The allocation of CO2 emissions as a claims problem

Abstract

This paper proposes to use claims models as a reasonable and operative alternative in order to allocate CO 2 emissions by countries (or groups), in the framework of multilateral negotiations and the fight against climate change. This framework has two characteristics which fits this type of claims models: a restrictive global endowment (the maximum world emissions permitted) and the excess of emissions (and demand) by countries. The proposed methodology consists on establishing some requirements that any admissible distribution solution should satisfy, examining a broad group of theoretical distribution solutions emerged from the specific literature and analyzing their application according to reasonable ordering criteria linked to equity and stability properties. The proposed theoretical framework is applied empirically to an analysis by groups of countries in the period 2010-2050, using various world endowments from Meinshausen et al. (2009), together with claims forecasts associated with the RCP scenarios. The results obtained point out that for intermediate claims scenarios the solutions associated with the constrained equal awards (CEA) and α-minimal (α-min) solutions are typically selected. In particular, these two solutions are clearly equity-sensitive, where the efforts to be made by Asia and OECD are very important, as a whole, and especially in the case of the CEA. Given these circumstances, and the better balance between equity and proportionality associated to the α-min allocation methodology maybe that one would be more operative and acceptable.

Fair international protocols for the abatement of GHG emissions

“…15 A crucial aspect of our axiomatic analysis of GHG reduction targets is to bring to the table historical and population considerations, which can hardly be ignored to deal with this problem. As such, our analysis departs from Giménez-Gómez et al, (2016) and Duro et al, (2020), who considered the problem without those considerations and used standard rules from the literature on adjudicating conflicting claims (in its benchmark model) to suggest solutions.…”

“…We use the so-called SRES A1FI Emissions Scenarios for the claims of each group. 11 The claims are defined as the remainder of the projected cumulative emissions in year 2050: REF = 300.36; ALM = 618.78; OECD90 = 768.47; ASIA = 1,048.57. For historical emissions and populations, we use the CAIT of the World Resources Institute.…”

Allocation of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Using the Fairness Principle: A Multi-Country Analysis

“…It is imperative that fossil fuel producing countries modify their business models to combat climate change, and all countries in general should realize that increasing the global share of clean energy in the energy consumption structure and restructuring industries would be an effective policy. Theoretical claim problem (a claim problem is a particular distribution problem in which the amount to be distributed, endowment E, is not enough to cover the agents' claims on it [20]) approaches are impracticable due to the absence of a supra-national authority-a social planner-with the capacity to propose a fair and egalitarian system for allocating resources based on different socially accepted principles [25], and allocation agreements that impose convergence would result in significant international income transfers. It is important to underline the responsibility of each government in achieving higher targets.…”

“…Research into carbon dioxide emissions allocation and convergence is a fertile field that includes literature reviews and meta-analyses, such as Pettersson et al [22], Zhou and Wang [23], Acar et al [7], and Payne [24], or more recently, Duro, Giménez-Gómez, and Vilella [25]. The academic literature also includes studies that have addressed emission allocation at the company level, particularly through the game theory approach [26][27][28][29] and linear programming models such as data envelope analysis [30][31][32].…”

Multi-issue bankruptcy problems with crossed claims

“…These problems were first studied by O'Neill (1982) and Aumann and Maschler (1985) . Since then this problem and their extensions have been widely studied (see Thomson 2003Thomson , 2015Thomson , 2019 for an excellent analysis of bankruptcy problems from an axiomatic perspective) and many applications of them can be found in the literature (see, for example, Gallastegui et al 2002;Pulido et al 2008Pulido et al , 2002Niyato and Hossain 2006;Casas-Méndez et al 2011;Bergantiños et al 2012;Gozálvez et al 2012;Hu et al 2012;Lucas-Estañ et al 2012;Giménez-Gómez et al 2016;Sánchez-Soriano et al 2016;Gutiérrez et al 2018;Bergantiños et al 2018;Duro et al 2020;Wickramage et al 2020, among others).…”