Search

Global firms are increasingly adopting greenhouse gas mitigation targets in response to climate change. These targets serve as a spur for carbon mitigation initiatives, provide guidelines to select appropriate mitigation actions, and set the standards to measure the progress of the mitigation efforts. Despite their important functionalities, firm-level mitigation targets have rarely been studied. In this paper we aim to provide a comparative view on mitigation targets set by global firms across different countries and industrial sectors. The analysis focuses on four dimensions, i.e., adoption, metric, scope, and stringency. We find Japan far leads the other major countries in terms of target adoption, but the targets of Japanese firms are generally less stringent. Canadian firms are laggards in both target adoption and target stringency. The mitigation targets are also considerably uncommon among Australian firms. Firms in developing countries fall behind in target stringency and display a significantly greater divergence than developed countries in sectoral adoption rate. The European Union firms are most likely to cover the emissions in their supply chains in targets. Target stringency has substantially tightened from 2005 to 2012. For all the countries in this study, around 95% of the firm-level targets are more stringent than the Intended Nationally Determined Contributions submitted to the Paris Agreement. Setting mitigation target has a significant positive impact on both the likelihood of investing in renewable energy and the amount of investment in renewable energy. However, there is no evidence that more stringent targets lead to higher investment. These findings point to the most pressing issues with regard to corporate mitigation target-setting that policymakers and corporate management should address. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: The EU''s new energy and environment policy – agreed by government leaders in their Council meeting in March 2007 – established a political agenda to tackle three core energy objectives: sustainability, economic competitiveness and security of supply. A triad of specific policies addresses these challenges: first, the 20/20/20 targets of the EU; then, the Second Strategic Energy Review of the European Commission; and finally, plans to liberalise energy markets. The European Union''s ‘20/20/20′ targets for 2020: reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 20% comparing with 1990 level (to become a 30% reduction if other major global economies join), increase the share of renewables in the final energy consumption to 20% and to achieve 20% improvement in energy efficiency compared to the level in 2020 if existing trends were to continue. The aim of the paper is to analyse the feasibility of EU to implement 20/20/20 targets under the various international GHG trading regimes. GHG trading regimes were addressed by developing 10 energy scenarios until 2020 for EU by applying several energy modelling tools ranging from top down partial equilibrium to detailed technology based bottom up models. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]