Journal of Geographical Sciences ›› 2012, Vol. 22 ›› Issue (6): 1131-1148.doi: 10.1007/s11442-012-0987-1

• Human-Environment Interactions • Previous Articles     Next Articles

MRICES: A new model for emission mitigation strategy assessment and its application

WANG Zheng1,2, WU Jing1, ZHU Qianting3, WANG Lijuan1, GONG Yi1, LI Huaqun4   

  1. 1. Institute of Policy and Management, CAS, Beijing 100190, China;
    2. School of Business Administration, China University of Petroleum, Beijing 102249, China;
    3. East China Normal University, Key Laboratory of Geographical Information Science, Ministry of State Education of China, Shanghai 200062, China;
    4. School of Public Policy, George Mason University, Virginia 22030, USA
  • Received:2012-01-09 Revised:2012-08-16 Online:2012-12-15 Published:2012-12-15

Abstract:

Many global emission reduction strategies have been proposed, but few have been assessed quantitatively from the view of equality, efficiency and effectiveness. Integrated assessment models (IAM) is one of the effective ways to make climate policy modeling. So in this paper we developed the MRICES (Multi-regional integrated model of climate and economy with GDP spillovers) model, which is an IAM but extends to include GDP spillover mechanism, to make assessment on several strategies for global emission reduction, including the egalitarianism strategy, the UNDP strategy and the Copenhagen Accord. Using 1990 as a baseline for historical emission levels, the egalitarian strategy argues that developed countries should implement urgent emission reductions, whereas developing countries are allowed relatively higher future emission quotas. The UNDP strategy addresses the issue of substantial changes in global temperature but acknowledges that developing countries are not able to afford more costs for mitigation measures, which is inequitable from the perspective of a country’s right to develop. We also simulated the Copenhagen Accord to determine the consequences by the year 2100 if each country continues their current emission mitigation actions, and results indicated that the increase in global temperature will be 2.8℃ by 2100; consequently, much stronger emission reduction efforts must be implemented after 2020. Based on analysis on mitigation strategies, it is recognized that the common but differentiated responsibility principle must be insisted when making global mitigation strategy. To comply with this principle, the emission reduction baseline of developed and developing countries should be discriminated, so 1990 and 2005 can be taken as the base year for developed and developing countries respectively.

Key words: IAM, climate change, GDP spillover, mitigation strategy assessment