The sensitivity of the costs of reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation (REDD) to future socioeconomic drivers and its implications for mitigation policy design

Mykola Gusti (), Nicklas Forsell, Petr Havlik, Nikolay Khabarov, Florian Kraxner and Michael Obersteiner
Additional contact information
Mykola Gusti: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA)
Nicklas Forsell: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA)
Petr Havlik: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA)
Nikolay Khabarov: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA)
Florian Kraxner: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA)
Michael Obersteiner: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA)

Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 2019, vol. 24, issue 6, No 12, 1123-1141

Abstract: Abstract Climate change mitigation policies for the land use, land use change, and forestry (LULUCF) sector are commonly assessed based on marginal abatement cost curves (MACC) derived from optimization models or engineering approaches. Yet, little is known about the space of validity of MACCs and how they are influenced by changes in main underlying drivers. In this study, we apply the Global Forest Model (G4M) to explore the sensitivity of MACCs to variation of socioeconomic drivers of deforestation, afforestation, and forest management activities. Particularly, three key factors are considered: (I) wood price, as an indicator of timber market developments; (II) agricultural land price, as a proxy representing the developments on agricultural markets; and (III) corruption coefficient, representing the progress in institutional development and measuring abatement costs use efficiency. The results indicate that the MACCs are more sensitive to the corruption coefficient than to agricultural land price and wood price. Furthermore, we find that the MACCs are more robust with high carbon dioxide (CO2) price and that the sensitivity of the MACCs is higher at low CO2 prices. In general, it can be concluded that when assessing medium-term mitigation policies characterized by low CO2 prices, MACCs need to be developed in-line with institutions currently in place. When designing long-term mitigation policy characterized by high CO2 prices, the role of the analyzed drivers in MACCs estimation is less important.

Keywords: Marginal abatement cost curve; Sensitivity; Institutional quality; Economic parameters; Mitigation policy; MACC uncertainty (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2019
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11027-018-9817-9 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:24:y:2019:i:6:d:10.1007_s11027-018-9817-9

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/11027

DOI: 10.1007/s11027-018-9817-9

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 ().