减缓、威慑和不切实际的期望:森林碳抵消的未来成本

IF 9.1 1区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Camilla Moioli , Laurent Drouet , Dominik Roeser , Johannes Emmerling , Hisham Zerriffi
{"title":"减缓、威慑和不切实际的期望:森林碳抵消的未来成本","authors":"Camilla Moioli ,&nbsp;Laurent Drouet ,&nbsp;Dominik Roeser ,&nbsp;Johannes Emmerling ,&nbsp;Hisham Zerriffi","doi":"10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2025.103068","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study examines the economic and societal impacts of using Forest Carbon Offsets (FCO) as a negative emissions technology in climate mitigation strategies. FCO includes afforestation, reforestation, and reduced emissions from deforestation and degradation (REDD) initiatives aimed at achieving global climate targets, such as limiting temperature rise to 2 °C by 2100. Despite their potential, challenges such as the impermanence of carbon storage, overestimation of carbon removal, and mitigation deterrence—where reliance on FCO reduces other climate actions—persist. Using the WITCH integrated assessment model, this study analyzes the effects of FCO on energy sector investments, carbon pricing, and mitigation costs under scenarios with perfect foresight, myopic behavior, and varying degrees of forest carbon loss (FCL). Results indicate that heavy reliance on FCO leads to mitigation deterrence, with renewable and carbon capture investments decreasing by 8.6 % and 31 %, respectively, while fossil fuel investments increase by 1 %. Scenarios with 100 % FCL by 2045 could increase global GDP loss by 0.5 percentage points, surpassing the costs of not using FCO. Non-OECD countries, more vulnerable with lower economic resilience, could face mitigation costs up to 1.7 percentage points higher than OECD countries in similar FCL scenarios, raising equity concerns in climate policy. This research underscores the need for careful FCO management, accurate carbon sequestration estimates, and equitable policy frameworks to prevent moral hazards and ensure effective climate action. Clear definitions of which emissions can be offset versus those requiring direct reduction are essential to prevent over-reliance on offsets and maintain a balanced mitigation approach.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":328,"journal":{"name":"Global Environmental Change","volume":"95 ","pages":"Article 103068"},"PeriodicalIF":9.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mitigation deterrence and unrealistic expectations: the future costs of forest carbon offsets\",\"authors\":\"Camilla Moioli ,&nbsp;Laurent Drouet ,&nbsp;Dominik Roeser ,&nbsp;Johannes Emmerling ,&nbsp;Hisham Zerriffi\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2025.103068\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>This study examines the economic and societal impacts of using Forest Carbon Offsets (FCO) as a negative emissions technology in climate mitigation strategies. FCO includes afforestation, reforestation, and reduced emissions from deforestation and degradation (REDD) initiatives aimed at achieving global climate targets, such as limiting temperature rise to 2 °C by 2100. Despite their potential, challenges such as the impermanence of carbon storage, overestimation of carbon removal, and mitigation deterrence—where reliance on FCO reduces other climate actions—persist. Using the WITCH integrated assessment model, this study analyzes the effects of FCO on energy sector investments, carbon pricing, and mitigation costs under scenarios with perfect foresight, myopic behavior, and varying degrees of forest carbon loss (FCL). Results indicate that heavy reliance on FCO leads to mitigation deterrence, with renewable and carbon capture investments decreasing by 8.6 % and 31 %, respectively, while fossil fuel investments increase by 1 %. Scenarios with 100 % FCL by 2045 could increase global GDP loss by 0.5 percentage points, surpassing the costs of not using FCO. Non-OECD countries, more vulnerable with lower economic resilience, could face mitigation costs up to 1.7 percentage points higher than OECD countries in similar FCL scenarios, raising equity concerns in climate policy. This research underscores the need for careful FCO management, accurate carbon sequestration estimates, and equitable policy frameworks to prevent moral hazards and ensure effective climate action. Clear definitions of which emissions can be offset versus those requiring direct reduction are essential to prevent over-reliance on offsets and maintain a balanced mitigation approach.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":328,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Environmental Change\",\"volume\":\"95 \",\"pages\":\"Article 103068\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Environmental Change\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"6\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378025001050\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Environmental Change","FirstCategoryId":"6","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378025001050","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究考察了在气候减缓战略中使用森林碳抵消(FCO)作为负排放技术的经济和社会影响。FCO包括植树造林、再造林和减少森林砍伐和退化(REDD)排放倡议,旨在实现全球气候目标,如到2100年将气温上升限制在2°C以内。尽管它们具有潜力,但诸如碳储存的非永久性、对碳去除的高估以及减缓威慑等挑战仍然存在——在这些方面,对外交事务部的依赖减少了其他气候行动。本文利用WITCH综合评估模型,分析了完全预见、短视行为和不同程度森林碳损失情景下,FCO对能源部门投资、碳定价和减排成本的影响。结果表明,对FCO的严重依赖导致减缓威慑,可再生能源和碳捕获投资分别减少8.6%和31%,而化石燃料投资增加1%。到2045年,100%使用FCO的情景可能会使全球GDP损失增加0.5个百分点,超过不使用FCO的成本。非经合组织国家更加脆弱,经济复原力较低,在类似的FCL情景下,它们面临的缓解成本可能比经合组织国家高出1.7个百分点,这引发了对气候政策公平性的担忧。这项研究强调,需要谨慎的外交事务部管理、准确的碳封存估算和公平的政策框架,以防止道德风险,确保有效的气候行动。明确界定哪些排放可以抵消,哪些排放需要直接减少,这对于防止过度依赖抵消和保持平衡的缓解办法至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Mitigation deterrence and unrealistic expectations: the future costs of forest carbon offsets
This study examines the economic and societal impacts of using Forest Carbon Offsets (FCO) as a negative emissions technology in climate mitigation strategies. FCO includes afforestation, reforestation, and reduced emissions from deforestation and degradation (REDD) initiatives aimed at achieving global climate targets, such as limiting temperature rise to 2 °C by 2100. Despite their potential, challenges such as the impermanence of carbon storage, overestimation of carbon removal, and mitigation deterrence—where reliance on FCO reduces other climate actions—persist. Using the WITCH integrated assessment model, this study analyzes the effects of FCO on energy sector investments, carbon pricing, and mitigation costs under scenarios with perfect foresight, myopic behavior, and varying degrees of forest carbon loss (FCL). Results indicate that heavy reliance on FCO leads to mitigation deterrence, with renewable and carbon capture investments decreasing by 8.6 % and 31 %, respectively, while fossil fuel investments increase by 1 %. Scenarios with 100 % FCL by 2045 could increase global GDP loss by 0.5 percentage points, surpassing the costs of not using FCO. Non-OECD countries, more vulnerable with lower economic resilience, could face mitigation costs up to 1.7 percentage points higher than OECD countries in similar FCL scenarios, raising equity concerns in climate policy. This research underscores the need for careful FCO management, accurate carbon sequestration estimates, and equitable policy frameworks to prevent moral hazards and ensure effective climate action. Clear definitions of which emissions can be offset versus those requiring direct reduction are essential to prevent over-reliance on offsets and maintain a balanced mitigation approach.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Global Environmental Change
Global Environmental Change 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
18.20
自引率
2.20%
发文量
146
审稿时长
12 months
期刊介绍: Global Environmental Change is a prestigious international journal that publishes articles of high quality, both theoretically and empirically rigorous. The journal aims to contribute to the understanding of global environmental change from the perspectives of human and policy dimensions. Specifically, it considers global environmental change as the result of processes occurring at the local level, but with wide-ranging impacts on various spatial, temporal, and socio-political scales. In terms of content, the journal seeks articles with a strong social science component. This includes research that examines the societal drivers and consequences of environmental change, as well as social and policy processes that aim to address these challenges. While the journal covers a broad range of topics, including biodiversity and ecosystem services, climate, coasts, food systems, land use and land cover, oceans, urban areas, and water resources, it also welcomes contributions that investigate the drivers, consequences, and management of other areas affected by environmental change. Overall, Global Environmental Change encourages research that deepens our understanding of the complex interactions between human activities and the environment, with the goal of informing policy and decision-making.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信