This paper analyzes the economic and investment implications of a series of climate mitigation scenarios, characterized by different levels of ambition for long-term stabilization goals and transitional pathways. Results indicate that although milder climate objectives can be achieved at moderate costs, stringent stabilization paths, compatible with the 2°C target, might require significant economic resources. Innovation and technology are shown to be able to mitigate, but not structurally alter, this trade-off. Technologies that allow capturing CO2 from the atmosphere are shown to be important for expanding the feasibility space of stringent climate policies, though only if deployed at a scale which would represent a tremendous challenge. In general, the analysis indicates that the timing of mitigation is an important factor of cost containment, with early action being desirable. It also elaborates on the set of mitigation strategies and policies that would be required to achieve climate protection at maximum efficiency.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Azar C, Lindgren K, Obersteiner M, Riahi K, van Vuuren D, den Elzen M, Möllersten K, Larson E (2010) The feasibility of low CO2 concentration targets and the role of bio-energy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS). Clim Change 100: 195–202
Blanford G, Richels R, Rutherford T (2009) Feasible climate targets: the roles of economic growth, coalition development and expectations, Energy Econ (in Press). doi:10.1016/j.eneco.2009.06.003
Bosetti V, Carraro C, Galeotti M, Massetti E, Tavoni M (2006) WITCH: a world induced technical change hybrid model, The Energy J, Special issue on hybrid modeling of energy-environment policies: reconciling bottom-up and top-down, 13–38
Bosetti V, Carraro C, Massetti E (2008) Banking permits: economic efficiency and distributional effects. J Policy Model 31(3): 382–403
Bosetti V, Lubowski R, Golub A, Markandia A (2009a) Linking reduced deforestation and a global carbon market: impacts on costs, financial flows, and technological innovation Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei, Working Paper 56
Bosetti V, Carraro C, Tavoni M (2009b) Climate change mitigation strategies in fast-growing countries: the benefits of early action, Energy Econ (in Press). doi:10.1016/j.eneco.2009.06.011
Bosetti V, Carraro C, Tavoni M (2009c) Climate policy after 2012. Technology, timing, participation, CESifo economic studies, vol 55, 2/2009, pp 235–254
Clarke L, Edmonds J, Krey V, Richels R, Rose S, Tavoni M (2009) International climate policy architectures: overview of the EMF 22 international scenarios. Energy Econ 31: S64–S81
Clarke L, Edmonds J, Jacoby H, Pitcher H, Reilly J, Richels R (2007) Scenarios of greenhouse gas emissions and atmospheric concentrations. Sub-report 2.1 a of synthesis and assessment product 2.1 by the US climate change science program and the subcommittee on global change research, Department of energy, Office of biological & environmental research, Washington, DC
Eliasch J (2008) Climate change: financing global forests. Office of Climate Change, UK
Tavoni M, Tol R (2009) Counting only the hits? The risk of underestimating the costs of stringent climate policy. Clim Change 100: 769–778
About this article
Cite this article
Bosetti, V., Carraro, C. & Tavoni, M. Timing of Mitigation and Technology Availability in Achieving a Low-Carbon World. Environ Resource Econ 51, 353–369 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-011-9502-x
- Climate policy
- Stabilization costs