4.7 Article

Exploring fair and ambitious mitigation contributions under the Paris Agreement goals

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & POLICY
Volume 74, Issue -, Pages 49-56

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.envsci.2017.04.020

Keywords

Climate change; NDCs; Fairness; Effort-sharing; Paris Agreement

Funding

  1. Science Foundation of China University of Petroleum, Beijing [2462016YJRCO23]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In order to achieve the Paris Agreement goals of keeping the temperature rise well below 2 degrees C or even 1.5 degrees C, all countries would need to make fair and ambitious contributions to reducing emissions. A vast majority of countries have adopted reduction targets by 2030 in their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). There are many alternative ways to analyze the fairness of national mitigation contributions. This article uses a model framework based on six equity principles of effort-sharing, to allocate countries' reduction targets under global emissions scenarios consistent with meeting the Paris climate goals. It further compares these allocations with the NDCs. The analysis shows that most countries need to adopt more ambitious reduction targets by 2030 to meet 2 degrees C, and even more for 1.5 degrees C. In the context of 2 degrees C, the NDCs of the United States of America and the European Union lack ambition with respect to the approaches that emphasize responsibility; China's NDC projection falls short of satisfying any approach in 2030. In the context of 1.5 degrees C, only India, by implementing its most ambitious efforts by 2030, could be in line with most equity principles. For most countries, the NDCs would use most of their allowed emissions space for the entire 21 st century by 2030, posing a major challenge to transform to a pathway consistent with their fair contributions in the long-term.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available