IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The EU long-term strategy to reduce GHG emissions in light of the Paris Agreement and the IPCC Special Report on 1,5°C


  • Wachsmuth, Jakob
  • Schaeffer, Michiel
  • Hare, Bill


The European Commission's long-term Strategic Vision "A clean planet for all" and the In-Depth Analysis supporting it were released on 28 November, 2018. The Commission claims that an 80% reduction of the EU's GHG emissions by 2050 can be taken as being in line with the Paris Agreement's long-term temper-ature goal (LTTG). This is shown to be questionable due to the Commission's re-labelling of the former "hold-below-2°C" pathways associated with the 2010 Can-cun Agreements as "well-below 2°C" pathways. Those "hold-below-2°C" path-ways had a 66% chance of limiting warming to 2°C and were further characterised by a peak warming of around 1.7-1.8°C. By contrast, the actual Paris long-term temperature goal is, by design, a strength-ening of the former "hold-below-2°C" goal. In this paper, strong arguments are provided that this implies achieving a lower peak warming and a higher probability of limiting warming to 2°C. Further, the "hold-below-2°C" pathways do not provide guidance in terms of lowering peak warming and increasing the probability of lim-iting warming to 1.5°C, an integral part of the Paris LTTG (unless with negative emissions at a scale the IPCC Special Report on 1.5°C does not deem feasible). At the same time, the IPCC SR1.5 is very clear about the increases in climate risks between 1.5°C and 2°C, which relates to the clause of the LTTG that holding warming well below 2°C significantly reduces the risks and impacts of climate change. This provides a clear argument for lower limit to peak warming. Despite the shortcoming with regard to interpreting "well-below-2°C", the EU Strategic Vision is a clear shift away from the lower end of the former "80-95%" re-duction target by 2050 towards achieving net-zero greenhouse gas emissions in 2050. This is based on the In-Depth Analysis, which shows that a greenhouse gas emission reduction of 90% by 2050 compared to 1990 is necessary to keep 1.5°C in range, while limiting negative emissions even calls for net-zero green-house gas emissions in 2050. Hence, the "net-zero greenhouse gas emissions in 2050" target chosen in the Strategic Vision is a reasonable choice in light of the Paris Agreement and the IPCC Special Report on 1.5°C, but 80% reduction by 2050 is not. Thus, the lower end of the current "80-95%" EU target is insufficient.

Suggested Citation

  • Wachsmuth, Jakob & Schaeffer, Michiel & Hare, Bill, 2018. "The EU long-term strategy to reduce GHG emissions in light of the Paris Agreement and the IPCC Special Report on 1,5°C," Working Papers "Sustainability and Innovation" S22/2018, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:fisisi:s222018

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. repec:taf:tcpoxx:v:17:y:2017:i:1:p:9-15 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Riahi, Keywan & Kriegler, Elmar & Johnson, Nils & Bertram, Christoph & den Elzen, Michel & Eom, Jiyong & Schaeffer, Michiel & Edmonds, Jae & Isaac, Morna & Krey, Volker & Longden, Thomas & Luderer, Gu, 2015. "Locked into Copenhagen pledges — Implications of short-term emission targets for the cost and feasibility of long-term climate goals," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 90(PA), pages 8-23.
    3. Radoslav S. Dimitrov, 2016. "The Paris Agreement on Climate Change: Behind Closed Doors," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 16(3), pages 1-11, August.
    4. repec:taf:tcpoxx:v:17:y:2017:i:1:p:33-47 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Michael Mastrandrea & Katharine Mach & Gian-Kasper Plattner & Ottmar Edenhofer & Thomas Stocker & Christopher Field & Kristie Ebi & Patrick Matschoss, 2011. "The IPCC AR5 guidance note on consistent treatment of uncertainties: a common approach across the working groups," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 108(4), pages 675-691, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:zbw:fisisi:s222018. 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: (ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics). General contact details of provider: .

    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.