International Climate Regime Beyond 2012: Are Quota Allocation Rules Robust to Uncertainty?

F. Lecocq, R. Crassous
{"title":"International Climate Regime Beyond 2012: Are Quota Allocation Rules Robust to Uncertainty?","authors":"F. Lecocq, R. Crassous","doi":"10.1596/1813-9450-3000","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Bringing the United States and major developing countries to control their greenhouse gas emissions will be the key challenge for the international climate regime beyond the Kyoto Protocol. But in the current quantity-based coordination, large uncertainties surrounding future emissions and future abatement opportunities make the costs of any commitment very difficult to assess ex ante, hence a strong risk that the negotiation will be stalled. The authors use a partial equilibrium model of the international allowance market to quantify the economic consequences of the main post-Kyoto quota allocation rules proposed in the literature and to assess how robust these consequences are to uncertainty on future population, economic, and emissions growth. They confirm that, regardless of the rule selected, the prices of allowances and the net costs of climate mitigation for all parties are very sensitive to uncertainty, and in some scenarios very large. This constitutes a strong barrier against adopting any of these schemes if no additional mechanism is introduced to limit the uncertainty on costs. On the other hand, parties'preferred (least-cost) rules are essentially robust to uncertainty. And although these preferences differ across countries, the authors'analysis suggest some bargaining is possible if developing countries make a commitment and join the allowance market earlier in exchange for tighter quotas in the North. This underscores the importance of the rules governing the entry of new parties into the coordination. But the magnitude of the win-win potential strongly depends on how different abatement costs are assumed to be between industrial and developing countries, and on how long that gap is assumed to persist.","PeriodicalId":118088,"journal":{"name":"SRPN: International Affairs Issues (Topic)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2003-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"28","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SRPN: International Affairs Issues (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1596/1813-9450-3000","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 28

Abstract

Bringing the United States and major developing countries to control their greenhouse gas emissions will be the key challenge for the international climate regime beyond the Kyoto Protocol. But in the current quantity-based coordination, large uncertainties surrounding future emissions and future abatement opportunities make the costs of any commitment very difficult to assess ex ante, hence a strong risk that the negotiation will be stalled. The authors use a partial equilibrium model of the international allowance market to quantify the economic consequences of the main post-Kyoto quota allocation rules proposed in the literature and to assess how robust these consequences are to uncertainty on future population, economic, and emissions growth. They confirm that, regardless of the rule selected, the prices of allowances and the net costs of climate mitigation for all parties are very sensitive to uncertainty, and in some scenarios very large. This constitutes a strong barrier against adopting any of these schemes if no additional mechanism is introduced to limit the uncertainty on costs. On the other hand, parties'preferred (least-cost) rules are essentially robust to uncertainty. And although these preferences differ across countries, the authors'analysis suggest some bargaining is possible if developing countries make a commitment and join the allowance market earlier in exchange for tighter quotas in the North. This underscores the importance of the rules governing the entry of new parties into the coordination. But the magnitude of the win-win potential strongly depends on how different abatement costs are assumed to be between industrial and developing countries, and on how long that gap is assumed to persist.
2012年以后的国际气候机制:配额分配规则是否经得起不确定性的考验?
促使美国和主要发展中国家控制其温室气体排放,将是《京都议定书》之后国际气候机制面临的主要挑战。但在目前以数量为基础的协调中,围绕未来排放和未来减排机会的巨大不确定性使得任何承诺的成本很难事先评估,因此谈判很有可能陷入停滞。作者使用国际配额市场的部分均衡模型来量化文献中提出的主要后京都配额分配规则的经济后果,并评估这些后果对未来人口、经济和排放增长的不确定性的稳健程度。它们确认,无论选择何种规则,所有缔约方的配额价格和气候缓解净成本对不确定性非常敏感,在某些情况下非常大。如果不引入额外的机制来限制成本的不确定性,这将对采用任何这些计划构成强大的障碍。另一方面,当事人偏好的(最低成本)规则对不确定性本质上是稳健的。尽管各国的偏好不同,但作者的分析表明,如果发展中国家做出承诺,更早地加入配额市场,以换取北方国家更严格的配额,那么讨价还价是可能的。这突出了关于新当事方参加协调的规则的重要性。但是,双赢潜力的大小在很大程度上取决于假定工业化国家和发展中国家之间减排成本的差异有多大,以及假定这种差距将持续多久。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信