1. The empirical basis for consumption-based accounting
Dr. Daniel Moran,
Industrial Ecology Program
Norwegian University of Science and Technology
Carbon Consumption-based Accounting and Policy
Side-Event UNFCCC Bonn, 10 June 2015

2. Consumption-based accounts are built atop global supply chain databases:
- “Big data” accounts of production, trade, and consumption
- Constructed by universities and agencies (OECD, UNSD)

3. Some modeling is necessary because the relevant accounts are incomplete:
Incomplete data
Conflicting data
Incomplete accounting standards (no GASB)

4. Several CBA databases have been developed:
Sectors
Countries
Years
EXIOBASE
200 48
2007 (timeseries soon)
WIOD 35 41
Eora
25-400
187
GTAP 57
129
2004, 2007
GRAM 62

5. Are these database robust enough for policy use
Are these database robust enough for policy use? Do results converge between models? How sensitive are results to stochastic error?

6. Core macroeconomic values (GDP, GNE, imports, exports) should be identical across all models.

7. Macroeconomic constraints should be identical and well-obeyed by every MRIO.

8. Much of the difference in CBA results is caused by different reports of territorial emissions.
Models should all use UNFCCC data, but still there are differences (for good reasons).

10. Carbon footprints will vary more between accounts because of
Differences in the economic accounts
Differences in the environmental accounts
Differences can be in totals and/or sectorwise allocation.

14. Sensitivity analysis:
How much do the CBA results change if we perturb the input data?

15. Source: worldmrio.com/confidence

16. Conclusions:
- Models are relatively robust (10-20% variance)
- Territorial emissions accounts are actually the biggest source of uncertainty