IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/tcpoxx/v4y2004i3p269-287.html

An emission intensity protocol for climate change: an application of FUND

Author

Listed:
  • Richard S.J. Tol

Abstract

An emission intensity protocol to govern long-term international greenhouse gas emission reduction is proposed. The protocol may also be interpreted as a technology protocol. The protocol consists of three parameters: a graduation income, below which countries have no emission reduction obligations; a convergence rate, at which emission intensities should approach that of the most carbon-extensive countries; and an acceleration rate, at which the most carbon-extensive countries should improve their technology over and above the business-asusual scenario. Depending on the parameter values, emission reduction ranges from draconian to almost nil. The graduation income and acceleration rate have the expected effects. The effect of the convergence rate is strongly scenario-dependent; some scenarios, perhaps unrealistically, assume strong technological convergence in the nopolicy case; in other scenarios, adopting 'best commercial technology in the whole world' would lead to substantial emission reduction. Not surprisingly, different regions prefer different parameters in the emission intensity protocol. Adopting the opinion of the median voter, atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide in the year 2200 would be reduced from 1650 to 950 ppm. This reduction is relatively robust to changes in crucial model parameters. The costs of complying with the emission intensity protocol can be reduced substantially through international trade in emission permits and, in particular, by banking and borrowing.

Suggested Citation

  • Richard S.J. Tol, 2004. "An emission intensity protocol for climate change: an application of FUND," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(3), pages 269-287, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:tcpoxx:v:4:y:2004:i:3:p:269-287
    DOI: 10.1080/14693062.2004.9685525
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/14693062.2004.9685525
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/14693062.2004.9685525?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:aen:journl:1999si-a05 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. William R. Cline, 1992. "Economics of Global Warming, The," Peterson Institute Press: All Books, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number 39, October.
    3. Barbara Buchner & Carlo Carraro & Igor Cersosimo & Carmen Marchiori, 2002. "Back to Kyoto? US Participation and the Linkage between R&D and Climate Cooperation," CESifo Working Paper Series 688, CESifo.
    4. repec:aen:journl:1999si-a02 is not listed on IDEAS
    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, Huiqing & Wei, Weixian, 2020. "Coordinating technological progress and environmental regulation in CO2 mitigation: The optimal levels for OECD countries & emerging economies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).

    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. Richard S.J. Tol, 2002. "Technology Protocols For Climate Change: An Application Of Fund," Working Papers FNU-14, Research unit Sustainability and Global Change, Hamburg University, revised Sep 2002.
    2. Johan Eyckmans & Michael Finus, 2006. "New roads to international environmental agreements: the case of global warming," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 7(4), pages 391-414, March.
    3. Ruiz Estrada, Mario Arturo, 2013. "The Macroeconomics evaluation of Climate Change Model (MECC-Model): The case Study of China," MPRA Paper 49158, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 18 Aug 2013.
    4. Newbold, Stephen & Griffiths, Charles & Moore, Chris & Wolverton, Ann & Kopits. Elizabeth, 2010. "The “Social Cost of Carbon” Made Simple," National Center for Environmental Economics-NCEE Working Papers 280887, United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
    5. Pizer, William A., 1999. "The optimal choice of climate change policy in the presence of uncertainty," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(3-4), pages 255-287, August.
    6. Matthias Schmidt & Hermann Held & Elmar Kriegler & Alexander Lorenz, 2013. "Climate Policy Under Uncertain and Heterogeneous Climate Damages," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 54(1), pages 79-99, January.
    7. Barbara Buchner & Carlo Carraro, 2006. "‘US, China and the Economics of Climate Negotiations’," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 63-89, March.
    8. Barbara Buchner & Carlo Carraro, 2004. "Economic and environmental effectiveness of a technology-based climate protocol," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(3), pages 229-248, September.
    9. Drennen, Thomas E. & Erickson, Jon D. & Chapman, Duane, 1993. "Solar Power and Climate Change Policy in Developing Countries," Staff Papers 121345, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    10. Tamazian, Artur & Bhaskara Rao, B., 2010. "Do economic, financial and institutional developments matter for environmental degradation? Evidence from transitional economies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 137-145, January.
    11. Simonis, Udo E., 1996. "Internationally tradeable emission certificates: efficiency and equity in linking environmental protection with economic development," Discussion Papers, Research Professorship Environmental Policy FS II 96-407, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    12. Yildiz, Özgür, 2014. "Lehren aus der Verhaltensökonomik für die Gestaltung umweltpolitischer Maßnahmen [Lessons from behavioral economics for the design of environmental policy measures]," MPRA Paper 59360, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Haraden, John, 1994. "Rebuttal to “The Marginal Cost of CO2 Emissions”," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 19(12), pages 1263-1266.
    14. Christian Azar, 1999. "Weight Factors in Cost-Benefit Analysis of Climate Change," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 13(3), pages 249-268, April.
    15. Nordhaus, William, 2013. "Integrated Economic and Climate Modeling," Handbook of Computable General Equilibrium Modeling, in: Peter B. Dixon & Dale Jorgenson (ed.), Handbook of Computable General Equilibrium Modeling, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 1069-1131, Elsevier.
    16. Schmidt, Holger, 1995. "Verteilungseffekte im Klimaschutz-Prozeß," Discussion Papers in Development Economics 18, Justus Liebig University Giessen, Institute for Development Economics.
    17. Heal, Geoffrey & Tarui, Nori, 2010. "Investment and emission control under technology and pollution externalities," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 1-14, January.
    18. Roeder, Kerstin & Habla, Wolfgang, 2012. "The Political Sustainability of Germany's Environmental Tax Rate," VfS Annual Conference 2012 (Goettingen): New Approaches and Challenges for the Labor Market of the 21st Century 62060, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    19. Mirasgedis, S. & Diakoulaki, D., 1997. "Multicriteria analysis vs. externalities assessment for the comparative evaluation of electricity generation systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 364-379, October.
    20. Alan S. Manne & Richard G. Richels, 1994. "The Costs of Stabilizing Global C02 Emissions: A Probabilistic Analysis Based on Expert Judgments," The Energy Journal, , vol. 15(1), pages 31-56, January.

    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:taf:tcpoxx:v:4:y:2004:i:3:p:269-287. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/tcpo20 .

    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.