳发展的可能影响和启示,以及如何在决策过程中正确、科学地理解和应用这些结论。     

Lessons from co-impacts assessment under the Mitigation Action Plans and Scenarios (MAPS) Programme

The MAPS Programme has been active in Brazil, Chile, Colombia and Peru in supporting the development of an evidence base to inform the processes involved in climate mitigation policy-making. The programme combines detailed quantitative analysis with an extensive stakeholder engagement process to provide policy and decision makers with the information required for long-term climate mitigation planning.

In recognition of the critical need to consider the developmental context and agenda in climate policy-making, the projects undertaken in these countries have experimented with various types of assessments of developmental impacts at both the macro and micro levels. These impacts have been collectively termed co-impacts to reflect the fact that these may be either positive or negative. In this article the value and challenges associated with co-impacts work for climate mitigation policy are considered. The value of including co-impacts analysis in the MAPS processes included increased stakeholder buy-in, making the case for mitigation action, informing INDCs and the prioritization of particular mitigation actions. Challenges include those associated with obtaining locally relevant data, the selection and operation of appropriate macro-economic models and analytical approaches and working with multidisciplinary teams.

The article concludes by making some suggestions to optimize co-impacts work, through reference to other bodies of literature. The authors highlight that this article is situated within a dominant approach to climate mitigation policy work in developing countries, which implicitly places the non-climate benefits of any action as secondary to the primary benefit of climate change mitigation and constructs an artificial separation of policy formulation and implementation. Practitioners are encouraged to reflect on the implications of these considerations in future efforts.

Policy relevance

One of the primary challenges to advancing climate mitigation policy in developing countries is that of perceived relevance: near-term development priorities are overwhelming. Identifying, understanding and engaging with the co-impacts of mitigation actions has emerged as one way of addressing this challenge. Although still at an experimental phase, experience with co-impacts analysis in the MAPS countries provides some useful lessons in how to develop this area of work.     

Climate policies after Fukushima: three views

The 2011 Japanese earthquake and tsunami, and the consequent accident at the Fukushima nuclear power plant, have had consequences far beyond Japan itself. Reactions to the accident in three major economies Japan, the UK, and Germany, all of whom were committed to relatively ambitious climate change targets prior to the accident are examined. In Japan and Germany, the accident precipitated a major change of policy direction. In the UK, debate has been muted and there has been essentially no change in energy or climate change policies. The status of the energy and climate change policies in each country prior to the accident is assessed, the responses to the accident are described, and the possible impacts on their positions in the international climate negotiations are analysed. Finally, the three countries' responses are compared and some differences between them observed. Some reasons for their different policy responses are suggested and some themes, common across all countries, are identified

Policy relevance

The attraction of nuclear power has rested on the promise of low-cost electricity, low-carbon energy supply, and enhanced energy independence. The Fukushima accident, which followed the Japanese tsunami of March 2011, has prompted a critical re-appraisal of nuclear power. The responses to Fukushima are assessed for the UK, Germany, and Japan. Before the accident, all three countries considered nuclear as playing a significant part in climate mitigation strategies. Although the UK Government has continued to support nuclear new build following a prompt review of safety arrangements, Japan and Germany have decided to phase out nuclear power, albeit according to different timescales. The factors that explain the different decisions are examined, including patterns of energy demand and supply, the wider political context, institutional arrangements, and public attitudes to risk. The implications for the international climate negotiations are also assessed.     

The global carbon market-mechanism landscape: pre and post 2020 perspectives

With market-mechanisms likely to achieve emission reductions at lower cost than alternative approaches, there is a presumption that they will be embraced by those who are serious about achieving ambitious reductions. Two broad messages exist; there is already considerable activity and some ambition in many parts of the world – a fragmented but embryonic ‘global’ trading landscape is emerging – and there are efforts at UN level to provide a unifying framework for these bottom-up developments. The topography of interest and response varies considerably across groups of countries, and there have been delays in making progress on a unifying framework. This article analyses the current carbon market landscape in terms of market dynamics and market-mechanism developments whilst undertaking an examination of how climate change negotiations under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is shaping the future carbon market landscape. This work shows that the combination of existing, emerging, and potential carbon market-mechanisms can be regarded as an emerging pre-2020 fragmented ‘global’ carbon market landscape based on differing bottom-up market based approaches. One outcome of a 2015 Climate Agreement could be a post-2020 global carbon market which would include new domestic and international market initiatives such as the Framework for Various Approaches and New Market Mechanism, together with reformed Kyoto mechanisms.

Policy relevance

With the 2015 Agreement under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) expected to see Parties commit to ambitious mitigation commitments, post-2020 could see significant Party (& industry) investment in market-mechanisms and associated emissions units in an effort to achieve some of the abatement cost minimization offered by market approaches. This article is written for those who have an interest in understanding what is happening – and what is not happening – as regards the emergence of market-related approaches to GHG mitigation globally in the run up to the 21st Conference of the Parties (COP) of the UNFCCC which meets in Paris in December 2015, and what could be the shape of things to come post-2020.     

Innovation for sustainable energy from a pro-poor perspective

The development and transfer of clean energy technologies to achieve universal energy access is challenging due to the inherent complexities of the energy sector, and the energy governance and financial systems in developing economies. Innovation is an essential part of successfully addressing these difficulties. Duplicating the energy infrastructure models of developed countries will not be sufficient to meet the needs of poor consumers. To the extent that innovation can accelerate energy access, it is important to understand the specific types of innovations that are necessary and how they might be facilitated. The general features of existing international clean energy innovation systems, which are predominantly driven by the markets and emissions reduction mechanisms of developed and rapidly growing emerging economies, are reviewed and the alignment of these systems to the innovation processes required to extend energy access globally is evaluated. Drawing on the innovation policy literature, the attributes of effective international and domestic energy innovation systems that are pro-poor and the associated policy approaches are identified.     

GDP and employment effects of policies to close the 2020 emissions gap

Four policies might close the gap between the global GHG emissions expected for 2020 on the basis of current (2013) policies and the reduced emissions that will be needed if the long-term global temperature increase can be kept below the 2 °C internationally agreed limit. The four policies are (1) specific energy efficiency measures, (2) closure of the least-efficient coal-fired power plants, (3) minimizing methane emissions from upstream oil and gas production, and (4) accelerating the (partial) phase-out of subsidies to fossil-fuel consumption. In this article we test the hypothesis of the International Energy Agency (IEA) that these policies will not result in a loss of gross domestic product (GDP) and we estimate their employment effects using the E3MG global macro-econometric model. Using a set of scenarios we assess each policy individually and then consider the outcomes if all four policies were implemented simultaneously. We find that the policies are insufficient to close the emissions gap, with an overall emission reduction that is 30% less than that found by the IEA. World GDP is 0.5% higher in 2020, with about 6 million net jobs created by 2020 and unemployment reduced.

Policy relevance

The gap between GHG emissions expected under the Copenhagen and Cancun Agreements and that needed for emissions trajectories to have a reasonable chance of reaching the 2 °C target requires additional policies if it is to be closed. This article uses a global simulation model E3MG to analyse a set of policies proposed by the IEA to close the gap and assesses their macroeconomic effects as well as their feasibility in closing the gap. It complements the IEA assessment by estimating the GDP and employment implications separately by the different policies year by year to 2020, by major industries, and by 21 world regions.     

The global impacts of US climate policy: a model simulation using GCAM-TU and MAGICC

To assess the potential impacts of the US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, this study applied GCAM-TU (an updated version of the Global Change Assessment Model) to simulate global and regional emission pathways of energy-related CO₂, which show that US emissions in 2100 would reduce to ?2.4?Gt, ?0.7?Gt and ?0.2?Gt under scenarios of RCP2.6, RCP3.7 and RCP4.5, respectively. Two unfavourable policy scenarios were designed, assuming a temporary delay and a complete stop for US mitigation actions after 2015. Simulations by the Model for the Assessment of Greenhouse-gas Induced Climate Change (MAGICC) indicate that the temperature increase by 2100 would rise by 0.081°C–0.161°C compared to the three original RCPs (Representative Concentration Pathways) if US emissions were kept at their 2015 levels until 2100. The probability of staying below 2°C would decrease by 6–9% even if the US resumes mitigation efforts for achieving its Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) target after 2025. It is estimated by GCAM-TU that, without US participation, increased reduction efforts are required for the rest of the world, including developing countries, in order to achieve the 2°C goal, resulting in 18% higher global cumulative mitigation costs from 2015 to 2100.

Key policy insights

• President Trump’s climate policies, including planned withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, cast a shadow on international climate actions, and would lower the likelihood of achieving the 2°C target.

• To meet the 2°C target without the US means increased reduction efforts and mitigation costs for the rest of the world, and considerable economic burdens for major developing areas.

• Active state-, city- and enterprise-level powers should be supported to keep the emission reduction gap from further widening even with reduced mitigation efforts from the US federal government.

     

A practitioner's guide to a low-carbon economy: lessons from the UK

Drawing primarily on the UK experience, five practical lessons are identified for policy makers who seek to decarbonize their economies. First, decarbonization needs a solid legal basis to give it credibility and overcome time inconsistency problems. Second, putting a price on carbon is essential, but low-carbon policies also have to address wider market, investment, and behavioural failures. This in turn raises issues of policy complexity and coordination. Third, the low-carbon economy is likely to be highly electrified. Clean electricity could be a cost-effective way of decarbonizing many parts of the economy, including transport, heating, and parts of industry. Decarbonization therefore starts in the power sector. Fourth, the low-carbon transition is primarily a revolution of production and not consumption. Both supply-side innovation and demand-side adjustments in lifestyle and behaviour are needed, though the former should dominate. Fifth, the transition to a low-carbon economy is economically and technologically feasible. Achieving it is a question of policy competence and having the political will to drive economic and social change.

Policy relevance

Practically all major GHG emitters now have climate change legislation on their statute books. Given what is at stake, and the complexity of the task at hand, it is important that policy makers learn from each other and establish a code of good low-carbon practice. The main lessons from the UK are distilled and presented. Carbon policy is considered for key sectors, such as electricity, buildings, and transport, and possible decarbonization paths are also outlined. It is shown that the transition to a low-carbon economy is economically and technologically feasible. Achieving it is primarily a question of policy competence and political will. This in turn means that climate change action needs a strong legislative basis to give the reforms statutory legitimacy. Low-carbon policies will have to address a wide range of market, investment and behavioural failures. Putting a price on carbon is an essential starting point, but only one of many policy reforms.     

Asian Development Bank's support for clean energy

The Asian Development Bank's (ADB) support for the development of the clean energy sector in Asia and the Pacific is examined, together with its implications for mitigating climate change. A key question is whether financing has shifted from fossil fuel projects to renewable energy and energy efficiency in the past decade (2000–2009). Financial data from the ADB – a multilateral source of significant financing in the region – are assessed, and 127 technology-deploying projects and 199 technical assistance projects are evaluated. The assessment suggests that clean energy assistance has gained momentum during the last few years, peaking in 2008, implying a considerable shift in energy investments from conventional fossil-fuel projects to clean energy. Although private sector involvement has been central to the ADB's investment policy, only 30% of funding has been channelled into this sector over the past decade. The reporting of clean energy investments has also progressed within the ADB by including renewable and energy efficiency components in conventional energy projects and other investments, which was not previously accounted for. Nevertheless, the ADB needs to address several challenges in the future, including sustaining funding for clean energy, strengthening private sector investments and improving financial reporting.     

Creating a mutual gains climate regime through universal clean energy services

Climate change is a serious threat to all nations. This raises the question of why continuous treaty negotiations for more than two decades have failed to create a viable or adequate international climate regime. The current strategy of addressing climate change misdiagnoses the issue as a pollution problem by focusing on symptoms (emissions) and not on underlying causes (unsustainable development). In short, the wrong treaty is being negotiated. Drawing on negotiation analysis, it is argued that the existing and proposed climate treaties fail to meet the national interests of any party. An alternative strategy for addressing climate change is proposed that reframes the overall approach to reflect all countries’ development needs and links climate protection goals to the development structure of the treaty. The current deadlock over emissions reductions might be overcome and a mutual gains agreement reached by directing international cooperation towards promoting the provision of clean energy services for development and ensuring universal access to those services as part of an ‘early action’ agenda that will complement efforts to utilize forests and reduce other GHGs from multiple sectors.     

Evaluating the US Mid-Century Strategy for Deep Decarbonization amidst early century uncertainty

The recent change in US presidential administrations has introduced significant uncertainty about both domestic and international policy support for continued reductions in GHG emissions. This brief analysis estimates the potential climate ramifications of changing US leadership, contrasting the Mid-Century Strategy for Deep Decarbonization (MCS) released under the Obama Administration, with campaign statements, early executive actions, and prevailing market conditions to estimate potential emission pathways under the Trump Administration. The analysis highlights areas where GHG reductions are less robust to changing policy conditions, and offers brief recommendations for addressing emissions in the interim. It specifically finds that continued reductions in the electricity sector are less vulnerable to changes in federal policy than those in the built environment and land use sectors. Given the long-lived nature of investments in these latter two sectors, however, opportunities for near-term climate action by willing cities, states, private landowners, and non-profit organizations warrant renewed attention in this time of climate uncertainty.

Key policy insights

• The recent US presidential election has already impacted mitigation goals and practices, injecting considerable uncertainty into domestic and international efforts to address climate change.

• A strategic assessment issued in the final days of the Obama Administration for how to reach long-term climate mitigation objectives provides a baseline from which to gauge potential changes under the Trump Administration.

• Though market trends may continue to foster emission declines in the energy sector, emission reductions in the land use sector and the built environment are subject to considerable uncertainty.

• Regardless of actions to scale back climate mitigation efforts, US emissions are likely to be flat in the coming years. Assuming that emissions remain constant under President Trump and that reductions resume afterwards to meet the Obama Administration mid-century targets in 2050, this near-term pause in reductions yields a difference in total emissions equivalent to 0.3–0.6 years of additional global greenhouse gas emissions, depending on the number of terms served by a Trump Administration.

     

Post-2012 climate policy dilemmas: a review of proposals

This article assesses a wide range of alternative proposals for post-2012 international climate policy regimes. We believe that these proposals will serve as a basis for debates about how to configure post-2012 climate policy. The article characterizes and assesses the policy proposals along the lines of five key policy dilemmas. We argue that (1) many proposals have ideas on how to reduce emissions, but fewer have a solution on how to stimulate technical innovation; (2) many proposals formulate climate policy in isolation, while there are fewer proposals that try to mainstream climate policies in other policy areas; (3) many proposals advocate market-based solutions, while fewer realize that there are certain drawbacks to this solution especially at the international level; (4) most proposals have a preference for a UN-based regime, while a more fragmented regime, based on regional and sectoral arrangements may be emerging; and (5) most proposals have ideas about mitigation, but not many have creative ideas on how to integrate mitigation with adaptation.