Global Triptych: A bottom-up approach for the differentiation of commitments under the Climate Convention

Climate Policy

Volumn 4, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 153-175

  Groenenberg, Heleen ^a   Blok, Kornelis ^b   van der Sluijs, Jeroen ^b  

^a JOINT RESEARCH CENTRE   (Italy)

^b Urban Futures Studio   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Atmospheric stabilization; Bottom up; Burden sharing; Equity; Sustainable development

Indexed keywords

BOTTOM-UP APPROACH; CLIMATE CHANGE; EMISSION CONTROL; ENERGY EFFICIENCY; INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENT; KYOTO PROTOCOL;

EID: 20644448825     PISSN: 14693062     EISSN: 17527457     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/14693062.2004.9685518     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Anonymous. 1995. Highest supercriticality for Skaerbaek and Nordjyland. Modern Power Systems, 3:41–43.
2. 2 stabilisation for the impacts of climate change. Climatic Change, 53:413–446.
3. Babiker, M. H., Reilly, J. M., Mayer, M., Eckaus, R. S., Sue Wing, I., and Hyman, R. C., 2001. The MIT Emissions Prediction and Policy Analysis (EPPA) Model:Revisions, Sensitivities, and Comparisons of Results. Cambridge, MA:Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
4. Berk, M. M., and den Elzen, M. G.J., 2001. Options for differentiation of future commitments in climate policy:how to realise timely participation to meet stringent climate goals?. Climate Policy, 1:465–480.
5. Blanchard, O., Criqui, C., Trommetter, M., and Vinguier, L., 2001. Equity and efficiency in climate change negotiations:a scenario for world emission entitlements by 2030, Cahier de Recherche No. 26. Grenoble, France:Institut d'Economie et de Politique de l'Energie (IEPE).
6. 2 emission reduction among European Union member states. Discussion paper informal workshop for the European Union Ad Hoc Group on Climate, Utrecht University, Department of Science, Technology and Society, Zeist, The Netherlands
7. CSE. 1998. Definitions of Equal Entitlements. Delhi, India:Centre for Science and Environment.
8. Cubasch, U., Meehl, G. A., Boer, G. J., Stouffer, R. J., Dix, M., Noda, A., Senior, C. A., Raper, S., and Yap, K. S., 2001. “ Projections of future climate change. ”. In Climate Change 2001:The Scientific Basis. Edited by:Houghton, J. T., Ding, Y., Griggs, D. J., Noguer, M., van der Linden, P., Dai, X., Maskell, K., and Johnson, C. I., 525–582. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
9. 2 greenhouse gases. Wageningen, The Netherlands:Ecofys Utrecht, TNO-MEP, Apeldoorn, Wageningen University.
10. den Elzen, M. G.J., 2001. Evaluating post-Kyoto climate regimes for differentiation of commitments under Article 2 of the Climate Change Convention. Integrated Assessment 4.
11. Eickhout, B., den Elzen, M. G.J., and van Vuuren, D. P., 2002. Emission profiles to meet climate goals. RIVM-Report 728001024. Bilthoven, The Netherlands:National Institute for Public Health and the Environment.
12. ETSAP. 2001. Energy Technology Systems Analysis Programme. Petten, The Netherlands:Energy Research Foundation.
13. European Parliament. 2001. Common Position. C5–0434/01 2001/0029 (COD) EN, 27 September 2001 Brussels
14. FAO. 2002. State of the World's Forests. Rome:Food and Agriculture Organization of theUnited Nations.
15. Fischer, G., van Velthuizen, H., Shah, M., and Nachtergaele, F., 2002. Global Agro-Ecological Assessment for Agriculture in the 21st Century:Methodology and Results., International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg Rome:Austria and Food and Agriculture Organization of theUnited Nations.
16. Goldemberg, J., Johansson, T. B., Reddy, A. K.N., and Williams, R. H., 1988. Energy for a Sustainable World. New York:John Wiley and Sons.
17. Groenenberg, H., 2002. Development and convergence:a bottom-up analysis for the differentiation of commitments under the Climate Convention. Dissertation Utrecht, The Netherlands:Utrecht University.
18. Groenenberg, H., Blok, K., and Phylipsen, D., 2001. Differentiating commitments world wide. Global differentiation of GHG emissions reductions based on the Triptych approach—a preliminary assessment. Energy Policy, 29:1007–1030.
19. Gupta, J., 1999. North—South aspects of the climate change issue:towards a constructive negotiating package for developing countries. Reciel, 8:198–208.
20. Gupta, J., van der Werff, P., Gagnon-Lebrun, F., and van Dijk, I., 2001. Bridging interest, classification and technology gaps in the climate change regime. Amsterdam:IVAM Environmental Research UvA BV and Institute of Environmental Sciences, Free University.
21. Harnisch, J., and Hendriks, C., 2000. “ Europe:contribution to the study Economic Evaluation of Sectoral Emission Reduction Objectives for Climate Change on behalf of the European Union Directorate General Environment ”. In Economic evaluation of emission reductions of HFCs, PFCs and SF6 Cologne, Germany:Ecofys. in
22. Hendriks, C., de Jager, D., Blok, K., de Beer, J., Harnisch, J., Joosen, S., Phylipsen, D., Kerssemeeckers, M., Byers, C., and Patel, M., 2001a. Economic evaluation of sectoral emission reduction objectives for climate change. Bottom-up analysis of emission reduction potentials and costs for greenhouse gases in the EU. Updated Summary Report on Result of the Bottomup Analysis. Utrecht, The Netherlands:Ecofys.
23. Hendriks, C. A., de Jager, D., de Beer, J., van Brummelen, M., Blok, K., and Kerssemeeckers, M., 2001b. Economic evaluation of emission reduction of greenhouse gases in the energy supply sector in the EU. DG Environment, European Commission. Utrecht, The Netherlands:Ecofys.
24. 2 Emissions from Fuel Combustion 1972–1995. Paris:International Energy Agency.
25. IEA-GHG. 1999. Abatement of Methane Emissions. Cheltenham, UK:IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme.
26. IMAGE-team. 2001. The IMAGE 2.2 Implementation of the SRES Scenarios. A Comprehensive Analysis of Emissions, Climate Change and Impacts in the 21st Century Bilthoven, The Netherlands:National Institute for Public Health and the Environment.
27. Imboden, D., and Roggo Voegelin, C., 2000. Die 2000 Watt-Gesellschaft. Der Mondflug des 21 Jahrhunderts. ETH Bulletin 276 Zürich:Swiss Federal Institute of Technology.
28. Lutz, W., 1996. The Future Population of the World:What can we Assume Today?, 2nd edition London:Earthscan.
29. Johansson, T. B., Kelly, H., Reddy, A. K.N., and Williams, R. H., 1993. “ Renewable fuels and electricity for a growing world economy:defining and achieving the potential. ”. In Renewable Energy:Sources for Fuels and Electricity. Edited by:Johansson, T. B., Kelly, H., Reddy, A. K.N., and Williams, R. H., 1–72. Washington, DC:Island Press.
30. Kauppi, P., 2001. “ Technological and economic potential of options to enhance, maintain, and manage biological carbon reservoirs and geo-engineering. ”. In Climate Change 2001. Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Edited by:Metz, B., Davidson, O., Swart, R., and Pan, J., Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
31. Krause, F., Bach, W., and Koomey, J., 1989. Energy Policy in the Greenhouse. Vol. 1:From Warming Fate to Warming Limit:Benchmarks for a Global Climate Convention El Cerrito, CA:International Project for Sustainable Energy Paths.
32. 2 Greenhouse Gases:Scientific Understanding, Control, 3rd Implementation
33. Lempert, R. J., and Schlesinger, M. C., 2000. Robust strategies for abating climate change. Climatic Change, 45:387–401.
34. Luiten, E., 2001. Beyond energy efficiency. Dissertation The Netherlands:Department of Science, Technology and Society, Utrecht University, trecht.
35. Meyer, A., 2000. Contraction and Convergence:The Global Solution to Climate Change. Bristol, UK:Green Books.
36. Mosier, A. R., Duxbury, J. M., Freney, J. R., Heinemeyer, O., Minami, K., and Johnson, D. E., 1998. Mitigating agricultural emissions of methane. Climatic Change, 40:39–80.
37. Nakicenovic, N., eds. 2000. Special Report on Emissions Scenarios. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
38. Olivier, J. G.J., 2002. Emission Database EDGAR 3.2. Bilthoven, The Netherlands:National Institute for Public Health and the Environment.
39. Philibert, C., and Pershing, J., 2001. Considering the options:climate targets for all countries. Climate Policy, 1:211–227.
40. Phylipsen, G. J.M., Bode, J. W., Blok, K., Merkus, H., and Metz, B., 1998. A Triptych sectoral approach to burden differentiation:GHG emissions in the European bubble. Energy Policy, 26:929–943.
41. Rijsberman, F. R., and Swart, R. J., 1990. Targets and Indicators of Climatic Change. Stockholm:The Stockholm Environment Institute.
42. Ringius, L., 1999. Differentiation, leaders, and fairness:negotiating climate commitments in the European Community. International Negotiations, 4:133–166.
43. Sathaye, J., and Ravindranath, N. H., 1998. Climate change mitigation in the energy and forestry sectors of developing countries. Annual Review of Energy and Environment, 23:387–437.
44. Sijm, J., Jansen, J., and Torvanger, A., 2001. Differentiation of mitigation commitments:the Multi-Sector Convergence approach. Climate Policy, 1:481–497.
45. Smith, D., 1999. First H System gas turbine planned for Baglan. Modern Power Systems, 5:39–42.
46. Steger, U., Puk, P., and Jansen, J., eds. 2002. Nachhaltige Entwicklung und Innovation im Energiebereich. Kapital 5 Heidelberg, Germany:Springer. Potentiale für die Nachhaltige Entwicklung von Energiesystemen
47. UN. 1997a. Framework compilation of proposals from Parties for the elements of a protocol or another legal instrument., Note by the Chairman
48. UN. 1997b. Implementation of the Berlin mandate. Proposals from Parties. Note by the Secretariat.
49. UN. 1998. Industrial Commodity Statistics Yearbook. Production Statistics (1987–1996) New York:United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Statistics Division. 1996
50. UN. 1999. Scientific and methodological aspects of the proposal by Brazil., Draft conclusions by the Chairman
51. UN. 2001. Scientific and methodological aspects of the Brazilian proposal.