D1.1 Report on case studies assessing the effectiveness of existing policies<\/p>\n
D1.2 Report on the comparison and transferability of existing policies across countries<\/p>\n
D1.3 Report on new indicators for measuring the stage of transformation and success of policies<\/p>\n
Berger, L. and Emmerling, J. 2017. Welfare as Simple(x) Equity Equivalents<\/a>. FEEM Nota Di Lavoro.<\/em> Milan: Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.<\/p>\n Bezerra et al. 2017. The power of light: socio-economic and environmental implications of \u00a0rural electrification program in Brazil<\/a>. Environmental Research Letters,<\/em> 12(<\/strong>9).<\/p>\n 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<\/a>. Energy Policy, <\/em>101,<\/strong>\u00a0612-628.<\/p>\n Guo, F. and Pachauri, S. 2017. China’s Green Lights Program: A review and assessment<\/a>. Energy Policy, <\/em>110, <\/strong>31\u201339.\u00a0(open access via IIASA PURE<\/a> repository)<\/p>\n Pahle, M., Pachauri, S. and Steinbacher, K. 2016. Can the Green Economy deliver it all? Experiences of renewable energy policies with socio-economic objectives<\/a>. Applied Energy,<\/em>\u00a0179<\/strong>, 1331-1341. (open access via IIASA PURE<\/a> repository)<\/p>\n Rao, N. and Pachauri, S. 2017.\u00a0 Energy access and living standards: some observations on recent trends<\/a>.<\/span> Environmental Research Letters, <\/em>12,<\/strong> 025011.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n 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<\/a>. Research Policy, <\/em>47<\/strong>(10). <\/em>(open access via ResearchGate<\/a> repository)<\/p>\n D2.1 Climate mitigation policies in the context of sustainable development<\/a><\/p>\n D2.1 Protocol Excel spreadsheet (2018 version) – all policies considered for model implementation<\/a><\/p>\n D2.1 Protocol Excel spreadsheet (2017 version) – all policies considered for model implementation<\/a><\/p>\n D2.2 Report on the impacts of current policies and pledges on 2020 and 2030 emissions<\/p>\n D2.3\u00a0 Report on possible methods to evaluate short-term climate policies in the context of long-term objectives<\/p>\n Rogelj, J. Fricko, O. Meinshausen, M. Krey, V. Zilliacus, J. and Riahi, K. 2017. Understanding the origin of Paris Agreement emission uncertainties<\/a>. Nature Communications,<\/em>\u00a08<\/strong>, 15748.<\/p>\n Rogelj, J. den Elzen, M. H\u00f6hne, 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 \u00b0C<\/a>. Nature <\/em>534<\/strong>, 631-639. (open access via IIASA PURE<\/a> repository)<\/p>\n Rochedo, P. Soares-Filho, B. Schaeffer, R. Viola, E. Szklo, A. Lucena, A. Koberle, A. Leroy Davis, J. Raj\u00e3o, R., and Rathmann, R. 2018. The threat of political bargaining to climate mitigation in Brazil<\/a>. Nature Climate Change, <\/em>8,\u00a0<\/b>695\u2013698.<\/em>\u00a0(open access via Zenodo<\/a> repository)<\/p>\n Iacobuta, G. Dubash, N. Upadhyaya, P. Deribe, M. and H\u00f6hne, N. 2018. National climate change mitigation legislation, strategy and targets: a global update<\/a>. Climate Policy<\/em>, 18<\/strong>(9).<\/p>\n Roelfsema, M. Fekete, H. H\u00f6hne, 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 \u2018good practice policies\u2019 scenario<\/a>. Climate Policy,<\/em> 18<\/strong>(9).<\/p>\n Roelfsema, M. et al. 2020. Taking stock of national climate policies to evaluate implementation of the Paris Agreement<\/a>. Nature Communications, <\/em>11<\/strong>, 2096.<\/p>\n D3.1 Report on global low-carbon and sustainable development pathways<\/p>\n D3.2 Global climate stabilisation strategies based on country-specific low-carbon development pathways, including country-specific adaptation portfolios<\/p>\n Global low-carbon development pathways protocol second round – June 2017<\/a><\/p>\n Rogelj, J. et al. 2018. Scenarios towards limiting global mean temperature increase below 1.5 \u00b0C<\/a>.\u00a0 Nature Climate Change, <\/em>8<\/b>, 325\u2013332.<\/p>\n Kriegler et al. 2018. Pathways limiting warming to 1.5\u00b0C: a tale of turning around in no time?<\/a> Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, <\/em>376<\/strong>(2119).<\/p>\n Luderer, G. et al. 2018. Residual fossil CO2 emissions in 1.5-2\u00b0C pathways<\/a>. Nature Climate Change, <\/i>8<\/b>, 626\u2013633. <\/i>(open access via IIASA PURE<\/a> repository)<\/p>\n Vishwanathan, S. Garg, A. Tiwari V. and Shukla, P. 2018. India in 2 \u00b0C and well below 2 \u00b0C worlds: Opportunities and challenges<\/a>. Carbon Management, <\/em>9<\/strong>, 459-479.<\/em><\/p>\n Krey, V. et al. 2018: Looking under the hood: A comparison of techno-economic assumptions across national and global integrated assessment models<\/a>, Energy<\/em>, 172<\/strong>, 1254-1267.<\/p>\n Schaeffer R. et al. (2020). CD-Links special issue on national low-carbon development pathways<\/a>.\u00a0Climatic Change<\/em>.<\/p>\n Feijoo, F. Iyer, G. Binsted, M. and Edmonds, J. (2020). U.S. energy system transitions under cumulative emissions budgets<\/a>. Climatic Change<\/em>.<\/p>\n K\u00f6berle, A. et al. (2020). Brazil emissions trajectories in a well-below 2\u00b0C world: the role of disruptive technologies versus land-based mitigation in an already low-emission energy system<\/a>. Climatic Change<\/em>.<\/p>\n Mathur, R. Shekhar, S. (2020). India’s energy sector choices – options and implications of ambitious mitigation effort<\/a>s. Climatic Change<\/em>.<\/p>\n Oshiro K. et al. (2019). Mid-century emission pathways in Japan associated with the global 2\u00b0C goal: national and global models\u2019 assessments based on carbon budgets<\/a>. Climatic Change<\/em>.<\/p>\n Safonov, G. et al. (2020). The low carbon development options for Russia: business-as-usual or the breakthrough to deep decarbonization<\/a>. Climatic Change<\/em>.<\/p>\n Schaeffer, R. et al. (2020). Comparing transformation pathways across major economies<\/a>. Climatic Change<\/em>.<\/p>\n Van den Berg et al. (2019). Implications of various effort-sharing approaches for national carbon budgets and emission pathways<\/a>. Climatic Change<\/em>.<\/p>\n Vishwanathan, S. and Garg, A. (2020). Energy system transformation to meet 2\u00b0C and well below 2\u00b0C targets for India<\/a>. Climatic Change<\/em>.<\/p>\n Vrontisi et al. (2019). Energy system transition and macroeconomic impacts of a European decarbonization action towards a below 2\u00b0C climate stabilization<\/a>. Climatic Change<\/em>.<\/p>\n Wang et al. 2019. Modeling of power sector decarbonization in China: comparisons of early and delayed mitigation towards 2-degree target<\/a>. Climatic Change<\/em>.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n D4.1 Report on model harmonisation and development to represent multiple policy objectives<\/a><\/p>\n D4.2 Database with national and global scenarios, including quantification of multiple policy objectives (DOI: 10.5281\/zenodo.3886872)<\/a><\/p>\n 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<\/p>\n Fricko, O.<\/span>\u00a0Parkinson, S. <\/span>Johnson, N. <\/span>Strubegger, M. <\/span>van Vliet, M.\u00a0<\/span>and\u00a0Riahi, K. 2016. <\/span>Energy sector water use implications of a 2\u00b0C climate policy<\/a>. Environmental Research Letters,<\/em>\u00a011<\/b>, 034011.<\/span><\/p>\n von Stechow, C.<\/span>\u00a0Minx, J.<\/span>\u00a0Riahi, K. <\/span>Jewell, J.<\/span>\u00a0McCollum, D. <\/span>Callaghan, M. <\/span>Bertram, C. <\/span>Luderer, G. an<\/span>d Baiocchi, G. 2016. 2\u00b0C and SDGs: united they stand, divided they fall?<\/a> Environmental<\/em> Research Letters<\/em>\u00a011<\/b> 034022 doi: 10.1088\/1748-9326\/11\/3\/034022<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n Emmerling, J. Groom B. and Wettingfeld, T. 2017. Discounting and the Representative Median Agent<\/a>. Economics Letters<\/em>, 161<\/strong>, 78-81. (open access via LSE<\/a> repository)<\/p>\n Rao, N. et al. 2017. Improving poverty and inequality modeling in climate research<\/a>. Nature Climate Change,<\/em>\u00a07<\/strong>, 857-862.\u00a0 (open access via IIASA PURE<\/a> repository)<\/p>\n Rao, N. and Pachauri, S. 2017. Energy access and living standards: some observations on recent trends<\/a>. Environmental Research Letters,<\/em> 12<\/strong> (2).<\/p>\n Rafaj, P. and Amann, M. 2018. Decomposing Air Pollutant Emissions in Asia: Determinants and Projections<\/a>. Energies,<\/em>\u00a011<\/strong>, 1299.<\/p>\n Portugal-Pereira, J. Koberle, A. Lucena, A. Rochedo, P. Imp\u00e9rio, 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 Brazil<\/a>.\u00a0Climatic Change,\u00a0<\/em>148<\/strong>, 293-309.<\/p>\n Reis, L. Drouet, L. Van Dingenen, R. and Emmerling, J. 2018. Future Global Air Quality Indices under Different Socioeconomic and Climate Assumptions<\/a>, Sustainability,<\/em>\u00a010<\/strong>(10).<\/p>\n 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\u00b0C climate goal<\/a>. Environmental Research Letters<\/em>, 13<\/strong>(7).<\/p>\n Parkinson, S. et al. 2019. Balancing clean water-climate change mitigation tradeoffs<\/a>. Environmental Research Letters<\/em>, 14<\/strong>(1).<\/p>\n Li, N. Chen, W. Rafaj, P. <\/span>Kiesewetter, G. <\/span>Sch\u00f6pp, W. <\/span>Wang, H. <\/span>Zhang, H. Krey, V. and Riahi K. 2019. Air Quality Improvement Co-benefits of Low-Carbon Pathways toward Well Below the 2 \u00b0C Climate Target in China<\/a>. Environmental Science & Technology<\/em>, 53<\/strong>(10).<\/span><\/p>\n Fujimori, S. et al. 2019. A multi-model assessment of food security implications of climate change mitigation<\/a>. Nature Sustainability<\/em>, 2, 386\u2013396.<\/p>\n D5.1 Report on trade and implementation of carbon policies: leakage and competitiveness concerns<\/p>\n D5.2 Report on the effect of near-term climate and technology policies on carbon lock-in in major economies<\/p>\n D5.3 Map of mitigation and adaptation strategies and implementation issues<\/p>\n McCollum, D. et al. 2018. Energy investment needs for fulfilling the Paris Agreement and achieving the Sustainable Development Goals<\/a>, Nature Energy<\/em>, 3<\/b>, 589\u2013599. (open access via IIASA PURE<\/a> repository)<\/p>\n Ricke, K. Drouet, L. Caldeira K. and Tavoni, M. 2018. Country-level Social Cost of Carbon<\/a>. Nature Climate Change,<\/em> 8<\/b>, 895\u2013900. (open access via ResearchGate<\/a> repository)<\/p>\n 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<\/a>. Environmental Research Letters<\/em>, 14<\/strong>(5).<\/p>\n D6.2 Dissemination and communication plan<\/a><\/p>\n D6.6 Summary for Policy Makers<\/a><\/p>\n D7.2 Data management plan<\/a><\/p>\n Cherp et al. (2018). Integrating techno-economic, socio-technical and political perspectives on national energy transitions: A meta-theoretical framework<\/a>. Energy Research and Social Science, 37, 175-190.<\/p>\n Dagnachew et al. (2018). Trade-offs and synergies between universal electricity access and climate change mitigation in sub-saharan africa<\/a>. Energy Policy, 114, 355-366.<\/p>\n Dagnachew et al. (2017). The role of decentralized systems in providing universal electricity access in sub-saharan africa \u2013 A model-based approach<\/a>. Energy, 139, 184-195.<\/p>\n Da Silveira Bezerra et al. (2017). The power of light: Socio-economic and environmental implications of a rural electrification program in brazil<\/a>. Environmental Research Letters, 12(9).<\/p>\n den Elzen et al. (2019). Are the G20 economies making enough progress to meet their NDC targets?<\/a> Energy Policy, 126, 238-250.<\/p>\n Frank et al. (2017). Reducing greenhouse gas emissions in agriculture without compromising food security?<\/a> Environmental Research Letters, 12(10).<\/p>\n Frank et al. (2018). Structural change as a key component for agricultural non-CO2 mitigation efforts<\/a>. Nature Communications, 9(1).<\/p>\n Frank et al. (2019). Agricultural non-CO2 emission reduction potential in the context of the 1.5 \u00b0C target<\/a>. Nature Climate Change, 9(1), 66-72.<\/p>\n Frieler et al. (2017). Assessing the impacts of 1.5\u00b0C global warming – simulation protocol of the inter-sectoral impact model intercomparison project (ISIMIP2b)<\/a>. Geoscientific Model Development, 10(12), 4321-4345.<\/p>\n 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<\/a>. Journal of Open Source Software, 4(33), 1095.<\/p>\n Huppmann et al. (2018). A new scenario resource for integrated 1.5 \u00b0C research<\/a>. Nature Climate Change, 8(12), 1027-1030.<\/p>\n Jewell et al. (2019). The international technological nuclear cooperation landscape: A new dataset and network analysis<\/a>. Energy Policy, 128, 838-852.<\/p>\n Lauri, P., Forsell, N., Korosuo, A., Havl\u00edk, P., Obersteiner, M., & Nordin, A. (2017). Impact of the 2 \u00b0C target on global woody biomass use. Forest Policy and Economics<\/a>, 83, 121-130.<\/p>\n McCollum et al. (2018). Connecting the sustainable development goals by their energy inter-linkages<\/a>. Environmental Research Letters, 13(3).<\/p>\n Mengel et al. (2018). Committed sea-level rise under the paris agreement and the legacy of delayed mitigation action<\/a>. Nature Communications, 9(1).<\/p>\n Nilsson et al. (2018). Work Package 2 –\u00a0Assessment of international country pledges, national action plans and development policies<\/h4>\n
Deliverables<\/h6>\n
Publications<\/h6>\n
Work Package 3 –\u00a0Coherent national and global low-carbon development pathways<\/h4>\n
Deliverables<\/h6>\n
Global model protocol<\/strong><\/h6>\n
Climatic Change Special Issue<\/strong><\/h6>\n
Work Package 4 –\u00a0Climate change as part of the broader development agenda \u2013 Systematic assessment of synergies and trade-offs between multiple policy objectives<\/h4>\n
Deliverables<\/h6>\n
Publications<\/h6>\n
Work Package 5 – Future policies and related implementation challenges and opportunities<\/h4>\n
Deliverables<\/h6>\n
Publications<\/h6>\n
Work Package 6 –\u00a0Capacity building, dissemination and stakeholder engagement<\/h4>\n
Deliverables<\/h6>\n
Work Package 7 –\u00a0Project management<\/h4>\n
Deliverables<\/h6>\n
Other CD-LINKS Publications<\/h4>\n