Approaches for performing uncertainty analysis in large-scale energy/economic policy models

A number of key policy insights have emerged from the application of large-scale economic/energy models, such as integrated assessment models for climate change. These insights have been particularly powerful in those instances when they are shared by all or most of the existing models. On the other hand, some results and policy recommendations obtained from integrated assessment models vary widely from model to model. This can limit their usability for policy analysis. The differences between model results are mostly due to different underlying assumptions about exogenous processes, about endogenous processes and the dynamics among them, differences in value judgments, and different approaches for simplifying model structure for computational purposes. Uncertainty analyses should be performed for the dual purpose of clarifying the uncertainties inherent in model results and improving decision making under uncertainty. This paper develops a unifying framework for comparing the different types of uncertainty analyses through their objective functions, categorizes types of uncertainty analyses that can be performed on large models, and compares different approaches to uncertainty analysis by explaining underlying assumptions, suitability for different model types, and advantages and disadvantages. The appendix presents a summary of integrated assessment models for climate change that explicitly account for uncertainty.     

Transitions-based strategic environmental assessment

Strategic environmental assessment (SEA) is emerging as an important tool for sustainability transitions, yet there has been limited research conceptualizing transitions-based SEA. If SEA's primary goal is to facilitate strategic change and guide decision-processes toward sustainability, an assessment framework that accounts for the multi-dimensional factors and relationships influencing transition processes seems highly relevant. This paper advances the transitions-based SEA design – an approach to SEA that is focused on the institutional environment and policy context for the development of strategic initiatives including institutional commitments, supporting policies, and opportunities. We do so within the context of energy transitions, bridging strategic planning theories, decision making, and transition management. Building on existing SEA frameworks that advance strategic thinking, the paper presents the foundational principles and strategic questions to be asked in a transitions-based SEA design. The framework was developed based on a review of sustainability transitions and SEA literature supplemented by expert input. The SEA design focuses on the guiding vision for transitions, the institutional context and governance arrangements, opportunities and risks of proposed sustainability pathways, progress indicators for on-going transition management, and impacts of the exogenous landscape. The framework defines a new functionality for SEA, pushing the boundaries of what SEA can achieve, and should accomplish, as a strategic assessment tool while also challenging conventional thinking and practice beyond its application to policies, plans and programs.     

Evaluating Uncertain CO2 Abatement over the Very Long Term

Climate change research with the economic methodology of cost–benefit analysis is challenging because of valuation and ethical issues associated with the long delays between CO₂ emissions and much of their potential damages, typically of several centuries. The large uncertainties with which climate change impacts are known today and the possibly temporary nature of some envisaged CO₂ abatement options exacerbate this challenge. For example, potential leakage of CO₂ from geological reservoirs, after this greenhouse gas has been stored artificially underground for climate control reasons, requires an analysis in which the uncertain climatic consequences of leakage are valued over many centuries. We here present a discussion of some of the relevant questions in this context and provide calculations with the top–down energy-environment-economy model DEMETER. Given the long-term features of the climate change conundrum as well as of technologies that can contribute to its solution, we considered it necessary extending DEMETER to cover a period from today until the year?3000, a time span so far hardly investigated with integrated assessment models of climate change.     

The rising tide: combating coastal pollution

Coastal zones are major hubs for economic and social activity and are in the front line of climate change. To safeguard these fragile ecosystems for our own and future generations we have to move towards more integrated approaches to the assessment and management of coastal and marine environments. Environmental monitoring-broadly defined-has a huge role to play.     

Conceptualising and managing trade-offs in sustainability assessment

One of the defining characteristics of sustainability assessment as a form of impact assessment is that it provides a forum for the explicit consideration of the trade-offs that are inherent in complex decision-making processes. Few sustainability assessments have achieved this goal though, and none has considered trade-offs in a holistic fashion throughout the process. Recent contributions such as the Gibson trade-off rules have significantly progressed thinking in this area by suggesting appropriate acceptability criteria for evaluating substantive trade-offs arising from proposed development, as well as process rules for how evaluations of acceptability should occur. However, there has been negligible uptake of these rules in practice. Overall, we argue that there is inadequate consideration of trade-offs, both process and substantive, throughout the sustainability assessment process, and insufficient considerations of how process decisions and compromises influence substantive outcomes. This paper presents a framework for understanding and managing both process and substantive trade-offs within each step of a typical sustainability assessment process. The framework draws together previously published literature and offers case studies that illustrate aspects of the practical application of the framework. The framing and design of sustainability assessment are vitally important, as process compromises or trade-offs can have substantive consequences in terms of sustainability outcomes delivered, with the choice of alternatives considered being a particularly significant determinant of substantive outcomes. The demarcation of acceptable from unacceptable impacts is a key aspect of managing trade-offs. Offsets can be considered as a form of trade-off within a category of sustainability that are utilised to enhance preferred alternatives once conditions of impact acceptability have been met. In this way they may enable net gains to be delivered; another imperative for progress to sustainability. Understanding the nature and implications of trade-offs within sustainability assessment is essential to improving practice.     

Models at the interface between science and society: impacts and options

Within the CLEAR project a new approach to integrated assessment modelling has been developed for the participatory integrated assessment of regional climate change involving citizens' focus groups. The climate change decision problem was structured by focusing separately on climate impacts and mitigation options. The attempt was made to link the different scales of the problem from the individual to the global level. The abstract topic of climate change was related to options on the level of a citizen's individual lifestyle. The option of a low energy society was emphasised in order to embed the climate change decision problem in a wider range of societal concerns. Special emphasis was given to the characterisation and communication of uncertainties. The chosen approach allows different kinds of uncertainties in one framework to be addressed. The paper concludes with a summary of the experience made, and recommendations for the use of models in participatory integrated assessments. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Deliberative assessment in complex socioecological systems: recommendations for environmental assessment in drylands

Desertification is a complex process, characterised not only by a damaged ecology but also by conflict over access to scarce resources and trade-offs between the needs of multiple stakeholders at multiple scales. As such, orthodox approaches to environmental assessment in drylands, which rely solely on ecological expertise, are gradually losing legitimacy and greater attention is being given to integrated and participatory assessment approaches, which draw on multiple sources of knowledge in order to accurately describe complex socioecological processes. Moreover, there is growing recognition that successful management of desertification requires a strategy that can accommodate the multiple and often competing needs of contemporary and future stakeholders. In light of these conceptual advances, this paper highlights seven key criteria that dryland environmental assessments must meet: (1) accurately understand complex socioecological system processes, (2) focus on slow variables, (3) integrate multiple scales of analysis, (4) integrate multiple stakeholder perspectives and values, (5) ensure that future generations are fairly represented, (6) ensure that less powerful stakeholders are fairly represented and (7) integrate local and scientific knowledge. The virtues and challenges of deliberative environmental assessments, a novel subset of participatory environmental assessment approaches which places emphasis on social learning, argumentation and critical reflection, are considered in relation to each of these requirements. We argue that deliberative approaches have the potential to achieve accurate, progressive and integrated assessment of dryland environments.     

A performance evaluation of strategic environmental assessment (SEA) processes within the South African context

SEA has been described as being more about process than about product. Yet very little research has been conducted to gain a better understanding of how SEA processes perform within developing country contexts. To address this gap in knowledge the research underlying this paper aimed to evaluate the quality of SEA processes within the South African context against specifically designed key performance indicators. Comparison of the different data patterns revealed general SEA process features as well as three broad models, namely the ‘stand alone’, ‘central to decision making’ and ‘integrated’ models. The research results suggest a particularly poor performance in terms of process quality for the SEA case studies investigated. Moreover, it shows that there is no one understanding of SEA process within the South African context. The main limitations related to a weak understanding of the decision making processes SEA aimed to inform, as well as an inability to incorporate flexibility into process design. To take the debate forward it is proposed that SEA follow-up and effectiveness research be explored to determine which of these models (if any) ultimately contributed to influencing decision making and promote sustainability.     

The Contribution of Mathematical Models to Climate Policy Design: a Researcher’s Perspective

Energy and the environment are closely interconnected. In particular, energy-related carbon dioxide emissions are major contributors to climate change. To analyze options within the energy sector to curb greenhouse gas emissions, or to study alternative climate strategies such as adaptation and geoengineering measures, policy-makers can rely on mathematical decision support models, in particular E3 (economy/energy/environment) models and integrated assessment models (IAMs). This paper reviews some of my recent contributions to climate policy design using different types of E3 models and IAMs.     

Climate Impact Response Functions for Terrestrial Ecosystems

We introduce climate impact response functions as a means for summarizing and visualizing the responses of climate-sensitive sectors to changes in fundamental drivers of global climate change. In an inverse application, they allow the translation of thresholds for climate change impacts (‘impact guard-rails’) into constraints for climate and atmospheric composition parameters (‘climate windows’). It thus becomes feasible to specify long-term objectives for climate protection with respect to the impacts of climate change instead of crude proxy variables, like the change in global mean temperature. We apply the method to assess impacts on terrestrial ecosystems, using the threat to protected areas as the central impact indicator. Future climate states are characterized by geographically and seasonally explicit climate change patterns for temperature, precipitation and cloud cover, and by their atmospheric CO₂ concentration. The patterns are based on the results of coupled general circulation models. We study the sensitivity of the impact indicators and the corresponding climate windows to the spatial coverage of the analysis and to different climate change projections. This enables us to identify the most sensitive biomes and regions, and to determine those factors which significantly influence the results of the impact assessment. Based on the analysis, we conclude that climate impact response functions are a valuable means for the representation of climate change impacts across a wide range of plausible futures. They are particularly useful in integrated assessment models of climate change based on optimizing or inverse approaches where the on-line simulation of climate impacts by sophisticated impact models is infeasible due to their high computational demand. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

On the representation of impact in integrated assessment models of climate change

The paper provides an overview of attempts to represent climate change impact in over twenty integrated assessment models (IAMs) of climate change. Focusing on policy optimization IAMs, the paper critically compares modeling solutions, discusses alternatives and outlines important areas for improvement. Perhaps the most crucial area of improvement concerns the dynamic representation of impact, where more credible functional forms need to be developed to express time‐dependent damage as a function of changing socio‐economic circumstances, vulnerability, degree of adaptation, and the speed as well as the absolute level of climate change.     

Advancing Energy Access Modelling with Geographic Information System Data

One of the main goals in pursuing sustainable development is to provide universal access to modern energy services, notably through the use of off-grid renewable energy technologies. To date, integrated assessment models (IAMs) poorly address energy access targets. In the context of research dedicated to energy scenarios and climate change mitigation in Africa, we attempt to advance the representation of energy access in one such IAM by using GIS data. In a case study for Ethiopia with the TIAM-ECN model, we demonstrate that by enriching an IAM with information derived from GIS databases, insights are obtained that better capture the dynamics of energy access developments, in comparison to conventional IAM analysis of energy technology deployment pathways. When duly accounting for the geographical spread in demography and technology costs in a developing country, we find that many people may gain access to electricity in remote areas thanks to the availability of affordable off-grid power production options that render expensive grid extensions unnecessary. This effect is not explicitly accounted for in most traditional IAMs. By the middle of the century, off-grid technologies could provide affordable electricity to 70% of the Ethiopian population, based almost entirely on renewable sources such as wind, solar and hydropower.     

Global climate change and regional sustainable development: the case of Mackenzie Basin in Canada

Cohen et al. [16] suggest that in order to explore ways to bring climate change (CC) and sustainable development (SD) research together, it is necessary to develop more heuristic tools that can involve resource users and other stakeholders. In this respect, this paper focuses on methodological development in research to study climate change impacts and regional sustainable development (RSD). It starts with an introduction of an integrated land assessment framework (ILAF) which is part of the integrated phase of the Mackenzie Basin Impact Study (MBIS) in Canada. The paper then provides some articulation on how the integrated approach was applied in the Mackenzie Basin to show implications of climate change for RSD.     

Integrating Impacts into Adaptation Measures

A mechanism has been established to improve integration of international climate-related programmes. Known as the Climate Agenda it outlines a programme, that in a cost-effective way, responds to national obligations to respond to international agreements as well as their national needs for social and economic development. The paper briefly describes the Climate Agenda and the incorporation within it of studies of climate impact assessments and response strategies to reduce vulnerability. The need for increased emphasis on climate impact assessment and for the development of effective adaptation measures is emphasised following the elaboration of a Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). UNEP's efforts to identify national programmes contributing to the Climate Agenda are described.The response from developing countries has, however, been very disappointing, even from countries where we know work is ongoing through funding by GEF or US Country Studies Program and other bilateral programmes. Initial compilation of information available so far shows that many developed countries are putting a lot into the area of impact assessment of not just climate change, but also climate variability. There remain some research gaps, especially in the area of assessment of climate impacts on ecosystems, hydrological systems, etc. Considerable efforts are presently being directed at reduction of emissions of greenhouse gases and in the case of developing countries, most efforts are being directed towards completing national communications and providing baseline data for future studies.The paper refers to early activities by UNEP in cooperation with other international organizations to undertake integrated assessments of the impacts of climate change on important socio-economic sectors and the later incorporation of lessons learned into the IPCC Guidelines for Assessing Impacts of Climate Change.Later sections outline the development of a handbook on methods for climate change impact assessment and adaptation strategies as a practical approach to national assessments and the development of appropriate and cost-effective response to climate change.The initiation of a GEF-funded project to apply the methods contained in the handbook and improve the results based on national studies is also described for both developed and developing countries.Working in collaboration with a team of international experts under the coordination of the Institute of Environmental Studies at Vrije University (Amsterdam), the goal of this ongoing project is to develop a valuable methodological tool that Parties to the UNFCCC may apply to develop national climate change impact and adaptation assessments. Development of these guidelines was linked to a series of country studies in Antigua and Barbuda, Estonia, Cameroon and Pakistan funded under a UNEP/GEF project. The application of the first version of the UNEP Handbook by national study teams in these four countries is making valuable technical and practical contributions and will ensure that the next version of the Handbook will be a more useful tool for experts in developing countries undertaking similar studies in the future. The methods contained in the Handbook are also the basis for similar assessments funded under bilateral development programmes in other countries. These and similar studies elsewhere are coordinated with the UNEP programme and will eventually aim to create reliable and comparable assessments, a compatible set of tools for such purpose and the identification of realistic adaptation options for incorporation into national planning for adapting to climate change. The paper also addresses how climate impact assessment and response strategies are undertaken as part of national enabling activities carried out in co-operation with UNEP.     

Anticipating Climate Threshold Damages

Several integrated assessment studies have concluded that future learning about the uncertainties involved in climate change has a considerable effect on welfare but only a small effect on optimal short-term emissions. In other words, learning is important but anticipation of learning is not. We confirm this result in the integrated assessment model “model of investment and technological development” for learning about climate sensitivity and climate damages. If learning about an irreversible threshold is included, though, we show that anticipation can become crucial both in terms of necessary adjustments of pre-learning emissions and resulting welfare gains. We specify conditions on the time of learning and the threshold characteristic, for which this is the case. They can be summarized as a narrow “anticipation window.”     

Assessing the urban carbon footprint: An overview

All cities present environmental sustainability issues, above all regarding greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and specifically carbon dioxide (CO₂), that directly affect climate change. Consequently, it is very important to quantify and report their Carbon Footprint (CF) for implementing national and international policies/strategies aimed at mitigating and adapting these concerns. The Urban Carbon Footprint (UCF), indeed, has been recognized as the more valuable choice to inform, specifically, decision makers about city environmental sustainability. Several accounting systems and inventory methods have been taken into account to perform UCF, highlighting the complexity of the topic and generating very often confusion among users.In this context, the authors aim to summarize what has been done and what is going on with UCFs, trying to classify them according to some principal dimensions. Thus, they divide UFCs in two main categories namely: “spatial” or “direct”, with a limited amount of data requested, and “economic” or “life cycle based”, more or less data inclusive according to the accounting systems considered. Furthermore, they observe that there is not a “global agreed-upon protocol” yet, neither is there a specific model shared among researchers, even if some steps have been made towards this direction (Relative Carbon Footprint - RCF, Publicly Available Specification – PAS 2070 and Global Protocol for Community scale - GPC). Consequently, it is necessary to complete and standardize, in the short term, the accounting and reporting frameworks, in order to compare different UCFs for adopting shared climate strategies and actions at global level.     

Mind the gap in SEA: An institutional perspective on why assessment of synergies amongst climate change mitigation, adaptation and other policy areas are missing

This article takes its point of departure in two approaches to integrating climate change into Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA): Mitigation and adaptation, and in the fact that these, as well as the synergies between them and other policy areas, are needed as part of an integrated assessment and policy response. First, the article makes a review of how positive and negative synergies between a) climate change mitigation and adaptation and b) climate change and other environmental concerns are integrated into Danish SEA practice. Then, the article discusses the implications of not addressing synergies. Finally, the article explores institutional explanations as to why synergies are not addressed in SEA practice. A document analysis of 149 Danish SEA reports shows that only one report comprises the assessment of synergies between mitigation and adaptation, whilst 9,4% of the reports assess the synergies between climate change and other environmental concerns. The consequences of separation are both the risk of trade-offs and missed opportunities for enhancing positive synergies. In order to propose explanations for the lacking integration, the institutional background is analysed and discussed, mainly based on Scott's theory of institutions. The institutional analysis highlights a regulatory element, since the assessment of climate change synergies is underpinned by legislation, but not by guidance. This means that great focus is on normative elements such as the local interpretation of legislation and of climate change mitigation and adaptation. The analysis also focuses on how the fragmentation of the organisation in which climate change and SEA are embedded has bearings on both normative and cultural-cognitive elements. This makes the assessment of synergies challenging. The evidence gathered and presented in the article points to a need for developing the SEA process and methodology in Denmark with the aim to include climate change in the assessments in a more systematic and integrated manner.     

Integrated assessment modeling of global climate change: Transparent rational tool for policy making or opaque screen hiding value‐laden assumptions?

One of the principal tools used in the integrated assessment (IA) of environmental science, technology and policy problems is integrated assessment models (IAMs). These models are often comprised of many sub‐models adopted from a wide range of disciplines. A multi‐disciplinary tool kit is presented, from which three decades of IA of global climatic change issues have tapped. A distinction between multi‐ and inter‐disciplinarity is suggested, hinging on the synergistic value added for the latter. Then, a hierarchy of five generations of IAMs are proposed, roughly paralleling the development of IAMs as they incorporated more components of the coupled physical, biological and social scientific disciplines needed to address a “real world” problem like climatic change impacts and policy responses. The need for validation protocols and exploration of predictability limits is also emphasized. The critical importance of making value‐laden assumptions highly transparent in both natural and social scientific components of IAMs is stressed, and it is suggested that incorporating decision‐makers and other citizens into the early design of IAMs can help with this process. The latter could also help IA modelers to offer a large range of value‐containing options via menu driven designs. Examples of specific topics which are often not well understood by potential users of IAMs are briefly surveyed, and it is argued that if the assumptions and values embedded in such topics are not made explicit to users, then IAMs, rather than helping to provide us with refined insights, could well hide value‐laden assumptions or conditions. In particular, issues of induced technological change, timing of carbon abatement, transients, surprises, adaptation, subjective probability assessment and the use of contemporary spatial variations as a substitute for time evolving changes (what I label “ergodic economics”) are given as examples of problematic issues that IA modelers need to explicitly address and make transparent if IAMs are to enlighten more than they conceal. A checklist of six practices which might help to increase transparency of IAMs is offered in the conclusions. Incorporation of decision‐makers into all stages of development and use of IAMs is re‐emphasized as one safeguard against misunderstanding or misrepresentation of IAM results by lay audiences.     

WARM: a European model for energy and environmental analysis

This paper describes the structure of a newly developed econometric, imperfectly competitive, general equilibrium model for the medium term study of energy and environmental problems. The geographical coverage of the model regards twelve European countries as well as the European Union as a whole. Compared to existing quantitative E3 (economy-energy-environment) models, the WARM model is characterized by a few novel and relevant features Firstly, in contrast to multicountry interlinked models, it copes with the international dimension by integrating differences from a common European denominator within a unified and homogeneously designed framework. A panel data estimation approach is used to achieve this objective. Secondly, in contrast to the traditional market-based philosophy of many econometric models, it adopts a perspective focused upon economic agents' decisions. Thirdly, in contrast with the practice of modelling technical progress as an exogenous and deterministic phenomenon, it incorporates an explicit attempt of modelling the sources and effects of endogenous technical change. A Kalman filter latent variable approach is the methodology from which statistical information on the dynamics of technical progress can be obtained. Finally, all markets in the model are imperfectly competitive, including the labour market where the wage bargaining process is explicitly modelled and estimated. This last feature is especially important in view of the European unemployment problem.