A carbon footprint proportional to expenditure - A case for Norway?

Isaksen, Elisabeth Thuestad; Narbel, Patrick A.

doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.08.027

Cited by 44 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Production-based accounting (PBA) is similar to territorial accounting except that it includes the GHG emissions caused by international transportation . Several studies have revealed that while the production-based emissions of some developed countries have decreased under the Kyoto Protocol, the consumption-based carbon footprints (CBCFs) of the same countries may have increased during the same period (Peters and Hertwich 2008, Clement et al 2017, Isaksen and Narbel 2017. Thus, although we can detect the decoupling of productionbased emissions from economic growth at country level, it does not mean that there is decoupling between total GHG emissions and economic growth at the global level.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 82%

What can we learn from consumption-based carbon footprints at different spatial scales? Review of policy implications

Ottelin

Ala-Mantila

Heinonen

et al. 2019

Environ. Res. Lett.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Current climate change mitigation policies, including the Paris Agreement, are based on territorial greenhouse gas (GHG) accounting. This neglects the understanding of GHG emissions embodied in trade. As a solution, consumption-based accounting (CBA) that reveals the lifecycle emissions, including transboundary flows, is gaining support as a complementary information tool. CBA is particularly relevant in cities that tend to outsource a large part of their production-based emissions to their hinterlands. While CBA has so far been used relatively little in practical policymaking, it has been used widely by scientists. Methods and design: The purpose of this systematic review, which covers more than 100 studies, is to reflect the policy implications of consumption-based carbon footprint (CBCF) studies at different spatial scales. The review was conducted by reading through the discussion sections of the reviewed studies and systematically collecting the given policy suggestions for different spatial scales. We used both numerical and qualitative methods to organize and interpret the findings of the review. Review results and discussion: The motivation for the review was to investigate whether the unique consumption perspective of CBA leads to similarly unique policy features. We found that various carbon pricing policies are the most widely supported policy instrument in the relevant literature. However, overall, there is a shortage of discussion on policy instruments, since the policy discussions focus on policy outcomes, such as behavioral change or technological solutions. In addition, some policy recommendations are conflicting. Particularly, urban density and compact city policies are supported by some studies and questioned by others. To clarify the issue, we examined how the results regarding the relationship between urban development and the CBCF vary. The review provides a concise starting point for policymakers and future research by summarizing the timely policy implications.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 82%

What can we learn from consumption-based carbon footprints at different spatial scales? Review of policy implications

Ottelin

Ala-Mantila

Heinonen

et al. 2019

Environ. Res. Lett.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We review the literature, and find that indeed there is more evidence in favor of an elasticity less than one, potentially to a greater extent in poor countries (Grunewald et al, ). The common range for household expenditure elasticity of emissions is from 0.6 to 1 (Ala‐Mantila, Heinonen, & Junnila, ; Isaksen & Narbel, ; Lenzen et al, ; Vringer & Blok, ; Weber & Matthews, ), though values over 1 (or increasing MPE with income) have also been observed for Brazil and China (Golley & Meng, ; Lenzen et al, ; Wiedenhofer et al, ).…”

Section: The Emissions From a Dollar Depend On Who Spends Itmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Both result in disproportionate burdens on the world's poor, and combating them both seriously must involve reducing vulnerabilities of the poor. It may then come as a surprise that a substantial literature investigates whether these two goals are indeed compatible (Baek & Gweisah, ; Berthe & Elie, ; Golley & Meng, ; Grunewald, Klasen, Martınez‐Zarzoso, & Muris, ; Hao, Chen, & Zhang, ; Isaksen & Narbel, ; A. Jorgenson, Schor, & Huang, ; A. K. Jorgenson, Schor, Knight, & Huang, ; Ravallion, Heil, & Jalan, ; Wiedenhofer et al, ; Wolde‐Rufael & Idowu, ). Will more equitable growth come with a cost to climate change?…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Less global inequality can improve climate outcomes

Rao

Min

2018

WIREs Climate Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two of the biggest global challenges we face today are mitigating climate change and economic inequality. Some research suggests these goals are in conflict, based largely on the observation that a dollar spent at higher income levels is less carbon intensive than at lower income levels. We put this concern to rest. We quantify this effect in its most extreme manifestation, both within countries and between countries. We use a wide range of income elasticities of emissions (0.7–1.0) and scenarios from the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSP) with the highest (SSP4) and lowest (SSP5) between‐country inequality. Within countries, even with assumptions of low elasticities (0.7) and aggressive inequality reduction (Gini coefficient of 0.55 to 0.30), emissions would realistically increase by less than 8%, which would likely occur over several decades. Income convergence between countries may reduce the emissions intensity of global income growth, because the energy intensity reductions from income growth in emerging economies, such as India and China, offsets the energy increasing effect of higher growth in developing countries. Given these findings, it seems a distraction for future research to dwell on this narrow framing when there are deeper under‐explored linkages and synergies between reducing income inequality and climate change, such as the effect of reducing inequality on social norms, consumption and on political mobilization around climate policy. This article is categorized under: Climate and Development > Sustainability and Human Well‐Being

show abstract

“…PHCEs in our study and other studies are compared in Table 3. PHCEs in Beijing, Tianjin, Shanghai, and Chongqing were larger than the national average household footprint shown by Wiedenhofer et al [65], Fan et al [66], and Qu et al [67], but much smaller than the U.S. [68] and European countries [18,69,70]. Compared to the results of Tian et al [71] and Fry et al [72], Beijing's total PHCEs in our results were 31.56% and 29.02% smaller, respectively, due to different research methods and data sources.…”

Section: Urban and Rural Total Hces And Phcesmentioning

confidence: 92%

Comparing Urban and Rural Household CO2 Emissions—Case from China’s Four Megacities: Beijing, Tianjin, Shanghai, and Chongqing

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

CO 2 emissions caused by household consumption have become one of the main sources of greenhouse gas emissions. Studying household CO 2 emissions (HCEs) is of great significance to energy conservation and emissions reduction. In this study, we quantitatively analyzed the direct and indirect CO 2 emissions by urban and rural households in Beijing, Tianjin, Shanghai, and Chongqing. The results show that urban total HCEs are larger than rural total HCEs for the four megacities. Urban total per capita household CO 2 emissions (PHCEs) are larger than rural total PHCEs in Beijing, Tianjin, and Chongqing, while rural total PHCEs in Shanghai are larger than urban total PHCEs. Electricity and hot water production and supply was the largest contributor of indirect HCEs for both rural and urban households. Beijing, Tianjin, Shanghai, and Chongqing outsourced a large amount of indirect CO 2 emissions to their neighboring provinces.

show abstract

A carbon footprint proportional to expenditure - A case for Norway?

Cited by 44 publications

References 22 publications

What can we learn from consumption-based carbon footprints at different spatial scales? Review of policy implications

What can we learn from consumption-based carbon footprints at different spatial scales? Review of policy implications

Less global inequality can improve climate outcomes

Comparing Urban and Rural Household CO2 Emissions—Case from China’s Four Megacities: Beijing, Tianjin, Shanghai, and Chongqing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About