Equity in international greenhouse gases abatement scenarios: a multicriteria approach. (English) Zbl 1137.90566

Vaillancourt, Kathleen; Waaub, Jean-Philippe

Eur. J. Oper. Res. 153, No. 2, 489-505 (2004).

Summary: The climate change problem involves long-term global efforts through sustainable development. The international burden sharing of greenhouse gases (GHG) abatement constitutes a controversial debate. Equity is an important issue to be considered in the mitigation policies to insure the participation of as many developing countries as possible. The main purpose of this research is to allocate equitable international GHG emission entitlements using several criteria. There are many equity definitions and some are conflicting. A dynamical multicriterion method is proposed to compare various alternatives and to find a compromise solution. If the decision-making process can take into account interests and preoccupations of every country, significant progress could be made to achieve a world consensus. Several burden sharing schemes are proposed. Then, modeling abatement scenarios using the TIMES world energy model will allow us to determine the cost-effectiveness opportunities.

MSC:

90B50	Management decision making, including multiple objectives
90C29	Multi-objective and goal programming
86A10	Meteorology and atmospheric physics

Keywords:

Multiple criteria analysis; Equity; Climate change; Permit allocations; TIMES; world energy model

References:

[1]	Aaheim, H. A., The appropriateness of economic approaches to the analysis of burden-sharing, (Toth, F. L., Fair Weather? Equity Concerns in Climate Change (1999), Earthscan Publications: Earthscan Publications London), 94-111
[4]	Barrett, S., Acceptable allocations of tradeable carbon emission entitlements in a global warming treaty, Combating Global Warming (1992), UNCTD: UNCTD Geneva, pp. 85-113 (Chapter VI)
[5]	Bayer, J. L., Climate change and multiple views of fairness, (Toth, F. L., Fair Weather? Equity Concerns in Climate Change (1999), Earthscan Publications: Earthscan Publications London), 44-64
[6]	Berk, M. M.; den Elzen, M. G.J., Options for differenciation of future commitments in climate policy: How to realize timely participation to meet stringent climate goals?, Climate Policy, 1, 465-480 (2001)
[9]	Brans, J.-P.; Vincke, Ph., A preference ranking organization method: The PROMETHEE method for multiple criteria decision-making, Management Science, 31, 6, 647-656 (1985) · Zbl 0609.90073
[10]	Brans, J.-P.; Vincke, Ph.; Mareschal, B., How to select and how to rank projects: The PROMETHEE method, European Journal of Operational Research, 24, 228-238 (1986) · Zbl 0576.90056
[12]	Claussen, E.; McNeilly, L., The Complex Elements of Global Fairness (1998), Pew Center on Global Climate Change: Pew Center on Global Climate Change Washington, 36 p
[13]	Commission mondiale sur l’environnement et le développement (CMED), Notre avenir à tous (1988), Les Publications du Québec: Les Publications du Québec Québec, 454 p
[15]	Elzen, M. D.; Berk, M.; Schaeffer, M.; Olivier, J.; Hendriks, C.; Metz, B., The Brazilian Proposal and Other Options for International Burden Sharing: An Evaluation of Methodological and Policy Aspects Using the FAIR Model (1999), National Institute of Public Health and the Environment: National Institute of Public Health and the Environment Netherlands, 103 p
[16]	Grubb, M.; Sebenius, J.; Magalhaes, A.; Subak, S., Sharing the Burden, (Mintzer, I. M., Confronting Climate Change: Risks, Implications and Responses (1992), Cambridge University Press), 305-322, (Chapter 21)
[17]	Grubler, A.; Nakicenovic, N., International Burden Sharing in Greenhouse Gas Reduction (1994), International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis Laxenburg, 94 p
[18]	Gupta, S.; Bhandari, P. M., An effective allocation criterion for \(CO_2\) emissions, Energy Policy, 27, 727-736 (1999)
[19]	Hens, L.; Pastijn, H.; Struys, W., Multicriteria analysis of the burden sharing in the European Community, European Journal of Operational Research, 59, 248-261 (1992)
[20]	Houghton, J. T.; Filho, L. G.M.; Griggs, D. J.; Maskell, K., Stabilisation des gaz atmosphériques à effet de serre: Conséquences physiques, biologiques et socio-économiques (1997), Cambridge University Press, 63 p
[21]	Kanudia, A.; Loulou, R., Advanced bottom-up modelling for national and regional energy planning in response to climate change, International Journal of Environment and Pollution, 12, 2/3, 191-216 (1997)
[22]	Kanudia, A.; Loulou, R., Robust responses to climate change via stochastic MARKAL: The case of Québec, European Journal of Operational Research, 106, 15-30 (1998)
[23]	Kram, T., Energy Technology Systems Analysis Programme (ETSAP), Dealing with Uncertainty Together Summary of Annex VI (1996-1998) (1999), International Energy Agency, 83 p
[24]	Loulou, R.; Kanudia, A., The Kyoto Protocol, Inter-Provincial Cooperation, and Energy Trading: A systems analysis with integrated MARKAL models, Energy Studies Review, 9, 1, 1-23 (1998)
[25]	Loulou, R.; Kanudia, A.; Lavigne, D., GHG abatement in central Canada with inter-provincial cooperation, Energy Studies Review, 8, 2, 120-129 (1997)
[26]	Mareschal, B., Aide à la décision multicritère: Développements récents des méthodes, Cahiers du Centre d’études de recherche opérationnelle, 29, 3-4, 175-214 (1987) · Zbl 0635.90052
[27]	Mareschal, B., Aide à la décision multicritére: Développements et applications, Cahiers du Centre d’études de recherche opérationnelle, 31, 1-2, 13-120 (1989) · Zbl 0709.90066
[28]	Morita, T., Global modeling and future scenario for climatic stabilization based on SRES world: A comparative analysis on development paths and climatic policies, (Fu-chen, L.; Tokuda, H.; Cooray, N. S., The Sustainable Future of the Global System III (2000), Institute of Advanced Studies and The United Nations University: Institute of Advanced Studies and The United Nations University Tokyo), 125-148
[29]	Morita, T.; Robinson, J., Greenhouse gas emission mitigation scenarios and implications, (Climate Change 2001: Mitigation. IPCC, WG III (2001), Cambridge University Press), 115-166, (Chapter 2)
[30]	Nakicenovic, N.; Davidson, O.; Davis, G.; Grubler, A.; Kram, T.; LaRovere, E. L.; Metz, B.; Morita, T.; Pepper, W.; Pitcher, H.; Sankovski, A.; Shukla, P.; Swart, R.; Watson, R.; Dadi, Z., Special Report on Emission Scenarios. Summary (2000), Cambridge University Press, 20 p
[31]	Nakicenovic, N.; Grübler, A.; McDonald, A., Global Energy Perspectives (1998), Cambridge University Press, 299 p
[32]	Onigkeit, J.; Alcamo, J., A different perspective for global climate policy: combining burden sharing and climate protection, (Carraro, C., Efficiency and Equity of Climate Change Policy (2000), Kluwer Academic Publishers: Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht), 305-314
[33]	Ramanathan, R., A multicriteria methodology for global negociations on climate change, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Mans and Cybernetics, Part C: Applications and Reviews, 28, 4, 541-548 (1998)
[34]	Rayner, S.; Malone, E. L.; Thompson, M., Equity issues and integrated assessment, (Toth, F. L., Fair Weather? Equity Concerns in Climate Change (1999), Earthscan Publications: Earthscan Publications London), 11-43
[35]	Reiner, D. M.; Jacoby, H. D., Annex I Differention Proposals: Implications for Welfare, Equity and Policy (1998), Massachusetts Institute of Technology: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Boston, 20 p
[36]	Ridgley, M. A., Fair sharing of greenhouse gas burdens, Energy Policy, 24, 6, 517-529 (1996)
[37]	Ringius, L.; Torvanger, A.; Holtsmark, B., Can multi-criteria rules fairly distribute climate burdens?, Energy Policy, 26, 10, 777-794 (1998)
[39]	Roy, B.; Bouyssou, D., Aide multicritère à la Décision: Méthodes et Cas (1993), Economica: Economica Paris, 695 p · Zbl 0925.90230
[40]	Shukla, P. R., Justice, equity and efficiency in climate change: a developing country perspective, (Toth, F. L., Fair Weather? Equity Concerns in Climate Change (1999), Earthscan Publications: Earthscan Publications London), 145-159
[46]	Weyant, J. P., The Costs of the Kyoto Protocol: A Multi-Model Evaluation. The Costs of the Kyoto Protocol: A Multi-Model Evaluation, The Energy Journal (1999), 398 p (Kyoto special issue)