Pan Xunzhang (pxz06@163.com) Understanding the fairness of countries’ (I)NDCs under the Paris Agreement goals Pan Xunzhang (pxz06@163.com) Academy of Chinese Energy Strategy, China University of Petroleum, Beijing ,China

Overarching goal The Paris Agreement ‘hold the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to below 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels’ The (Intended) Nationally Determined Contributions ((I)NDCs) are hailed as a major first step on the long road for human society to achieve the Paris Agreement goals Over 190 countries and regions have already submitted their INDCs by now

Large global gaps between (I)NDCs and goals Very limited global emissions space Extremely large global emissions mitigations Source: UNEP 2016 Source: Rogelj, 2016, NAT

Fair contributions To achieve the goals, all countries need to provide fair and ambitious contributions in reducing emissions, considering differences in circumstances among countries To fill the gap, how to consider the benchmarks to guide countries in ratcheting- up ambition? One of the most fundamental questions surrounding the new Paris Agreement is whether countries’ proposals to reduce GHG emissions are fair or equally ambitious

Alternative ways to narrative fairness A possible way--effort-sharing approaches The UNFCCC: equity and CBDRRC principles An effort-sharing approach provides a specific interpretation of countries’ fair mitigation shares following one (or more) equity or fairness arguments Source: Höhne, 2017, CP

Effort-sharing studies in IPCC AR5 A wide range of effort-sharing approaches existing Six categories of effort-sharing approaches using specific definitions of equity principles: responsibility, capability, equality, responsibility–capability–need, equal cumulative per capita emissions, and staged approaches Source: IPCC, 2014

Comparisons between (I)NDCs and fair shares An effort-sharing framework incorporating multiple approaches is able to highlight possible ranges of countries’ emissions allowances for meeting different negotiable equity The comparison, between emissions from (I)NDCs and emissions allowances as calculated from the effort-sharing framework, is expected to illustrate whether and to what degree countries’ (I)NDCs are aligned with various equity principles This comparison provides some useful guidance in ratcheting-up national ambition to meet the 2°C or the 1.5°C goal

(I)NDC mitigations The submitted (I)NDCs are characterized with broad dimensions such as the coverage of gases, the scope of sectors and the form of mitigations Economy-wide Kyoto GHGs in all the IPCC sectors including LULUCF

Effort-sharing framework The framework covers all the six categories of equity principles in the IPCC AR5 The ranges of countries’ fair contributions would be properly covered

Existed studies Climate Action Tracker (2016), Robiou Du Pont et al. (2017) A more comprehensive effort-sharing framework is built that accounts for more approaches per IPCC category to constitute Might avoid debates on the selection of approaches Source: Robiou du pont, 2017, NCC

Comparisons under 2°C The global emissions range from 34.2 GtCO2eq to 45.2 GtCO2eq (about 3%–27% below 2010 levels) in 2030

Results under 2°C The NDCs of the United States of America and the European Union lack ambition with respect to the approaches that emphasize responsibility China’s NDC projection falls short of satisfying any approach in 2030 Among the eight analyzed Parties, only India, by achieving its most ambitious efforts, could be seen as an adequate contribution The others need to ratchet up their NDCs to bridge the gap between (I)NDCs and 2°C-consistent scenarios

China’s contributions Differences in the timing and level of peaks between NDC emissions trajectory and emissions allowances projection Focus exclusively on CO2 If implementing the most ambitious efforts, China’s NDC would be within the upper bound of emissions allowance ranges and meet the fair contributions resulting from the responsibility–capability–need

Comparisons under 1.5°C The global emissions are 33 GtCO2eq (about 29% below 2010 levels) in 2030

Results under 1.5°C India’s NDC could still be able to match a large majority of principles and approaches by implementing the most ambitious efforts. South Africa’s stringent target complies with responsibility-capability-need Beyond that, all other Parties’ NDCs fall substantially short of any equity principle For the USA, the EU and China, the emissions gaps with equity principles are at least 0.58–0.71 GtCO2eq (10%–12% of the 2010 emissions), 0.35 GtCO2eq (8% of the 2010 emissions) and 2.8–5.1 GtCO2eq (28%–50% of the 2010 emissions) in 2030, respectively

Application I Provide a possible way to analyze the fairness of the (I)NDCs and consider how to ratchet up national ambitions Based on the comparison between (I)NDC emissions and emissions allowances, each country might first consider to review its current (I)NDC to guarantee a fair contribution by 2030 Then the international community could further discuss how the global emissions gap could be shared amongst countries under the UNFCCC

Application II In the Paris Agreement, Parties have agreed to submit low-emission development strategies by 2020 to envisage their long-term mitigations until 2050 The anthropogenic global warming highly relates to cumulative emissions released into the atmosphere Emissions before 2030 exhaust the available emissions allowances under the Paris Agreement goals throughout the whole century Source: Peters, 2015, ERL

Implications for mitigations beyond 2030 The USA’s emissions allowances in this century would fully run out before 2025 under responsibility-capability-need and equal cumulative per capita emissions Russian Federation and South Africa might consider to accelerate the mitigation effort before 2050 because of the GHG allowance debts existing for 2051–2100 under all principles and approaches

Exemplary emissions trajectories For example: China, assuming an exponential convergence of CO2 emissions Based on the principle of equal cumulative per capita emissions

Application III How countries should transform energy systems to make at least fair contributions to the Paris Agreement goals? For example: China, modeling by Global Change Assessment Model (GCAM)

Thank you