Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

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

  • Article
  • Published:
Evolutionary and Institutional Economics Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • 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):3384–3393

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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):246–256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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):3–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aldy J, Pizer B, Akimoto K (2016) Comparing emission mitigation effort. Clim Policy. doi:10.1080/14693062.2015.119098

    Google Scholar 

  • Geden O (2015) Policy: climate advisers must maintain integrity. Nature 521:27–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 Press

  • 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 Press

  • 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 Press

  • 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 Press

  • 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 

  • 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 11:1417–1456

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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

  • 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 

  • Tavoni M et al (2015) Post-2020 climate agreements in the major economies assessed in the light of global models. Nat Clim Change 5:119–126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tollefson J (2015) Is the 2 °C world a fantasy? Nature 527:436–438

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UNFCCC (2015) Adoption of the Paris agreement. http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/l09.pdf. Accessed 28 Jan 2016

  • Victor DG, Kennel CF (2014) Climate policy: ditch the 2 °C warming goal. Nature 514:30–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Keigo Akimoto.

Appendix: Overview of the global energy and GHG emission reduction assessment model DNE21+

Appendix: Overview of the global energy and GHG emission reduction assessment model DNE21+

The DNE21+ model (Akimoto et al. 2010; 2014) is an intertemporal linear programming model for the assessment of global energy systems and global warming mitigation in which the worldwide costs are to be minimized. The model represents regional differences, and assesses detailed energy-related CO2 emission reduction technologies up to 2050. When any emission restriction (e.g., an upper limit of emissions, emission reduction targets, targets of energy or emission intensity improvements, or carbon taxes) is applied, the model specifies the energy systems whose costs are minimized, meeting all the assumed requirements, including assumed production for industries such as iron and steel, cement, and paper and pulp, transportation by automobile, bus, and truck, and other energy demands. The energy supply sectors are hard-linked with the energy end-use sectors, including energy exporting/importing, and the lifetimes of facilities are taken into account so that assessments are made with complete consistency kept over the energy systems. Salient features of the model include (1) analysis of regional differences between 54 world regions while maintaining common assumptions and interrelationships, (2) a detailed evaluation of global warming response measures that involves modeling of about 300 specific technologies that help suppress global warming, and (3) explicit facility replacement considerations over the entire time period. Based on the plausible ranges derived from the relevant literature, the model assumes energy efficiency improvements in several kinds of technologies and cost reductions of renewable energies, carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS), amongst others.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Akimoto, K., Sano, F. & Tehrani, B.S. The analyses on the economic costs for achieving the nationally determined contributions and the expected global emission pathways. Evolut Inst Econ Rev 14, 193–206 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40844-016-0049-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40844-016-0049-y

Keywords

JEL Classification

Navigation