Landing the climate regime in
Paris 2015
Laurence Tubiana
Professor Sciences po and Columbia University
What is at stake in Paris in 2015
• It is simple :
• It is about changing economic and political
signals in favor of the low carbon economy
• It is about the alignment of expectations of:
– Governments
– Local authorities
– Businesses
– Consumers and citizens
How we do that?
• This is not simple ! required : something like a
sheepdog or a magic flute
The notion of a centralized emission of the
signal have disappeared together with time
tables and targets model including a global
carbon price
Two pillars of the Paris compact
• The agreement between governments within UNFCC
mandate : the sheep dog
• The actions of all supporting the UNFCCC agreement :
the flute player
• And a cross-cutting innovation and R and D agenda
Two pillars of the Paris compact
• UNFCCC agreement : the sheepdog method
• Legal agreement on processes : the remaining
top down elements
• Push and pull : national contributions as the
center piece
Mitigation contributions
A fundamental shift from a ‘logic of targets’ to a
‘logic of pathways’.
Under a ‘logic of pathways’, countries would
submit long-term, indicative low emissions
pathways, combined with operational multisector, multi-timeframe target packages.
Four levels of uncertainties making
comitments difficult
Level 1: uncertainty about the level and
structure of future economic activity
Level 2 : uncertainty of actions of others
Level 3: uncertainty on the reality of action:
understanding the ‘signal’ of serious
decarbonisation effort amid short-term
uncertainty and inertia
Level 4: capacity to deliver depending on costs,
government capacity, availability of technologies
Mitigation structure
• Combining the short-term and the long-term
perspective through a combination of short-term
targets and aspirational long-term pathways.
• Align domestic policy processes and international
negotiations through collective, predictable
expectations about future negotiation cycles.
• Reflect the inertia of infrastructure by updating nearterm targets by setting new targets for the next period.
For example, in 2020 it would make very little sense to
adjust a 2025 target. Rather, new ambition and
reduction opportunities should be expressed by more
ambitious 2030 and 2035 targets.
Reducing uncertainties
A Global goal : why and how keep 2°
• 2°C target : a directional reference to assess progress at the global
level and national contributions.
• a risk management approach recognizing the imperative to avoid
risks of higher concentration, delayed action scenarios:
• It should include more operational directional references than the
current framing under the Cancun Agreements,
• key quantified conclusions of the IPCC regarding the global 2˚C
trajectory as a directional reference point.
• iterations of nationally determined contributions should be taken in
the context of the 2˚C target.
• An on-going process of reinforced action to address the gap. Ex
sectoral policy efforts,
• Mainly R and D…
Updated contributions
The approach for a dynamic agreement should address three
challenges:
• Combining the short-term and the long-term perspective through a
combination of short-term targets and aspirational long-term
pathways.
• Align domestic policy processes and international negotiations
through collective, predictable expectations about future
negotiation cycles.
• Reflect the inertia of infrastructure by updating near-term targets
by setting new targets for the next period. For example, in 2020 it
would make very little sense to adjust a 2025 target. Rather, new
ambition and reduction opportunities should be expressed by more
ambitious 2030 and 2035 targets.
• rolling, multi-period target framework
combined with a long-term low emissions
pathway, i.e. an indicative long-term low
emissions development strategy.
• 2025/2030 …2050
• A combination of Targets and Pathways
Rolling targets
Three tier approach
• Tier one: absolute, economy-wide targets relative
to a predefined base-year/period, including both
absolute reduction or absolute growth targets
(e.g. for emerging countries), or aspirational
peaking targets;
• Tier two: relative, economy-wide targets against
GDP (carbon intensity) or population (per capita)
or against ex ante defined BAU;
• Tier three: quantitative or qualitative sectoral
indicators, targets or policies organized around
the major emitting sectors.
The second pillar : actions in support
of UNFCCC agreement
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
The flute player :
Cities, subnationals authorities
Businesse acting in local or global value chains
Financial institutions :
National development banks
Multilaterals development banks
Pension and Soverereign funds
How to organize ?
• Working on the time horizon
• Risk disclosure
• Long term visions
Its complex stupid!
A role for economists
•
•
•
•
•
•
Work on this new reality :
Imperfect markets
No carbon price silver bullet solution
Inertia and lock in
Innovation
Co-benefits ….
GOOD LUCK FOR ALL OF US !