IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/masfgc/v23y2018i8d10.1007_s11027-018-9781-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Scale and benefit of global carbon markets under the 2 °C goal: integrated modeling and an effort-sharing platform

Author

Listed:
  • Lining Wang

    (Tsinghua University
    Tsinghua University
    CNPC)

  • Wenying Chen

    (Tsinghua University
    Tsinghua University)

  • XunZhang Pan

    (China University of Petroleum-Beijing)

  • Nan Li

    (Tsinghua University
    Tsinghua University)

  • Huan Wang

    (Tsinghua University
    Tsinghua University)

  • Danyang Li

    (Tsinghua University
    Tsinghua University)

  • Han Chen

    (Tsinghua University
    Tsinghua University)

Abstract

Global climate change mitigation needs all countries’ efforts under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change’s guideline of equity and common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities. The medium-to-long term regional emissions pathways simulated by integrated assessment models with global mitigation costs minimized to achieve the 2 °C goal might be very different from the regional emissions allowances allocated based on effort-sharing principles. Global carbon trading is a cost-effective mechanism to bridge the gap. Insight of previous papers has mainly focused on the impact of a single effort-sharing scheme on global carbon market, while this study attempts to explore the scale and benefit of global carbon market under different effort-sharing principles to achieve the 2 °C goal, with the application of a consistent modeling framework, consisting of an integrated assessment model and an effort-sharing platform. The results indicate that scale of global carbon market would be highly related with the effort-sharing principles. The global trading volumes would change from 1.8 Gigatons (Gt) carbon dioxide (CO2) to over 12 GtCO2 per year and largely peak between 2030 and 2040 under different kinds of effort-sharing principles. Correspondingly, annual global finance flows in the carbon market would increase gradually and reach the scale of hundreds of billions United States (US) dollars since 2020. Global carbon market would lower the abatement costs of developed countries, and the overall global abatement costs would drop by 0.4–2.6% during 2011–2050. The developing countries would not only acquire revenues from global carbon trading but also be provided with an opportunity to accelerate their domestic low-carbon energy transformation, local environmental improvement, job creation, and economic development. Linking national and regional carbon markets to develop global carbon market will be critical to maximize the utility of the market mechanism.

Suggested Citation

  • Lining Wang & Wenying Chen & XunZhang Pan & Nan Li & Huan Wang & Danyang Li & Han Chen, 2018. "Scale and benefit of global carbon markets under the 2 °C goal: integrated modeling and an effort-sharing platform," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 23(8), pages 1207-1223, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:masfgc:v:23:y:2018:i:8:d:10.1007_s11027-018-9781-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s11027-018-9781-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11027-018-9781-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11027-018-9781-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Hof, Andries F. & den Elzen, Michel G.J. & Admiraal, Annemiek & Roelfsema, Mark & Gernaat, David E.H.J. & van Vuuren, Detlef P., 2017. "Global and regional abatement costs of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and of enhanced action to levels well below 2°C and 1.5°C," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 30-40.
    3. Christoph Bohringer & Heinz Welsch, 2006. "Burden sharing in a greenhouse: egalitarianism and sovereignty reconciled," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(9), pages 981-996.
    4. World Bank & Ecofys & Vivid Economics, "undated". "State and Trends of Carbon Pricing 2017," World Bank Publications - Reports 28510, The World Bank Group.
    5. Michel Elzen & Angelica Beltran & Andries Hof & Bas Ruijven & Jasper Vliet, 2013. "Reduction targets and abatement costs of developing countries resulting from global and developed countries’ reduction targets by 2050," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 491-512, April.
    6. Yin, Xiang & Chen, Wenying & Eom, Jiyong & Clarke, Leon E. & Kim, Son H. & Patel, Pralit L. & Yu, Sha & Kyle, G. Page, 2015. "China's transportation energy consumption and CO2 emissions from a global perspective," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 233-248.
    7. Wang, Lining & Patel, Pralit L. & Yu, Sha & Liu, Bo & McLeod, Jeff & Clarke, Leon E. & Chen, Wenying, 2016. "Win–Win strategies to promote air pollutant control policies and non-fossil energy target regulation in China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 244-253.
    8. Ringius, Lasse & Torvanger, Asbjorn & Holtsmark, Bjart, 1998. "Can multi-criteria rules fairly distribute climate burdens?: OECD results from three burden sharing rules," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(10), pages 777-793, August.
    9. J. Edmonds & L. Clarke & J. Lurz & M. Wise, 2008. "Stabilizing CO 2 concentrations with incomplete international cooperation," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(4), pages 355-376, July.
    10. Lucas, Paul L. & Shukla, P.R. & Chen, Wenying & van Ruijven, Bas J. & Dhar, Subash & den Elzen, Michel G.J. & van Vuuren, Detlef P., 2013. "Implications of the international reduction pledges on long-term energy system changes and costs in China and India," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 1032-1041.
    11. J. Onigkeit & N. Anger & B. Brouns, 2009. "Fairness aspects of linking the European emissions trading scheme under a long-term stabilization scenario for CO 2 concentration," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 14(5), pages 477-494, June.
    12. Michel Elzen & Marcel Berk & Paul Lucas & Patrick Criqui & Alban Kitous, 2006. "Multi-Stage: A Rule-Based Evolution of Future Commitments under the Climate Change Convention," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 1-28, March.
    13. Qi, Tianyu & Weng, Yuyan, 2016. "Economic impacts of an international carbon market in achieving the INDC targets," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 886-893.
    14. Niklas H�hne & Michel den Elzen & Donovan Escalante, 2014. "Regional GHG reduction targets based on effort sharing: a comparison of studies," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(1), pages 122-147, January.
    15. Solveig Glomsrød & Taoyuan Wei & Knut Alfsen, 2013. "Pledges for climate mitigation: the effects of the Copenhagen accord on CO 2 emissions and mitigation costs," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 18(5), pages 619-636, June.
    16. 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.
    17. Chen, Wenying & Wu, Zongxin & He, Jiankun & Gao, Pengfei & Xu, Shaofeng, 2007. "Carbon emission control strategies for China: A comparative study with partial and general equilibrium versions of the China MARKAL model," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 59-72.
    18. Wei Li & Zhijie Jia, 2017. "Carbon tax, emission trading, or the mixed policy: which is the most effective strategy for climate change mitigation in China?," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 22(6), pages 973-992, August.
    19. Lining Wang & Wenying Chen & Hongjun Zhang & Ding Ma, 2017. "Dynamic equity carbon permit allocation scheme to limit global warming to two degrees," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 609-628, April.
    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. Lining Wang & Han Chen & Wenying Chen, 2020. "Co-control of carbon dioxide and air pollutant emissions in China from a cost-effective perspective," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 25(7), pages 1177-1197, October.
    2. Huiying Ye & Qi Zhang & Xunzhang Pan & Arash Farnoosh, 2020. "Market-induced carbon leakage in China’s certified emission reduction projects," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 25(6), pages 987-1012, August.

    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. Lining Wang & Wenying Chen & Hongjun Zhang & Ding Ma, 2017. "Dynamic equity carbon permit allocation scheme to limit global warming to two degrees," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 609-628, April.
    2. Li, Mengyu & Duan, Maosheng, 2020. "Efforts-sharing to achieve the Paris goals: Ratcheting-up of NDCs and taking full advantage of international carbon market," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 280(C).
    3. Zhou, P. & Wang, M., 2016. "Carbon dioxide emissions allocation: A review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 47-59.
    4. Xunzhang Pan & Fei Teng, 2017. "Assessment of China’s Mitigation Targets in an Effort-Sharing Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-16, June.
    5. Li, Nan & Chen, Wenying, 2018. "Modeling China’s interprovincial coal transportation under low carbon transition," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 222(C), pages 267-279.
    6. Fang, Kai & Zhang, Qifeng & Long, Yin & Yoshida, Yoshikuni & Sun, Lu & Zhang, Haoran & Dou, Yi & Li, Shuai, 2019. "How can China achieve its Intended Nationally Determined Contributions by 2030? A multi-criteria allocation of China’s carbon emission allowance," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 241(C), pages 380-389.
    7. Pan, Xunzhang & Wang, Hailin & Wang, Lining & Chen, Wenying, 2018. "Decarbonization of China's transportation sector: In light of national mitigation toward the Paris Agreement goals," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 853-864.
    8. A. F. Hof & M. G. J. Elzen & A. Mendoza Beltran, 2016. "The EU 40 % greenhouse gas emission reduction target by 2030 in perspective," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 375-392, June.
    9. Pan, Xunzhang & Teng, Fei & Wang, Gehua, 2014. "A comparison of carbon allocation schemes: On the equity-efficiency tradeoff," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 222-229.
    10. Xunzhang, Pan & Wenying, Chen & Clarke, Leon E. & Lining, Wang & Guannan, Liu, 2017. "China's energy system transformation towards the 2°C goal: Implications of different effort-sharing principles," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 116-126.
    11. Chen, Han & Yang, Lei & Chen, Wenying, 2020. "Modelling national, provincial and city-level low-carbon energy transformation pathways," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    12. 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.
    13. Nicole J. Berg & Heleen L. Soest & Andries F. Hof & Michel G. J. Elzen & Detlef P. Vuuren & Wenying Chen & Laurent Drouet & Johannes Emmerling & Shinichiro Fujimori & Niklas Höhne & Alexandre C. Kõber, 2020. "Implications of various effort-sharing approaches for national carbon budgets and emission pathways," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 162(4), pages 1805-1822, October.
    14. Zhang, Qiang & Chen, Wenying, 2020. "Modeling China’s interprovincial electricity transmission under low carbon transition," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 279(C).
    15. Daniel Johansson & Paul Lucas & Matthias Weitzel & Erik Ahlgren & A. Bazaz & Wenying Chen & Michel Elzen & Joydeep Ghosh & Maria Grahn & Qiao-Mei Liang & Sonja Peterson & Basanta Pradhan & Bas Ruijven, 2015. "Multi-model comparison of the economic and energy implications for China and India in an international climate regime," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 20(8), pages 1335-1359, December.
    16. Zhang, Lirong & Li, Yakun & Jia, Zhijie, 2018. "Impact of carbon allowance allocation on power industry in China’s carbon trading market: Computable general equilibrium based analysis," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 229(C), pages 814-827.
    17. 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.
    18. 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.
    19. Fragkos, Panagiotis & Kouvaritakis, Nikos, 2018. "Model-based analysis of Intended Nationally Determined Contributions and 2 °C pathways for major economies," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 965-978.
    20. Johansson, Daniel J. A. & Lucas, Paul L. & Weitzel, Matthias & Ahlgren, Erik O. & Bazaz, A. B. & Chen, Wenying & den Elzen, Michel G. J. & Ghosh, Joydeep & Grahn, Maria & Liang, Qiao-Mei & Peterson, S, 2012. "Multi-model analyses of the economic and energy implications for China and India in a post-Kyoto climate regime," Kiel Working Papers 1808, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).

    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:spr:masfgc:v:23:y:2018:i:8:d:10.1007_s11027-018-9781-4. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.