Climate Policy Analysis

We provide analysis and expert information on existing and required emissions reductions measures and policies to assist SIDS and LDCs in strengthening their negotiating positions and ambition in the negotiations.

Coal Mine Garzweiler ©Bert Kaufmann, CC BY-SA 2.0
Coal Mine Garzweiler ©Bert Kaufmann, CC BY-SA 2.0

Latest

Our side event at COP21 on 4 Dec 2015 focuses on data and values, science, politics and mechanisms relating to the ambition and impact of INDCs and the new climate agreement. The event is a collaboration with PBL and TERI.  
There are many effort-sharing approaches used to determine what constitutes a fair and equitable emission reduction for a given country. This leads to very different outcomes and a large range of emissions allowances for a country. This new report by Climate Analytics provides insight into the key differences between a wide range of effort sharing models and the most important assumptions that influence countries’ emissions allowances under different equity regimes.  

Publications

This paper analyses “fair and adequate” emission reduction ranges for 2025, 2030 and 2050 for Brazil, India and South Africa, largest economies and a set of African countries (part of MAPS - Mitigation Action Plans and Scenarios Programme). This analysis provides insight into the key differences between a wide range of effort sharing models, criteria, their proxy metrics and the most important assumptions that influence countries’ emissions allowances under different equity regimes. This analysis provides insight into the key differences between a wide range of effort sharing models, criteria, their proxy metrics and the most important assumptions that influence countries’ emissions allowances under different equity regimes.  
The issue of a fair distribution of the burden in the fight against climate change has been the major point of contention since the beginning of the climate negotiations in the 1990s. Although a number of different approaches of effort distribution emerged in the meantime, many of them reflected the interests of the stakeholders developing them. As a result different weight has been given to different aspects, such as historic responsibility, current emission levels or the capability to reduce these emissions. This report presents different approaches to the distribution of the mitigation efforts and compares their results to the contributions that some governments submitted to the UNFCCC ahead of the climate conference in Paris.  
The report, produced for the German environmental protection agency Umweltbundesamt (UBA), evaluates available options for a variety of aspects around the differentiation of mitigation commitments. We find that for the level of participation, the selection of commitment types, and choice of effort-sharing approaches there is no silver bullet. A portfolio approach that incorporates multiple options may be most suited to ensure environmental effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and political feasibility.