How Ambitious are China and India's Emissions Intensity Targets?
Several developing economies have announced carbon emissions targets for 2020 as part of the negotiating process for a post-Kyoto climate policy regime. China and India¹s commitments are framed as reductions in the emissions intensity of the economy by 40-45% and 20-25% respectively between 2005 and 2020. How feasible are the proposed reductions in emissions intensity for China and India, and how do they compare with the targeted reductions in the US and the EU? In this paper, we use a stochastic frontier model of energy intensity to decompose energy intensity into input and output mix, climate, and a residual technology variable. We use the model to produce emissions projections for China and India under a number of scenarios regarding the pace of technological change and changes in the share of non-fossil energy. We find that China is likely to need to adopt ambitious carbon mitigation policies in order to achieve its stated target, and that its targeted reductions in emissions intensity are on par with those implicit in the US and EU targets. India¹s target is less ambitious, and might be met with only limited or even no dedicated mitigation policies.
|Date of creation:||Dec 2009|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Crawford Building, Lennox Crossing, Building #132, Canberra ACT 2601|
Phone: +61 2 6125 4705
Fax: +61 2 6125 5448
Web page: https://crawford.anu.edu.au/research_units/eerh/
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Stern, David I., 2009.
16857, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Frank Jotzo & John C. V. Pezzey, 2007.
"Optimal Intensity Targets for Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading Under Uncertainty,"
Economics and Environment Network Working Papers
0701, Australian National University, Economics and Environment Network.
- Frank Jotzo & John Pezzey, 2007. "Optimal intensity targets for greenhouse gas emissions trading under uncertainty," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 38(2), pages 259-284, October.
- Fischer, Carolyn & Springborn, Michael, 2011.
"Emissions targets and the real business cycle: Intensity targets versus caps or taxes,"
Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,
Elsevier, vol. 62(3), pages 352-366.
- Fischer, Carolyn & Springborn, Michael R., 2011. "Emissions Targets and the Real Business Cycle: Intensity Targets versus Caps or Taxes," Discussion Papers dp-09-47-rev, Resources For the Future.
- Fischer, Carolyn & Springborn, Michael R., 2009. "Emissions Targets and the Real Business Cycle: Intensity Targets versus Caps or Taxes," Discussion Papers dp-09-47, Resources For the Future.
- Warwick J. McKibbin & Adele C. Morris & Peter J. Wilcoxen, 2010.
"Comparing Climate Commitments: A Model-Based Analysis of the Copenhagen Accord,"
CAMA Working Papers
2010-24, Centre for Applied Macroeconomic Analysis, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
- Warwick J. Mckibbin & Adele C. Morris & Peter J. Wilcoxen, 2011. "Comparing Climate Commitments: A Model-Based Analysis Of The Copenhagen Accord," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 2(02), pages 79-103.
- Ross Garnaut & Stephen Howes & Frank Jotzo & Peter Sheehan, 2008. "Emissions in the Platinum Age: the implications of rapid development for climate-change mitigation," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 24(2), pages 377-401, Summer.
- David I.Stern, 2010.
"Modeling International Trends in Energy Efficiency and Carbon Emissions,"
Environmental Economics Research Hub Research Reports
1054, Environmental Economics Research Hub, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
- Stern, David I., 2010. "Modeling International Trends in Energy Efficiency and Carbon Emissions," Research Reports 94950, Australian National University, Environmental Economics Research Hub.
- Subodh Kumar & R. Robert Russell, 2002. "Technological Change, Technological Catch-up, and Capital Deepening: Relative Contributions to Growth and Convergence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(3), pages 527-548, June.
- Lopez, Ramon & Mitra, Siddhartha, 2000. "Corruption, Pollution, and the Kuznets Environment Curve," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 137-150, September.
- Kumbhakar, Subal C & Ghosh, Soumendra & McGuckin, J Thomas, 1991. "A Generalized Production Frontier Approach for Estimating Determinants of Inefficiency in U.S. Dairy Farms," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 9(3), pages 279-86, July.
- K. Hadri & C. Guermat & J. Whittaker, 2003. "Estimation of technical inefficiency effects using panel data and doubly heteroscedastic stochastic production frontiers," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 203-222, January.
- Robert J. Hodrick & Edward Prescott, 1981.
"Post-War U.S. Business Cycles: An Empirical Investigation,"
451, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
- Hodrick, Robert J & Prescott, Edward C, 1997. "Postwar U.S. Business Cycles: An Empirical Investigation," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 29(1), pages 1-16, February.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:een:eenhrr:1051. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (CAP Web Team)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.