2C or Not 2C?
Political attention has increasingly focused on limiting warming to 2°C. However, to date the only mitigation commitments accompanying this target are the so-called Copenhagen pledges, and these pledges appear to be inconsistent with the 2°C objective. Diverging opinions on whether this inconsistency can or should be resolved have been expressed. This paper clarifies the alternative assumptions underlying these diverging view points and explicits their implications. It first gives simple visualizations of the challenge posed by the 2°C target. It then proposes a “decision tree”, linking different beliefs on climate change, the achievability of different policies, and current international policy dynamics to various options to move forward on climate change.
|Date of creation:||Dec 2011|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Corso Magenta, 63 - 20123 Milan|
Web page: http://www.feem.it/
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.:
- Jean Charles Hourcade & Philippe Ambrosi & Stéphane Hallegatte & Franck Lecocq & Patrice Dumas & Minh Ha-Duong, 2003. "Optimal control models and elicitation of attitudes towards climate damages," Post-Print halshs-00000966, HAL.
- Detlef Vuuren & Elke Stehfest & Michel Elzen & Tom Kram & Jasper Vliet & Sebastiaan Deetman & Morna Isaac & Kees Klein Goldewijk & Andries Hof & Angelica Mendoza Beltran & Rineke Oostenrijk & Bas Ruij, 2011. "RCP2.6: exploring the possibility to keep global mean temperature increase below 2°C," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 109(1), pages 95-116, November.