Sufficient or insufficient: Assessment of the intended nationally determined contributions (INDCs) of the world’s major greenhouse gas emitters

Abstract

The recent Conference of the Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change has resulted in the submission of the Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) of 190 countries. This study aims to provide an analysis of the ambitiousness and fairness of the mitigation components of the INDCs submitted by various parties. We use a unified framework to assess 23 INDCs that cover 50 countries, including European Union (EU)-28 countries as parties to the Convention, which represent 87.45% of the global greenhouse gas emissions in 2012. First, we transform initial INDC files into reported reduction targets. Second, we create four schemes and six scenarios to determine the required reduction effort, which considers each nation’s reduction responsibility, capacity, and potential, thereby reflecting their historical and current development status. Finally, we combine the reported reduction target and the required reduction effort to assess INDCs. Evaluation results of the 23 emitters indicate that 2 emitters (i.e., EU and Brazil) are rated as “sufficient,” 7 emitters (e.g., China, the United States, and Canada) are rated as “moderate,” and 14 emitters (e.g., India, Russia, and Japan) are rated as “insufficient.” Most pledges exhibit a considerable distance from representing a fair contribution.

Keywords

Intended Nationally Determined Contributions / mitigation / responsibility / capacity / potential

References

[1] Baer P, Athanasiou T, Kartha S, Kemp-Benedict E (2009). Greenhouse development rights: A proposal for a fair global climate treaty. Ethics Place and Environment, 12(3): 267–281

[2] van Vuuren D P, Stehfest E, den Elzen M G J, Kram T, van Vliet J, Deetman S, Isaac M, Klein G K, Hof A, Mendoza B A, Oostenrijk R, van R B (2011). RCP2.6: exploring the possibility to keep global mean temperature increase below 2°C. Climatic Change, 109(1-2): 95–116

[3] BP (2016). Statistical review of world energy. http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy/downloads.html

[4] Climate Action Tracker (2016). Assessment of mitigation contributions to the Paris Agreement. http://www.climateactiontracker.org/indcs.html, 2016–10–3

[5] Davide M, Vesco P (2016). Alternative approaches for rating INDCs: A comparative analysis. FEEM Working Paper No. 018.2016. https://ssrn.com/abstract=2745816, 2016–11–5

[6] den Elzen M, Admiraal A, Roelfsema M, van Soest H, Hof A F, Forsell N (2016). Contribution of the G20 economies to the global impact of the Paris agreement climate proposals. Climatic Change, 137(3-4): 1–11

[7] DESAUN (2015). World population prospects, the 2015 revision. https://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/Download/Standard/Population/

[8] Höhne N, den Elzen M, Escalante D (2014). Regional GHG reduction targets based on effort sharing: A comparison of studies. Climate Policy, 14(1): 122–147

[9] Joint Global Change Research Institute (2015). Global Change Assessment Model v4.2. http://www.globalchange.umd.edu/archived-models/gcam/download/, 2016–9-28

[10] Meinshausen M, Smith S J, Calvin K, Daniel J S, Kainuma M L T, Lamarque J F, Matsumoto K, Montzka S A, Raper S C B, Riahi K, Thomson A, Velders G J M, van Vuuren D P P (2011). The RCP greenhouse gas concentrations and their extensions from 1765 to 2300. Climatic Change, 109(1-2): 213–241

[11] Moss R H, Edmonds J A, Hibbard K A, Manning M R, Rose S K, van Vuuren D P, Carter T R, Emori S, Kainuma M, Kram T, Meehl G A, Mitchell J F, Nakicenovic N, Riahi K, Smith S J, Stouffer R J, Thomson A M, Weyant J P, Wilbanks T J (2010). The next generation of scenarios for climate change research and assessment. Nature, 463(7282): 747–756

[12] Ott H E, Winkler H, Brouns B (2004). South–north dialogue on equity in the greenhouse: A proposal for an adequate and equitable global climate agreements. https://www.mysciencework.com/publication/show/9551e6d8e3f764394790c3a2829ce94b, 2016–4-10

[13] Phylipsen G, Bode J W, Blok K, Merkus H, Metz B (1998). A triptych sectoral approach to burden differentiation; GHG emissions in the European bubble. Energy Policy, 26(12): 929–943

[14] Ringius L, Torvanger A, Holtsmark B (1998). Can multi-criteria rules fairly distribute climate burdens? OECD results from three burden sharing rules. Energy Policy, 26(10): 777–793

[15] Rogelj J, den Elzen M, Höhne N, Fransen T, Fekete H, Winkler H, Schaeffer R, Sha F, Riahi K, Meinshausen M (2016). Paris Agreement climate proposals need a boost to keep warming well below 2°C. Nature, 534(7609): 631–639

[16] UNDP (2015). Human Development Data (1990–2012). http://hdr.undp.org/en/data

[17] UNEP (2015). The Emissions Gap Report 2015: A UNEP Synthesis Report. http://uneplive.unep.org/media/docs/theme/13/EGR_2015_Technical_Report_final_version.pdf, 2016–11–17

[18] UNFCCC (1997). Proposed elements of a protocol to the United Nations framework convention on climate change. http://unfccc.int/cop4/resource/docs/1997/agbm/misc01a3.htm, 2016–3-10

[19] UNFCCC (2015). Synthesis report on the aggregate effect of the intended nationally determined contributions. http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2015/cop21/eng/07.pdf?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss, 2016–12–25

[20] UNFCCC (2016). Intended nationally determined contributions (INDCs). http://www4.unfccc.int/submissions/indc/Submission%20Pages/submissions.aspx, 2016–12–13

[21] van Vuuren D P, den Elzen M G J, Lucas P L, Eickhout B, Strengers B J, van Ruijven B, Wonink S, van Houdt R (2007). Stabilizing greenhouse gas concentrations at low levels: An assessment of reduction strategies and costs. Climatic Change, 81(2): 119–159

[22] van Vuuren D P, Stehfest E, den Elzen M G J, Kram T, van Vliet J, Deetman S, Isaac M, Klein Goldewijk K K, Hof A, Wang K, Xian Y J, Zhang J M, Li Y, Che L N (2016). Potential carbon emission abatement cost recovery from carbon emission trading in China: an estimation of industry sector. Journal of Modelling in Management, 11(3): 842–854

[23] Wang K, Zhang X, Wei Y M, Yu S (2013). Regional allocation of CO₂ emissions allowance over provinces in china by 2020. Energy Policy, 54: 214–229

[24] Winkler H, Baumert K, Blanchard O, Burch S, Robinson J (2007). What factors influence mitigative capacity? Energy Policy, 35(1): 692–703

[25] Winkler H, Letete T, Marquard A (2013). Equitable access to sustainable development: Operationalizing key criteria. Climate Policy, 13(4): 411–432

[26] World Bank (2015). World Bank Open Data-GDP. http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD

[27] WRI (2016). CAIT Climate Data Explore.http://cait.wri.org/indc/

[28] Yi W J, Zou L L, Guo J, Wang K, Wei Y M (2011). How can china reach its CO₂ intensity reduction targets by 2020? A regional allocation based on equity and development. Energy Policy, 39(5): 2407–2415

Acknowledgments

We acknowledge the financial support from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 71871022, 71471018, 71521002, and 71828401), the Social Science Foundation of Beijing (Grant No. 16JDGLB013), the Joint Development Program of Beijing Municipal Commission of Education, the Fok Ying Tung Education Foundation (No. 161076), the National Key R&D Program (Grant No. 2016YFA0602603), the International Clean Energy Talent Program of the Chinese Scholarship Council, and the Key Technology Partnership Visiting Fellow Program from University of Technology Sydney and Beijing Institute of Technology.

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

2019 Higher Education Press