Deliverables & Publications

Work Package 1 – Empirical assessment of the effectiveness of past and existing policies


D1.1 Report on case studies assessing the effectiveness of existing policies

D1.2 Report on the comparison and transferability of existing policies across countries

D1.3 Report on new indicators for measuring the stage of transformation and success of policies


Berger, L. and Emmerling, J. 2017. Welfare as Simple(x) Equity Equivalents. FEEM Nota Di Lavoro. Milan: Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.

Bezerra et al. 2017. The power of light: socio-economic and environmental implications of  rural electrification program in Brazil. Environmental Research Letters, 12(9).

Cherp, A. Vinichenko, V. Jewell, J. Suzuki, M. and Antal, M. 2017. Comparing electricity transitions: A historical analysis of nuclear, wind and solar power in Germany and Japan. Energy Policy, 101, 612-628.

Guo, F. and Pachauri, S. 2017. China’s Green Lights Program: A review and assessment. Energy Policy, 110, 31–39. (open access via IIASA PURE repository)

Pahle, M., Pachauri, S. and Steinbacher, K. 2016. Can the Green Economy deliver it all? Experiences of renewable energy policies with socio-economic objectives. Applied Energy, 179, 1331-1341. (open access via IIASA PURE repository)

Rao, N. and Pachauri, S. 2017.  Energy access and living standards: some observations on recent trends. Environmental Research Letters, 12, 025011.

Conti, C. Mancusi, M.L. Sanna-Randaccio, F. Sestini, R. Verdolini, E. 2018. Transition towards a green economy in Europe: Innovation and knowledge integration in the renewable energy sector. Research Policy, 47(10). (open access via ResearchGate repository)

Work Package 2 – Assessment of international country pledges, national action plans and development policies


D2.1 Climate mitigation policies in the context of sustainable development

D2.1 Protocol Excel spreadsheet (2018 version) – all policies considered for model implementation

D2.1 Protocol Excel spreadsheet (2017 version) – all policies considered for model implementation

D2.2 Report on the impacts of current policies and pledges on 2020 and 2030 emissions

D2.3  Report on possible methods to evaluate short-term climate policies in the context of long-term objectives


Rogelj, J. Fricko, O. Meinshausen, M. Krey, V. Zilliacus, J. and Riahi, K. 2017. Understanding the origin of Paris Agreement emission uncertainties. Nature Communications, 8, 15748.

Rogelj, J. den Elzen, M. Höhne, N. Fransen, T. Fekete, H. Winkler, H. Schaeffer, R. Sha, F. Riahi, K. and Meinshausen, M. 2016. Paris Agreement climate proposals need a boost to keep warming well below 2 °C. Nature 534, 631-639. (open access via IIASA PURE repository)

Rochedo, P. Soares-Filho, B. Schaeffer, R. Viola, E. Szklo, A. Lucena, A. Koberle, A. Leroy Davis, J. Rajão, R., and Rathmann, R. 2018. The threat of political bargaining to climate mitigation in Brazil. Nature Climate Change, 8, 695–698. (open access via Zenodo repository)

Iacobuta, G. Dubash, N. Upadhyaya, P. Deribe, M. and Höhne, N. 2018. National climate change mitigation legislation, strategy and targets: a global update. Climate Policy, 18(9).

Roelfsema, M. Fekete, H. Höhne, N. den Elzen, M. Forsell, N. Kuramochi, T. de Coninck, H. and van Vuuren, D. 2018. Reducing global GHG emissions by replicating successful sector examples: the ‘good practice policies’ scenario. Climate Policy, 18(9).

Roelfsema, M. et al. 2020. Taking stock of national climate policies to evaluate implementation of the Paris Agreement. Nature Communications, 11, 2096.

Work Package 3 – Coherent national and global low-carbon development pathways


D3.1 Report on global low-carbon and sustainable development pathways

D3.2 Global climate stabilisation strategies based on country-specific low-carbon development pathways, including country-specific adaptation portfolios

Global model protocol

Global low-carbon development pathways protocol second round – June 2017

Rogelj, J. et al. 2018. Scenarios towards limiting global mean temperature increase below 1.5 °CNature Climate Change, 8, 325–332.

Kriegler et al. 2018. Pathways limiting warming to 1.5°C: a tale of turning around in no time? Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, 376(2119).

Luderer, G. et al. 2018. Residual fossil CO2 emissions in 1.5-2°C pathways. Nature Climate Change, 8, 626–633. (open access via IIASA PURE repository)

Vishwanathan, S. Garg, A. Tiwari V. and Shukla, P. 2018. India in 2 °C and well below 2 °C worlds: Opportunities and challenges. Carbon Management, 9, 459-479.

Krey, V. et al. 2018: Looking under the hood: A comparison of techno-economic assumptions across national and global integrated assessment models, Energy, 172, 1254-1267.

Climatic Change Special Issue

He., C. et al. (forthcoming). Quantification of Indicators for Selected SDGs with the 2°C Emission Pathways for China. Climatic Change.

Feijoo, F. Iyer, G. Binsted, M. and Edmonds, J. 2020. U.S. energy system transitions under cumulative emissions budgets. Climatic Change.

Köberle, A. et al. (forthcoming). Brazil emissions trajectories in a well-below 2°C world: the role of disruptive technologies versus land-based mitigation in an already low-emission energy system. Climatic Change.

Mathur, R. et al. (forthcoming). Analysis of India’s Mitigation potential. Climatic Change.

Oshiro et al. 2019. Mid-century emission pathways in Japan associated with the global 2°C goal: national and global models’ assessments based on carbon budgets. Climatic Change.

Safanov, G. et al. (forthcoming). The low carbon development options for Russia: business-as-usual or the breakthrough to deep decarbonization. Climatic Change.

Schaeffer, R. et al. (forthcoming). Comparing transformation pathways across major economies. Climatic Change.

Van den Berg et al. 2019. Implications of various effort-sharing approaches for national carbon budgets and emission pathways. Climatic Change.

Vishwanathan, S. and Garg, A. 2020. Energy system transformation to meet 2°C and well below 2°C targets for India. Climatic Change.

Vrontisi et al. 2019. Energy system transition and macroeconomic impacts of a European decarbonization action towards a below 2°C climate stabilization. Climatic Change.

Wang et al. 2019. Modeling of power sector decarbonization in China: comparisons of early and delayed mitigation towards 2-degree target. Climatic Change.

Work Package 4 – Climate change as part of the broader development agenda – Systematic assessment of synergies and trade-offs between multiple policy objectives


D4.1 Report on model harmonisation and development to represent multiple policy objectives

D4.2 Database with national and global scenarios, including quantification of multiple policy objectives

D4.3 Report on synergies and trade-offs between multiple policy objectives, with a focus on how national and local policy priorities and circumstances affect the interaction among the policy objectives


Fricko, O. Parkinson, S. Johnson, N. Strubegger, M. van Vliet, M. and Riahi, K. 2016. Energy sector water use implications of a 2°C climate policy. Environmental Research Letters, 11, 034011.

von Stechow, C. Minx, J. Riahi, K. Jewell, J. McCollum, D. Callaghan, M. Bertram, C. Luderer, G. and Baiocchi, G. 2016. 2°C and SDGs: united they stand, divided they fall? Environmental Research Letters 11 034022 doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/11/3/034022

Emmerling, J. Groom B. and Wettingfeld, T. 2017. Discounting and the Representative Median Agent. Economics Letters, 161, 78-81. (open access via LSE repository)

Rao, N. et al. 2017. Improving poverty and inequality modeling in climate research. Nature Climate Change, 7, 857-862.  (open access via IIASA PURE repository)

Rao, N. and Pachauri, S. 2017. Energy access and living standards: some observations on recent trends. Environmental Research Letters, 12 (2).

Rafaj, P. and Amann, M. 2018. Decomposing Air Pollutant Emissions in Asia: Determinants and Projections. Energies, 11, 1299.

Portugal-Pereira, J. Koberle, A. Lucena, A. Rochedo, P. Império, M. Monteiro Carsalade, A. Schaeffer, R. and Rafaj, P. 2018. Interactions between global climate change strategies and local air pollution: lessons learnt from the expansion of the power sector in BrazilClimatic Change, 148, 293-309.

Reis, L. Drouet, L. Van Dingenen, R. and Emmerling, J. 2018. Future Global Air Quality Indices under Different Socioeconomic and Climate Assumptions, Sustainability, 10(10).

Fujimori, S. Hasegawa, T. Rogelj, J. Su, X. Havlik, P. Krey, V. Takahashi, K. and Riahi, K. 2018. Inclusive climate change mitigation and food security policy under 1.5°C climate goal. Environmental Research Letters, 13(7).

Parkinson, S. et al. 2019. Balancing clean water-climate change mitigation tradeoffs. Environmental Research Letters, 14(1).

Li, N. Chen, W. Rafaj, P. Kiesewetter, G. Schöpp, W. Wang, H. Zhang, H. Krey, V. and Riahi K. 2019. Air Quality Improvement Co-benefits of Low-Carbon Pathways toward Well Below the 2 °C Climate Target in China. Environmental Science & Technology, 53(10).

Fujimori, S. et al. 2019. A multi-model assessment of food security implications of climate change mitigation. Nature Sustainability, 2, 386–396.

Work Package 5 – Future policies and related implementation challenges and opportunities


D5.1 Report on trade and implementation of carbon policies: leakage and competitiveness concerns

D5.2 Report on the effect of near-term climate and technology policies on carbon lock-in in major economies

D5.3 Map of mitigation and adaptation strategies and implementation issues


McCollum, D. et al. 2018. Energy investment needs for fulfilling the Paris Agreement and achieving the Sustainable Development Goals, Nature Energy, 3, 589–599. (open access via IIASA PURE repository)

Ricke, K. Drouet, L. Caldeira K. and Tavoni, M. 2018. Country-level Social Cost of Carbon. Nature Climate Change, 8, 895–900. (open access via ResearchGate repository)

Zhou, W. McCollum, D. Fricko O. Gidden M. Huppmann D. Krey V. and Riahi K. 2019. A comparison of low carbon investment needs between China and Europe in stringent climate policy scenarios. Environmental Research Letters, 14(5).

Work Package 6 – Capacity building, dissemination and stakeholder engagement


D6.2 Dissemination and communication plan

D6.6 Summary for Policy Makers

Work Package 7 – Project management


D7.2 Data management plan

Other CD-LINKS Publications

Cherp et al. (2018). Integrating techno-economic, socio-technical and political perspectives on national energy transitions: A meta-theoretical framework. Energy Research and Social Science, 37, 175-190.

Dagnachew et al. (2018). Trade-offs and synergies between universal electricity access and climate change mitigation in sub-saharan africa. Energy Policy, 114, 355-366.

Dagnachew et al. (2017). The role of decentralized systems in providing universal electricity access in sub-saharan africa – A model-based approach. Energy, 139, 184-195.

Da Silveira Bezerra et al. (2017). The power of light: Socio-economic and environmental implications of a rural electrification program in brazil. Environmental Research Letters, 12(9).

den Elzen et al. (2019). Are the G20 economies making enough progress to meet their NDC targets? Energy Policy, 126, 238-250.

Frank et al. (2018). Structural change as a key component for agricultural non-CO2 mitigation efforts. Nature Communications, 9(1).

Frank et al. (2019). Agricultural non-CO2 emission reduction potential in the context of the 1.5 °C target. Nature Climate Change, 9(1), 66-72.

Frieler et al. (2017). Assessing the impacts of 1.5°C global warming – simulation protocol of the inter-sectoral impact model intercomparison project (ISIMIP2b). Geoscientific Model Development, 10(12), 4321-4345.

Gidden, M. and Huppman, D. (2019). pyam: a Python Package for the Analysis and Visualization of Models of the Interaction of Climate, Human, and Environmental Systems. Journal of Open Source Software, 4(33), 1095.

Huppmann et al. (2018). A new scenario resource for integrated 1.5 °C research. Nature Climate Change, 8(12), 1027-1030.

Jewell et al. (2019). The international technological nuclear cooperation landscape: A new dataset and network analysis. Energy Policy, 128, 838-852.

Lauri, P., Forsell, N., Korosuo, A., Havlík, P., Obersteiner, M., & Nordin, A. (2017). Impact of the 2 °C target on global woody biomass use. Forest Policy and Economics, 83, 121-130.

McCollum et al. (2018). Connecting the sustainable development goals by their energy inter-linkages. Environmental Research Letters, 13(3).

Mengel et al. (2018). Committed sea-level rise under the paris agreement and the legacy of delayed mitigation action. Nature Communications, 9(1).

Nilsson et al. (2018). Mapping interactions between the sustainable development goals: lessons learned and ways forward. Sustainability Science, 13, 1489-1503.

Rao et al. (2017). Improving poverty and inequality modelling in climate research. Nature Climate Change, 7(12), 857-862.

Ricke et al. (2018). Country-level social cost of carbon. Nature Climate Change, 8(10), 895-900.

Schinko et al. (2019). Economy-wide effects of coastal flooding due to sea level rise: A multi-model simultaneous treatment of mitigation, adaptation, and residual impacts. Environmental Research Communications, 2.

Sun et al. (2019). Future regional contributions for climate change mitigation: Insights from energy investment gap and policy cost. Sustainability (Switzerland), 11(12).

van Soest et al. (2017). Low-emission pathways in 11 major economies: Comparison of cost-optimal pathways and paris climate proposals. Climatic Change, 142(3-4), 491-504.

van Soest, H. van Vuuren, D. Hilaire, J. Harmsen, M. Krey, V. Popp, A. Riahi, K. and Luderer, G. (2019). Analysing interactions among Sustainable Development Goals with Integrated Assessment Models. Global Transitions, 1, 201-225.

Wang, H. Chen, W. Bertram, C. Malik, A. Kriegler, E. Luderer, G. Després, J. Jiang, K and Krey, V. (2020). Early transformation of the Chinese power sector to avoid additional coal lock-in. Environmental Research Letters, 15 (2).

Weindl et al. (2017). Livestock production and the water challenge of future food supply: Implications of agricultural management and dietary choices. Global Environmental Change, 47, 121-132.