Sharing emission space at an equitable basis: Allocation scheme based on the equal cumulative emission per capita principle

Applied Energy

Volumn 113, Issue , 2014, Pages 1810-1818

  Pan, Xunzhang ^a   Teng, Fei ^a   Wang, Gehua ^a  

^a TSINGHUA UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

Allocation schemes; Climate change; Equal cumulative emission per capita

Indexed keywords

DEVELOPING COUNTRIES;

ABATEMENT COSTS; ALLOCATION SCHEMES; CARBON EMISSIONS; CUMULATIVE EMISSIONS; GLOBAL EMISSIONS; HISTORICAL EMISSIONS; PER CAPITA; TIME-PERIODS;

CLIMATE CHANGE;

CARBON EMISSION; CLIMATE CHANGE; DEVELOPING WORLD; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; TIME ALLOCATION; VALUATION;

EID: 84887024187     PISSN: 03062619     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.07.021     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. European-Council. Communication on community strategy on climate change, council conclusions. Brussels, Belgium; 1996.
2. UNFCCC. United nations general assembly. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. New York; 1992.
3. Bohringer C., Welsch H. Contraction and convergence of carbon emissions: an intertemporal multi-region CGE analysis. J Policy Model 2004, 26(1):21-39.
4. Bohringer C., Lange A. On the design of optimal grandfathering schemes for emission allowances. Eur Econ Rev 2005, 49(8):2041-2055.
5. den Elzen M., Hohne N. Reductions of greenhouse gas emissions in Annex I and non-Annex I countries for meeting concentration stabilization targets. Climat Change 2008, 91:249-274.
6. Jiahua Pan. Meeting human development goals with low emissions: an alternative to emissions caps for post-Kyoto from a developing country perspective. Int Environ Agreement: Politics, Law Econ 2005, 5(1):89-104.
7. Jacoby H.D., Prinn R.G., Schmalensee R. Kyoto's unfinished business. Foreign Aff 2005, 77(4):1-8.
8. UNFCCC. Paper no.1: Brazil, proposed elements of a protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Bonn, Germany; 1997.
9. SEI. Calculations for the greenhouse development rights calculator; 2008. <> [accessed February 2011]. http://sei-us.org/publications/id/91.
10. den Elzen M, Berk MM. Bottom-up approaches for defining future climate mitigation commitments. RIVM Report; 2004.
11. Experts from BASIC countries. Equitable access to sustainable development: contribution to the body of scientific knowledge. Expert Forum: Beijing, Brasilia, Cape Town and New Delhi; 2011.
12. Rose, Stevens B., Edmonds J. International equity and differentiation in global warming policy. Environ Resour Econ 1998, 12(1):25-51.
13. 2 emission reductions among one billion high emitters. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA 2009, 106(29):11884-11888.
14. den Elzen M, Lucas P. FAIR 2.0-A decision-support tool to assess the environmental and economic consequences of future climate regimes. RIVM, Report; 2003.
15. Winkler H., Spalding-Fecher R., Tyani L. Comparing developing countries under potential carbon allocation schemes. Clim Policy 2002, 2:303-318.
16. 2 emissions. Energy Policy 1999, 27(12):727-736.
17. 2 emission permits-Economic incentives for emission reductions in developing countries. Energy Policy 2006, 34:1889-1899.
18. Hohne N., den Elzen M., Weiss M. Common but differentiated convergence (CDC): a new conceptual approach to the long-term climate policy. Clim Policy 2006, 6:181-199.
19. Baer P., Harte J., Haya B., Herzog A.V. Equity and greenhouse gas responsibility. Science 2000, 289(5488):2287.
20. CSE. Definitions of equal entitlements. CSE-dossier, fact sheet5, Centre for Science and Environment. Delhi, India; 1998.
21. GOI. National Action Plan on Climate Change-Prime Minister's Council on Climate Change; 2008. <>. [accessed August 2012]. http://www.india.gov.in/allimpfrms/alldocs/15651.doc.
22. Ringius L., Torvanger A., Underdal A. Burden sharing and fairness principles in international climate policy. Int Environ Agreements: Politics, Law Econ 2002, 2:1-22.
23. Muller B. Justice in global warming negotiations: how to obtain a procedurally fair compromise 1999, Oxford Institute for Energy Studies, Oxford.
24. den Elzen M., Hohne N., Brouns B. Differentiation of countries' future commitments in a post-2012 climate regime-An assessement of the "South-North Dialogue" proposal. Environ Sci Policy 2007, 10:185-203.
25. Sijm J., Jansen J., Torvanger A. Differentiation of mitigation commitments: the multi-sector convergence approach. Clim Policy 2001, 1(4):481-497.
26. Groenenberg H., Blok K., van der Sluijs J. Global Triptych: a bottom-up approach for the differentiation of commitments under the climate convention. Clim Policy 2004, 4:153-175.
27. Wicke L. Beyond Kyoto-A new global climate certificate system 2005, Springer Verlag, Heidelberg, Germany.
28. GCI. GCI Briefing: contraction-convergence; 2005. <> [accessed December 2010]. http://www.gci.org.uk/briefings.html.
29. Lecocq F, Crassous R. International climate regime beyond 2012-Are quota allocation rules robust to uncertainty; 2003. <> [accessed April 2011]. http://ideas.repec.org/p/wbk/wbrwps/3000.html.
30. den Elzen M., Schaeffer M. Responsibility for past and future global warming: uncertainties in attributing anthropogenic climate change. Climat Change 2002, 54:29-73.
31. den Elzen M., Lucas P. The FAIR model: a tool to analyse environmental and costs implications of regimes of future commitments. Environ Model Assess 2005, 10:115-134.
32. Hohne N, Ullrich S. Emission allowances under the proposal of the "South north dialogue-equity in the greenhouse. ECO FYS Report; 2005.
33. Hohne N., Blok K. Calculating historical contributions to climate change-discussing the 'Brazilian Proposal'. Climat Change 2005, 71:141-173.
34. WRI. Climate Analysis Indicators Tool; 2012. < [accessed March 2013]. http://www.wri.org/tools/cait/.
35. United Nations. Department of economic and social affairs. World population prospects; 2010. <> [accessed August 2012]. http://esa.un.org/wpp/unpp/panel_population.htm.
36. He Jiankun. Socio-economic assessment of climate change mitigation In: Editorial committee of China's national assessment report on climate change, editors. China's National Assessment Report on Climate Change. Beijing: Science Press; 2007, p. 313-415.
37. Jiankun He, Wenying Chen, Fei Teng, et al. Long-term climate change mitigation target and carbon permit allocation. Adv Clim Change Res 2009, 2(3):78-85. [Chinese].
38. 2 concentration by 2050: an allocation on the emission rights of different countries. Sci China Series D: Earth Sci 2009, 39(8):1009-1027. [Chinese].
39. Jiahua Pan, Ying Chen The carbon budget scheme: an institutional framework for a fair and sustainable word climate regime. Soc Sci China 2009, 5(6):83-98. [Chinese].
40. Bode S. Equal emissions per capita over time-a proposal to combine responsibility and equity of rights for post-2012 GHG emission entitlement allocation. Eur Environ 2004, 14:300-316.
41. Fei Teng, Jiankun He, Xunzhang Pan, et al. Metric of carbon equity: carbon Gini index based on historical cumulative emission per capita. Adv Clim Change Res 2011, 2(3):134-140. [Chinese].
42. German Advisory Council on Global Change. Solving the climate dilemma: the budget approach-special report. Berlin, WBGU; 2009.
43. Sharma S.S. Determinants of carbon dioxide emissions: Empirical evidence from 69 countries. Appl Energy 2011, 88(1):376-382.
44. 2 emissions in China: an improved fuzzy clustering ananlusis based on particle swarm optimization. Appl Energy 2012, 92:552-562.
45. Streimikiene D., Girdzijauskas S. Assessment of post-Kyoto climate change mitigation regimes impact on sustainable development. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2009, 13:129-141.
46. 2 weighted convergence across the EU-25 countries (1920-2007). Appl Energy 2012, 92:9-16.
47. 2 emissions distribution in climate change integrated assessment modeling. Energy 2010, 35:298-313.
48. 2 emissions: evidence from Beijing city, China. Appl Energy 2012, 100:277-284.
49. Chung W., Tohno S., Shim S.Y. An estimation of energy and GHG emission intensity caused by energy consumption in Korea: an energy IO approach. Appl Energ 2009, 86(10):1902-1914.
50. SiMCaP. EQW pathway set 1; 2003. < [accessed September 2010]. http://www.simcap.org/.
51. World Bank. GDP; 2012. <> [accessed December 2012]. http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD.
52. Ellerman AD, Decaux A. Analysis of post-Kyoto CO2 emissions trading using marginal abatement curves; 1998. <> [accessed September 2012]. http://web.mit.edu/globalchange/www/MITJPSPGC_Rpt40.pdf.
53. 2 emission reductions, geographical flexibility and concrete ceilings: an assessment using the POLES model. Energy Policy 1999, 27:585-601.
54. JGCRI. GCAM; 2009. <> [accessed May 2013]. http://www.globalchange.umd.edu/models/gcam/.
55. den Elzen M., Lucas P., van Vuuren D. Abatement costs of post-Kyoto climate regimes. Energy Policy 2005, 33:2138-2151.
56. PBL. Framework to assess international regimes for differentiation of commitments; 2010. <> [assessed May 2013]. http://themasites.pbl.nl/tridion/en/themasites/fair/overview/index-2.html.
57. PBL. Downscaling drivers of global environmental change. Enabling use of global SRES scenarios at the national and grid levels; 2006. <> [accessed August 2012]. http://www.pbl.nl/en/publications/2006.
58. Nordhaus W., Boyer J., Turton H. ECLIPSE: an integrated energy-economy model for climate policy and scenario analysis. Energy 2008, 33:1754-1769.
59. Coase R. The problem of social cost. J Law Econ 1960, 3:1-4.