Who picks up the remainder? Mitigation in developed and developing countries

 

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Winkler, Harald
dc.contributor.author Vorster, Shaun
dc.contributor.author Marquard, Andrew
dc.date.accessioned 2016-02-08T09:03:28Z
dc.date.available 2016-02-08T09:03:28Z
dc.date.issued 2009
dc.identifier.citation Winkler, H; Vorster, S & Marquard, A (2009) Who picks up the remainder? Mitigation in developed and developing countries. Climate Policy 9:634–651. en_ZA
dc.identifier.issn 1469-3062 en_ZA
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/11427/16878
dc.description.abstract A fair, effective, flexible and inclusive climate regime beyond 2012 will need several political balances. Mitigation and funding will be at the heart of the agreement. The IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report indicates that absolute reductions will be needed in Annex I (AI) countries and substantial deviation from baseline in some non-Annex I (NAI) regions by 2020. Although the latter was not explicitly quantified by the IPCC, the EU subsequently proposed a range for developing countries. Sharing the burden for mitigation is essentially zero-sum: if one does less, the other has to do more. We critically examine the implicit assumption that NAI countries would pick up the remainder of the required global effort minus the AI contribution. We suggest that greater levels of ambition can be achieved by turning the formula around politically, starting from the achievable ‘deviation below baseline’ given NAI’s national programmes and appropriate international support. AI countries may have to exceed the IPCC ranges or pay for the remainder. For notional levels of NAI mitigation action, Annex I has to reduce by between –52% and –69% below 1990 by 2020, only dropping to a domestic –35% with commitments to offset payments through the carbon market. Given the large mitigation gap, a political agreement on the question of ‘who pays’ is fundamental. The carbon market will provide some investment, but it mainly serves to reduce costs, particularly in developed countries, rather than adding to the overall effort. Market-linked levies and Annex I public funding will therefore be crucial to bridge the gap. en_ZA
dc.language eng en_ZA
dc.publisher Taylor & Francis en_ZA
dc.source Climate Policy en_ZA
dc.source.uri http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/tcpo20/current
dc.subject.other Sustainable development
dc.subject.other Climatic changes
dc.subject.other Greenhouse gas mitigation
dc.title Who picks up the remainder? Mitigation in developed and developing countries en_ZA
dc.type Journal Article en_ZA
dc.date.updated 2016-02-03T09:50:47Z
uct.type.publication Research en_ZA
uct.type.resource Article en_ZA
uct.subject.keywords climate finance en_ZA
uct.subject.keywords climate negotiations en_ZA
uct.subject.keywords developed countries en_ZA
uct.subject.keywords developing countries en_ZA
uct.subject.keywords mitigation en_ZA
dc.publisher.institution University of Cape Town
dc.publisher.faculty Faculty of Engineering and the Built Environment
dc.publisher.department Energy Research Centre en_ZA
uct.type.filetype Text
uct.type.filetype Image
dc.identifier.apacitation Winkler, H., Vorster, S., & Marquard, A. (2009). Who picks up the remainder? Mitigation in developed and developing countries. <i>Climate Policy</i>, http://hdl.handle.net/11427/16878 en_ZA
dc.identifier.chicagocitation Winkler, Harald, Shaun Vorster, and Andrew Marquard "Who picks up the remainder? Mitigation in developed and developing countries." <i>Climate Policy</i> (2009) http://hdl.handle.net/11427/16878 en_ZA
dc.identifier.vancouvercitation Winkler H, Vorster S, Marquard A. Who picks up the remainder? Mitigation in developed and developing countries. Climate Policy. 2009; http://hdl.handle.net/11427/16878. en_ZA
dc.identifier.ris TY - Journal Article AU - Winkler, Harald AU - Vorster, Shaun AU - Marquard, Andrew AB - A fair, effective, flexible and inclusive climate regime beyond 2012 will need several political balances. Mitigation and funding will be at the heart of the agreement. The IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report indicates that absolute reductions will be needed in Annex I (AI) countries and substantial deviation from baseline in some non-Annex I (NAI) regions by 2020. Although the latter was not explicitly quantified by the IPCC, the EU subsequently proposed a range for developing countries. Sharing the burden for mitigation is essentially zero-sum: if one does less, the other has to do more. We critically examine the implicit assumption that NAI countries would pick up the remainder of the required global effort minus the AI contribution. We suggest that greater levels of ambition can be achieved by turning the formula around politically, starting from the achievable ‘deviation below baseline’ given NAI’s national programmes and appropriate international support. AI countries may have to exceed the IPCC ranges or pay for the remainder. For notional levels of NAI mitigation action, Annex I has to reduce by between –52% and –69% below 1990 by 2020, only dropping to a domestic –35% with commitments to offset payments through the carbon market. Given the large mitigation gap, a political agreement on the question of ‘who pays’ is fundamental. The carbon market will provide some investment, but it mainly serves to reduce costs, particularly in developed countries, rather than adding to the overall effort. Market-linked levies and Annex I public funding will therefore be crucial to bridge the gap. DA - 2009 DB - OpenUCT DP - University of Cape Town J1 - Climate Policy LK - https://open.uct.ac.za PB - University of Cape Town PY - 2009 SM - 1469-3062 T1 - Who picks up the remainder? Mitigation in developed and developing countries TI - Who picks up the remainder? Mitigation in developed and developing countries UR - http://hdl.handle.net/11427/16878 ER - en_ZA


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record