Common but differentiated convergence...Kornelis Blok, 2004: “Options for the second commitment period for the Kyoto Protocol”, Research report for the German Federal Environmental

RIVM (the Netherlands) and Ecofys (Germany) 1

Common but differentiated convergence

Michel den Elzen (RIVM, the Netherlands)Niklas Höhne (Ecofys, Germany)Martin Weiß (UBA, Germany)

Side Event COP-10 14th December 2004

Buenos Aires


Delayed participationCommon but Differentiated

Convergence (CDC)

GH

G/c

apTime

Threshold

Contraction & Convergence (C&C)

GH

G/c

ap

Time

IC

DC

LDC

CDC overcome two basic concerns of C&C:1. ADCs do not have to reduce at the same time as ICs2. CDC avoids political problems related to the resource sharing concept

and financial transfers, because of no excess emission for LDCs


Common-but-differentiated convergence (CDC)

� Three stages1. No commitments2. Positively binding emission targets 3. Convergence to an equal per capita level within e.g.

40 years as of entry

� Threshold: � World average GHG/cap

1. Timely participation NA-12. Rewards DC that keep emissions low3. Rewards Annex I action (low threshold)

GH

G/c

ap

Time

Threshold


Characteristics of CDC� Common: all countries converge to the same per capita

emission level.

� Differentiated: countries follow these common trajectories delayed

� Conditional: Non-Annex I actions are linked to Annex I actions

� Without excess emissions: only countries participate thatneed to reduce emissions

� Efficient: developing countries’ reductions are encouraged by “positively binding” targets. Emission trading possible

� Simple: Simple rules, only countries with high per capita emission need to participate


Results towards 550 ppmv CO2

0

5

10

15

20

25

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

2030

2035

2040

2045

2050

2055

2060

2065

2070

2075

2080

2085

2090

2095

2100

tCO

2eq

/cap

Annex I

Non Annex I

World total

Threshold

PhilippinesIndiaChina

S. Africa

Kenya

Saudi Arabia

USA

EU 25

JapanArgentina

Towards 550 ppmv CO2:

Threshold:30% above world average,

Convergence level:4.5 tCO2eq/cap

A1B scenarioExcl. LUCF CO2

GHG per capita




Threshold:30% above world average,



0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

1990

2000

2010

2020

2030

2040

2050

2060

2070

2080

2090

2100

MtC

O2e

q

India

China

Brazil

Saudi Arabia

USA

EU 25

Japan

GHG emissions




Threshold:10% below world average,



0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

2030

2035

2040

2045

2050

2055

2060

2065

2070

2075

2080

2085

2090

2095

2100

tCO

2eq

/cap

Annex I

Non Annex I

World total

Threshold

PhilippinesIndia

China

S. Africa

Kenya

Saudi Arabia

USAEU 25

Japan

Argentina

GHG per capita




Threshold:10% below world average,



2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

1990

2000

2010

2020

2030

2040

2050

2060

2070

2080

2090

2100

MtC

O2e

q

India

China

Brazil

Saudi Arabia

USA

EU 25

Japan

GHG emissions


Conclusions� New concept for an international climate regime

� Simple, and eliminates two concerns of C&C:

� ADCs do not have to reduce at the same time as ICs

� avoids political problems related to the resource sharing concept and financial transfers (no excess emissions LDCs)

� For 450 CO2: participation at roughly world average and convergence to 3 tCO2eq./cap within 40 years

� For 550 CO2: participation at roughly 50% above global average and convergence to 4.5 tCO2eq./cap within 40 years

� Decisions on post 2012 regime can be guided by the principles provided in the CDC approach:

� Developed countries per capita emissions converge

� Developing countries do the same but delayed and conditional to developed country action.


Common but differentiated convergence

N. Höhne, M. den Elzen, M. Weiß “Common but differentiated convergence (CDC)” in Niklas Höhne, Dian Phylipsen, Simone Ullrich, Kornelis Blok, 2004: “Options for the second commitment period for the Kyoto Protocol”, Research report for the German Federal Environmental Agency, soon available on www.fiacc.net

N. Höhne, M. den Elzen, M. Weiß “Common but differentiated convergence (CDC) - A new conceptual approach to long-term climate policy” submitted to climate policy

Contact:Niklas Höhne, [email protected] den Elzen, �� Martin Weiß, [email protected]


Backup slides


• LDC are exempt• Resource transfers to LDC, but these lack institutional capacity

• delayed participation, conditional to developed countries’ action

• All countries participate

• No excess allowances• Excess allowances (hot air) LDCs

• Via the delay it accounts for historical responsibility

• does not consider historical responsibility

• Two forms of commitments• One form of commitments

• bottom-up• top-down• Simple rules• Very simple rulesCDCContraction & Convergence


Time of participation 450 ppmv CO2

Region 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100Annex I 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Rest of Eastern Europe 71% 74% 80% 85% 90% 91% 91% 92% 92%

Argentina 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Brazil 67% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Mexico 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Venezuela 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Rest of Latin America 18% 69% 74% 81% 89% 89% 89% 89% 89%

Egypt 0% 0% 67% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

South Africa 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Nigeria 0% 0% 50% 67% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Rest of North Africa 34% 58% 60% 87% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Rest of Africa 2% 2% 9% 28% 48% 52% 65% 71% 71%

Saudi Arabia 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

United Arab Emirates 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Rest of Middle East 73% 85% 88% 88% 88% 88% 88% 88% 88%

China 0% 67% 83% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

India 0% 0% 33% 67% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Indonesia 0% 0% 67% 67% 83% 83% 83% 83% 83%

South Korea 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Malaysia 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Philippines 0% 0% 0% 50% 83% 83% 83% 83% 83%

Singapore 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Thailand 67% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Rest of Asia 8% 8% 10% 28% 41% 48% 51% 52% 53%


Time of participation 550 ppmv CO2

Region 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100Annex I 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Rest of Eastern Europe 38% 53% 57% 58% 58% 59% 60% 62% 62%

Argentina 83% 83% 83% 83% 83% 83% 83% 83% 83%

Brazil 0% 0% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50%

Mexico 0% 33% 67% 67% 67% 67% 67% 67% 67%

Venezuela 83% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Rest of Latin America 7% 13% 16% 29% 37% 37% 37% 39% 41%

Egypt 0% 0% 0% 33% 33% 33% 33% 33% 33%

South Africa 33% 67% 67% 67% 83% 83% 83% 83% 83%

Nigeria 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 33% 33% 33% 50%

Rest of North Africa 6% 6% 19% 40% 42% 42% 49% 49% 49%

Rest of Africa 1% 1% 2% 3% 11% 16% 23% 28% 32%

Saudi Arabia 83% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

United Arab Emirates 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Rest of Middle East 31% 41% 50% 64% 65% 65% 65% 65% 65%

China 0% 0% 17% 33% 33% 33% 67% 67% 67%

India 0% 0% 0% 0% 33% 33% 33% 33% 33%

Indonesia 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 17% 17% 33% 33%

South Korea 83% 83% 83% 83% 83% 83% 83% 83% 83%

Malaysia 33% 83% 83% 83% 83% 83% 83% 83% 83%

Philippines 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 17% 17%

Singapore 83% 83% 83% 83% 83% 83% 83% 83% 83%

Thailand 0% 0% 33% 67% 83% 83% 83% 83% 83%

Rest of Asia 7% 6% 6% 6% 7% 11% 16% 17% 17%


Immediate participation

Contraction & Convergence

GH

G/c

apTime

BAU

GH

G/c

ap

Time

IC

DC

LDC

IC

DC

LDC

Documents

Common but differentiated convergence...Kornelis Blok, 2004: “Options for the second commitment period for the Kyoto Protocol”, Research report for the German Federal Environmental