IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v36y2008i3p1107-1124.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Triptych approach revisited: A staged sectoral approach for climate mitigation

Author

Listed:
  • den Elzen, Michel
  • Höhne, Niklas
  • Moltmann, Sara

Abstract

The Triptych approach is a method for allocating future greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions among countries under a post-2012 international climate mitigation regime based on technological criteria at the sector level, and accounting for structural differences. The emission allowances are decomposed according to sectors, thereby enabling the link to real-world emission reduction strategies to be more concrete. The new Triptych approach presented here is a refinement of an earlier version in terms of an increased transparency and allowing a delayed participation for developing countries (initial participation of developing countries with incentives but no penalties through 'no lose' targets or sustainable development policies and measures). For this article we calculated the emission reductions for countries for two technology-oriented scenarios, which stabilize GHG concentrations at 450 and 550Â ppm CO2-eq, respectively. The reductions are ambitious, but nonetheless compatible with existing technical reduction potentials as growth is allowed but efficiency has to be improved.

Suggested Citation

  • den Elzen, Michel & Höhne, Niklas & Moltmann, Sara, 2008. "The Triptych approach revisited: A staged sectoral approach for climate mitigation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 1107-1124, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:36:y:2008:i:3:p:1107-1124
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301-4215(07)00528-9
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Niklas H�hne & Michel den Elzen & Martin Weiss, 2006. "Common but differentiated convergence (CDC): a new conceptual approach to long-term climate policy," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(2), pages 181-199, March.
    2. Groenenberg, Heleen & Phylipsen, Dian & Blok, Kornelis, 2001. "Differentiating commitments world wide: global differentiation of GHG emissions reductions based on the Triptych approach--a preliminary assessment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(12), pages 1007-1030, October.
    3. Asbjørn Torvanger & Odd Godal, 2004. "An Evaluation of Pre-Kyoto Differentiation Proposals for National Greenhouse Gas Abatement Targets," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 65-91, March.
    4. van Vuuren, Detlef P. & Weyant, John & de la Chesnaye, Francisco, 2006. "Multi-gas scenarios to stabilize radiative forcing," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 102-120, January.
    5. World Bank, 2004. "World Development Indicators 2004," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 13890, December.
    6. Phylipsen, G J M & 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, Elsevier, vol. 26(12), pages 929-943, October.
    7. Schwarz, Hans-Gunter, 2005. "Modernisation of existing and new construction of power plants in Germany: results of an optimisation model," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 113-137, January.
    8. Heleen Groenenberg & Kornelis Blok & Jeroen van der Sluijs, 2004. "Global Triptych: a bottom-up approach for the differentiation of commitments under the Climate Convention," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(2), pages 153-175, June.
    9. K. Casey Delhotal, Francisco C. de la Chesnaye, Ann Gardiner, Judith Bates, and Alexei Sankovski, 2006. "Mitigation of Methane and Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Waste, Energy and Industry," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I), pages 45-62.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Wang, Ke & Zhang, Xian & Wei, Yi-Ming & Yu, Shiwei, 2013. "Regional allocation of CO2 emissions allowance over provinces in China by 2020," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 214-229.
    2. Zhou, P. & Wang, M., 2016. "Carbon dioxide emissions allocation: A review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 47-59.
    3. Ekholm, Tommi & Soimakallio, Sampo & Moltmann, Sara & Höhne, Niklas & Syri, Sanna & Savolainen, Ilkka, 2010. "Effort sharing in ambitious, global climate change mitigation scenarios," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 1797-1810, April.
    4. Vicki Duscha & Everett B. Peterson & Joachim Schleich & Katja Schumacher, 2019. "Sectoral Targets To Address Competitiveness — A Cge Analysis With Focus On The Global Steel Sector," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 10(01), pages 1-27, February.
    5. Zhu, Bangzhu & Jiang, Mingxing & He, Kaijian & Chevallier, Julien & Xie, Rui, 2018. "Allocating CO2 allowances to emitters in China: A multi-objective decision approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 441-451.
    6. Andries F. Hof & Michel G.J. Den Elzen, 2010. "The effect of different historical emissions datasets on emission targets of the sectoral mitigation approach Triptych," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(6), pages 684-704, November.
    7. Forin, Silvia & Radebach, Alexander & Steckel, Jan Christoph & Ward, Hauke, 2018. "The effect of industry delocalization on global energy use: A global sectoral perspective," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 233-243.
    8. Fujimori, Shinichiro & Masui, Toshihiko & Matsuoka, Yuzuru, 2015. "Gains from emission trading under multiple stabilization targets and technological constraints," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 306-315.
    9. Cai, Wenjia & Wang, Can & Liu, Wenling & Mao, Ziwei & Yu, Huichao & Chen, Jining, 2009. "Sectoral analysis for international technology development and transfer: Cases of coal-fired power generation, cement and aluminium in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 2283-2291, June.
    10. Wachsmuth, Jakob & Denishchenkova, Alexandra & Fekete, Hanna & Parra, Paola & Schaeffer, Michiel & Ancygier, Andrzej & Sferra, Fabio, 2019. "Fairness- and cost-effectiveness-based approaches to effort-sharing under the Paris agreement," Working Papers "Sustainability and Innovation" S04/2019, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
    11. den Elzen, Michel & Höhne, Niklas & van Vliet, Jasper, 2009. "Analysing comparable greenhouse gas mitigation efforts for Annex I countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 4114-4131, October.
    12. Huang, Wei Ming & Lee, Grace W.M., 2009. "GHG legislation: Lessons from Taiwan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(7), pages 2696-2707, July.
    13. Jing CAO, 2010. "Reconciling Economic Growth and Carbon Mitigation: Challenges and Policy Options in China," Asian Economic Policy Review, Japan Center for Economic Research, vol. 5(1), pages 110-129, June.
    14. Qianting Zhu & Wenwu Tang, 2017. "Regional-Level Carbon Allocation in China Based on Sectoral Emission Patterns under the Peak Commitment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-18, April.
    15. van Ruijven, Bas J. & Weitzel, Matthias & den Elzen, Michel G.J. & Hof, Andries F. & van Vuuren, Detlef P. & Peterson, Sonja & Narita, Daiju, 2012. "Emission allowances and mitigation costs of China and India resulting from different effort-sharing approaches," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 116-134.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zhou, P. & Wang, M., 2016. "Carbon dioxide emissions allocation: A review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 47-59.
    2. E. Kuntsi‐Reunanen & J. Luukkanen, 2006. "Greenhouse gas emission reductions in the post‐Kyoto period: Emission intensity changes required under the ‘contraction and convergence’ approach," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 30(4), pages 272-279, November.
    3. Zhu, Bangzhu & Jiang, Mingxing & He, Kaijian & Chevallier, Julien & Xie, Rui, 2018. "Allocating CO2 allowances to emitters in China: A multi-objective decision approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 441-451.
    4. Joseph E. Aldy & William A. Pizer & Keigo Akimoto, 2017. "Comparing emissions mitigation efforts across countries," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(4), pages 501-515, May.
    5. Thomas Jobert & Fatih Karanfil & Anna Tykhonenko, 2012. "Trade and Environment: Further Empirical Evidence from Heterogeneous Panels Using Aggregate Data," GREDEG Working Papers 2012-15, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    6. Wachsmuth, Jakob & Denishchenkova, Alexandra & Fekete, Hanna & Parra, Paola & Schaeffer, Michiel & Ancygier, Andrzej & Sferra, Fabio, 2019. "Fairness- and cost-effectiveness-based approaches to effort-sharing under the Paris agreement," Working Papers "Sustainability and Innovation" S04/2019, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
    7. Pan, Xunzhang & Teng, Fei & Ha, Yuejiao & Wang, Gehua, 2014. "Equitable Access to Sustainable Development: Based on the comparative study of carbon emission rights allocation schemes," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 632-640.
    8. Yu, Shiwei & Wei, Yi-Ming & Wang, Ke, 2014. "Provincial allocation of carbon emission reduction targets in China: An approach based on improved fuzzy cluster and Shapley value decomposition," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 630-644.
    9. van Ruijven, Bas J. & Weitzel, Matthias & den Elzen, Michel G.J. & Hof, Andries F. & van Vuuren, Detlef P. & Peterson, Sonja & Narita, Daiju, 2012. "Emission allowances and mitigation costs of China and India resulting from different effort-sharing approaches," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 116-134.
    10. Wang, Ke & Zhang, Xian & Wei, Yi-Ming & Yu, Shiwei, 2013. "Regional allocation of CO2 emissions allowance over provinces in China by 2020," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 214-229.
    11. Ekholm, Tommi & Soimakallio, Sampo & Moltmann, Sara & Höhne, Niklas & Syri, Sanna & Savolainen, Ilkka, 2010. "Effort sharing in ambitious, global climate change mitigation scenarios," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 1797-1810, April.
    12. Pan, Xunzhang & Teng, Fei & Wang, Gehua, 2014. "Sharing emission space at an equitable basis: Allocation scheme based on the equal cumulative emission per capita principle," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 1810-1818.
    13. Aldy, Joseph E. & Pizer, William A. & Akimoto, Keigo, 2015. "A natural outcome of the emerging pledge and review approach to international climate change policy is the interest in comparing mitigation efforts among countries. Domestic publics and stakeholders w," RFF Working Paper Series dp-15-32, Resources for the Future.
    14. Joanna Depledge, 2022. "The “top-down” Kyoto Protocol? Exploring caricature and misrepresentation in literature on global climate change governance," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 673-692, December.
    15. Alain Bernard & Marc Vielle, 2008. "GEMINI-E3, a general equilibrium model of international–national interactions between economy, energy and the environment," Computational Management Science, Springer, vol. 5(3), pages 173-206, May.
    16. Ni, Jinlan & Wei, Chu & Du, Limin, 2015. "Revealing the political decision toward Chinese carbon abatement: Based on equity and efficiency criteria," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 609-621.
    17. Weitzel, Matthias & Ghosh, Joydeep & Peterson, Sonja & Pradhan, Basanta K., 2015. "Effects of international climate policy for India: evidence from a national and global CGE model," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(4), pages 516-538, August.
    18. Jakob Skoet & Kostas Stamoulis & Annelies Deuss, 2004. "Investing in Agriculture for Growth and Food Security in the ACP countries," Working Papers 04-22, Agricultural and Development Economics Division of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO - ESA).
    19. Justin Lin & Peilin Liu, 2006. "Economic Development Strategy, Openness and Rural Poverty: A Framework and China's Experiences," WIDER Working Paper Series RP2006-43, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    20. Una Okonkwo Osili & Anna L. Paulson, 2006. "What can we learn about financial access from U.S. immigrants?," Working Paper Series WP-06-25, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:36:y:2008:i:3:p:1107-1124. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.