Browse all documents

Regional GHG reduction targets based on effort sharing: a comparison of

Report an error

Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

This document compares over 40 studies on regional GHG reduction targets based on various effort-sharing approaches. It finds that targets vary significantly by approach and region; for a 450 ppm CO2e stabilization level by 2030, OECD 1990 allowances would be roughly half of 2010 levels, while other regions like Asia and Latin America would see different relative reductions. The author notes that current literature covers only a small fraction of possible allocation approaches and calls for more in-depth modelling.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • The stringency of regional GHG reduction targets varies significantly depending on the effort-sharing approach used. In the OECD 1990 region, targets are more stringent when based on carbon budgets (equal cumulative per capita emissions) or equity principles focusing on need, capability, and responsibility.
  • To achieve a concentration stabilization level of 450 ppm CO2e by 2030, allowances for the OECD 1990 region would be roughly half of 2010 emissions. Other regional allowances for 2030 would be approximately two-thirds of 2010 levels in Economies in Transition (EIT), around or slightly below 2010 levels in Asia, slightly above 2010 levels in the Middle East and Africa, and well below 2010 levels in Latin America.
  • By 2050, allowances for OECD 1990 and EIT would be a fraction of current emissions, while Asia would be at approximately half of 2010 levels and Latin America possibly less than half of 2010 levels.
  • The results of effort-sharing approaches are primarily driven by the implementation of equity principles, the chosen stabilization level, and the global emissions pathway. However, current literature only addresses a small portion of possible allocation approaches, indicating a need for more in-depth modelling comparisons to support decision-making.

Cite the original document

APA
NewClimate Institute (2013). Regional GHG reduction targets based on effort sharing: a comparison of. http://www.newclimate.org/resources/publications/regional-ghg-reduction-targets-based-on-effort-sharing-a-comparison-of
Chicago
NewClimate Institute. Regional GHG reduction targets based on effort sharing: a comparison of. 2013. http://www.newclimate.org/resources/publications/regional-ghg-reduction-targets-based-on-effort-sharing-a-comparison-of.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |author=NewClimate Institute |title=Regional GHG reduction targets based on effort sharing: a comparison of |date=1 October 2013 |url=http://www.newclimate.org/resources/publications/regional-ghg-reduction-targets-based-on-effort-sharing-a-comparison-of |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{newclimateinstitute2013regional, author = {{NewClimate Institute}}, title = {{Regional GHG reduction targets based on effort sharing: a comparison of}}, institution = {NewClimate Institute}, year = {2013}, month = oct, url = {http://www.newclimate.org/resources/publications/regional-ghg-reduction-targets-based-on-effort-sharing-a-comparison-of}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated