Critical adjustment of land mitigation pathways for assessing countries’ climate progress

Giacomo Grassi (), Elke Stehfest, Joeri Rogelj, Detlef Vuuren, Alessandro Cescatti, Jo House, Gert-Jan Nabuurs, Simone Rossi, Ramdane Alkama, Raúl Abad Viñas, Katherine Calvin, Guido Ceccherini, Sandro Federici, Shinichiro Fujimori, Mykola Gusti, Tomoko Hasegawa, Peter Havlik, Florian Humpenöder, Anu Korosuo, Lucia Perugini, Francesco N. Tubiello and Alexander Popp
Additional contact information
Giacomo Grassi: European Commission
Elke Stehfest: PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency
Joeri Rogelj: Imperial College London
Detlef Vuuren: PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency
Alessandro Cescatti: European Commission
Jo House: University of Bristol
Gert-Jan Nabuurs: Wageningen University and Research
Simone Rossi: European Commission
Ramdane Alkama: European Commission
Raúl Abad Viñas: European Commission
Katherine Calvin: Joint Global Change Research Institute at the University of Maryland–College Park
Guido Ceccherini: European Commission
Sandro Federici: Institute for Global Environmental Strategies
Shinichiro Fujimori: International Institute for Applied System Analysis (IIASA)
Mykola Gusti: International Institute for Applied System Analysis (IIASA)
Tomoko Hasegawa: National Institute for Environmental Studies (NIES)
Florian Humpenöder: Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK)
Anu Korosuo: European Commission
Lucia Perugini: Foundation Euro-Mediterranean Center on Climate Change (CMCC)
Francesco N. Tubiello: Via Terme di Caracalla
Alexander Popp: Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK)

Nature Climate Change, 2021, vol. 11, issue 5, 425-434

Abstract: Abstract Mitigation pathways by Integrated Assessment Models (IAMs) describe future emissions that keep global warming below specific temperature limits and are compared with countries’ collective greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction pledges. This is needed to assess mitigation progress and inform emission targets under the Paris Agreement. Currently, however, a mismatch of ~5.5 GtCO2 yr−1 exists between the global land-use fluxes estimated with IAMs and from countries’ GHG inventories. Here we present a ‘Rosetta stone’ adjustment to translate IAMs’ land-use mitigation pathways to estimates more comparable with GHG inventories. This does not change the original decarbonization pathways, but reallocates part of the land sink to be consistent with GHG inventories. Adjusted cumulative emissions over the period until net zero for 1.5 or 2 °C limits are reduced by 120–192 GtCO2 relative to the original IAM pathways. These differences should be taken into account to ensure an accurate assessment of progress towards the Paris Agreement.

Date: 2021
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (7)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-021-01033-6 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
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:nat:natcli:v:11:y:2021:i:5:d:10.1038_s41558-021-01033-6

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://www.nature.com/nclimate/

DOI: 10.1038/s41558-021-01033-6

Access Statistics for this article

Nature Climate Change is currently edited by Bronwyn Wake

More articles in Nature Climate Change from Nature
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().