A short note on integrated assessment modeling approaches: Rejoinder to the review of "Making or breaking climate targets - The AMPERE study on staged accession scenarios for climate policy"

E. Kriegler, K. Riahi, N. Bauer, V. J. Schwanitz, N. Petermann, Valentina Bosetti, A. Marcucci, S. Otto, Leonidas Paroussos, S. Rao-Skirbekk, T. A. Currás, S. Ashina, Johannes Bollen, J. Eom, M. Hamdi-Cherif, Thomas Longden, Alban Kitous, Aurélie Méjean, F. Sano, M. Schaeffer, K. Wada, Pantelis Capros, D. P. Vuuren, Ottmar Edenhofer, C. Bertram, R. Bibas, J. Edmonds, N. Johnson, V. Krey, G. Luderer, D. Mccollum and K. Jiang
Additional contact information
E. Kriegler: PIK - Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research
K. Riahi: IIASA - International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis [Laxenburg]
M. Hamdi-Cherif: CIRED - centre international de recherche sur l'environnement et le développement - Cirad - Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - AgroParisTech - ENPC - École nationale des ponts et chaussées - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique
R. Bibas: CIRED - centre international de recherche sur l'environnement et le développement - Cirad - Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement - EHESS - École des hautes études en sciences sociales - AgroParisTech - ENPC - École nationale des ponts et chaussées - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique
G. Luderer: PIK - Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research

Post-Print from HAL

Abstract: We provide a rejoinder to a review (Rosen, 2015) of our original article "Making or breaking climate targets - the AMPERE study on staged accession scenarios for climate policy" (Kriegler et al., 2015a). We have a substantial disagreement with the content of the review, and feel that it is plagued by a number of misconceptions about the nature of the AMPERE study and the integrated assessment modeling approach employed by it. We therefore see this rejoinder as an opportunity to clarify these misconceptions and advance the debate by providing a clearer understanding of the strengths, weaknesses, and ultimately the value of integrated assessment. © 2015 Elsevier Inc.

Date: 2015
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Published in Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 2015, 99, pp.273-276. ⟨10.1016/j.techfore.2015.07.011⟩

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
Journal Article: A short note on integrated assessment modeling approaches: Rejoinder to the review of “Making or breaking climate targets — The AMPERE study on staged accession scenarios for climate policy” (2015)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:hal:journl:hal-01239777

DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2015.07.011

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Post-Print from HAL
Bibliographic data for series maintained by CCSD ().