Constraining fossil fuels based on 2 °C carbon budgets: the rapid adoption of a transformative concept in politics and finance


This article traces how the notion of finite limits to emissions based on 2 °C carbon budgets was applied to increase the credibility of a carbon-constrained future in two very separate realms, social movements contesting fossil-fuel development and the financial sector—a process yet to be described in the relevant political and financial literatures. For each realm and sub-areas within them, we apply a three-wave taxonomy to trace the application of 2 °C carbon budget based concepts—including stranded assets, the carbon bubble, divestment, and anti-pipeline campaigns—from the fringe to the mainstream in under 10 years. We do so by drawing on relevant primary documents and peer-reviewed literature, complemented by a quantitative textual analysis of relevant discourse from news sources. The article establishes how, in efforts to shift expectations, climate proponents used 2 °C carbon budgets to frame a stark choice between a safe climate with strict carbon constraints and growth-oriented fossil-fuel interests. The article also demonstrates that these concepts, and efforts inspired by them, contributed to constraints on fossil-fuel developments and interests, arguably further enhancing the credibility of a carbon-constrained future. We conclude with a discussion of the potentially self-reinforcing nature of such expectation dynamics and by highlighting overlapping implications for actors across finance, where investors reorient risk assessment around climate, and social movements, where activists disrupt states’ entrenched commitment to fossil-fuel expansion.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3


  1. 1.

    (ALL = ((“carbon budget” OR “cumulative emission*” OR “cumulative carbon emission*”)AND(“2 C” OR “2C” OR“2 degree *“OR “2-degree*“OR “two degree*“OR “two-degree*”))) AND LANGUAGE:(English) AND DOCUMENT TYPES:(Article)

  2. 2.

    By contrast, the actual resolution—supported by Shell and BP—never mentioned 2 °C, implying an aversion to the acknowledgement of finite limits.


  1. (2013) Do the math – the movie. Accessed Sept 2018

  2. (2015) Home: We’re building a Global Climate Movement. In: Accessed Sept 2018

  3. Allianz (2018) Statement on coal-based business model. Accessed Aug 2018

  4. Anderson K, Peters G (2016) The trouble with negative emissions. Science 354:182–183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Ansar A, Caldecott B, Tilbury J (2013) Stranded assets and the fossil fuel divestment campaign: what does divestment mean for the valuation of fossil fuel assets. Stranded Assets Program SSEE, Univ Oxford

  6. Arabella Advisors (2015) Measuring the growth of the global fossil fuel divestment and clean energy investment movement

  7. Arthur WB (1989) Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock-in by historical events. Econ J 99:116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Axa (2017) AXA accelerates its commitment to fight climate change. Accessed Aug 2018

  9. Aykut S, Foyer J, Morena E (Eds.) (2017) Globalising the climate: COP21 and the climatisation of global debates. Taylor & Francis

  10. Baron R, Fischer D (2015) Divestment and stranded assets in the low-carbon transition

  11. Benedikter R, Kühne K, Benedikter A, Atzeni G (2016) “Keep it in the ground.” The Paris Agreement and the renewal of the energy economy: toward an alternative future for globalized resource policy? Challenge 59:205–222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Bergman N (2018) Impacts of the fossil fuel divestment movement: effects on finance, policy and public discourse. Sustainability 10:2529

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Bertram C, Johnson N, Luderer G et al (2015) Carbon lock-in through capital stock inertia associated with weak near-term climate policies. Tech Forcasting Soc Chang 90:62–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Bertram C, Luderer G, Popp A, Minx J et al (2018) Targeted policies can compensate most of the increased sustainability risks in 1.5 C mitigation scenarios. Environ Res Lett 13:064038

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. BNP Paribas (2017) BNP Paribas takes further measures to accelerate its support of the energy transition. Accessed Aug 2018

  16. Briand R, Lee L-E, Lieblich S, et al (2015) Beyond divestment: using low carbon indexes

  17. British Petroleum (2014) BP Energy Outlook 2035

  18. British Petroleum (2017) BP Energy Outlook, 2017 edition

  19. British Petroleum (2018) BP Energy Outlook, 2018 edition

  20. Caldecott B, Leaton J (2012) Carbon bubble: Bank of England’s opportunity to tackle market failure. Guard

  21. Caldecott B, Tilbury J, Carey C (2014) Stranded assets and scenarios. Smith Sch Enterp Environ Univ Oxford

  22. Campanale M, Leggett J (2011) Unburnable carbon: are the world’s financial markets carrying a carbon bubble?

  23. Caniglia BS, Brulle RJ, Szasz A (2015) Civil society, social movements, and climate change. Clim Chang Soc Sociol Perspect:235–268

  24. Carbon Brief (2014) Two degrees: The history of climate change’s speed limit. Carbon Brief

  25. Carbon Tracker Initiative (2018) Under the microscope: are companies’ scenario analyses meeting investors’ requirements?

  26. Carney M (2015) Breaking the tragedy of the horizon--climate change and financial stability. Speech given Lloyd’s London by Gov Bank Engl 29

  27. Carter A, Eaton EM (2016) Subnational responses to fracking in Canada: explaining Saskatchewan’s “Wild West” regulatory approach. Rev Policy Res 33:393–419

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Carter A, McKenzie J, Salam J. (2019) Amplifying ‘keep it in the ground’ first-movers: toward a comparative framework. Paper presented at the Congress of the Humanities and Social Sciences, Vancouver, June 4

  29. Channell J, Curmi E, Nguyen P, et al (2015) Energy Darwinism II. Citigroup

  30. Church of England (2017) Victory for ExxonMobil shareholders as climate change disclosure resolution receives majority support despite company opposition. Church Engl

  31. Collins M, Knutti R, Arblaster J, et al (2013) Long-term climate change: projections, commitments and irreversibility. In Climate Change 2013-the physical science basis: contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (pp. 1029–1136). Cambridge University Press

  32. Cui R, Hultman N, Edwards M et al (2019) Quantifying operational lifetimes for coal power plants under the Paris goals. Nat Commun 10:1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Davis SJ, Socolow RH (2014) Commitment accounting of CO 2 emissions. Environ Res Lett 9:084018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Dietz M, Garrelts H, Garrelts H (2014) Routledge Handbook of the Climate Change Movement. Routledge

  35. Divest-Invest (2018) Home. Accessed Aug 2018

  36. Dordi T, Weber O (2019) The impact of divestment announcements on the share price of fossil fuel stocks. Sustainability 11:3122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Douglas, E (2013) Bloomberg LP launches first tool that measures risk of “unburnable carbon” assets. Insid. Clim. News

  38. ExxonMobil (2018) 2018 outlook for energy: a view to 2040

  39. Figueres C, Schellnhuber HJ, Whiteman G et al (2017) Three years to safeguard our climate. Nature 546:593–595

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Frumhoff P, Heede R, Oreskes N (2015) The climate responsibilities of industrial carbon producers. Clim Chang 132:157–171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. (2019) Fossil free: divestment – commitments. Retrieved September 2019 from Accessed Sept 2019

  42. Gore A and Blood D (2013) The coming carbon asset bubble. Wall Street Journal

  43. Grady-Benson J (2014) Fossil fuel divestment: the power and promise of a student movement for climate justice

  44. Grady-Benson J, Sarathy B (2015) Fossil fuel divestment in US higher education: student-led organising for climate justice. Local Environ 0:1–21

    Google Scholar 

  45. Grist (2015) Naomi Klein on the power of fossil fuel divestment. Accessed Sept 2018

  46. Grubler A, Wilson C, Bento N, Boza-Kiss B, Krey V et al (2018) A low energy demand scenario for meeting the 1.5 C target and sustainable development goals without negative emission technologies. Nat Energy 3:515–527

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Guardian (2009) Copenhagen climate change conference: fourteen days to seal history’s judgment on this generation

  48. Guardian (2015) Keep it in the ground. The Guardian. Accessed Aug 2018

  49. Guivarch C, Hallegatte S (2011) Existing infrastructure and the 2°C target. Clim Chang 109:801–805

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Gunningham N (2017) Review essay: divestment, nonstate governance, and climate change. Law Policy 39:309–324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Healing, D. (2014) Keystone XL cost grows 50 per cent to $8B US. Calgary Herald. Accessed August 2018

  52. Hoberg G (2017) A line in the sand: how the Keystone Xl Pipeline controversy transformed environmental politics in North America. Annu Meet Am Polit Sci Assoc

  53. Hoberg G (2018) Pipelines and the politics of structure: constitutional conflicts in the Canadian oil sector. Rev Const Stud 23(1):53–90

    Google Scholar 

  54. HSBC (2018) HSBC strengthens energy policy. Accessed Aug 2018

  55. Huppmann D, Rogelj J, Kriegler E, Mundaca L, et al (2018) Notebooks for IAM scenario analysis for the IPCC Special Report on 1.5° C of Global Warming

  56. ING Group (2015) ING ends new coal financing, continues to reduce coal portfolio Accessed Aug 2018

  57. International Energy Agency (2008) World Energy Outlook 2008

  58. International Energy Agency (2009) World Energy Outlook 2009

  59. International Energy Agency (2010) World Energy Outlook 2010

  60. International Energy Agency (2012) World Energy Outlook 2012

  61. Jaeger CC, Jaeger J (2011) Three views of two degrees. Reg Environ Chang 11:15–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. King E (2015) Terrifying math: how carbon tracker changed the climate debate. Climate Home News

  63. Knutti R, Rogelj J, Sedláček J, Fischer EM (2016) A scientific critique of the two-degree climate change target. Nat Geosci 9:13–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Kousky C, Cooke RM (2009) Climate change and risk management: challenges for insurance, adaptation, and loss estimation

  65. Lazarus, Michael, Verkuijl C., Yehle, E. (2019) Closing the fossil fuel production gap. Stockholm Environment Institute

  66. Billon P Le, Carter A (2012) Securing Alberta’s Tar Sands: Resistance and criminalization on a new energy frontier. In: Natural resources and social conflict. Palgrave Macmillan UK, London, pp 170–192

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  67. Le Quéré C, Andrew R, Friedlingstein P, Sitch S, Hauck J, Pongratz J, Arneth A (2018) Global carbon budget 2018. Earth Syst Sci Data 10:2141–2194

  68. Leaton J (2012) Unburnable carbon—are the world’s financial markets carrying a carbon bubble. Carbon Tracker Initiative

  69. LGIM (2019) Press release: LGIM steps up pressure on companies to address climate change. Accessed Oct 2019

  70. Liberati A, Altman D, Tetzlaff J et al (2009) The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med 6:e1000100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Lipschutz R, McKendry C (2011) Social movements and global civil society. Oxford Handb Clim Chang Soc:369–383

  72. Mangat R, Dalby S, Paterson M (2018) Divestment discourse: war, justice, morality and money. Environ Polit 27:187–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Martinez-Alier J, Temper L, Del Bene D, Scheidel A (2016) Is there a global environmental justice movement? J Peasant Stud 43:731–755

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. McIntosh J (2015) Canada faces future of ‘stranded assets’ in Trudeau’s low-carbon policy pursuit. Financ. Post

  75. McKibben B (2012) Global warming’s terrifying new math. Roll Stone 19

  76. Meinshausen M, Meinshausen N, Hare W et al (2009) Greenhouse-gas emission targets for limiting global warming to 2 °C. Nature 458:1158–1162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Mercure J-F, Pollitt H, Viñuales JE, et al (2018) Macroeconomic impact of stranded fossil fuel assets. Nat Clim Chang 1

  78. Monasterolo I, Battiston S, Janetos AC, Zheng Z (2017) Vulnerable yet relevant: the two dimensions of climate-related financial disclosure. Clim Chang 145:495–507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. National Treasury Management (2016) Fossil Fuel Divestment Bill 2016. Ireland

  80. New York City (2018) Climate action: mayor, comptroller, trustees announce first-in-the-nation goal to divest from fossil fuels. Accessed Aug 2018

  81. Nisbet MC (2013) Nature’s prophet: Bill McKibben as journalist, public intellectual and activist. Joan Shorenstein Cent Press Polit Public Policy Discussion Pap Ser D-78 March

  82. Norges Bank (2018) Norges Bank recommends the removal of oil stocks from the benchmark index of the government pension fund global (GPFG)

  83. Nulman E (2016) Climate change and social movements: civil society and the development of national climate change policy. Springer

  84. Pfeiffer A, Millar R, Hepburn C, Beinhocker E (2016) The ‘2°C capital stock’ for electricity generation: committed cumulative carbon emissions from the electricity generation sector and the transition to a green economy. Appl Energy 179:1395–1408

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Pierson P (2000) Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics. Am Polit Sci Rev 94:251–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. Randalls S (2010) History of the 2°C climate target. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Clim Chang 1:598–605

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Rijsberman FR, Swart RJ (1990) Targets and indicators of climatic change. Stockholm Environment Institute Stockholm

  88. Rogelj J, Shindell D, Jiang K, et al (2018) Mitigation pathways compatible with 1.5 C in the context of sustainable development. In: Global warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty [V. Masson-Delmotte V, Zhai P, Pörtner H, et al (eds.)]

  89. Schifeling T, Hoffman AJ (2017) Bill McKibben’s influence on U.S. climate change discourse: shifting field-level debates through radical flank effects. Organ Environ 108602661774427

  90. SEC (2010) Commission guidance regarding disclosure related to climate change

  91. SEC (2017) Untitled document. Accessed Aug 2018

  92. Share Action (2015) Expectations for BP and Shell around climate risk shareholder resolutions

  93. Share Action (2017) Two year after ‘aiming for A’: where are we now

  94. Stanford News (2014) Stanford to divest from coal companies

  95. Steinman E (2018) Why was Standing Rock and the #NoDAPL campaign so historic? Factors affecting American Indian participation in social movement collaborations and coalitions. Ethn Racial Stud 1–21

  96. Stern N (2011) A profound contradiction at the heart of climate change policy. Financ. Times

  97. Supran G, Oreskes N (2017) Assessing ExxonMobil’s climate change communications (1977–2014). Environ Res Lett 12:084019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  98. Swiss Re (2018) Swiss Re establishes thermal coal policy to support transition to a low-carbon economy. releases/2018/nr_20180702_swiss_re_establishes_thermal_coal_policy.html. Accessed August 2018

  99. Tokar B (2014) Movements for climate justice in the US and worldwide. Routledge Handb Clim Chang Mov 131–146

  100. Towers Watson (2015) Fossil fuels – exploring the stranded assets debate

  101. UNFCC (2010) Framework Convention on Climate Change: report of the Conference of the Parties on its sixteenth session, held in Cancún from 29 November to 10 December 2010. FCCC/CP/2010/7/Add.1

  102. Wordland J (2016) Does president Obama want to keep fossil fuels in the ground? Time Mag

  103. Yona L, Lenferna A (2016) Fossil fuel divestment movement within universities. Environ Clim Chang Int Relat 190

  104. Zurich Insurance Group (2017) Insurers can facilitate the transition to a low-carbon future. Accessed Aug 2018

Download references


We thank Peter Frumhoff and Robbie Andrew for their assistance with Fig. 1 and anonymous reviewers and editors for their substantive guidance. We also thank the organizers of divestment and climate justice campaigns in which we have participated — these experiences enriched our understanding of the movement.


This work was initially presented at the 2nd Conference on Fossil Fuel Supply & Climate Policy in Oxford, UK, with financial support from the Corporate Mapping Project, funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Council of Canada.

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yonatan Strauch.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material


(HTML 882 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Strauch, Y., Dordi, T. & Carter, A. Constraining fossil fuels based on 2 °C carbon budgets: the rapid adoption of a transformative concept in politics and finance. Climatic Change 160, 181–201 (2020).

Download citation


  • Carbon budgets
  • Fossil fuels
  • Social movements
  • Climate justice
  • Financial sector
  • Fossil-fuel divestment
  • Carbon bubble
  • Stranded assets
  • Climate politics