@article{DoebbelingHildebrandtMierschKhannaetal., author = {D{\"o}bbeling-Hildebrandt, Niklas and Miersch, Klaas and Khanna, Tarun M. and Bachelet, Marion and Bruns, Stephan B. and Callaghan, Max and Edenhofer, Ottmar and Flachsland, Christian and Forster, Piers M. and Kalkuhl, Matthias and Koch, Nicolas and Lamb, William F. and Ohlendorf, Nils and Steckel, Jan Christoph and Minx, Jan C.}, title = {Systematic review and meta-analysis of ex-post evaluations on the effectiveness of carbon pricing}, series = {Nature Communications}, volume = {15}, journal = {Nature Communications}, publisher = {Springer Science and Business Media LLC}, issn = {2041-1723}, doi = {10.1038/s41467-024-48512-w}, abstract = {Today, more than 70 carbon pricing schemes have been implemented around the globe, but their contributions to emissions reductions remains a subject of heated debate in science and policy. Here we assess the effectiveness of carbon pricing in reducing emissions using a rigorous, machine-learning assisted systematic review and meta-analysis. Based on 483 effect sizes extracted from 80 causal ex-post evaluations across 21 carbon pricing schemes, we find that introducing a carbon price has yielded immediate and substantial emission reductions for at least 17 of these policies, despite the low level of prices in most instances. Statistically significant emissions reductions range between -5\% to -21\% across the schemes (-4\% to -15\% after correcting for publication bias). Our study highlights critical evidence gaps with regard to dozens of unevaluated carbon pricing schemes and the price elasticity of emissions reductions. More rigorous synthesis of carbon pricing and other climate policies is required across a range of outcomes to advance our understanding of "what works" and accelerate learning on climate solutions in science and policy.}, language = {en} } @techreport{FlachslandEdenhoferJakobetal., type = {Working Paper}, author = {Flachsland, Christian and Edenhofer, Ottmar and Jakob, Michael and Steckel, Jan}, title = {Developing the International Carbon Market : Linking Options for the EU ETS ; Report to the Policy Planning Staff in the Federal Foreign Office}, pages = {105 S.}, language = {en} } @article{SteckelJakobFlachslandetal., author = {Steckel, Jan Christoph and Jakob, Michael and Flachsland, Christian and Kornek, Ulrike and Lessmann, Kai and Edenhofer, Ottmar}, title = {From climate finance towards sustainable development finance}, series = {WIREs Climate Change}, volume = {8}, journal = {WIREs Climate Change}, number = {1}, doi = {10.1002/wcc.437}, pages = {8}, abstract = {Decarbonizing the global energy system requires large-scale investment flows, with a central role for international climate finance to mobilize private funds. The willingness to provide international finance in accordance with common but differentiated responsibilities was acknowledged by the broad endorsement of the Paris Agreement, and the Green Climate Funds in particular. The international community aims to mobilize at least USD 100 billion per year for mitigation and adaption in developing countries. In this article, we argue that too little attention has been paid on the spending side of climate finance, both in the political as well as the academic debate. To this end, we review the challenges encountered in project-based approaches of allocating climate finance in the past. In contrast to project-based finance, we find many advantages to spending climate finance in support of price-based national policies. First, the support for international climate cooperation is improved when efforts of successively rising domestic carbon pricing levels are compensated. Second, carbon pricing sets incentives for least-cost mitigation. Third, investing domestic revenues from emission pricing schemes could advance a country's individual development goals and ensure the recipient's 'ownership' of climate policies. We conclude that by reconciling the global goal of cost-efficient mitigation with national policy priorities, climate finance for carbon pricing could become a central pillar of sustainable development and promote international cooperation to achieve the climate targets laid down in the Paris Agreement.}, language = {en} } @article{FlachslandJakobSteckeletal.2014, author = {Flachsland, Christian and Jakob, Michael and Steckel, Jan C. and Baumstark, Lavinia}, title = {Climate Finance for Developing Country Mitigation: Blessing or Curse?}, series = {Climate and Development}, volume = {7}, journal = {Climate and Development}, number = {1}, publisher = {Taylor \& Francis}, issn = {1756-5537}, doi = {10.1080/17565529.2014.934768}, pages = {1 -- 15}, year = {2014}, abstract = {Under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, industrialized countries have agreed to cover the incremental costs of climate change mitigation in developing countries and recent climate negotiations have reaffirmed the central role of climate finance for global mitigation efforts. We use an integrated energy-economy-climate model to assess the potential magnitude of financial transfers to developing countries that can be expected under non-market transfer mechanisms as well as international emission trading with several allocation schemes. Our results indicate that for the latter, depending on international permit allocation rules financial transfers to developing countries could reach almost USD bln 400 per year in 2020, with Sub-Saharan Africa receiving financial inflows of as much as 14.5\% of its GDP. Reviewing the literature on natural resource revenues, official development assistance and foreign direct investment, we identify three major channels through which such sizable financial inflows may induce harmful effects for recipients: volatility, Dutch disease, and rent-seeking and corruption. We discuss the relevance of these mechanisms for climate finance and identify institutional arrangements which could help to avoid a 'climate finance curse'. We conclude that there is no deterministic relationship between financial inflows and adverse consequences, as the most serious problems could be prevented or at least alleviated by appropriately designed policies and governance provisions.}, language = {en} } @article{HirthSteckel, author = {Hirth, Lion and Steckel, Jan}, title = {The role of capital costs for decarbonizing the electricity sector}, series = {Environmental Research Letters}, volume = {11}, journal = {Environmental Research Letters}, number = {11}, issn = {1748-9326}, doi = {10.1088/1748-9326/11/11/114010}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:b1570-opus4-22804}, pages = {8}, abstract = {Low-carbon electricity generation, i.e. renewable energy, nuclear power and carbon capture and storage, is more capital intensive than electricity generation through carbon emitting fossil fuel power stations. High capital costs, expressed as high weighted average cost of capital (WACC), thus tend to encourage the use of fossil fuels. To achieve the same degree of decarbonization, countries with high capital costs therefore need to impose a higher price on carbon emissions than countries with low capital costs. This is particularly relevant for developing and emerging economies, where capital costs tend to be higher than in rich countries. In this paper we quantitatively evaluate how high capital costs impact the transformation of the energy system under climate policy, applying a numerical techno-economic model of the power system. We find that high capital costs can significantly reduce the effectiveness of carbon prices: if carbon emissions are priced at USD 50 per ton and the WACC is 3\%, the cost-optimal electricity mix comprises 40\% renewable energy. At the same carbon price and a WACC of 15\%, the cost-optimal mix comprises almost no renewable energy. At 15\% WACC, there is no significant emission mitigation with carbon pricing up to USD 50 per ton, but at 3\% WACC and the same carbon price, emissions are reduced by almost half. These results have implications for climate policy; carbon pricing might need to be combined with policies to reduce capital costs of low-carbon options in order to decarbonize power systems.}, language = {en} } @article{JakobFlachslandSteckeletal., author = {Jakob, Michael and Flachsland, Christian and Steckel, Jan Christoph and Urpelainen, Johannes}, title = {Actors, objectives, context: A framework of the political economy of energy and climate policy applied to India, Indonesia, and Vietnam}, series = {Energy Research \& Social Science}, volume = {70}, journal = {Energy Research \& Social Science}, doi = {10.1016/j.erss.2020.101775}, pages = {1 -- 12}, abstract = {Devising policies that facilitate a transition to low-carbon energy systems requires a close understanding of the country-specific political economy of energy and climate policy. We develop a generalized AOC ('Actors, Objectives, Context') political economy framework to inform and enable comparison of country-specific case studies of how economic structure, political institutions, and the political environment shape policy outcomes. Our actor-centered perspective is built on the assumption that those policies are implemented that best meet the objectives of actors with the greatest influence on policy decisions. Applying the framework in practice includes four basic steps: i) identifying the societal and political actors most relevant for the formulation, implementation and enforcement of energy and climate policies; ii) spelling out these actors' underlying objectives; iii) assessing the economic, institutional, discursive and environmental context which determines how certain objectives matter for certain societal actors; and iv) analyzing the dynamic interactions among these factors leading to aggregate policy outcomes. Context factors determine how societal actors influence political actors engaged in formal public policy formulation, implementation and enforcement, and how the dynamic interplay of different political actors' interests results in energy and climate policy outcomes. The framework can accommodate a wide range of theoretical perspectives. We illustrate how the framework enables conducting comparable energy and climate policy country case studies, using the example of coal use in India, Indonesia and Vietnam. Finally, we discuss how the framework can contribute to the identification of entry points that could bring about policy change.}, language = {en} } @article{OhlendorfFlachslandNemetetal., author = {Ohlendorf, Nils and Flachsland, Christian and Nemet, Gregory F. and Steckel, Jan Christoph}, title = {Carbon price floors and low-carbon investment: A survey of German firms}, series = {Energy Policy}, volume = {169}, journal = {Energy Policy}, number = {113187}, issn = {0301-4215}, doi = {10.1016/j.enpol.2022.113187}, abstract = {Introducing a price floor in emissions trading schemes (ETS) theoretically stabilizes expectations on future carbon prices and thus fosters low-carbon investment. Yet, ex post evidence on high carbon prices is scant and the relevance of carbon pricing for investment decisions is frequently contested. We provide empirical ex ante evidence on how a price floor in the EU ETS would impact the size and portfolio of energy firms' investments. Analyzing survey responses of high-level managers in 113 German energy and industry companies, we find that the level of the price floor is crucial. A low price floor trajectory only provides insurance against downward price fluctuations and would leave investments largely unchanged except for industries receiving electricity price compensation, which reduce their investments. A high floor, significantly increasing the price level beyond current expectations, leads to higher investment by the majority of firms, especially by green firms, while investment in fossil energy would partially be abolished. Our studies implies that price floors can be important design components of ETS. However, policymakers need to ensure that they are at sufficiently high levels to affect investment decisions in a meaningful way.}, language = {en} } @techreport{FlachslandSteckelJakobetal., type = {Working Paper}, author = {Flachsland, Christian and Steckel, Jan and Jakob, Michael and Fahl, Ulrich and Feist, Marian and G{\"o}rlach, Benjamin and K{\"u}hner, Ann-Kathrin and T{\"a}nzler, Dennis and Zeller, Marie}, title = {Eckpunkte zur Entwicklung einer Klimaaußenpolitikstrategie Deutschlands}, publisher = {Kopernikus-Projekt Ariadne}, address = {Potsdam}, pages = {38}, abstract = {Eine koh{\"a}rente Klimaaußenpolitik (KAP) Deutschlands ist essentiell f{\"u}r das Gelingen sowohl der nationalen und europ{\"a}ischen Energiewende als auch f{\"u}r die effektive Unterst{\"u}tzung ambitionierter Klimapolitik außerhalb der Europ{\"a}ischen Union. Ziel dieses Ariadne-Hintergrundpapiers ist es, einen Diskussionsbeitrag zur Strukturierung der Debatte um die Eckpunkte und Optionen zur Ausarbeitung und Weiterentwicklung der deutschen KAP-Strategie zu leisten. Dazu werden vier Kategorien relevanter Ziele unterschieden. Diese reichen von klassischen klimapolitischen Zielen {\"u}ber industriepolitische sowie sicherheits- und handelspolitische Ziele hin zu breiteren außenpolitischen Zielen. F{\"u}r jedes Ziel m{\"u}ssen entsprechende Mittel identifiziert werden, mit denen es erreicht werden kann, und Barrieren, die ihm im Weg stehen und entsprechend bedacht werden m{\"u}ssen. F{\"u}r die Charakterisierung und Analyse verschiedener Mittel werden f{\"u}nf Kategorien vorgeschlagen. Eine zentrale, aber in der Bewertung konzeptionell und empirisch herausfordernde Kategorie ist dabei das Transformationspotenzial einer Maßnahme. Im Fall von Zielkonflikten und begrenzten Ressourcen m{\"u}ssen Ziele priorisiert werden. Wir skizzieren daf{\"u}r einen analytischen Rahmen und diskutieren illustrativ m{\"o}gliche Optionen zur strategischen Gesamtausrichtung. Diese umfassen zum einen KAP-Gesamtstrategien von Staaten gegen{\"u}ber allen anderen L{\"a}ndern, und zum anderen Strategien f{\"u}r spezifische Staaten (z.B. die deutsche Strategie f{\"u}r den Umgang mit Indien oder S{\"u}dafrika). Dabei k{\"o}nnen Strategien in einem Kontinuum von maximaler Priorisierung von Klimazielen (Klimapolitik First) bis hin zur nachrangigen Behandlung (Klimapolitik als Mittel zum Zweck) verortet und entsprechend ausgestaltet werden. Neben den Inhalten der Strategie werden Fragen der Organisation und Koordination in der Entwicklung und Implementierung der KAP-Strategie in den Blick genommen und die n{\"a}chsten Schritte diskutiert. Eine erfolgreiche KAP-Strategie sollte dabei von Beginn an zwischen zentralen Stakeholdern im In- und Ausland in jeweils geeigneten Formaten erarbeitet, implementiert und im Sinne eines Lernprozesses fortlaufend angepasst werden. Eine KAP sollte sich in die breitere Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik Deutschlands einf{\"u}gen, da relevante Politikfelder auf verschiedenen Ebenen eng miteinander verbunden sind. Bei der Erarbeitung der neuen KAP-Strategie der Bundesregierung sollte dazu insbesondere auf Koh{\"a}renz zur deutschen Sicherheits- und der Chinastrategie geachtet werden. Grundlage der Strategieentwicklung ist die Kl{\"a}rung m{\"o}glicher Ziele und Mittel der deutschen KAP und ihrer Wechselwirkungen miteinander. Eine KAP-Strategie muss durch Analysen zu Umsetzbarkeit und Kosten, politischen Widerst{\"a}nden und Zielkonflikten informiert sein und die normativen Vorgaben der deutschen Außenpolitik ber{\"u}cksichtigen.}, language = {de} } @article{JakobLambSteckeletal., author = {Jakob, Michael and Lamb, William F. and Steckel, Jan Christoph and Flachsland, Christian and Edenhofer, Ottmar}, title = {Understanding different perspectives on economic growth and climate policy}, series = {WIREs Climate Change}, journal = {WIREs Climate Change}, doi = {10.1002/wcc.677}, pages = {1 -- 17}, abstract = {Should economic growth continue in a world threatened by the prospect of catastrophic climate change? The scientific and public debate has brought forth a broad spectrum of views and narratives on this question, ranging from neoclassical economics to degrowth. We argue that different positions can be attributed to underlying differences in views on (a) factors that determine human well-being, (b) the feasibility and desirability of economic growth, (c) appropriate intervention points, and (d) preferences about governance and policy options. For each of these dimensions, we propose points of agreement on which a consensus between conflicting positions might be achieved. From this basis, we distill a sustainability transition perspective that could act as a basis for a renewed debate on how to align human well-being with environmental sustainability.}, language = {en} }