Exploring climate regimes for differentiation of commitments to achieve the EU climate target
Citations
Altmetric:
Series / Report no.
Open Access
Type
Report
Language
en
Date
2003-11-28
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Journal Issue
Title
Exploring climate regimes for differentiation of
commitments to achieve the EU climate target
Translated Title
Evaluatie van klimaatregimes voor internationale
lastenverdeling voor het realiseren van de EU
klimaatdoelstelling
Published in
Abstract
Dit rapport bevat een kwantitatieve verkenning van
verschillende regimes voor lastenverdeling in het internationale
klimaatbeleid op basis van mondiale emissieplafonds in overeenstemming met
de EU lange termijn klimaatdoelstelling om de mondiaal gemiddelde
temperatuurstijging te beperken tot 2 graden C niveau ten opzichte van het
pre-industriele niveau. Vijf verschillende benaderingen voor internationale
lastenverdeling zijn geanalyseerd: 1. het Braziliaans voorstel, met een
differentiatie van emissiereductiedoelstellingen op basis van de bijdrage
van landen aan de gerealiseerde mondiale temperatuurstijging. 2.
'Multi-stage' (toenemende participatie): in deze benadering neemt het aantal
landen en hun inspanningsniveau geleidelijk toe op basis van regels en
criteria voor zowel deelname als lastenverdeling; 3. Per Capita
Convergentie (PCC), een benadering waarbij alle landen direct deelnemen en
hun emissierechten in de tijd convergeren van bestaande naar gelijke niveaus
per hoofd; 4. 'Preference Score' (PS) (preferentie score), waarbij alle
partijen direct deel nemen aan een allocatie van de mondiale emissieruimte
op basis van een naar bevolkingsaantallen gewogen voorkeur voor verdeling
naar hun aandeel in de emissies of wereldbevolking. 5. De 'Jacoby regel'
benadering, waarbij zowel de deelname van landen als de lastenverdeling is
gebaseerd op hoofdelijke inkomensniveaus. De studie laat zien dat op de
korte termijn (2025) stabilisatie van de CO2 concentratie op 450 ppmv
betekent dat de emissieruimte van de industrielanden (Annex I) ten opzicht
van 1990 met 20-60 procent afneemt, afhankelijk van het gekozen
lastenverdelingsregime. Voor Europa zijn de reducties 40-60 procent.
Tegelijkertijd is snelle deelname (binnen 20-40 jaar) van met name grote
niet Annex I landen, zoals China en India aan wereldwijde beheersing van
broeikasgassen noodzakelijk. Naast de kwantitatieve analyse is op basis van
een multi-criteria analyse ook een kwalitatieve beoordeling gemaakt van de
sterke en zwakke kanten van de verschillende regime benaderingen. Hierbij
wordt een onderscheid gemaakt tussen verschillende soorten criteria: milieu
criteria, politieke criteria, economische criteria,
institutioneel-technische criteria en algemene beleidscriteria. Uit deze
evaluatie komt naar voren dat de Multi-Stage benadering het beste voldoet
aan de verschillende soorten criteria. Echter, er zijn ook mogelijkheden om
de score van de andere benaderingen te verbeteren door middel van
aanpassingen in het ontwerp
This report explores the implications of various international climate regimes for differentiating post-Kyoto (after 2012) commitments compatible with the EU long-term climate objective to limit global-mean temperature increase to less than 2 degrees Celsius compared to pre-industrial levels. Five climate regimes are explored: (1) the Brazilian Proposal, with differentiation of emission reductions based on countries' relative contribution to the global temperature increase realised. (2) Multi-Stage (MS) approach with a gradual increase in the number of Parties involved and their level of commitment according to participation and differentiation rules. (3) Per Capita Convergence approach (PCC) or 'Contraction & Convergence', with universal participation and a convergence of per capita emissions. (4) Preference Score (PS) approach, an allocation derived from a population weighted preference score voting for either grandfathering or per capita allocation. (5) Jacoby Rule (JR) approach with both participation thresholds and burden allocation based on per capita income. It is found that, on the short-term (2025) and under a emission profile for stabilising CO2 concentrations at 450 ppmv (consistent with the EU-target), all approaches result into reductions of emission allowances of Annex I regions of about 20 to 60 percent compared to their 1990 emission levels. For Europe the reductions are 40-60 percent in 2025. At the same time, major non-Annex I regions (East Asia and South Asia) need to start participating in global emission reduction before the middle of this century, irrespective of the emission allocation approach and type of threshold chosen. In addition to the quantitative analysis the strengths and weaknesses of the various regimes were also explored in a qualitative way on the basis of a multi-criteria evaluation. Different types of criteria were identified: environmental, political, economic, technical and institutional and general policy criteria. Overall, the MS approach seems, in principle, to best satisfy the various types of criteria. However, other approaches could improve their performance by making adjustments in their design.
This report explores the implications of various international climate regimes for differentiating post-Kyoto (after 2012) commitments compatible with the EU long-term climate objective to limit global-mean temperature increase to less than 2 degrees Celsius compared to pre-industrial levels. Five climate regimes are explored: (1) the Brazilian Proposal, with differentiation of emission reductions based on countries' relative contribution to the global temperature increase realised. (2) Multi-Stage (MS) approach with a gradual increase in the number of Parties involved and their level of commitment according to participation and differentiation rules. (3) Per Capita Convergence approach (PCC) or 'Contraction & Convergence', with universal participation and a convergence of per capita emissions. (4) Preference Score (PS) approach, an allocation derived from a population weighted preference score voting for either grandfathering or per capita allocation. (5) Jacoby Rule (JR) approach with both participation thresholds and burden allocation based on per capita income. It is found that, on the short-term (2025) and under a emission profile for stabilising CO2 concentrations at 450 ppmv (consistent with the EU-target), all approaches result into reductions of emission allowances of Annex I regions of about 20 to 60 percent compared to their 1990 emission levels. For Europe the reductions are 40-60 percent in 2025. At the same time, major non-Annex I regions (East Asia and South Asia) need to start participating in global emission reduction before the middle of this century, irrespective of the emission allocation approach and type of threshold chosen. In addition to the quantitative analysis the strengths and weaknesses of the various regimes were also explored in a qualitative way on the basis of a multi-criteria evaluation. Different types of criteria were identified: environmental, political, economic, technical and institutional and general policy criteria. Overall, the MS approach seems, in principle, to best satisfy the various types of criteria. However, other approaches could improve their performance by making adjustments in their design.
Description
Publisher
Sponsors
VROM