How fair are countries' climate pledges? Incorporating fairness into cutting global emissions

December 21, 2016, University of Melbourne
Credit: CC0 Public Domain

A new study published in Nature Climate Change analyzes the national climate targets needed to meet the 1.5 and 2°C goals according to five different equity principles, and how these compare with the current climate pledges.

Benchmarks to guide countries in ratcheting-up their ambition to remain well-below 2°C and pursue 1.5°C in an equitable manner are critical but not yet determined in the context of the Paris Agreement.

The study's lead author PhD candidate Yann Robiou du Pont, of the Australian-German Climate & Energy College at the University of Melbourne said that following the categories outlined by the IPCC, we show that the G8 and China together could close the emissions mitigation gap to keep warming to below 2°C.

"However, equitably limiting warming to 1.5°C would require individual countries to achieve mitigation milestones like peaking emissions or reaching net-zero emissions much earlier," adds Mr Robiou du Pont.

"Our study presents for the first time emissions allocations of global cost-optimal emissions pathways consistent with the Paris Agreement goals, in particular the 1.5°C goal."

"Equity refers to the fairness and comparability of climate pledges. Fairness can be interpreted in many ways; our paper quantifies these different interpretations so that the quantitative implications can be compared," co-author Louise Jeffery of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research adds.

"Equity concepts include those that assign lower future emissions allowances to countries with high past emissions and wealthier , those that aim for equal per person, and those that preserve the right to development and accommodate national circumstances".

The results of the study will also be available on a new website called Paris Equity Check, the first website to offer a multi-dimensional and completely peer-reviewed overview on climate pledges with regard to equity principles, consistent with the Paris Agreement.

Explore further: US climate pledges likely to go unmet: study

More information: Yann Robiou du Pont et al. Equitable mitigation to achieve the Paris Agreement goals, Nature Climate Change (2016). DOI: 10.1038/nclimate3186

Related Stories

US climate pledges likely to go unmet: study

November 10, 2016

The United States will likely fail to meet its pledges under the landmark Paris climate pact to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, analysts said Thursday on the margin of UN climate talks.

Paris climate deal: Where are we now?

October 2, 2016

India's ratification of the Paris climate agreement on Sunday brings the ambitious global warming deal a big step closer to coming into effect.

German lawmakers ratify Paris climate accord

September 22, 2016

Germany's lower of house of parliament on Thursday ratified the Paris agreement on climate change, following in the footsteps of 60 other countries that have committed to the landmark agreement designed to stem the planet's ...

Recommended for you

7 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

antialias_physorg
5 / 5 (5) Dec 21, 2016
and those that preserve the right to development and accommodate national circumstances

I don't get how moving to a low carbon future is at oods with preserving ones right to development. If you build up your own system using low carbon technologies and renewables as soon as possible then you're in an ideal position to export the know-how to others. It'd be win-win.
Clinging to the old ways will just leave you with a manufacturing base that will produce goods no one will buy, because at some point the climate footprint will be a mandatory part of a product's description and a relevant detail in any PR-conscious buyer's decision.
TulsaMikel
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 21, 2016
As fossil fuels slowly dwindle the prices of alternative energy sources will become more and more comparable. America shouldn't have to sacrifice their economy to make up for the massive pollution pumped into the atmosphere from heavily over populated countries.
We will need to lead the way but we need to carefully choose people for that responsibility.
novaman
3 / 5 (6) Dec 21, 2016
oh no the sky is falling ??? wheres monkey nuts antigoracle and his sack load of socks !!! did they fail to pay him this week to post banana hearsay ???, i mean this is the kind of thread he lives for everyday to post monkey jack bubblegum, scoring bananas by the truckload for his dumbfounded comments.
philstacy9
1 / 5 (5) Dec 21, 2016
Like fantasy football this is fantasy climate where imaginary points are scored.
howhot3
4.2 / 5 (6) Dec 22, 2016
Clinging to the old ways will just leave you with a manufacturing base that will produce goods no one will buy, because at some point the climate footprint will be a mandatory part of a product's description and a relevant detail in any PR-conscious buyer's decision.

Good point @antialias. It reminds me of the 70's when auto makers were building these massive cars (classically decadent beauties) that just eat gas when gas was 35 cents / gal. Then we had the oil crisis and no one made small cars except the Japanese. That devastated the American auto industry. It's now the same thing with low carbon. The companies that get there first are going to be successful.

That is one reason I think Tesla - SolarCity has a good future. A 200 mile range for a day of solar juice just makes for a cool day.

@novaman, Love your comment. I couldn't have said it any better. Now that Trump is president, maybe they laid him off?
HeloMenelo
5 / 5 (2) Dec 22, 2016
Clinging to the old ways will just leave you with a manufacturing base that will produce goods no one will buy, because at some point the climate footprint will be a mandatory part of a product's description and a relevant detail in any PR-conscious buyer's decision.

Good point @antialias. It reminds me of the 70's when auto makers were building these massive cars (classically decadent beauties) that just eat gas when gas was 35 cents / gal. Then we had the oil crisis and no one made small cars except the Japanese. That devastated the American auto industry. It's now the same thing with low carbon. The companies that get there first are going to be successful.

That is one reason I think Tesla - SolarCity has a good future. A 200 mile range for a day of solar juice just makes for a cool day.

@novaman, Love your comment. I couldn't have said it any better. Now that Trump is president, maybe they laid him off?


+1
philstacy9
1 / 5 (2) Dec 28, 2016
All pledges are unfair.
http://realclimat...mpering/

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.