Working Paper: CEPR ID: DP6995
Authors: Valentina Bosetti; Carlo Carraro; Alessandra Sgobbi; Massimo Tavoni
Abstract: This paper provides a quantitative comparison of the main architectures for an agreement on climate policy. Possible successors to the Kyoto protocol are assessed according to four criteria: economic efficiency; environmental effectiveness; distributional implications; and their political acceptability which is measured in terms of feasibility and enforceability. The ultimate aim is to derive useful information for designing a future agreement on climate change control.
Keywords: climate policy; integrated modelling; international agreements
JEL Codes: C72; H23; Q25; Q28
Edges that are evidenced by causal inference methods are in orange, and the rest are in light blue.
| Cause | Effect |
|---|---|
| more stringent policy architectures (such as cap-and-trade with avoided deforestation) (Q58) | stabilization of emissions at levels below 5 GtC by mid-century (Q54) |
| stabilization of emissions at levels below 5 GtC by mid-century (Q54) | reduction in temperature increase (Q54) |
| architectures designed with a focus on avoided deforestation (Q57) | improve economic efficiency (D61) |
| architectures designed with a focus on avoided deforestation (Q57) | enhance enforceability by providing incentives for participation among developing countries (O19) |
| fairer distribution of burdens (D30) | greater political acceptability (F55) |
| policies aiming at research and development cooperation (O32) | positive economic outcomes (D78) |
| policies aiming at research and development cooperation (O32) | minimal impact on climate protection (Q54) |