Comparing emissions mitigation efforts across countries

References

• Akimoto, K., Sano, F., Homma, T., Wada, K., Nagashima, M., & Oda, J. (2012). Comparison of marginal abatement cost curves for 2020 and 2030: Longer perspectives for effective global GHG emission reductions. Sustainability Science, 7, 157–168. doi: 10.1007/s11625-012-0165-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Akimoto, K., Sano, F., Oda, J., Homma, T., Kumar Rout, U., & Tomoda, T. (2008). Global emission reductions through a sectoral intensity target scheme. Climate Policy, 8, S46–S59. doi: 10.3763/cpol.2007.0492
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aldy, J. E. (2004). Saving the planet cost-effectively: The role of economic analysis in climate change mitigation policy. In R. Lutter, & J. F. Shogren (Eds.), Painting the white house green: Rationalizing environmental policy inside the executive office of the president (pp. 89–118). Washington, DC: Resources for the Future Press.
   Google Scholar
• Aldy, J. E. (2013). Designing a Bretton Woods institution to address global climate change. In R. Fouquet (Eds.), Handbook of energy and climate change (pp. 352–374). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Aldy, J. E. (2014). The crucial role of policy surveillance in international climate policy. Climatic Change, 126, 279–292. doi: 10.1007/s10584-014-1238-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aldy, J. E., & Pizer, W. A. (2015). Alternative metrics for comparing domestic climate change mitigation efforts and the emerging international climate policy architecture. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy. Advance online publication. doi:10.1093/reep/rev013.
   Google Scholar
• Aldy, J. E., & Stavins, R. N. (2012). Climate negotiators create an opportunity for scholars. Science, 337, 1043–1044. doi: 10.1126/science.1223836
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bosetti, V., & Frankel, J. (2012). Politically feasible emission targets to attain 460 ppm CO2 concentrations. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 6, 86–109. doi: 10.1093/reep/rer022
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Climate Action Tracker. 2014. Retrieved from http://www.climateactiontracker.org
   Google Scholar
• Dellink, R., & Corfee-Morlot, J. 2010. Costs and effectiveness of the Copenhagen pledges: Assessing global greenhouse gas emissions targets and actions for 2020. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/environment/cc/45441364.pdf
   Google Scholar
• den Elzen, M. G. J., Berk, M., Lucas, P., Criqui, P., & Kitous, A. (2006). Multi-stage: A rule-based evolution of future commitments under the climate change convention. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 6, 1–28. doi: 10.1007/s10784-004-5645-3
   Google Scholar
• Energy Information Administration. (2013). International energy outlook 2013. Washington, DC: Department of Energy.
   Google Scholar
• Groenenberg, H., Blok, K., & van der Sluijs, J. (2004). Global triptych: A bottom-up approach for the differentiation of commitments under the climate convention. Climate Policy, 4, 153–175. doi: 10.1080/14693062.2004.9685518
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gupta, J. (2007). Beyond graduation and deepening: Toward cosmopolitan scholarship. In J. E. Aldy, & R. N. Stavins (Eds.), Architectures for agreement: Addressing global climate change in the post-Kyoto world (pp. 116–130). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hof, A. F., & den Elzen, M. G. J. (2010). The effect of different historical emissions datasets on emission targets of the sectoral mitigation approach triptych. Climate Policy, 10, 684–704. doi: 10.3763/cpol.2009.0649
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Höhne, N., den Elzen, M., & Escalante, D. (2014). Regional GHG reduction targets based on effort sharing: A comparison of studies. Climate Policy, 14, 122–147. doi: 10.1080/14693062.2014.849452
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Höhne, N., den Elzen, M., & Weiss, M. (2006). Common but differentiated convergence (CDC): A new conceptual approach to long-term climate policy. Climate Policy, 6, 181–199. doi: 10.1080/14693062.2006.9685594
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Houser, T. (2010). Copenhagen, the accord, and the way forward. Petersen institute for international economics policy brief PB10–5. Retrieved from http://www.iie.com/publications/pb/pb10–05.pdf
   Google Scholar
• International Energy Agency. (2013). World energy outlook 2013. Paris: IEA.
   Google Scholar
• Kriegler, E., Weyant, J. P., Blanford, G. J., Krey, V., Clarke, L., Edmonds, J. … van Vuuren, D. P. (2014). The role of technology for achieving climate policy objectives: Overview of the EMF 27 study on global technology and climate policy strategies. Climatic Change, 123, 353–367. doi: 10.1007/s10584-013-0953-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McKibbin, W. J., Morris, A. C., & Wilcoxen, P. J. (2011). Comparing climate commitments: A model-based analysis of the copenhagen accord. Climate Change Economics, 2, 79–103. doi: 10.1142/S201000781100022X
   Google Scholar
• Michaelowa, A., Butzengeiger, S., & Jung, M. (2005). Graduation and deepening: An ambitious post-2012 climate policy scenario. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 5, 25–46. doi: 10.1007/s10784-004-3674-6
   Google Scholar
• Newell, R. N., & Pizer, W. A. (2008). Indexed regulation. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 56, 221–233. doi: 10.1016/j.jeem.2008.07.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Organisation of Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2013). Effective carbon prices. Paris: OECD.
   Google Scholar
• Pizer, W., Adler, M., Aldy, J., Anthoff, D., Cropper, M., Gillingham, K., … Wiener, J. (2014). Using and improving the social cost of carbon. Science, 346, 1189–1190. doi: 10.1126/science.1259774
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pizer, W. A. (2007). Practical global climate policy. In J. E. Aldy, & R. N. Stavins (Eds.), Architectures for agreement: Addressing global climate change in the post-Kyoto world (pp. 280–314). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Research Institute of Innovative Technology for the Earth (RITE). (2015). RITE GHG mitigation assessment model DNE21+. Retrieved from http://www.rite.or.jp/Japanese/labo/sysken/about-global-warming/download-data/RITE_GHGMitigationAssessmentModel_20150130.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Schelling, T. C. (1997). The cost of combating global warming: Facing the tradeoffs. Foreign Affairs, 76(6), 8–14. doi: 10.2307/20048272
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tavoni, M., Kriegler, E., Riahi, K., van Vuuren, D. P., Aboumahboub, T., Bowen, A., … van der Zwaan, B. (2015). Post-2020 climate agreements in the major economies assessed in light of global models. Nature Climate Change, 5, 116–126.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson, A. (2006). Management under anarchy: The international politics of climate change. Climatic Change, 78, 7–29. doi: 10.1007/s10584-006-9090-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weyant, J. P., & Hill, J. (1999). Introduction and overview, in the costs of the Kyoto protocol: A multi-model evaluation, special issue. Energy Journal, 20, vii–xliv.
   Google Scholar
• Wiener, J. (1999). Global environmental regulation: Instrument choice in legal context. The Yale Law Journal, 108, 677–800. doi: 10.2307/797394
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Resources Institute (WRI). (2015). CAIT Paris contributions map. Retrieved from http://cait.wri.org/indc/
   Google Scholar