Ambitious and Credible Pledges

Teng, Fei

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-022-01459-6

IF: 30.7

2022-01-01

Nature Climate Change

Abstract:Credibility is the cornerstone of international climate pledges; meanwhile, ambition is essential to reach the temperature targets. Research shows the flexibility of Paris agreements encourages countries to be ambitious yet maintain credible.

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Determining the credibility of commitments in international climate policy

David G. Victor,Marcel Lumkowsky,Astrid Dannenberg

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-022-01454-x

IF: 30.7

2022-09-01

Nature Climate Change

Abstract:Abstract The Paris Agreement on climate change aims to improve cooperation by allowing governments to set their own commitments. Its success hinges on whether governments and investors believe those national commitments. To assess credibility, we interrogate a large novel sample of climate policy elites with decades of experience and well-placed to evaluate whether nations’ policy pledges are aligned with what they are politically and administratively able to implement. This expert assessment reveals that countries making the boldest pledges are also making the most credible pledges, contrasting theoretical warnings of a trade-off between ambition and credibility. We find that the quality of national political institutions is the largest explanator of the variation in credibility, and Europe’s credibility is exceptionally high. We also find that economic factors, such as the costs and benefits of controlling emissions, are statistically unimportant in explaining the credibility of national pledges to cooperate.

environmental sciences,environmental studies,meteorology & atmospheric sciences
The Paris Agreement and the new logic of international climate politics

ROBERT FALKNER

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2346.12708

IF: 4.985

2016-08-31

International Affairs

Abstract:This article reviews and assesses the outcome of the 21st Conference of the Parties (COP‐21) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), held in Paris in December 2015. It argues that the Paris Agreement breaks new ground in international climate policy, by acknowledging the primacy of domestic politics in climate change and allowing countries to set their own level of ambition for climate change mitigation. It creates a framework for making voluntary pledges that can be compared and reviewed internationally, in the hope that global ambition can be increased through a process of ‘naming and shaming’. By sidestepping distributional conflicts, the Paris Agreement manages to remove one of the biggest barriers to international climate cooperation. It recognizes that none of the major powers can be forced into drastic emissions cuts. However, instead of leaving mitigation efforts to an entirely bottom‐up logic, it embeds country pledges in an international system of climate accountability and a ‘ratchet mechanism’, thus offering the chance of more durable international cooperation. At the same time, it is far from clear whether the treaty can actually deliver on the urgent need to de‐carbonize the global economy. The past record of climate policies suggests that governments have a tendency to express lofty aspirations but avoid tough decisions. For the Paris Agreement to make a difference, the new logic of ‘pledge and review’ will need to mobilize international and domestic pressure and generate political momentum behind more substantial climate policies worldwide. It matters, therefore, whether the Paris Agreement's new approach can be made to work.

international relations
Exploring Fair and Ambitious Mitigation Contributions under the Paris Agreement Goals

Xunzhang Pan,Michel den Elzen,Niklas Hoehne,Fei Teng,Lining Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2017.04.020

IF: 6.424

2017-01-01

Environmental Science & Policy

Abstract: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.
Ratcheting of climate pledges needed to limit peak global warming

Gokul Iyer,Yang Ou,James Edmonds,Allen A. Fawcett,Nathan Hultman,James McFarland,Jay Fuhrman,Stephanie Waldhoff,Haewon McJeon

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-022-01508-0

IF: 30.7

2022-11-11

Nature Climate Change

Abstract:The new and updated emission reduction pledges submitted by countries ahead of the Twenty-Sixth Conference of Parties represent a meaningful strengthening of global ambition compared to the 2015 Paris pledges. Yet, limiting global warming below 1.5 °C this century will require countries to ratchet ambition for 2030 and beyond. Here, we explore a suite of emissions pathways to show that ratcheting near-term ambition through 2030 will be crucial to limiting peak temperature changes. Delaying ratcheting ambition to beyond 2030 could still deliver end-of-century temperature change of less than 1.5 °C but would result in higher temperature overshoot over many decades with the potential for adverse consequences. Ratcheting near-term ambition would also deliver benefits from enhanced non-CO 2 mitigation and facilitate faster transitions to net-zero emissions systems in major economies.

environmental sciences,environmental studies,meteorology & atmospheric sciences
The Paris Agreement: Destined to Succeed or Doomed to Fail?

Oran R. Young

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v4i3.635

2016-01-01

Politics and Governance

Abstract:Is the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change destined to succeed or doomed to fail? If all the pledges embedded in the intended nationally determined contributions (INDCs) are implemented fully, temperatures at the Earth’s surface are predicted to rise by 3–4 °C, far above the agreement’s goal of limiting increases to 1.5 °C. This means that the fate of the agreement will be determined by the success of efforts to strengthen or ratchet up the commitments contained in the national pledges over time. The first substantive section of this essay provides a general account of mechanisms for ratcheting up commitments and conditions determining the use of these mechanisms in international environmental agreements. The second section applies this analysis to the specific case of the Paris Agreement. The conclusion is mixed. There are plenty of reasons to doubt whether the Paris Agreement will succeed in moving from strength to strength in a fashion resembling experience with the Montreal Protocol on ozone depleting substances. Nevertheless, there is more room for hope in this regard than those who see the climate problem as unusually malign, wicked, or even diabolical are willing to acknowledge.
Levers of climate pledges influencing the Paris Agreement target

Kushal Tibrewal,Katsumasa Tanaka,Olivier Boucher,Philippe Ciais

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu23-6566

2023-01-01

Abstract:Countries pledge GHG mitigation goals in form of near-term emissions targets for 2030, long-term net-zero emissions in mid-century (some countries) and targets for methane emission reductions, towards limiting global warming as stipulated in the Paris Agreement. These undergo regular revisions to strengthen the ambition, with the latest set of revisions occurring during COP26 and COP27. As of December 2022, 169 countries have near-term targets, 56 have long-term targets to become carbon neutral and 150 nations have pledged to reduce their methane emissions up to 30% by 2030. The end-of-century temperature rise is highly sensitive to the pledges but also to actual extent of implementation of these pledges. Using historical emissions from the PRIMAP-Hist dataset, future emissions of CO2, N2O and CH4 are modelled for each country by incorporating their respective near-term, long-term and methane pledges. Emissions for other climate forcers are assumed to follow SSP4-60. These emission profiles are used as input to simple climate model – ACC2 (Tanaka et al., 2021) to estimate the temperature impacts. With the current pledges, the global temperature rise in 2100 is expected to be 2.0 and 2.1 °C, corresponding to the fulfillment of conditional and unconditional near-term pledges, respectively. We further explore a suite of emissions pathways to identify some key ‘levers’ across the pledges that can strongly influence the projected global temperature in 2100. We found that these levers can further reduce the temperature by 0.50 °C or increase by 0.25 °C. The most significant reductions in temperature rise can be achieved by ratcheting up of the current conditional targets by 10%, shifting the net-zero target year to 2050 for all countries currently having a longer-term goal and adding a net-zero target in 2070 for countries with currently no long-term goals. Inclusion of all these levers can increase the likelihood of limiting temperature rise well below 2 °C and bringing it closer to 1.5 °C. Additional, relatively smaller, contributions accrue from inclusion of Russia, China and India in the Global Methane Pledge. On the other hand, failing to meet even the unconditional NDC targets and delaying the current net-zero targets by 10 years contribute to increases in temperature rise of 0.08 and 0.17 °C. Contributions are also evaluated on a country-by-country basis.ReferenceTanaka K, Boucher O, Ciais P, Johansson DJA, Morfeldt J (2021) Cost-effective implementation of the Paris Agreement using flexible greenhouse gas metrics. Science Advances 7 (22):eabf9020. doi:10.1126/sciadv.abf902
Efforts-sharing to Achieve the Paris Goals: Ratcheting-up of NDCs and Taking Full Advantage of International Carbon Market

Mengyu Li,Maosheng Duan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.115864

IF: 11.2

2020-01-01

Applied Energy

Abstract:Aggregated mitigation efforts represented by current Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) fall far short of meeting the 2 degrees C and 1.5 degrees C Paris goals, and Parties should enhance their mitigation targets through a ratcheting-up mechanism to close the large gap. The paper first assesses the stringency of major emitters' NDCs based on a comparison with the seven equity allocations. Then, it proposes a novel ratcheting-up scheme which distributes the mitigation gap between aggregated NDCs and the Paris goals based on key equity criteria and calculates the additional emission reduction rates for countries with insufficient ambitions. To fully consider different ambition levels of NDCs and also avoid overambitious outcomes, lower and upper limits are set for individual country's reduction rate, thus improving the equity and feasibility of the scheme. The results indicate that most countries should strengthen current efforts. By 2030, countries with insufficient NDCs need to reduce their aggregated emissions by 23% and 36% respectively to achieve the 2 degrees C and 1.5 degrees C goals. Most developed countries should undertake reduction rates which are above the global average level. Under the 1.5 degrees C pathway, many developed countries need to reduce their NDC emissions by about 50% in 2030. The mitigation costs of achieving the Paris goals as well as the benefits of international emissions trading have been evaluated. The results show that global GDP losses in 2030 for achieving 2 ?C and 1.5 degrees C could decrease by 69% and 50% respectively through permits trading, and regional GDP losses would also be reduced, highlighting the importance of an effective global carbon market for meeting the Paris goals.
Entry into force and then? The Paris agreement and state accountability

Sylvia I. Karlsson-Vinkhuyzen,Maja Groff,Peter A. Tamás,Arthur Dahl,Marie Harder,Graham Hassall

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2017.1331904

2018-01-01

Climate Policy

Abstract:The entry into force of the Paris Agreement on climate change brings expectations that states will be held to account for their commitments. The article elaborates on why this is not a realistic assumption unless a broader multilevel perspective is taken on the nature of accountability regimes for international (legal) agreements. The formal accountability mechanisms of such agreements tend to be weak, and there are no indications that they will be stronger for the recent global goals adopted in the Paris Agreement. Looking beyond only peer review among states, national institutions, direct civil society engagement and internal government processes - while each coming with their own strengths and weaknesses - provide additional accountability pathways that together may do a better job. Scientific enquiry is, however, required to better understand, support and find improved mixtures of, and perhaps to move beyond, these accountability pathways.Policy relevanceThis perspective provides something of a clarion call for a variety of different types of actors at both global and national levels to engage in ensuring that states keep the promises they made in the Paris Agreement. It particularly highlights the importance of national institutions and civil society to step up to the task in the present world order, where states are reluctant to build strong accountability regimes at the global level.
Uncompensated claims to fair emission space risk putting Paris Agreement goals out of reach

Gaurav Ganti,Matthew J Gidden,Christopher J Smith,Claire Fyson,Alexander Nauels,Keywan Riahi,Carl-Friedrich Schleußner

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/acb502

IF: 6.7

2023-02-08

Environmental Research Letters

Abstract:Addressing questions of equitable contributions to emission reductions is important to facilitate ambitious global action on climate change within the ambit of the Paris Agreement. Several large developing regions with low historical contributions to global warming have a strong moral claim to a large proportion of the remaining carbon budget (RCB). However, this claim needs to be assessed in a context where the RCB consistent with the long-term temperature goal (LTTG) of the Paris Agreement is rapidly diminishing. Here we assess the potential tension between the moral claim to the remaining carbon space by large developing regions with low per capita emissions, and the collective obligation to achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement. Based on scenarios underlying the IPCC's 6th Assessment Report, we construct a suite of scenarios that combine the following elements: (a) two quantifications of a moral claim to the remaining carbon space by South Asia, and Africa, (b) a 'highest possible emission reduction' effort by developed regions (DRs), and (c) a corresponding range for other developing regions (ODR). We find that even the best effort by DRs cannot compensate for a unilateral claim to the remaining carbon space by South Asia and Africa. This would put the LTTG firmly out of reach unless ODRs cede their moral claim to emissions space and, like DRs, pursue highest possible emission reductions, which would also constitute an inequitable outcome. Furthermore, regions such as Latin America would need to provide large-scale negative emissions with potential risks and negative side effects. Our findings raise important questions of perspectives on equity in the context of the Paris Agreement including on the critical importance of climate finance. A failure to provide adequate levels of financial support to compensate large developing regions to emit less than their moral claim will put the Paris Agreement at risk.

environmental sciences,meteorology & atmospheric sciences
Feasible climate mitigation

Paul C. Stern,Thomas Dietz,Kristian S. Nielsen,Wei Peng,Michael P. Vandenbergh

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-022-01563-7

IF: 30.7

2022-12-23

Nature Climate Change

Abstract:Efforts to achieve emissions targets often fall short. Science can help meet the targets by assessing the feasibility of initiatives proposed to reach them, focusing on issues of adoption and implementation and the behavioural plasticity of intended responders.

environmental sciences,environmental studies,meteorology & atmospheric sciences
Climate Policy Ambition: Exploring A Policy Density Perspective

Simon Schaub,Jale Tosun,Andrew Jordan,Joan Enguer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v10i3.5347

2022-09-22

Politics and Governance

Abstract:National policy ambition plays a central role in climate change governance under the Paris Agreement and is now a focus of rapidly emerging literature. In this contribution, we argue that policy ambition can be captured by the level of national policy activity, which in accordance with the existing literature should be referred to as "policy density." In this study, we measure climate policy density by drawing on three publicly available databases. All three measurements show an upward trend in the adoption of climate policy. However, our empirical comparison also reveals differences between the measurements with regard to the degree of policy expansion and sectoral coverage, which are due to differences in the type of policies in the databases. For the first time, we compare the patterns of policy density within each database (2000–2019) and reveal that while they are different, they are nonetheless potentially complementary. Since the choice of the database and the resulting measurement of policy density ultimately depend on the questions posed by researchers, we conclude by discussing whether some questions are better answered by some measurements than others.

political science
Policy credibility is a key component for an effective and efficient EU Emissions Trading System

Joanna Sitarz,Michael Pahle,Sebastian Osorio,Gunnar Luderer,Robert Pietzcker

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-024-01545-3

IF: 56.7

2024-06-19

Nature Energy

Abstract:Recent reforms of the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) boosted carbon prices by tightening the cap on emission allowances and increasing political commitment to it, which effectively made actors more farsighted. Policymakers should thus view prices as an indicator of credibility as well as scarcity, and manage potential future drops in the former by renewing commitment to the cap.

materials science, multidisciplinary,energy & fuels
Caught in between: credibility and feasibility of the voluntary carbon market post-2020

Nicolas Kreibich,Lukas Hermwille

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2021.1948384

2021-07-07

Climate Policy

Abstract:On the one hand, a large number of companies have committed to achieve net zero emissions and many of them foresee to offset some remaining emissions with carbon credits, suggesting a surge of future demand. Yet, the supply side of the voluntary carbon market is struggling to align its business model with the new legal architecture of the Paris Agreement. This article juxtaposes these two perspectives. It provides an overview of the plans of 482 major companies with some form of neutrality/net zero pledge and traces the struggle on the supply side of the voluntary carbon market to come up with a viable business model that ensures environmental integrity and contributes to achieving the objectives of the Paris Agreement. Our analysis finds that if carbon credits are used to offset remaining emissions against neutrality objectives, these credits need to be accounted against the host countries' Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) to ensure environmental integrity. Yet, operationalizing this approach is challenging and will require innovative solutions and political support.Key policy insights There is a growing mismatch between the faith placed in carbon credits by private sector companies and the continued quest for a common position of the main suppliers of the voluntary carbon market.The voluntary carbon market has not yet found a way to align itself with the new legal architecture of the Paris Agreement in a credible and legitimate way.Public policy support at the national and international level will be needed to operationalize a robust approach for the market's future activities.

environmental studies,public administration
Taking stock of national climate policies to evaluate implementation of the Paris Agreement

Mark Roelfsema,Heleen L. van Soest,Mathijs Harmsen,Detlef P. van Vuuren,Christoph Bertram,Michel den Elzen,Niklas Höhne,Gabriela Iacobuta,Volker Krey,Elmar Kriegler,Gunnar Luderer,Keywan Riahi,Falko Ueckerdt,Jacques Després,Laurent Drouet,Johannes Emmerling,Stefan Frank,Oliver Fricko,Matthew Gidden,Florian Humpenöder,Daniel Huppmann,Shinichiro Fujimori,Kostas Fragkiadakis,Keii Gi,Kimon Keramidas,Alexandre C. Köberle,Lara Aleluia Reis,Pedro Rochedo,Roberto Schaeffer,Ken Oshiro,Zoi Vrontisi,Wenying Chen,Gokul C. Iyer,Jae Edmonds,Maria Kannavou,Kejun Jiang,Ritu Mathur,George Safonov,Saritha Sudharmma Vishwanathan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-15414-6

IF: 16.6

2020-04-29

Nature Communications

Abstract:Abstract Many countries have implemented national climate policies to accomplish pledged Nationally Determined Contributions and to contribute to the temperature objectives of the Paris Agreement on climate change. In 2023, the global stocktake will assess the combined effort of countries. Here, based on a public policy database and a multi-model scenario analysis, we show that implementation of current policies leaves a median emission gap of 22.4 to 28.2 GtCO 2 eq by 2030 with the optimal pathways to implement the well below 2 °C and 1.5 °C Paris goals. If Nationally Determined Contributions would be fully implemented, this gap would be reduced by a third. Interestingly, the countries evaluated were found to not achieve their pledged contributions with implemented policies (implementation gap), or to have an ambition gap with optimal pathways towards well below 2 °C. This shows that all countries would need to accelerate the implementation of policies for renewable technologies, while efficiency improvements are especially important in emerging countries and fossil-fuel-dependent countries.

multidisciplinary sciences
The international climate finance accounting muddle: is there hope on the horizon?

Romain Weikmans,J. Timmons Roberts

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17565529.2017.1410087

2017-12-03

Climate and Development

Abstract:The sources and governance of climate finance have been widely debated since the 2009 climate change summit in Copenhagen, when rich countries promised to provide US$ 30 billion in additional climate finance by 2012 and to mobilize US$ 100 billion a year by 2020 to address the mitigation and adaptation needs of developing countries. Have developed countries respected their financial commitments? Which countries have been the main beneficiaries of international climate money? As simple as these questions may seem, answers to them have proved to be highly controversial and have contributed to a continuous erosion of trust between Parties in international climate negotiations. This article explores the controversies around international climate finance figures. It examines how the lack of internationally agreed modalities to account for climate finance has given rise to a plethora of accounting and reporting practices that leads to widely contrasting statements on climate finance. We show that, despite some gaps, the Paris Agreement’s “enhanced transparency framework” could lead to marked improvements in the way climate finance is accounted and reported.

environmental studies,development studies
A justice-based framework to determine countries’ fair warming contributions to Paris Agreement

Joeri Rogelj,Mingyu Li,Setu Pelz,Robin Lamboll,Can Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4129114/v1

2024-01-01

Abstract:Abstract Equity is a cornerstone of global climate policy, yet no international agreement has managed to agree on how to allocate mitigation efforts across countries. While a rich literature informs these deliberations, there remains a gap in approaches that appropriately consider non-CO2 emissions and their warming contributions. In this study, we define a global warming budget applicable to all anthropogenic greenhouse gases and allocate it to countries based on equity principles drawn from international environmental law. We find that by 2021 up to 85 countries, including all major developed countries, exhausted their budget compatible with keeping warming to 1.5°C under all allocation approaches considered in this study. A similar picture emerges for 2°C. A large group of countries will hence exceed their fair shares even if their updated pledges under the Paris Agreement represent the deepest possible reductions. Considerations of fairness should therefore start to include aspects beyond domestic emissions reductions only.
Environmental integrity of international carbon market mechanisms under the Paris Agreement

Lambert Schneider,Stephanie La Hoz Theuer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2018.1521332

2018-09-21

Climate Policy

Abstract:The Paris Agreement establishes provisions for using international carbon market mechanisms to achieve climate mitigation contributions. Environmental integrity is a key principle for using such mechanisms under the Agreement. This paper systematically identifies and categorizes issues and options to achieve environmental integrity, including how it could be defined, what influences it, and what approaches could mitigate environmental integrity risks. Here, environmental integrity is assumed to be ensured if the engagement in international transfers of carbon market units leads to the same or lower aggregated global emissions. Four factors are identified that influence environmental integrity: the accounting for international transfers; the quality of units generated, i.e. whether the mechanism ensures that the issuance or transfer of units leads to emission reductions in the transferring country; the ambition and scope of the mitigation target of the transferring country; and incentives or disincentives for future mitigation action, such as possible disincentives for transferring countries to define future mitigation targets less ambitiously or more narrowly in order to sell more units. It is recommended that policy-makers combine several approaches to address the significant risks to environmental integrity. Key policy insights Robust accounting is a key prerequisite for ensuring environmental integrity. The diversity of nationally determined contributions is an important challenge, in particular for avoiding double counting and for ensuring that the accounting for international transfers is representative for the mitigation efforts by Parties over time.Unit quality can, in theory, be ensured through appropriate design of carbon market mechanisms; in practice, existing mechanisms face considerable challenges in ensuring unit quality. Unit quality could be promoted through guidance under Paris Agreement Article 6, and reporting and review under Article 13.The ambition and scope of mitigation targets is key for the incentive for transferring countries to ensure unit quality because countries with ambitious and economy-wide targets would have to compensate for any transfer of units that lack quality. Encouraging countries to adopt ambitious and economy-wide NDC targets would therefore facilitate achieving environmental integrity.Restricting transfers in instances of high environmental integrity risk – through eligibility criteria or limits – could complement these approaches. Robust accounting is a key prerequisite for ensuring environmental integrity. The diversity of nationally determined contributions is an important challenge, in particular for avoiding double counting and for ensuring that the accounting for international transfers is representative for the mitigation efforts by Parties over time. Unit quality can, in theory, be ensured through appropriate design of carbon market mechanisms; in practice, existing mechanisms face considerable challenges in ensuring unit quality. Unit quality could be promoted through guidance under Paris Agreement Article 6, and reporting and review under Article 13. The ambition and scope of mitigation targets is key for the incentive for transferring countries to ensure unit quality because countries with ambitious and economy-wide targets would have to compensate for any transfer of units that lack quality. Encouraging countries to adopt ambitious and economy-wide NDC targets would therefore facilitate achieving environmental integrity. Restricting transfers in instances of high environmental integrity risk – through eligibility criteria or limits – could complement these approaches.

environmental studies,public administration
Is China's carbon neutrality commitment truly credible? Evidence from a natural experiment

Wen Gao,Maobin Wang,Tao Ye,Wen Gao,Maobin Wang,Tao Ye

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2022.103284

IF: 9.848

2022-12-01

Finance Research Letters

Abstract:The credibility of China's carbon neutrality commitment is an interesting and controversial topic. We investigate this issue using an exogenous policy experiment in 2021, in which the Chinese government surprisingly accelerated the pace of action to meet its pledge. We find that domestic investors perceive China's carbon emission commitment as credible by responding sharply to the possible enhanced energy control policies in China due to its pledge. Our evidence also suggests that investors’ concerns regarding escalating policies drive their reactions. Our evidence contributes to the discussion on perceived credibility and investor reactions to policy announcements.

business, finance
Tsinghua University China Beyond Copenhagen : Reconciling International Fairness , Economic Development , and Climate Protection

Jing Cao

2010-01-01

Abstract:The goal of the Harvard Project on International Climate Agreements is to help identify key design elements of a scientifically sound, economically rational, and politically pragmatic post-2012 international policy architecture for global climate change. It draws upon leading thinkers from academia, private industry, government, and non-governmental organizations from around the world to construct a small set of promising policy frameworks and then disseminate and discuss the design elements and frameworks with decision-makers. The Project is directed Acknowledgements Major funding for the Harvard Project on International Climate Agreements has been provided by a grant from the Climate Change Initiative of the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation. Additional support has been provided by Christopher P. The views expressed in the Harvard Project on International Climate Agreements Discussion Paper Series are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of the John F. Kennedy School of Government or of Harvard University. Discussion Papers have not undergone formal review and approval. Such papers are included in this series to elicit feedback and to encourage debate on important public policy challenges. Copyright belongs to the author(s). Papers may be downloaded for personal use only.ABSTRACT Time to respond to the severe threat posed by global climate change is running short. Though the most recent international climate negotiations under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) achieved some consensus in the form of the Copenhagen Accord, they failed to produce an adequate and legally binding action plan for achieving long-term reductions in greenhouse-gas emissions. Looking beyond Copenhagen, this paper proposes a new architecture for international climate policy going forward. It highlights a top-down, burden-sharing rule that is designed to produce a fair distribution of burdens across countries while also (a) giving priority to economic development and concerns about wealth inequality and (b) achieving emission reductions consistent with holding the expected increase in global average temperature to 2 degrees Celsius. In addition, this paper discusses several key design elements that will be important, especially from the perspective of developing countries, to the success of future international climate negotiations. These design elements include agreements on burden sharing, choice of policy instruments, financial mechanisms and technology transfer, penalties for noncompliance, and linkages between trade and climate change.
Achieving consensus in multilateral international negotiations: The case study of the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change

Carmela Bernardo,Lingfei Wang,Francesco Vasca,Yiguang Hong,Guodong Shi,Claudio Altafini

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abg8068

IF: 13.6

2021-12-17

Science Advances

Abstract:A dynamical model describes the negotiation process that led to the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change.

multidisciplinary sciences

Ambitious and Credible Pledges

Determining the credibility of commitments in international climate policy

The Paris Agreement and the new logic of international climate politics

Exploring Fair and Ambitious Mitigation Contributions under the Paris Agreement Goals

Ratcheting of climate pledges needed to limit peak global warming

The Paris Agreement: Destined to Succeed or Doomed to Fail?

Levers of climate pledges influencing the Paris Agreement target

Efforts-sharing to Achieve the Paris Goals: Ratcheting-up of NDCs and Taking Full Advantage of International Carbon Market

Entry into force and then? The Paris agreement and state accountability

Uncompensated claims to fair emission space risk putting Paris Agreement goals out of reach

Feasible climate mitigation

Climate Policy Ambition: Exploring A Policy Density Perspective

Policy credibility is a key component for an effective and efficient EU Emissions Trading System

Caught in between: credibility and feasibility of the voluntary carbon market post-2020

Taking stock of national climate policies to evaluate implementation of the Paris Agreement

The international climate finance accounting muddle: is there hope on the horizon?

A justice-based framework to determine countries’ fair warming contributions to Paris Agreement

Environmental integrity of international carbon market mechanisms under the Paris Agreement

Is China's carbon neutrality commitment truly credible? Evidence from a natural experiment

Tsinghua University China Beyond Copenhagen : Reconciling International Fairness , Economic Development , and Climate Protection

Achieving consensus in multilateral international negotiations: The case study of the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change