Abstract:We analyze how stylized Integrated Assessment Models (IAMs), and specifically the widely‐used Dynamic Integrated Climate‐Economy model (DICE), represent the cost of emissions abatement. Many assume temporal independence—that abatement costs in one period are not affected by prior abatement. We contrast this with three dimensions of dynamic realism in emitting systems: (i) inertia, (ii) induced innovation, and (iii) path dependence. We review key evidence from the last quarter century on each of these three components. Studies of stock lifetime, dynamics of diffusion and past transitions suggest typical transition timescales of at least 20–40 years for the bulk emitting systems. The evidence that substantial innovation is induced by both prices and market deployment is unambiguous. Finally, both data and a rapidly growing literature demonstrate substantial path dependence in general, and specifically "carbon lock‐in and lock‐out." Some stylized models in the past decade have incorporated technology learning, and others have considered inertia, but the combination of these factors is important and not yet evident. More complex hybrid IAMs with technology‐rich energy‐system models incorporate these factors, but their complexity has limited the wider understanding and influence of their underlying insights. Few if any global models fully represent path dependence. We conclude with likely implications drawing upon the empirical and modeling evidence accumulated, including results from extending DICE with a highly stylized representation of such dynamic factors. This suggests that dynamic interdependencies could multiply several‐fold the optimal level of initial abatement expenditure. This is because early abatement then also directly facilitates subsequent emission savings. The diversity of dynamic linkages across sectors and technologies also implies more nuanced policy than a single global carbon price. Thus, the issues explored in this review can radically change the general policy conclusions drawn from models, which, like DICE, neglect dynamic realism.This article is categorized under: <ul class="plain-list"><li>Climate Economics > Aggregation Techniques for Impacts and Mitigation Costs</li></ul>

Introducing global learning in regional energy system models

Applying endogenous learning models in energy system optimization

Technology Learning and Diffusion at the Global and Local Scales: A Modeling Exercise in the REMIND Model

Impact of endogenous learning curves on maritime transition pathways

Global multi regional CGE model with its 3E extensions

Optimized phasing of the development of a regional energy system

Effects of learning curve models on onshore wind and solar PV cost developments in the USA

The Role of Technology Diffusion in a Decarbonizing World to Limit Global Warming to Well below 2 °C: an Assessment with Application of Global TIMES Model

A dynamic model to optimize a regional energy system with waste and crops as energy resources for greenhouse gases mitigation

Model-based step-wise marginal CO2 abatement cost curves to determine least-cost decarbonization pathways for sector-coupled energy systems

Endogenous learning for green hydrogen in a sector-coupled energy model for Europe

Advanced technologies in energy-economy models for climate change assessment

Modelling Low Carbon Transition and Economic Impacts under SSPs and RCPs Based on GTIMES

EnergyScope Pathway: An open-source model to optimise the energy transition pathways of a regional whole-energy system

Learning the Marginal Fuel Type for Effective Carbon Reduction

An energy system model for mixed bilateral and pool markets

On the global economic potentials and marginal costs of non-renewable resources and the price of energy commodities

Simulating flexibility, variability and decentralisation with an integrated energy system model for Great Britain

Untangling global levelised cost of electricity based on multi-factor learning curve for renewable energy: Wind, solar, geothermal, hydropower and bioenergy

Counter-intuitive behaviour of energy system models under CO2 caps and prices

Modeling myths: On DICE and dynamic realism in integrated assessment models of climate change mitigation