Assessing the Missed Benefits of Countries' National Contributions
Countries are currently in the process of preparing and submitting their Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs) to the achievement of Article 2 of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), which is for the stabilisation of atmospheric greenhouses gases (GHGs) at a safe level. In 2009, in Copenhagen, Parties to the UNFCCC agreed that a safe level for the stabilisation of atmospheric GHG concentration is a level which should not cause a global temperature increase in excess of 2°C compared to pre-industrial years. An increasing number of Parties and analysts now support a limit of 1.5°C, in light of more recent scientific analysis on the causes and effects of climate change. Three major steps for the achievement of this target are the short-term phase out of fossil fuel production and consumption, increased installation of renewable energy generation capacities, and implementation of measures for increased energy efficiency.
Countries are expected to present contributions that are as ambitious as their national circumstances allow. A key consideration and constraint in this context is the perceived upfront costs associated with transitioning to a low carbon economy, including the gradual depreciating of unsustainable industries which often occupy a central position in a country’s economic and political climate. An increasing volume of research from recent years demonstrates how a more serious consideration of the co-benefits of climate change mitigation action can bring down the perceived costs considerably, and even generate positive economy-wide returns.
This report first provides an overview of the general co-benefits that climate action may have and how they could be used to incentivise further ambitious greenhouse gas (GHG) reductions. We then provide illustrative results for the forgone or missed benefits that could have been achieved with action to meet a trajectory towards 100% renewables by 2050 (and thus in line with keeping global warming below 2°C and possibly even 1.5°C), as compared to the current policies and the INDCs of USA, China, the EU, Canada and Japan.