Robustness of climate metrics under climate policy ambiguity

Tommi Ekholm (Corresponding Author), Tomi J. Lindroos, Ilkka Savolainen

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

    14 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    A wide array of alternatives has been proposed as the common metrics with which to compare the climate impacts of different emission types. Different physical and economic metrics and their parameterizations give diverse weights between e.g. CH4 and CO2, and fixing the metric from one perspective makes it sub-optimal from another. As the aims of global climate policy involve some degree of ambiguity, it is not possible to determine a metric that would be optimal and consistent with all policy aims. This paper evaluates the cost implications of using predetermined metrics in cost-efficient mitigation scenarios. Three formulations of the 2 °C target, including both deterministic and stochastic approaches, shared a wide range of metric values for CH4 with which the mitigation costs are only slightly above the cost-optimal levels. Therefore, although ambiguity in current policy might prevent us from selecting an optimal metric, it can be possible to select robust metric values that perform well with multiple policy targets.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)44-52
    Number of pages9
    JournalEnvironmental Science and Policy
    Volume31
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2013
    MoE publication typeA1 Journal article-refereed

    Fingerprint

    climate policy
    environmental policy
    climate
    costs
    cost
    mitigation
    climate effect
    global climate
    Values
    parameterization
    scenario
    economics
    policy

    Keywords

    • climate economics
    • climate metric
    • climate policy

    Cite this

    @article{d0f05990b9654c8783bad7ead0a4283c,
    title = "Robustness of climate metrics under climate policy ambiguity",
    abstract = "A wide array of alternatives has been proposed as the common metrics with which to compare the climate impacts of different emission types. Different physical and economic metrics and their parameterizations give diverse weights between e.g. CH4 and CO2, and fixing the metric from one perspective makes it sub-optimal from another. As the aims of global climate policy involve some degree of ambiguity, it is not possible to determine a metric that would be optimal and consistent with all policy aims. This paper evaluates the cost implications of using predetermined metrics in cost-efficient mitigation scenarios. Three formulations of the 2 °C target, including both deterministic and stochastic approaches, shared a wide range of metric values for CH4 with which the mitigation costs are only slightly above the cost-optimal levels. Therefore, although ambiguity in current policy might prevent us from selecting an optimal metric, it can be possible to select robust metric values that perform well with multiple policy targets.",
    keywords = "climate economics, climate metric, climate policy",
    author = "Tommi Ekholm and Lindroos, {Tomi J.} and Ilkka Savolainen",
    year = "2013",
    doi = "10.1016/j.envsci.2013.03.006",
    language = "English",
    volume = "31",
    pages = "44--52",
    journal = "Environmental Science and Policy",
    issn = "1462-9011",
    publisher = "Elsevier",

    }

    Robustness of climate metrics under climate policy ambiguity. / Ekholm, Tommi (Corresponding Author); Lindroos, Tomi J.; Savolainen, Ilkka.

    In: Environmental Science and Policy, Vol. 31, 2013, p. 44-52.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Robustness of climate metrics under climate policy ambiguity

    AU - Ekholm, Tommi

    AU - Lindroos, Tomi J.

    AU - Savolainen, Ilkka

    PY - 2013

    Y1 - 2013

    N2 - A wide array of alternatives has been proposed as the common metrics with which to compare the climate impacts of different emission types. Different physical and economic metrics and their parameterizations give diverse weights between e.g. CH4 and CO2, and fixing the metric from one perspective makes it sub-optimal from another. As the aims of global climate policy involve some degree of ambiguity, it is not possible to determine a metric that would be optimal and consistent with all policy aims. This paper evaluates the cost implications of using predetermined metrics in cost-efficient mitigation scenarios. Three formulations of the 2 °C target, including both deterministic and stochastic approaches, shared a wide range of metric values for CH4 with which the mitigation costs are only slightly above the cost-optimal levels. Therefore, although ambiguity in current policy might prevent us from selecting an optimal metric, it can be possible to select robust metric values that perform well with multiple policy targets.

    AB - A wide array of alternatives has been proposed as the common metrics with which to compare the climate impacts of different emission types. Different physical and economic metrics and their parameterizations give diverse weights between e.g. CH4 and CO2, and fixing the metric from one perspective makes it sub-optimal from another. As the aims of global climate policy involve some degree of ambiguity, it is not possible to determine a metric that would be optimal and consistent with all policy aims. This paper evaluates the cost implications of using predetermined metrics in cost-efficient mitigation scenarios. Three formulations of the 2 °C target, including both deterministic and stochastic approaches, shared a wide range of metric values for CH4 with which the mitigation costs are only slightly above the cost-optimal levels. Therefore, although ambiguity in current policy might prevent us from selecting an optimal metric, it can be possible to select robust metric values that perform well with multiple policy targets.

    KW - climate economics

    KW - climate metric

    KW - climate policy

    U2 - 10.1016/j.envsci.2013.03.006

    DO - 10.1016/j.envsci.2013.03.006

    M3 - Article

    VL - 31

    SP - 44

    EP - 52

    JO - Environmental Science and Policy

    JF - Environmental Science and Policy

    SN - 1462-9011

    ER -