Dynamic equity carbon permit allocation scheme to limit global warming to two degrees
Lining Wang (),
Wenying Chen (),
Hongjun Zhang () and
Ding Ma ()
Additional contact information
Lining Wang: Tsinghua University
Wenying Chen: Tsinghua University
Hongjun Zhang: Tsinghua University
Ding Ma: Tsinghua University
Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 2017, vol. 22, issue 4, No 4, 609-628
Abstract:
Abstract Significant international collaboration is required to limit global temperature increase to below 2 °C above pre-industrial levels. Equity is the foundation of cooperation, and therefore, this study proposed a new dynamic carbon permit allocation scheme based on four principles: equality, historical responsibility, capability, and future development opportunities. Decision makers could have different preferences for allocating carbon permits, therefore, four equity rules or indicators (equality, responsibility, capacity, and sovereignty) were assigned different weights. Based on the global carbon budget of the 2 °C target, emission permits were calculated and relevant economic implications analyzed using the Global Change Assessment Model. Results indicated that developed countries should reduce emissions immediately, while allowances for developing regions could permit an initial increase in emissions until peaking. Applying different weights to the indicators resulted in multifarious regional allowances. Developed regions would benefit from the “preferring sovereignty” scenario and most developing countries would benefit under the “preferring responsibility” and “preferring capacity” scenarios. Compared with the Intended Nationally Determined Contributions submitted to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, this study found that in the short term, developed countries might insist on sovereignty as the preferred indicator. However, preferring sovereignty would place substantial mitigation pressures on developing countries in the long term. Therefore, in addressing global climate change, a dynamic choice in the weighting distribution for different indicators might be conducive to international agreement. Furthermore, a market-based trading instrument could help all participants both mitigate global climate change by reducing regional and global costs and facilitate mitigation capital flow from developed to less developed regions.
Keywords: Allocation scheme; Carbon budget; Climate change; Equity; Policy cost (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2017
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (10)
Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11027-015-9690-8 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:spr:masfgc:v:22:y:2017:i:4:d:10.1007_s11027-015-9690-8
Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/11027
DOI: 10.1007/s11027-015-9690-8
Access Statistics for this article
Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change is currently edited by Robert Dixon
More articles in Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().