Roundtable: Research for Long-Term Climate Policy

Abstract

In order to limit climate impacts, phasing out net greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 has become a focal point of climate policy in a growing number of countries. The EU has agreed to such an aggregate goal as has the USA, some countries have announced more ambitious deadlines, while others aim at the same goal somewhat later (such as China). At minimum, ambitious goals risk the challenge of time inconsistency, i.e., under changed circumstances, this goal may be retracted or simply not complied with in the absence of external enforcement. Other challenges lurk, e.g., by way of technological, economic, political and behavioral changes that may be beyond the control of governments and either accelerate or decelerate the reduction efforts regarding greenhouse gas emissions. Given the architecture of the 2015 Paris Agreement on Climate Change, enforcement is relegated largely to naming and shaming. Ultimately, domestic climate policies will bear the major burden of accomplishing ambitious long-term climate goals. Rather than finding some master solution on how to achieve sufficient mitigation to honor a net zero emissions goal, the purpose of this roundtable is to present ideas on how to conduct fruitful research that probes whether ambitious announcements for carbon neutrality are credible or that generate research results that might be practically useful to achieve such goals. It would also be enlightening to probe why some countries may eschew to set themselves such ambitious long-term policy goals. To shed light on these questions, the roundtable invites cutting-edge topics by way of dedicated two-page extended outlines that form the background for a fruitful discussion among the roundtable panellists. The format has been used in past conferences (on different topics) and proven fruitful. In conclusion, the purpose of this roundtable is to initiate research on a major unresolved issue of ambitious long-term climate mitigation. The researchers involved represent geographical, thematic, and methodological diversity.