National post-2020 greenhouse gas targets and diversity-aware leadership

Malte Meinshausen (), Louise Jeffery, Johannes Guetschow, Yann Robiou du Pont, Joeri Rogelj, Michiel Schaeffer, Niklas Höhne, Michel den Elzen, Sebastian Oberthür and Nicolai Meinshausen
Additional contact information
Malte Meinshausen: Australian-German Climate & Energy College, The University of Melbourne
Louise Jeffery: Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Telegraphenberg, 14412 Potsdam, Germany
Johannes Guetschow: Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Telegraphenberg, 14412 Potsdam, Germany
Yann Robiou du Pont: Australian-German Climate & Energy College, The University of Melbourne
Joeri Rogelj: Energy Program, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), Schlossplatz 1, A-2361 Laxenburg, Austria
Michiel Schaeffer: Climate Analytics
Niklas Höhne: New Climate Institute
Michel den Elzen: PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency
Sebastian Oberthür: Institute for European Studies, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Pleinlaan 2, B-1050 Brussels, Belgium
Nicolai Meinshausen: Seminar für Statistik, ETH Zurich, Rämistrasse 101, 8092 Zürich, Switzerland

Nature Climate Change, 2015, vol. 5, issue 12, 1098-1106

Abstract: Abstract Achieving the collective goal of limiting warming to below 2 °C or 1.5 °C compared to pre-industrial levels requires a transition towards a fully decarbonized world. Annual greenhouse gas emissions on such a path in 2025 or 2030 can be allocated to individual countries using a variety of allocation schemes. We reanalyse the IPCC literature allocation database and provide country-level details for three approaches. At this stage, however, it seems utopian to assume that the international community will agree on a single allocation scheme. Here, we investigate an approach that involves a major-economy country taking the lead. In a bottom-up manner, other countries then determine what they consider a fair comparable target, for example, either a ‘per-capita convergence’ or ‘equal cumulative per-capita’ approach. For example, we find that a 2030 target of 67% below 1990 for the EU28, a 2025 target of 54% below 2005 for the USA or a 2030 target of 32% below 2010 for China could secure a likely chance of meeting the 2 °C target in our illustrative default case. Comparing those targets to post-2020 mitigation targets reveals a large gap. No major emitter can at present claim to show the necessary leadership in the concerted effort of avoiding warming of 2 °C in a diverse global context.

Date: 2015
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (14)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate2826 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:5:y:2015:i:12:d:10.1038_nclimate2826

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

DOI: 10.1038/nclimate2826

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 ().