The analyses on the economic costs for achieving the nationally determined contributions and the expected global emission pathways

  • Keigo Akimoto
  • Fuminori Sano
  • Bianka Shoai Tehrani
Article

Abstract

The Paris Agreement for a post-2020 international framework for tackling climate change was adopted in December 2015. The agreement requires that each country prepares and communicates nationally determined contributions (NDCs) every 5 years, including greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction targets. Most countries submitted NDCs before the Paris Agreement. According to our analyses using a global energy and GHG emission reduction assessment model, the emission reduction costs of the NDCs vary widely among countries; and those differences will induce carbon leakage, thus the expected global emission reduction is smaller than that predicted by simply aggregating the emission reductions of all the countries. Moreover, the emissions are larger than those required for the pathways leading to a high probability of temperature stabilization at below 2 °C above pre-industrial levels. To fill the gap, a rigorous review process employing robust indicators measuring emission reduction efforts is crucial. However, the development and deployment of innovative technologies with cheaper costs is even more significant.

Keywords

Climate change mitigation Greenhouse gas emission Marginal abatement cost Nationally determined contributions Emission pathway 

JEL Classification

C590 H00 Z180 

References

  1. Akimoto K, Sano F, Homma T, Oda J, Nagashima M, Kii M (2010) Estimates of GHG emission reduction potential by country, sector, and cost. Energy Policy 38(7):3384–3393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Akimoto K, Homma T, Sano F, Nagashima M, Tokushige K, Tomoda T (2014) Assessment of the emission reduction target of halving CO2 emissions by 2050: macro-factors analysis and model analysis under newly developed socio-economic scenarios. Energy Strategy Rev 2(3–4):246–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aldy J, Pizer B (2016) Alternative metrics for comparing domestic climate change mitigation efforts and the emerging international climate policy architecture. Rev Environ Econ Policy 10(1):3–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aldy J, Pizer B, Akimoto K (2016) Comparing emission mitigation effort. Clim Policy. doi:10.1080/14693062.2015.119098 Google Scholar
  5. Geden O (2015) Policy: climate advisers must maintain integrity. Nature 521:27–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. IPCC (2001) Climate change 2001: the scientific basis. Contribution of working group I to the third assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  7. IPCC (2007) Climate Change 2007: the scientific basis. Contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  8. IPCC (2013) Climate change 2013: the physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  9. IPCC (2014) Climate change 2014: mitigation of climate change contribution of working group III to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  10. Kaya Y, Yamaguchi M, Akimoto K (2015) The uncertainty of climate sensitivity and its implication for the Paris negotiation. Sustain Sci. doi:10.1007/s11625-015-0339-z Google Scholar
  11. Meinshausen M, Raper SCB, Wigley TML (2011) Emulating coupled atmosphere-ocean and carbon cycle models with a simpler model, MAGICC6–part 1: model description and calibration. Atmos Chem Phys 11:1417–1456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. RITE, NIES (2015) MILES (modelling and informing low emissions strategies) project–Japan policy paper: a joint analysis of Japan’s INDC. http://www-iam.nies.go.jp/aim/publications/report/2015/miles_japan.pdf. Accessed 28 Jan 2016
  13. Sano F, Akimoto K, Homma T, Tokushige K (2016) Evaluations on the Japan’s greenhouse gas emission reduction target for 2030. J Jpn Soc Energy Resour 37(1):51–60 (in Japanese) Google Scholar
  14. Tavoni M et al (2015) Post-2020 climate agreements in the major economies assessed in the light of global models. Nat Clim Change 5:119–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Tollefson J (2015) Is the 2 °C world a fantasy? Nature 527:436–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. UNFCCC (2015) Adoption of the Paris agreement. http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/l09.pdf. Accessed 28 Jan 2016
  17. Victor DG, Kennel CF (2014) Climate policy: ditch the 2 °C warming goal. Nature 514:30–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Japan Association for Evolutionary Economics 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Keigo Akimoto
    • 1
  • Fuminori Sano
    • 1
  • Bianka Shoai Tehrani
    • 1
  1. 1.Research Institute of Innovative Technology for the EarthKizugawa-ShiJapan

Personalised recommendations