Climate policies after Paris: Pledge, Trade and Recycle

Böhringer, Christoph; Peterson, Sonja; Rutherford, Thomas F.; Schneider, Jan; Winkler, Malte

doi:10.1016/j.eneco.2021.105471

Cited by 52 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Changes in the energy mix are based on data from JRC and GTAP. Finally, changes in energy efficiency are calibrated to generate a baseline close to emissions projected in the Energy Model Forum Study on "Carbon Pricing after Paris" (EMF36) as reported in Böhringer et al (2021). Projected emissions necessary to stay on the path of 2°C global warming are taken from the same study, which are based in turn on projections by the IEA.…”

Section: Methodology: Model and Baseline Constructionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing different approaches to tackle the challenges of global carbon pricing

2022

WTO Working Papers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Climate change mitigation faces two main policy challenges: the need for global cooperation to tackle the collective action problem and the need to share the burden of global carbon pricing fair way following the principle of common but differentiated responsibility (CBRD). In this paper we explore the best ways to incentivize regions to reduce their CO2 emissions while minimizing the welfare losses for low-income countries using simulations with a recursive dynamic computable general equilibrium (CGE) model. We first present the necessity, efficiency and urgency of global carbon pricing policies climate change mitigation policies. Global carbon pricing is necessary to tackle climate change, is more efficient than regional carbon pricing, and is urgent to prevent a patchwork of carbon pricing policies leading to calls for border carbon adjustment (BCA). However, because the impact of global carbon pricing on most regions is negative, complementary policies are needed to provide sufficient incentives to join a global carbon pricing coalition and at the same time share the burden fairly. We examine four potential complementary policies: BCA, Nordhaus's climate club, a global incentive scheme, and emission trading with progressive emission reduction targets. We evaluate these proposals based on their projected effects on average income and income inequality among countries, as well as their effectiveness as an incentive to introduce carbon pricing. BCA scores poorly along the three dimensions; Nordhaus's carbon club performs well as an incentive tool but has a negative impact on income and income inequality; the global carbon incentive has a positive impact on income and income inequality but performs poorly as an incentive tool; and emission trading with progressive reduction targets scores well across all dimensions.We conclude with a discussion of the feasibility of emission trading.

show abstract

Section: Methodology: Model and Baseline Constructionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing different approaches to tackle the challenges of global carbon pricing

2022

WTO Working Papers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, if we observe deviations among MAC across countries, we can achieve the same reduction at a lower cost. Summarizing the discussion from the Energy Modeling Forum study, Böhringer et al (2021) analyze each country's efforts to achieve NDC under the Paris Agreement. They show that the MAC of emission reduction under NDC are lower for developing countries than those of NDC in developed countries.…”

Section: Economics Of Ndc and Historical Emissionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implications of Deglobalization on Energy and Carbon Neutrality in Asia and the Pacific Region

Arimura,

Sugino

2023

Asian Economic Policy Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) special report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C urged the world to move toward carbon neutrality (CN). Following the announcement by European countries of their CN target by 2050, Japan, South Korea, and the USA announced their CN targets by 2050. However, the Russian invasion of Ukraine has divided the world and drastically changed energy markets, including natural gas. Moreover, the EU is now implementing controversial policies on carbon border adjustment mechanisms which may impose a heavier burden on developing countries. This study discusses how global divisions may influence energy strategies and climate policy for various Asian countries.

show abstract

“…Because of regional differences in governance, development and societal and technological context, mitigation cost estimates differ between countries. For example, under the idealized assumption that emission reductions are achieved through a globally uniform carbon price, countries with carbon-intensive economies or fossil fuel exporting countries would have relatively higher macroeconomic costs as their economies require a deeper transformation (Stern, Pezzey and Lambie 2012;Tavoni et al 2015;Böhringer et al 2021). For a detailed discussion see Riahi et al (2022).…”

Section: Box 42 Putting Cost Estimates From Least-cost Emissions Scen...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Transforming food systems

2022

Emissions Gap Report 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

DisclaimersThe designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory or city or its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Some illustrations or graphics appearing in this publication may have been adapted from content published by third parties. This may have been done to illustrate and communicate the authors' own interpretations of the key messages emerging from illustrations or graphics produced by third parties. In such cases, the material in this publication does not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the United Nations Environment Programme concerning the source materials used as a basis for such graphics or illustrations.Mention of a commercial company or product in this document does not imply endorsement by the United Nations Environment Programme or the authors. The use of information from this document for publicity or advertising is not permitted. Trademark names and symbols are used in an editorial fashion with no intention on infringement of trademark or copyright laws.The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations Environment Programme. We regret any errors or omissions that may have been unwittingly made.

show abstract

Climate policies after Paris: Pledge, Trade and Recycle

Cited by 52 publications

References 21 publications

Comparing different approaches to tackle the challenges of global carbon pricing

Comparing different approaches to tackle the challenges of global carbon pricing

Implications of Deglobalization on Energy and Carbon Neutrality in Asia and the Pacific Region

Transforming food systems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About