Search

From the World2 and World3 models to contemporary Integrated Assessment Models (IAMs) that model carbon neutral emission pathways, global computer models have served as virtual laboratories for addressing economic, environmental and technological concerns together. Representing technological change has been a controversial element of global modelling efforts because, to a great extent, it sets the parameters on conceivable futures. To retrace this history, this article analyses four moments when modellers debated technological change: the controversy spurred by The Limits to Growth in the 1970s; subsequent global future studies during that decade; the IIASA Energy in a Finite World study in the 1980s; and the shift to endogenous technological change in IAMs in the 2000s. It shows that the notion of technological change as a predictable parameter affecting the future of society was not a given. Technological change progressively became a parameter in models as more elaborate methodologies were developed to simulate it. When modellers began to focus on climate action in the 1990s and 2000s, their interest in the relationship between technological change and social change dwindled. The increasing skill with which modellers formally represented technological dynamics was commensurate to the decline of heated discussions over how conflicting worldviews shaped simulations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An increasing number of countries issue Deep Decarbonization Strategies (DDS). While DDS contents are well analysed, the processes by which they are developed attract less attention. This paper investigates what numerical model(s) are used in these processes, how they are used, and how models, modellers and stakeholders jointly contribute to the production of DDS. It draws lessons from an in-depth analysis of the second French national low-carbon strategy, complemented with insights from the US, Swedish and Brazilian DDS production processes. While configurations differ, DDS processes typically rely on multiple, sometimes overlapping models and involve a broad range of stakeholders. Articulating models together, and through stakeholder consultations, produces both numbers and collectives that share visions of the future – and both are equally important. Setting up and coordinating such assemblages of models and stakeholders requires effort, time, anticipation and resources. The cases presented here highlight the importance of technical, institutional and relational legacies (e.g. prior experience of joint work, hybrid communities), and of political support. We conclude on the importance for policymakers to account for these dimensions when setting up DDS processes and layout avenues for further research. Key policy insights The production of Deep Decarbonization Strategies (DDS) relies on multi-model, multi-stakeholder processes and requires developing models in consultation with stakeholders. These modelling assemblages produce numbers, shared visions and also relationships – all of which are equally important when it comes to elaborating DDS. Such assemblages require time, resources, trial and error, which in turn points to the importance of institutional, relational and technical legacies (e.g. prior experience with and around modelling tools, hybrid communities), as well as of political support, in facilitating this work. DDS elaboration processes constitute a learning experiment and present opportunities for technical and institutional innovation. Policymakers should anticipate and plan for these dimensions when deciding to produce DDS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper focuses on transformational processes in a post Paris agreement context. It uses IMACLIM-R, an E3 (Environment--Energy--Economy) model allowing for the integration of urban forms, transport dynamics, environmental policies and behaviors. Building upon the study of a set of local low carbon experiments throughout the European Union (EU), the paper explores two contrasted stylized scenarios of the low carbon transition in Europe. It highlights that carbon pricing policies are useful guides for transition but cannot achieve the ambitious objective without significant transition costs. It shows that low carbon experiments in the transport and energy sectors are critical dimensions of complementary measures in favor of green infrastructures. Broadening and upscaling low carbon experiments helps overcome the inertias of the transport sector by fostering radical changes in infrastructures, thereby introducing deep transformations in mobility behavior. This can then generate positive macroeconomic outcomes, even though they are also dependent on specific financial support, calling for a renegotiation of the social contract based on specific fiscal reforms and measures to secure funding for these initiatives. The paper concludes with some research avenues for improving this preliminary work and calls for a better understanding of the complexity of the socio-economic patterns of both the transition and the conditions for an effective implementation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The economics of climate policy after Rio led to a climate centric paradigm which departs from the original UNFCCC's cooperative framework for designing climate policies from the perspective of sustainable development. This resulted in a cap-and-trade approach which aims to mitigate the adverse effects on development through appropriate transfers to achieve fair burden sharing. However, the continuation of this paradigm cannot untie the development-climate Gordian knot. (The Gordian Knot refers to a seemingly intractable problem. According to a Greek legend, Gordios arrived in Phrygia in an ox cart, was made King and dedicated his cart to Zeus, tying it up with an intricate knot. The person who would untie the knot would rule Asia. Alexander the Great found a solution by cutting it with his sword. Hourcade et al. (The design of climate policy. MIT Press, Cambridge, p 408, ) explain that, after Rio Earth Summit (1992), the climate negotiations remained disengaged from the debates on development pathways, thus tying up a new Gordian knot of misunderstandings.) Instead one loses sight of the benefits of cooperation in a global agreement to abate GHGs emissions. The challenge is now to align the development and climate objectives taking into consideration the changing context since the 1990s which includes a re-equilibrium of the world economic balance and the adverse context created by the 2008 financial crisis. This paper proposes that carbon finance should be considered as part of a general reform of the financial system. The adoption of a carbon value as a notional price could trigger a wave of low-carbon investments in the world thereby redirecting some global savings towards low-carbon investments, thus providing a lever for equitable access to development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Natures Sciences Sociétés is the property of EDP Sciences and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In this article, we analyze the socioeconomic effects of energy sustainability challenges raised by oil depletion and climate change at the European and global levels. We assess macroeconomic impacts at different period markers from 2010 to 2100 and under different visions of the future of globalization. Fragmented capital markets affect the pace and direction of change and induce additional economic losses in the long term. Regionalized good markets have a positive effect in the long term because less intense international trade moderates the effects of fossil fuel constraints. A sustainable energy future will require implementing policies and measures that are able to (a) provide correct incentives for long-term investments by resorting to other signals than current market prices, (b) incorporate sectoral measures that act complementarily to pricing scheme measures for sectors confronted with biased agents’ behaviors or strong inertias, and (c) foster globalization patterns that are consistent with energy sustainability objectives. The challenge consists in articulating the objectives and the instruments of these different policy and measures triggering the transition toward a sustainable future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]