Abstract
The Paris Climate Change Agreement is a mixed blessing. Although it has been heralded as a great success, there is a low probability that it will reduce carbon dioxide equivalent emissions at the pace required to ensure a safe climate, based on current progress and processes. This chapter provides an overview of the scale of the problem of achieving the Paris Climate Change aspirations using a carbon emissions budget approach. This is important because current National Determined Contributions and Intended National Determined Contributions do not place the global community on a pathway to limit warming at or below 2 °C above pre-industrial levels by 2100. Suggestions are made on how a general carbon emissions budget can be used to limit global warming through equity and transparency processes. This chapter adds to the conversation on the imperative to ratchet up commitments under the Paris Agreement as the window on action to mitigate against dangerous climate change is about to close.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Althor, G., Watson, J. E., & Fuller, R. A. (2016). Global mismatch between greenhouse gas emissions and the burden of climate change. Scientific reports, 6, srep20281.
Briner, G., & Moarif, S. (2017). Possible structure of mitigation-related modalities, procedures and guidelines for the enhanced transparency framework. OECD/IEA Climate Change Expert Group Papers, 2016/05, 18. https://doi.org/10.1787/2227779X.
Carbon Budget. (2016). The emission pledges from the US, EU, China, and India leave no room for other countries to emit in a 2°C emission budget (66% chance). Retrieved from http://www.globalcarbonproject.org/carbonbudget/
Carbon Tracker. (2016). Carbon Tracker Initiative. Retrieved from http://www.carbontracker.org/
Climate Interactive. (2016). Climate scoreboard update: National plans lead to 3.3°C. Retrieved from https://www.climateinteractive.org/analysis/climate-scoreboard-update-national-plans-lead-to-3-4c/
Dietz, R., & O’Neill, D. W. (2013). Enough is enough: Building a sustainable economy in a world of finite resources. San Francisco: Routledge.
du Pont, Y. R., Jeffery, M. L., Gutschow, J., Christoff, P., & Meinshausen, M. (2016). National contributions for decarbonizing the world economy in line with the G7 agreement. Environmental Research Letters, 11(5), 054005. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/11/5/054005.
Hansen, J., Sato, M., Kharecha, P., von Schuckmann, K., Beerling, D. J., Cao, J., et al. (2017). Young people’s burden: Requirement of negative CO2 emissions. Earth System Dynamics, 8(3), 577–616. https://doi.org/10.5194/esd-8-577-2017.
IPCC. (2014). In K. Pachauri & L. A. Meyer (Eds.), Climate change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of then Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Geneva: IPCC.
Kinley, R. (2017). Climate change after Paris: from turning point to transformation. Climate Policy, 17, (1), 9–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2016.1191009.
Le Quere, C., Andrew, R. M., Canadell, J. G., Sitch, S., Korsbakken, J. I., Peters, G. P., et al. (2016). Global carbon budget 2016. Earth System Science Data, 8(2), 605–649. https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-8-605-2016.
Mackey, B., & Rogers, N. (2015). Climate justice and the distribution of rights to emit carbon. In P. Keyzer, V. Popovski, & C. Sampford (Eds.), Access to international justice (pp. 225–240). Abingdon: Routledge.
Mattoo, A., & Subramanian, A. (2012). Equity in climate change: An analytical review. World Development, 40(6), 1083–1097. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2011.11.007.
Meyer, A. (2000). Contraction and convergence. The global solution to climate change. Foxhole, Devon, UK: Green Books for the Schumaker Sociey.
Peters, G. P., Andrew, R. M., Canadell, J. G., Fuss, S., Jackson, R. B., Korsbakken, J. I., et al. (2017). Key indicators to track current progress and future ambition of the Paris Agreement. Nature Climate Change, 7(2), 118–122. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate3202.
Peters, G. P., Andrew, R. M., Solomon, S., & Friedlingstein, P. (2015). Measuring a fair and ambitious climate agreement using cumulative emissions. Environmental Research Letters, 10(10), 105004. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/10/10/105004.
Prinn, R. G., & Reilly, J. M. (2017). Transparency in the Paris Agreement. Retrieved from https://globalchange.mit.edu/sites/default/files/MITJPSPGC_Rpt308.pdf.
Robiou Du Pont, Y., Jeffery, M. L., Guetschow, J., Rogelj, J., Christoff, P., & Meinshausen, M. (2017). Equitable mitigation to achieve the Paris Agreement goals. Nature Climate Change, 7, 38–43.
Rogelj, J., den Elzen, M., Hohne, N., Fransen, T., Fekete, H., Winkler, H., et al. (2016). Paris Agreement climate proposals need a boost to keep warming well below 2 °C. Nature, 534(7609), 631–639. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature18307PMID:27357792.
Rogelj, J., Schaeffer, M., Friedlingstein, P., Gillett, N. P., Van Vuuren, D. P., Riahi, K., et al. (2016). Differences between carbon budget estimates unravelled. Nature Climate Change, 6(3), 245–252. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2868.
Rose, S. K., Richels, R., Blanford, G., & Rutherford, T. (2017). The Paris Agreement and next steps in limiting global warming. Climatic Change, 142(1–2), 255–270. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-017-1935-y.
Schandl, H., Hatfield-Dodds, S., Wiedmann, T., Geschke, A., Cai, Y., West, J., et al. (2016). Decoupling global environmental pressure and economic growth: Scenarios for energy use, materials use and carbon emissions. Journal of Cleaner Production, 132, 45–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.06.100.
Skeie, R. B., Fuglestvedt, J., Berntsen, T., Peters, G. P., Andrew, R., Allen, M., & Kallbekken, S. (2017). Perspective has a strong effect on the calculation of historical contributions to global warming. Environmental Research Letters, 12(2), 024022. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa5b0a.
Stockholm Institute. (2016). Putting the ‘enhanced transparency framework’ into action: Priorities for a key pillar of the Paris Agreement. Retrieved from https://www.sei-international.org/mediamanager/documents/Publications/Climate/SEI-PB-2016-Transparency-under-Paris-Agreement.pdf
UNFCCC. (1992). United Nations framework convention on climate change—Rio Declaration, Rio Janeiro. United Nations.
UNFCCC. (1997). United Nations framework convention on climate change: Kyoto Protocol. Kyoto, Japan: United Nations.
UNFCCC. (2015). Paris Agreement. Paris, France: United Nations.
UNFCCC. (2016) Aggregate effect of the intended nationally determined contributions: an update. Retrieved from https://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2016/cop22/eng/02.pdf
Wang, T., & Watson, J. (2012). Scenario analysis of China’s emissions pathways in the 21st century for low carbon transition. Energy Policy, 38(August 2009), 3537–3546. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2010.02.031.
Winkler, H., Mantlana, B., & Letete, T. (2017). Transparency of action and support in the Paris Agreement. Climate Policy, 17, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2017.1302918.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hales, R., Mackey, B. (2018). Carbon Budgeting Post-COP21: The Need for an Equitable Strategy for Meeting CO2e Targets. In: Hossain, M., Hales, R., Sarker, T. (eds) Pathways to a Sustainable Economy . Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67702-6_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67702-6_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-67701-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-67702-6
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)