IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/poango/v10y2022i3p171-185.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exploring Global Climate Policy Futures and Their Representation in Integrated Assessment Models

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas Hickmann

    (Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development, Utrecht University, The Netherlands / Department of Political Science, Lund University, Sweden)

  • Christoph Bertram

    (Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Leibniz Association, Germany)

  • Frank Biermann

    (Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development, Utrecht University, The Netherlands)

  • Elina Brutschin

    (International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Austria)

  • Elmar Kriegler

    (Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Leibniz Association, Germany)

  • Jasmine E. Livingston

    (Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development, Utrecht University, The Netherlands)

  • Silvia Pianta

    (European University Institute, Italy / RFF-CMCC European Institute on Economics and the Environment, Italy)

  • Keywan Riahi

    (International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Austria)

  • Bas van Ruijven

    (International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Austria)

  • Detlef van Vuuren

    (Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development, Utrecht University, The Netherlands / PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, The Netherlands)

Abstract

The Paris Agreement, adopted in 2015, paved the way for a new hybrid global climate governance architecture with both bottom-up and top-down elements. While governments can choose individual climate goals and actions, a global stocktake and a ratcheting-up mechanism have been put in place with the overall aim to ensure that collective efforts will prevent increasing adverse impacts of climate change. Integrated assessment models show that current combined climate commitments and policies of national governments fall short of keeping global warming to 1.5 °C or 2 °C above preindustrial levels. Although major greenhouse gas emitters, such as China, the European Union, India, the United States under the Biden administration, and several other countries, have made new pledges to take more ambitious climate action, it is highly uncertain where global climate policy is heading. Scenarios in line with long-term temperature targets typically assume a simplistic and hardly realistic level of harmonization of climate policies across countries. Against this backdrop, this article develops four archetypes for the further evolution of the global climate governance architecture and matches them with existing sets of scenarios developed by integrated assessment models. By these means, the article identifies knowledge gaps in the current scenario literature and discusses possible research avenues to explore the pre-conditions for successful coordination of national policies towards achieving the long-term target stipulated in the Paris Agreement.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas Hickmann & Christoph Bertram & Frank Biermann & Elina Brutschin & Elmar Kriegler & Jasmine E. Livingston & Silvia Pianta & Keywan Riahi & Bas van Ruijven & Detlef van Vuuren, 2022. "Exploring Global Climate Policy Futures and Their Representation in Integrated Assessment Models," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 10(3), pages 171-185.
  • Handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v:10:y:2022:i:3:p:171-185
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/5328
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jen Iris Allan, 2019. "Dangerous Incrementalism of the Paris Agreement," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 19(1), pages 4-11, February.
    2. Niklas Höhne & Matthew J. Gidden & Michel Elzen & Frederic Hans & Claire Fyson & Andreas Geiges & M. Louise Jeffery & Sofia Gonzales-Zuñiga & Silke Mooldijk & William Hare & Joeri Rogelj, 2021. "Wave of net zero emission targets opens window to meeting the Paris Agreement," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 11(10), pages 820-822, October.
    3. Bosetti, Valentina & Carraro, Carlo & De Cian, Enrica & Massetti, Emanuele & Tavoni, Massimo, 2013. "Incentives and stability of international climate coalitions: An integrated assessment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 44-56.
    4. Navroz K. Dubash, 2020. "Revisiting climate ambition: The case for prioritizing current action over future intent," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(1), January.
    5. William Hare & Claire Stockwell & Christian Flachsland & Sebastian Oberth�R, 2010. "The architecture of the global climate regime: a top-down perspective," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(6), pages 600-614, November.
    6. David Held & Charles Roger, 2018. "Three Models of Global Climate Governance: From Kyoto to Paris and Beyond," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 9(4), pages 527-537, November.
    7. Hoffmann, Matthew J., 2011. "Climate Governance at the Crossroads: Experimenting with a Global Response after Kyoto," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195390087.
    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. Larisa Gorina & Marina Gordova & Irina Khristoforova & Lyudmila Sundeeva & Wadim Strielkowski, 2023. "Sustainable Education and Digitalization through the Prism of the COVID-19 Pandemic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-18, April.

    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. Pickering, Jonathan & Jotzo, Frank & Wood, Peter J., 2015. "Splitting the difference: can limited coordination achieve a fair distribution of the global climate financing effort?," Working Papers 249508, Australian National University, Centre for Climate Economics & Policy.
    2. Geng Qin & Hanzhi Yu, 2023. "Rescuing the Paris Agreement: Improving the Global Experimentalist Governance by Reclassifying Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-19, February.
    3. Michelle Betsill & Navroz K. Dubash & Matthew Paterson & Harro van Asselt & Antto Vihma & Harald Winkler, 2015. "Building Productive Links between the UNFCCC and the Broader Global Climate Governance Landscape," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 15(2), pages 1-10, May.
    4. Marcel J. Dorsch & Christian Flachsland, 2017. "A Polycentric Approach to Global Climate Governance," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 17(2), pages 45-64, May.
    5. 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.
    6. Harro Asselt & Fariborz Zelli, 2014. "Connect the dots: managing the fragmentation of global climate governance," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 16(2), pages 137-155, April.
    7. Liping Zhao & Xincheng Li & Xiangmei Li & Chenyang Ai, 2022. "Dynamic Changes and Regional Differences of Net Carbon Sequestration of Food Crops in the Yangtze River Economic Belt of China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(20), pages 1-16, October.
    8. Richard Stewart & Michael Oppenheimer & Bryce Rudyk, 2013. "A new strategy for global climate protection," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 120(1), pages 1-12, September.
    9. repec:zbw:bofrdp:2017_020 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Andrea Mah & Eunkyung Song, 2024. "Elite Speech about Climate Change: Analysis of Sentiment from the United Nations Conference of Parties, 1995–2021," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-27, March.
    11. Michael Howlett & Ishani Mukherjee, 2014. "Policy Design and Non-Design: Towards a Spectrum of Policy Formulation Types," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 2(2), pages 57-71.
    12. Milan Ščasný & Emanuele Massetti & Jan Melichar & Samuel Carrara, 2015. "Quantifying the Ancillary Benefits of the Representative Concentration Pathways on Air Quality in Europe," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 62(2), pages 383-415, October.
    13. Adrian Amelung, 2016. "Das "Paris-Agreement": Durchbruch der Top-Down-Klimaschutzverhandlungen im Kreise der Vereinten Nationen," Otto-Wolff-Institut Discussion Paper Series 03/2016, Otto-Wolff-Institut für Wirtschaftsordnung, Köln, Deutschland.
    14. Oliver Westerwinter, 2021. "Transnational public-private governance initiatives in world politics: Introducing a new dataset," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 137-174, January.
    15. Katharina Michaelowa & Axel Michaelowa & Bernhard Reinsberg & Igor Shishlov, 2020. "Do Multilateral Development Bank Trust Funds Allocate Climate Finance Efficiently?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-19, July.
    16. Kenneth W. Abbott & Benjamin Faude, 2022. "Hybrid institutional complexes in global governance," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 263-291, April.
    17. Teresa Kramarz & Susan Park, 2016. "Accountability in Global Environmental Governance: A Meaningful Tool for Action?," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 16(2), pages 1-21, May.
    18. D'Orazio, Paola & Hertel, Tobias & Kasbrink, Fynn, 2022. "No need to worry? Estimating the exposure of the German banking sector to climate-related transition risks," Ruhr Economic Papers 946, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    19. Frans Sengers & Bruno Turnheim & Frans Berkhout, 2021. "Beyond experiments: Embedding outcomes in climate governance," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 39(6), pages 1148-1171, September.
    20. Valentina Bosetti & Enrica De Cian, 2013. "A Good Opening: The Key to Make the Most of Unilateral Climate Action," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 56(2), pages 255-276, October.
    21. Jason Thistlethwaite & Matthew Paterson, 2016. "Private governance and accounting for sustainability networks," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 34(7), pages 1197-1221, November.

    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:cog:poango:v:10:y:2022:i:3:p:171-185. 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: António Vieira (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.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.