IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/16090.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Potential Global and Developing Country Impacts of Alternative Emission Cuts and Accompanying Mechanisms for the Post Copenhagen Process

Author

Listed:
  • Huifang Tian
  • John Whalley

Abstract

We report numerical simulation results using a multiyear global multi country modeling framework which we use to assess the impacts of alternative emissions cuts which will likely come under consideration for the process to follow the December 2009 UNFCCC negotiation in Copenhagen. The Copenhagen Accord sets out prior country unilateral commitments, and provides a framework for further negotiation of mutually agreed cuts. We also consider possible financial transfers under the Adaptation Fund and possible trade linked border measures against non participants. Countries are linked not only through shared impacts of global temperature change but also through trade among country subscripted goods. We can thus evaluate the potential impacts of either explicit or implicit accompanying mechanisms including funds/transfers, border adjustments, and tariffs. We calibrate the model to alternative BAU damage scenarios largely as set out in the Stern report. The welfare impacts of both emission reductions and accompanying measures are computed in Hicksian money metric equivalent form over alternative potential commitment periods: 2012-2020, 2012-2030, and 2012-2050. We consider different depth, forms, and timeframes for reductions by China, India, Russia, Brazil, US, EU, Japan and a residual Row. Given the damage estimates we use all countries lose from joint reductions since their foregone consumption is more costly than saved damage from reduced climate change. With the use of larger damage estimates this reverses the depth of cut and allocation of cuts by country cause large differences in impacts by country, while differences in form of cut (intensity, embedment) matter less. Accompanying mechanisms also can make a large difference to participation decisions and especially for large population, low wage, rapidly growing non OECD countries, but are costly for the OECD countries. This all suggests that the bargaining set for the post Copenhagen process is very large, making an eventual jointly agreed outcome difficult to achieve. This paper was mistakenly issued in its paper form with the final word missing from the title. Our apologies for the error. NBER Publications

Suggested Citation

  • Huifang Tian & John Whalley, 2010. "The Potential Global and Developing Country Impacts of Alternative Emission Cuts and Accompanying Mechanisms for the Post Copenhagen Process," NBER Working Papers 16090, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:16090
    Note: EEE ITI
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w16090.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tian, Huifang & Whalley, John, 2010. "Trade sanctions, financial transfers and BRIC participation in global climate change negotiations," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 47-63, January.
    2. Cai, Yuezhou & Riezman, Raymond & Whalley, John, 2013. "International trade and the negotiability of global climate change agreements," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 421-427.
    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. Jaime de Melo, 2014. "Trade in a “Green Growth” Development Strategy. Issues and Challenges," Revue d’économie du développement, De Boeck Université, vol. 22(HS01), pages 157-184.
    2. Jaime de Melo, 2012. "Trade in a 'Green Growth' Development Strategy Global Scale Issues and Challenges," Working Papers 2012.47, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • F01 - International Economics - - General - - - Global Outlook
    • F51 - International Economics - - International Relations, National Security, and International Political Economy - - - International Conflicts; Negotiations; Sanctions
    • 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:nbr:nberwo:16090. 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: (). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.