IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fem/femwpa/2009.92.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Global Climate Policy Architecture and Political Feasibility: Specific Formulas and Emission Targets to Attain 460 ppm CO2 Concentrations

Author

Listed:
  • Valentina Bosetti

    (Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei)

  • Jeffrey Frankel

    (Harvard University)

Abstract

Three gaps in the Kyoto Protocol most badly need to be filled: the absence of emission targets extending far into the future, the absence of participation by the United States, China, and other developing countries, and the absence of reason to think that members will abide by commitments. To be politically acceptable, any new treaty that fills these gaps must, we believe, obey certain constraints regarding country-by-country economic costs. We offer a framework of formulas that assign quantitative allocations of emissions, across countries, one budget period at a time. The two-part plan: (i) China and other developing countries accept targets at BAU in the coming budget period, the same period in which the US first agrees to cuts below BAU; and (ii) all countries are asked in the future to make further cuts in accordance with a formula which sums up a Progressive Reductions Factor, a Latecomer Catch-up Factor, and a Gradual Equalization Factor. An earlier proposal for specific parameter values in the formulas – Frankel (2009), as analyzed by Bosetti, et al (2009) – achieved the environmental goal that concentrations of CO2 plateau at 500 ppm by 2100. It succeeded in obeying our political constraints, such as keeping the economic cost for every country below the thresholds of Y=1% of income in Present Discounted Value, and X=5% of income in the worst period. In pursuit of more aggressive environmental goals, we now advance the dates at which some countries are asked to begin cutting below BAU, within our framework. We also tinker with the values for the parameters in the formulas. The resulting target paths for emissions are run through the WITCH model to find their economic and environmental effects. We find that it is not possible to attain a 380 ppm CO2 goal (roughly in line with the 2°C target) without violating our political constraints. We were however, able to attain a concentration goal of 460 ppm CO2 with looser political constraints. The most important result is that we had to raise the threshold of costs above which a country drops out, to as high as Y =3.4% of income in PDV terms, or X =12 % in the worst budget period. Some may conclude from these results that the more aggressive environmental goals are not attainable in practice, and that our earlier proposal for how to attain 500 ppm CO2 is the better plan. We take no position on which environmental goal is best overall. Rather, we submit that, whatever the goal, our approach will give targets that are more practical economically and politically than approaches that have been proposed by others.

Suggested Citation

  • Valentina Bosetti & Jeffrey Frankel, 2009. "Global Climate Policy Architecture and Political Feasibility: Specific Formulas and Emission Targets to Attain 460 ppm CO2 Concentrations," Working Papers 2009.92, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
  • Handle: RePEc:fem:femwpa:2009.92
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://feem-media.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/NDL2009-092.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Valentina Bosetti & Carlo Carraro & Marzio Galeotti & Emanuele Massetti & Massimo Tavoni, 2006. "WITCH. A World Induced Technical Change Hybrid Model," Working Papers 2006_46, Department of Economics, University of Venice "Ca' Foscari".
    2. Jeffrey A. Frankel, 2009. "An Elaborated Global Climate Policy Architecture: Specific Formulas and Emission Targets for All Countries in All Decades," NBER Working Papers 14876, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Sheila M. Olmstead & Robert N. Stavins, 2006. "An International Policy Architecture for the Post-Kyoto Era," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(2), pages 35-38, May.
    4. Aldy,Joseph E. & Stavins,Robert N. (ed.), 2007. "Architectures for Agreement," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521871631, October.
    5. William A. Pizer, 2006. "The Evolution of a Global Climate Change Agreement," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(2), pages 26-30, May.
    6. Scott Barrett, 2006. "Climate Treaties and "Breakthrough" Technologies," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(2), pages 22-25, May.
    7. Warwick McKibbin & Adele Morris & Peter Wilcoxen, 2008. "Expecting The Unexpected: Macroeconomic Volatility And Climate Policy," CAMA Working Papers 2008-35, Centre for Applied Macroeconomic Analysis, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    8. Valentina Bosetti, Carlo Carraro, Marzio Galeotti, Emanuele Massetti, Massimo Tavoni, 2006. "A World induced Technical Change Hybrid Model," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I), pages 13-38.
    9. Enrica De Cian & Valentina Bosetti & Alessandra Sgobbi & Massimo Tavoni, 2009. "The 2008 WITCH Model: New Model Features and Baseline," Working Papers 2009.85, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    10. Frankel, Jeffrey, 2007. "Formulas for Quantitative Emission Targets," Working Paper Series rwp07-011, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    11. Manne, Alan & Mendelsohn, Robert & Richels, Richard, 1995. "MERGE : A model for evaluating regional and global effects of GHG reduction policies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 17-34, January.
    12. Karp, Larry & Zhao, Jinhua, 2009. "Suggestions for the Road to Copenhagen," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt3nj4h7k2, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    13. Joseph E. Aldy & Scott Barrett & Robert N. Stavins, 2003. "Thirteen plus one: a comparison of global climate policy architectures," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(4), pages 373-397, December.
    14. Aldy,Joseph E. & Stavins,Robert N. (ed.), 2007. "Architectures for Agreement," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521692175, October.
    15. Richard B. Stewart & Jonathan B. Wiener, 2003. "Reconstructing Climate Policy," Books, American Enterprise Institute, number 53156, September.
    16. Randall Lutter, 2000. "Developing Countries' Greenhouse Emmissions: Uncertainty and Implications for Participation in the Kyoto Protocol," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 4), pages 93-120.
    17. Aldy,Joseph E. & Stavins,Robert N. (ed.), 2009. "Post-Kyoto International Climate Policy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521129527, October.
    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. Emanuele Massetti, 2011. "Carbon tax scenarios for China and India: exploring politically feasible mitigation goals," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 11(3), pages 209-227, September.
    2. Valentina Bosetti & Jeffrey Frankel, 2014. "Sustainable Cooperation In Global Climate Policy: Specific Formulas And Emission Targets," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 5(03), pages 1-34.
    3. Sheila M. Olmstead & Robert N. Stavins, 2012. "Three Key Elements of a Post-2012 International Climate Policy Architecture," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 6(1), pages 65-85.
    4. Stefan Schleicher & Angela Köppl, 2012. "Scanning for Global Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Targets and their Distributions," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 44533, February.
    5. Menz, Tobias & Welsch, Heinz, 2010. "Population aging and environmental preferences in OECD countries: The case of air pollution," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 2582-2589, October.
    6. Mattoo, Aaditya & Subramanian, Arvind, 2012. "Equity in Climate Change: An Analytical Review," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(6), pages 1083-1097.
    7. De Cian, Enrica & Favero, Alice, 2010. "Fairness, Credibility and Effectiveness in the Copenhagen Accord: An Economic Assessment," Sustainable Development Papers 59478, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    8. Muhammad Faisal Majid & Muhammad Meraj & Muhammad Shujaat Mubarik, 2022. "In the Pursuit of Environmental Sustainability: The Role of Environmental Accounting," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-20, May.
    9. Rolf Färe & Shawna Grosskopf & Dimitri Margaritis & William Weber, 2012. "Technological change and timing reductions in greenhouse gas emissions," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 205-216, June.

    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. Jeffrey A. Frankel, 2009. "An Elaborated Global Climate Policy Architecture: Specific Formulas and Emission Targets for All Countries in All Decades," NBER Working Papers 14876, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Frankel, Jeffrey A. & Bosetti, Valentina, 2011. "Politically Feasible Emission Target Formulas to Attain 460 ppm CO[subscript 2] Concentrations," Working Paper Series rwp11-016, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    3. Valentina Bosetti & Jeffrey A. Frankel, 2011. "Sustainable Cooperation in Global Climate Policy: Specific Formulas and Emission Targets to Build on Copenhagen and Cancun," NBER Working Papers 17669, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Valentina Bosetti & Jeffrey Frankel, 2014. "Sustainable Cooperation In Global Climate Policy: Specific Formulas And Emission Targets," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 5(03), pages 1-34.
    5. Bosetti, Valentina & Frankel, Jeffrey A., 2011. "Politically Feasible Emission Target Formulas to Attain 460 ppm CO2 Concentrations," Scholarly Articles 4735391, Harvard Kennedy School of Government.
    6. Valentina Bosetti & Jeffrey Frankel, 2012. "Politically Feasible Emissions Targets to Attain 460 ppm CO 2 Concentrations," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 6(1), pages 86-109.
    7. Hansjürgens, Bernd, 2008. "Internationale Klimapolitik nach Kyoto: Architekturen und Institutionen," UFZ Discussion Papers 10/2008, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    8. Seidman, Laurence & Lewis, Kenneth, 2009. "Compensations and contributions under an international carbon treaty," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 341-350, May.
    9. De Cian, Enrica & Tavoni, Massimo, 2012. "Do technology externalities justify restrictions on emission permit trading?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 624-646.
    10. Catton, Will, 2009. "Dynamic carbon caps. Splitting the bill: A fairer solution post-Kyoto?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(12), pages 5636-5649, December.
    11. Frankel, Jeffrey, 2007. "Formulas for Quantitative Emission Targets," Working Paper Series rwp07-011, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    12. Carraro, Carlo & Aldy, Joseph & Pizer, William A. & Akimoto, Keigo & Tavoni, Massimo & Aleluia Reis, Lara, 2018. "Learning from Nationally Determined Contributions," CEPR Discussion Papers 12757, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    13. Max Meulemann, 2017. "An Empirical Assessment Of Components Of Climate Architectures," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 8(04), pages 1-36, November.
    14. Valentina Bosetti & Carlo Carraro & Alessandra Sgobbi & Massimo Tavoni, 2008. "Modelling Economic Impacts of Alternative International Climate Policy Architectures. A Quantitative and Comparative Assessment of Architectures for Agreement," Working Papers 2008.85, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    15. Carraro, Carlo & Sgobbi, Alessandra & Bosetti, Valentina & Tavoni, Massimo, 2008. "Modelling Economic Impacts of Alternative International Climate Policy Architectures: A Quantitative and Comparative Assessment," CEPR Discussion Papers 6995, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    16. Robert N. Stavins, 2017. "The Evolution Of Environmental Economics: A View From The Inside," The Singapore Economic Review (SER), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 62(02), pages 251-274, June.
    17. Emanuele Massetti, 2011. "Carbon tax scenarios for China and India: exploring politically feasible mitigation goals," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 11(3), pages 209-227, September.
    18. Thomas Norman & Heinrich H. Nax, 2011. "Leading the Way: Coalitional Stability in Technological Cooperation & Sequential Climate Policy," Economics Series Working Papers 585, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    19. Bård Harstad, 2016. "The Dynamics Of Climate Agreements," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 14(3), pages 719-752, June.
    20. Bosetti, Valentina & Longden, Thomas, 2013. "Light duty vehicle transportation and global climate policy: The importance of electric drive vehicles," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 209-219.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    International Climate Agreements;

    JEL classification:

    • Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics
    • Q40 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - General
    • Q54 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Climate; Natural Disasters and their Management; Global Warming

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:fem:femwpa:2009.92. 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: Alberto Prina Cerai (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feemmit.html .

    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.