美欧中印“国家自主贡献”目标的力度和公平性评估

基于气候公平的不同原则,采用动态的衡量指标,建立了公平分配未来碳排放空间的综合性框架,计算了基数、平等、能力、责任和混合方案下2010~2100年全球累积碳排放配额的地区分布,并评估了美欧中印“国家自主贡献（Intended Nationally Determined Contribution,INDC）”目标的力度,提出了各国减排目标力度应当增加的程度.结果表明：美欧中印总体的INDC力度离实现2℃目标仍有差距,不同方案下的排放差距为8.0~9.6Gt CO₂,超出2030年2℃目标下全球排放的比例为20%~24%.在各自最为有利的方案下,中印能满足实现2℃目标的公平分配方案的低限要求.而在所有方案下美欧距离实现2℃目标的公平分配要求均有差距,需要进一步提高力度.公平指标的动态和静态衡量方法,以及历史责任计量起始年的选取,对公平分配的结果影响很大.     

基于公平与效率双重视角的中国农业碳减排潜力分析

科学估算减排潜力是实施减排责任分摊的基础。论文将环境因素纳入到经济生产体系,构建含有期望产出与非期望产出的农业经济核算框架,借助方向距离函数方法,对2000-2011 年中国31 个省(市、区)的农业碳边际减排成本进行估算。在此基础上,利用人均农业碳排放、人均农业生产总值、农业碳排放强度与农业碳排放影子价格4 个指标,构建农业碳减排潜力指数,基于公平与效率双重视角,对各省区农业碳减排潜力水平进行评估与分析。结果显示:① 农业减排成本地区差异较大。其中,海南、福建、山东、辽宁、广东、北京、天津等省区减排成本较高,其年均农业碳排放影子价格居于全国前列,最高值达2.542×10⁸元/10⁴ t;而西藏、青海两地农业碳排放影子价格最低,分别为0.105×10⁸元/10⁴ t 和0.542×10⁸元/10⁴ t,农业减排成本较低。② 基于农业碳减排的公平性与效率性差异,将中国大陆31 个省级行政区域划分为四大类:西藏等1 省2 区属于“高效较公平”型地区;甘肃1 省1 区属于“高效欠公平”型地区;辽宁等8省2 区属于“低效较公平”型地区;北京等12 省4 市属于“低效欠公平”型地区。③ 西藏、海南、青海、内蒙古四地农业碳减排潜力指数在三种情景下均排名前四,北京、黑龙江、山西三地均排名最后。④ 决策者对于公平原则与效率原则的不同偏好会导致各省区减排责任分摊机制不同。     

State-By-State Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Fossil Fuel Use in the United States 1960–2000

Time series of fossil fuel carbon emissions from 1960–2000 for each of the U.S. states and the District of Columbia are presented and discussed. Comparison of the nationally summarized results with other national datasets shows generally good agreement, usually within 2%, and gives insight into the quality of all the data series. Our extension of the state-by-state emissions estimates back to 1960 reveals patterns of change that are coherent across states and can be related to historic events such as energy crises and federal legislation. Most notable is the changing pattern of coal usage, as coal-producing states produce increasingly more energy (mostly for electricity) for other states so that per capita CO₂ emissions diverge for states that import as opposed to those that export electricity. The decline in carbon emissions from petroleum products following the 1970s is also evident. Per capita emissions range over an order of magnitude for the different states. The data suggest that differences in per capita emissions arise from differences in many technological, physical, resource, social, and economic factors. The data presented here and the few correlations briefly noted pose a challenge for trying to use per capita emissions as a measure of equity or to provide mitigation targets.     

后京都时代全球碳排放权配额分配模拟研究

采用自底向上和自顶向下两种建模方法,构建了一个全球碳排放权配额分配模型.通过对排放水平控制方案、单一原则方案和加权原则方案的情景模拟和分析,结果发现:当前全球试图通过气候谈判制定的减排方案是一种排放水平控制方案.由于在减排方式、基准年份和减排比例方面各国仍无法统一,该方案具有很大的不确定性.虽然单一原则方案可在某一指标上体现公平,但各区域对不同原则的偏好程度差异悬殊,甚至在某些原则下可能出现极端的分配结果,如人均累计碳排放均等原则.与前两类方案相比,加权原则方案更具公平性、可行性、可扩展性和可操作性.实施加权原则方案应尽可能多地涵盖不同原则,并以投票方式决定相关原则权重.     

Integrating agricultural and forestry GHG mitigation response into general economy frameworks: Developing a family of response functions

An econometrically estimated family ofresponse functions is developed forcharacterizing potential responses togreenhouse gas mitigation policies by theagriculture and forestry sectors in theU.S. The response functions are estimatedbased on results of anagricultural/forestry sector model. Theyprovide estimates of sequestration andemission reductions in forestry andagriculture along with levels of sectoralproduction, prices, welfare, andenvironmental attributes given a carbonprice, levels of demand for agriculturalgoods, and the energy price. Sixalternative mitigation policiesrepresenting types of greenhouse gasoffsets allowed are considered. Resultsindicate that the largest quantity ofgreenhouse gas offset consistently appearswith the mitigation policy that pays forall opportunities. Restricting carbonpayments (emission tax or sequestrationsubsidy) only to aff/deforestation or onlyto agricultural sequestration substantiallyreduces potential mitigation. Highercarbon prices lead to more sequestration,less emissions, reduced consumer and totalwelfare, improved environmental indicatorsand increased producer welfare.     

Equity rules for burden sharing in the mitigation process of climate change

Although international negotiation on the mitigation of climate change is a process of determining burden-sharing rules between countries, there has been no clear agreement on equity principles for burden sharing. During the negotiating process up to the Kyoto Protocol, various proposals were made on such burden-sharing rules, but an agreement on emission targets for Annex I countries was achieved without explicitly agreeing to any rules. In the next phase of the negotiation, debates on emission targets are likely to shift from those between developed countries to those between all parties to the convention. In such a phase, debates on burden-sharing rules will be revisited. The purpose of this paper is: (1) to determine implicitly a formula for the rule for burden sharing between Annex I countries that was considered to be underlying the emission targets of the Kyoto Protocol, and (2) to examine plausible emission targets and timing of commitments for non-Annex I countries in the future by using the result of the analysis on the Kyoto Protocol. A multi-regression method is used for this purpose. It was concluded that the burden sharing between Annex I countries in the Kyoto Protocol can mostly be explained by three variables: the increase in the rate of CO₂ emission during the years 1990 to 2010, the increase in the rate of afforestation between 1990 and 1995, and the GDP per capita at the time of negotiation. The timing of future commitments of developing countries and the levels of targets differ widely, depending on which index or formula is agreed as "equitable". Some of the developing countries would have to start limiting their emissions within several years if GDP per capita or CO₂ per capita were chosen as the burden-sharing indicator. Developing countries would not have to make commitments until the mid-late 21st century if population growth rate were chosen. If the inferred formula of the Kyoto Protocol were applied to developing countries, they would have had to start mild limitation from 1990.     

Climate change mitigation strategies in the forest sector: biophysical impacts and economic implications in British Columbia,Canada

Managing forests to increase carbon sequestration or reduce carbon emissions and using wood products and bioenergy to store carbon and substitute for other emission-intensive products and fossil fuel energy have been considered effective ways to tackle climate change in many countries and regions. The objective of this study is to examine the climate change mitigation potential of the forest sector by developing and assessing potential mitigation strategies and portfolios with various goals in British Columbia (BC), Canada. From a systems perspective, mitigation potentials of five individual strategies and their combinations were examined with regionally differentiated implementations of changes. We also calculated cost curves for the strategies and explored socio-economic impacts using an input-output model. Our results showed a wide range of mitigation potentials and that both the magnitude and the timing of mitigation varied across strategies. The greatest mitigation potential was achieved by improving the harvest utilization, shifting the commodity mix to longer-lived wood products, and using harvest residues for bioenergy. The highest cumulative mitigation of 421 MtCO₂e for BC was estimated when employing the strategy portfolio that maximized domestic mitigation during 2017–2050, and this would contribute 35% of BC’s greenhouse gas emission reduction target by 2050 at less than $100/tCO₂e and provide additional socio-economic benefits. This case study demonstrated the application of an integrated systems approach that tracks carbon stock changes and emissions in forest ecosystems, harvested wood products (HWPs), and the avoidance of emissions through the use of HWPs and is therefore applicable to other countries and regions.     

Dynamic equity carbon permit allocation scheme to limit global warming to two degrees

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.     

Socio-economic impacts of climate change on rural United States

Directly or indirectly, positively or negatively, climate change will affect all sectors and regions of the United States. The impacts, however, will not be homogenous across regions, sectors, population groups or time. The literature specifically related to how climate change will affect rural communities, their resilience, and adaptive capacity in the United States (U.S.) is scarce. This article bridges this knowledge gap through an extensive review of the current state of knowledge to make inferences about the rural communities vulnerability to climate change based on Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) scenarios. Our analysis shows that rural communities tend to be more vulnerable than their urban counterparts due to factors such as demography, occupations, earnings, literacy, poverty incidence, and dependency on government funds. Climate change impacts on rural communities differs across regions and economic sectors; some will likely benefit while others lose. Rural communities engaged in agricultural and forest related activities in the Northeast might benefit, while those in the Southwest and Southeast could face additional water stress and increased energy cost respectively. Developing adaptation and mitigation policy options geared towards reducing climatic vulnerability of rural communities is warranted. A set of regional and local studies is needed to delineate climate change impacts across rural and urban communities, and to develop appropriate policies to mitigate these impacts. Integrating research across disciplines, strengthening research-policy linkages, integrating ecosystem services while undertaking resource valuation, and expanding alternative energy sources, might also enhance coping capacity of rural communities in face of future climate change.     

Equity rules for burden sharing in the mitigation process of climate change

Although international negotiation on the mitigation of climate change is a process of determining burden-sharing rules between countries, there has been no clear agreement on equity principles for burden sharing. During the negotiating process up to the Kyoto Protocol, various proposals were made on such burden-sharing rules, but an agreement on emission targets for Annex I countries was achieved without explicitly agree-ing to any rules. In the next phase of the negotiation, debates on emission targets are likely to shift from those between developed countries to those between all parties to the convention. In such a phase, debates on burden-sharing rules will be revisited. The purpose of this paper is: (1) to determine implicitly a formula for the rule for burden sharing between Annex I countries that was considered to be underlying the emission targets of the Kyoto Protocol, and (2) to examine plausible emission targets and timing of commitments for non-Annex I countries in the future by using the result of the analysis on the Kyoto Protocol. A multi-regression method is used for this purpose. It was concluded that the burden sharing between Annex I countries in the Kyoto Protocol can mostly be explained by three variables: the increase in the rate of CO₂ emission during the years 1990 to 2010, the increase in the rate of afforestation between 1990 and 1995, and the GDP per capita at the time of negotiation. The timing of future commitments of developing countries and the levels of targets differ widely, depending on which index or formula is agreed as “equitable”. Some of the developing countries would have to start limiting their emissions within several years if GDP per capita or CO₂ per capita were chosen as the burden-sharing indicator. Developing countries would not have to make commitments until the mid-late 21st century if population growth rate were chosen. If the inferred formula of the Kyoto Protocol were applied to developing countries, they would have had to start mild limitation from 1990.     

Can Advances in Science and Technology Prevent Global Warming?

The most stringent emission scenarios published by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) would result in the stabilization of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO₂) at concentrations of approximately 550 ppm which would produce a global temperature increase of at least 2 ^{^}C by 2100. Given the large uncertainties regarding the potential risks associated with this degree of global warming, it would be more prudent to stabilize atmospheric CO₂ concentrations at or below current levels which, in turn, would require more than 20-fold reduction (i.e., ≥95%) in per capita carbon emissions in industrialized nations within the next 50–100 years. Using the Kaya equation as a conceptual framework, this paper examines whether CO₂ mitigation approaches such as energy efficiency improvements, carbon sequestration, and the development of carbon-free energy sources would be sufficient to bring about the required reduction in per capita carbon emissions without creating unforeseen negative impacts elsewhere. In terms of energy efficiency, large improvements (≥5-fold) are in principle possible through aggressive investments in R&D and the removal of market imperfections such as corporate subsidies. However, energy efficiency improvements per se will not result in a reduction in carbon emissions if, as predicted by the IPCC, the size of the global economy expands 12–26-fold by 2100. Terrestrial carbon sequestration via reforestation and improved agricultural soil management has many environmental advantages, but has only limited CO₂ mitigation potential because the global terrestrial carbon sink (ca. 200 Gt C) is small relative to the size of fossil fuel deposits (≥4000 Gt C). By contrast, very large amounts of CO₂ can potentially be removed from the atmosphere via sequestration in geologic formations and oceans, but carbon storage is not permanent and is likely to create many unpredictable environmental consequences. Renewable energy can in theory provide large amounts of carbon-free power. However, biomass and hydroelectric energy can only be marginally expanded, and large-scale solar energy installations (i.e., wind, photovoltaics, and direct thermal) are likely to have significant negative environmental impacts. Expansion of nuclear energy is highly unlikely due to concerns over reactor safety, radioactive waste management, weapons proliferation, and cost. In view of the serious limitations and liabilities of many proposed CO₂ mitigation approaches, it appears that there remain only few no-regrets options such as drastic energy efficiency improvements, extensive terrestrial carbon sequestration, and cautious expansion of renewable energy generation. These promising CO₂ mitigation technologies have the potential to bring about the required 20-fold reduction in per capita carbon emission only if population and economic growth are halted without delay. Therefore, addressing the problem of global warming requires not only technological research and development but also a reexamination of core values that equate material consumption and economic growth with happiness and well- being.     

生态经济持续性的度量和趋势预测——以甘肃武威市为例

应用生态占用模型,对武威市生态经济的可持续性进行了评价。对武威的生物资源、能源资源和制成品资源消费的生态占用的计算结果表明,1999年武威市人均占用生物生产性空间为1.589423hm₂,调整后的武威实际生产空间供给为0.856876hm₂/人。1999年武威生态赤字0.73254hm₂/人。对于世界56个国家和地区的人均生态占用和人均GDP数据进行分析,认为二者高度相关。用幂指数模型进行趋势拟合,具有较好的拟合优度和理论一致性。武威生态占用处于强的扩张时期,到2015年,人均生态占用将会达到2.60142hm₂/人,而当年实际生态承载力阈值预测值为1.0657hm₂/人。人均生态赤字扩大到1.5357hm₂/人。生态经济系统的运行是以过度消耗自然资本为代价的。     

Assessing negative carbon dioxide emissions from the perspective of a national “fair share” of the remaining global carbon budget

We present an assessment of the plausible Paris-aligned fair share nett cumulative carbon dioxide (CO₂) quota for an example nation state, the Republic of Ireland. By Paris-aligned, we mean consistent with the Paris Agreement adopted at the 21st Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, at Paris, France, in December 2015 (UNFCCC 2015). We compare and contrast this quota with both the aspirations expressed in the current Irish National Policy Position and current national emission projections. The fair share quota is assessed as a maximum of c. 391 million tonnes of carbon dioxide (MtCO₂), equal to 83 tonnes of carbon dioxide (tCO₂) per capita, from 2015, based on a precautionary estimate of the global carbon budget (GCB) and specific interpretation of global equity. Given Ireland’s high current CO₂ per capita emission rate, this would correspond to sustained year-on-year reductions in nett annual CO₂ emissions of over ??11% per year (beginning as of 2016). By contrast, the CO₂ mitigation target indicated in the National Policy Position corresponds to nett annual reduction rates in the range of only ?4.7% per year (low ambition) up to a maximum of ??8.3% per year (high ambition), and projections based on current and immediately planned mitigation measures indicate the possibility, instead, of sustained increases in emissions at a rate of the order of +?0.7% per year. Accordingly, there is a large gap between Paris-aligned ambition and current political and policy reality on the ground, with a significant risk of early emergence of “CO₂ debt” and tacit reliance on rapid deployment of currently speculative (at a relevant scale and feasible cost) negative CO₂ emission technologies to actively remove CO₂ from the atmosphere. While the detailed policy situation will clearly differ from country to country, we suggest that this methodology, and its CO₂debt framing, may be usefully applied in other individual countries or regions. We recommend that such framing be incorporated explicitly into a global mitigation strategy via the statements of nationally determined contributions required to be submitted and updated by all parties under the Paris Agreement processes.

     

Economic Assessment of Mitigation Options for Enhancing and Maintaining Carbon Sink Capacity in Indonesia

Land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF) projects may becomeeligible under Article 12 of the United Nations Framework Convention onClimate Change (UNFCCC) Kyoto Protocol's Clean DevelopmentMechanism (CDM). Some of the issues, which need to be addressed,include identifying the types of greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation activitiesin LULUCF, which could be undertaken as CDM projects. Other issuesinvolve evaluating the mitigation potential and cost effectiveness of theactivities, as well as their likely socio-economic impacts and their influenceon the national carbon (C) stock. Three broad categories of mitigationactivities in LULUCF analyzed in this study include managing Cstorage, C conservation and carbon substitution. The C intensityof the activities was estimated to range from 37 to 218 Mg C per ha. The highest is in reforested land with slow growing species and the lowestin short-rotation plantations. At a real discount rate of 10%, investmentcosts required to implement the mitigation activities ranged from US$0.07 to 0.88 per Mg C, with life cycle costs ranging from US$ 0.07to 3.87 per Mg C, and benefits ranging from US$ –0.81 to 6.57 perMg C. Mitigation options with negative benefits are forest protection,reforestation, reduced impact logging and enhanced natural regeneration,while those with positive benefits are short rotation timber plantation, andbio-energy. Reforestation gave negative benefit since no revenue fromwood as trees are left in the forest for conservation, while Reduced ImpactLogging (RIL) and Enhanced Natural Regeneration (ENR)gave negative benefits because additional cost required to implement theoptions could not be compensated by the increase in round-hardwoodyield. Other factor is that the local price of round-hardwood is very low,i.e. US$ 160 per m³, while FOB price is between 250–400 US$ per m³. Total area available for implementing mitigationoptions (planting trees) in 1997 was 31 million hectares (× 10⁶ha) (about 40% are critical lands, 35% grasslands and 25%unproductive lands).Total area being considered for implementing the options under baseline,government-plans and mitigation scenarios in the period 2000–2030 is12.6, 16.3 and 23.6 × 10⁶ ha respectively. Furthermore, total area of production forest being considered for implementing reduced impactlogging and enrichment planting under the tree scenarios is 9, 26 and 16 × 10⁶ ha respectively, and that for forest protection is 2.1, 3.7, 3.1× 10⁶ ha respectively. The cumulative investment for implementingall mitigation activities in the three scenarios was estimated at 595, 892and 1026 million US$ respectively. National C stock under thebaseline scenario will continuously decline through 2030, while undergovernment-plans and mitigation scenarios the carbon stock increases. In2030, national C stock of the government and mitigation scenarios isalmost the same, 13% higher than that of baseline. However, the increasein national carbon stock in both scenarios could not offset carbon emissionsdue to deforestation.     

雅砻江下游梯级水电开发生态环境影响的经济损益评价

生态环境影响经济损益分析在统一量纲下,实现工程对环境影响的综合评价,可为工程决策提供依据。根据雅砻江水电开发对生态环境的影响,在建立评价指标体系的基础上,评价了雅砻江下游梯级水电开发生态环境影响的经济损益。结果表明：雅砻江下游梯级水电开发所带来的直接环境效益包括水产养殖、旅游、调蓄洪水和调节小气候,价值为7.52×10⁸元/a;能源替代的间接环境效益为36.50×10⁸元/a;生态环境成本包括水库蓄水后淹没土地资源造成的经济损失、水库温室气体排放、移民搬迁及环境保护费用等,其总成本为3.72×10⁸元/a。水电开发生态环境影响的评价技术与方法尚未成熟,评价内容的完整性和评价结果的准确性也因此受到一定程度影响,本研究的初步探索可为综合决策提供参考。     

Mitigation of CO<Subscript>2</Subscript> emissions from the road passenger transport sector in Bahrain

There is much optimism that the 2015 Conference of the Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention will yield an agreement on mitigation of climate change, to become effective in 2020. In this context, Bahrain represents a developing country with insufficient data to assess mitigation opportunities: its per capita carbon emissions rank among the world’s highest, yet there has been no research on the reduction potential of its rapidly growing transport sector. We examine this reduction potential and the costs of various mitigation measures and, further, explore barriers and the view of policymakers and experts. Potential benefits of combined mitigation scenarios are also identified based on their acceptability. We adopt a modified participatory method to develop the scenarios, using the long-range energy alternative planning (LEAP) modelling system, and find that an integrated policy approach can deliver a 23 % reduction in carbon dioxide emissions, costing 108 United States dollars per avoided metric tonne, with politically acceptable scenarios. Better performance, however, would require less acceptable approaches. These findings are significant for decision-making in Bahrain and other Gulf Cooperation Council countries; national target preparation and the setting of fuel economy standards should be begun promptly. We offer lessons to other developing countries on the timely regulation of technical specifications and numbers of passenger vehicles. Participatory approaches to the assessment of mitigation measures can advance environmentally effective, economically feasible and politically acceptable scenarios. The global community can use these results to provide necessary technical and financial assistance to developing countries.     

The cost of mitigation strategies for agricultural adaptation to global change

Land recovery and the improvement of lands affected by desertification for agricultural use, is achieved when a sustained recovery of agricultural productivity over time is obtained. In the areas affected by desertification and drought, it is common that the ecosystems do not have enough funding for water management and irrigation. This situation leads to an inadequate assessment of the environmental goods and services in arid zones. As a result we have a misuse of these dry lands. Many countries are implementing policies and making investments and efforts to mitigate arid land degradation and desertification through the National Action Programs (NAP). However, for the long term planning of mitigation and adaptation strategies, it is necessary to know the cost of recovery and land improvement in certain areas in order to forecast the budgets. This is the main objective of this paper in order to combat desertification and drought in central northern Chile. We have calculated a recovery cost per hectare by region and for each of the agriculture, livestock and forestry (ALF) promotion agencies. The results indicate that the cost of land reclamation in the northern regions is much higher than in the southern regions of this studied area. The cost is especially high for Region II, where investment per hectare is almost to 3000 US$ per hectare. At the other extreme is the Region VII, in the south of the studied area where the investment required per hectare barely reaches 500 US$. The contribution of the promotion agencies to the total cost also varied among regions and agencies. We discuss the results within a context of recovery cost per hectare depending on the different environmental characteristics and agricultural development of each of the studied regions.     

基于Theil指数KAYA分解的中国碳排放差异性分析

为了量化2005至2010年中国各省区市之间碳排放差异性及其变化趋势,本文运用Theil指数KAYA分解方法进行研究,结果表明:全国人均碳排放差异逐年减小,能源强度是差异的主要影响因素,人均GDP是人均碳排放差异缩小的主要原因;东中西部和东北地区区域划分方法的组内差异大于组间差异,且中西部地区内部差异是造成全国差异的主要原因;相对"十一五"能源强度目标分解,"十二五"碳强度目标分解已考虑省市区差异,但其基本上根据人均GDP差异进行分组,且很大程度沿用了东中西部和东北地区区域划分。因此,建议在对各省区市分配减排指标时,考虑各地经济发展水平差异的同时兼顾产业结构和资源禀赋,并根据中西部地区内部排放差异将目标分解方案精细化     

The potential of behavioural change for climate change mitigation: a case study for the European Union

Mainstream literature on climate change concentrates overwhelmingly on technological solutions for this global long-term problem, while a change towards climate-friendly behaviour could play a role in emission reduction and has received little attention. This paper focuses on the potential climate mitigation by behavioural change in the European Union (EU) covering many behavioural options in food, mobility and housing demand which do not require any personal up-front investment. We use the Global Change Assessment Model (GCAM), capturing both their direct and indirect implications in terms of greenhouse gas emissions. Our results indicate that modest to rigorous behavioural change could reduce per capita footprint emissions by 6 to 16%, out of which one fourth will take place outside the EU, predominantly by reducing land use change. The domestic emission savings would contribute to reduce the costs of achieving the internationally agreed climate goal of the EU by 13.5 to 30%. Moreover, many of these options would also yield co-benefits such as monetary savings, positive health impacts or animal wellbeing. These results imply the need for policymakers to focus on climate education and awareness programs more seriously and strategically, making use of the multiple co-benefits related with adopting pro-environmental behaviour. Apart from that, the relevance of behavioural change in climate change mitigation implies that policy-informing models on climate change should include behavioural change as a complement or partial alternative to technological change.     

Including adaptation costs and climate change damages in evaluating post-2012 burden-sharing regimes

Many studies have been published to evaluate the consequences of different post-2012 emission allocation regimes on regional mitigation costs. This paper goes one step further and evaluates not only mitigation costs, but also adaptation costs and climate change damages. Three post-2012 emission allocation regimes (Contraction & Convergence, Multistage and Common but differentiated convergence) and two climate targets (2°C and 3°C above the pre-industrial level) are considered. This explorative analysis shows that including these other cost categories could lead to different perspectives on the outcomes of allocation regimes. Up to 2050, the poorest regions have negative mitigation costs under all allocation regimes considered, as they benefit from emission trading. However, these regions also suffer from the most severe climate impacts. As such, the financial flows due to emission trading from developed to developing countries created under these allocation regimes could also be interpreted as compensation of climate change damages and adaptation costs. In the longer run, the sum of climate change damages, adaptation costs and mitigation costs are the highest in the poorest regions of Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, for both climate targets and practically all emission allocation regimes.