TY - JOUR A1 - Flachsland, Christian A1 - Carraro, Carlo A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar A1 - Kolstad, Charles A1 - Stavins, Robert A1 - Stowe, Robert T1 - The IPCC at a Crossroads: Opportunities for Reform JF - Science N2 - The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has proven its value as an institution for large-scale scientific collaboration to synthesize and assess large volumes of climate research for use by policy-makers, as well as for establishing credibility of findings among diverse national governments. But the IPCC has received considerable criticism of both its substance and process. The new IPCC leadership to be elected in October could help guide the IPCC to a clear, shared understanding of future objectives and could shape procedural reforms. We identify key opportunities for reform by addressing two related questions: Is the IPCC doing the right things? Is the IPCC doing things right? Y1 - 2015 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aac4419 SN - 1095-9203 VL - 350 IS - 6256 SP - 34 EP - 35 PB - American Association for the Advancement of Science CY - Washington, DC [u.a.] ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Flachsland, Christian A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar A1 - Creutzig, Felix T1 - Closing the Emission Price Gap JF - Global Environmental Change N2 - Even without internationally concerted action on climate change mitigation, there are important incentives for countries to put a price on their domestic emissions, including public finance considerations, internalizing the climate impacts of their own emissions, and co-benefits, such as clean air or energy security. Whereas these arguments have been mostly discussed in separate strands of literature, this article carries out a synthesis that exemplifies how policies to put a price on emissions can be conceptualized in a multi-objective framework. Despite considerable uncertainty, empirical evidence suggests that different countries may face quite different incentives for emission pricing. For instance, avoided climate damages and co-benefits of reduced air pollution appear to be the main motivation for emission pricing in China, while for the US generating public revenue dominates and for the EU all three motivations are of intermediate importance. We finally argue that such unilateral incentives could form the basis for incremental progress in international climate negotiations toward a realistic climate treaty based on national interest and differentiated emission pricing and describe how such an agreement could be put into practice. KW - Unilateral incentives KW - Co-benefits KW - Hybrid climate agreement Y1 - 2015 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.01.003 VL - 31 SP - 132 EP - 143 PB - Elsevier B.V. CY - Amsterdam ER - TY - CHAP A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar A1 - Flachsland, Christian A1 - Jakob, Michael T1 - The Atmosphere as a Global Commons – Challenges for International Cooperation and Governance T2 - The Handbook on the Macroeconomics of Climate Change Y1 - 2014 SN - 978-0199856978 SP - 260 EP - 296 PB - Oxford University Press CY - Oxford ER - TY - CHAP A1 - Flachsland, Christian A1 - Lessmann, Kai A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar T1 - Climate Policy in a decentralized World T2 - Climate Change, Justice, and Sustainability: Linking Climate and Development Policy Y1 - 2014 SN - 978-9400799028 SP - 257 EP - 268 PB - Springer CY - München ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Flachsland, Christian A1 - Brunner, Steffen A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar A1 - Creutzig, Felix T1 - Climate Policies for road transport revisited (II): Closing the policy gap with cap-and-trade JF - Energy Policy Y1 - 2011 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.01.053 SN - 1873-6777 VL - 39 IS - 4 SP - 2100 EP - 2110 PB - Elsevier CY - Mexico ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Flachsland, Christian A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar A1 - Knopf, Brigitte T1 - Science and religion in dialogue over the global commons JF - Nature Climate Change N2 - The Pope's encyclical makes unprecedented progress in developing scientific dialogue with religion by drawing on research, and encouraging further discussion about the ethical challenge of governing the global commons. KW - Climate-change policy KW - Ethics KW - Policy Y1 - 2015 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2798 VL - 5 IS - 10 SP - 907 EP - 909 PB - Springer Nature ER - TY - CHAP A1 - Brunner, Steffen A1 - Flachsland, Christian A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar T1 - Domestic Emissions Trading Systems T2 - The Economics of Climate Change in China: Towards a Low Carbon Economy Y1 - 2011 PB - Routledge CY - London ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Flachsland, Christian A1 - Knopf, Brigitte A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar A1 - Kok, Marcel A1 - Lotze-Campen, Hermann A1 - Luderer, Gunnar A1 - Popp, Alexander A1 - van Vuuren, Detlef P. T1 - Managing the Low-Carbon Transition – From Model Results to Policies, Special Issue:‘The Economics of Low Stabilization’ JF - The Energy Journal N2 - Model analysis within the ADAM project has shown that achieving low greenhouse gas concentration levels, e.g. at 400ppm CO 2 -eq, is technologically feasible at costs of a few percent of GDP. However, models simplify the dynamics involved in implementing climate policy and the results depend on critical model assumptions such as global participation in climate policy and full availability of current and newly evolving technologies. The design of a low stabilization policy regime in the real world depends on factors that can only be partly covered by models. In this context, the paper reflects on limits of the integrated assessment models used to explore climate policy and addresses the issues of (i) how global participation might be achieved, (ii) which kind of options are available to induce deep GHG reductions inside and outside the energy sector, and (iii) which risks and which co-benefits of mitigation options are not assessed by the models. Y1 - 2010 UR - http://widgets.ebscohost.com/prod/customlink/hanapi/hanapi.php?profile=4dfs1q6ik%2BHI6trd2JLhy6XO1eGS3NLlldzU0trT4ZLZ19elxNzcp6jHspXmyNipz6WP&DestinationURL=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eoh&AN=EP59360746&site=eds-live SN - 0195-6574 VL - 31 IS - Special Issue 1 SP - 223 EP - 245 PB - IAEE - International Association for Energy Economics CY - Cleveland ER - TY - CHAP A1 - Flachsland, Christian A1 - Marschinski, Robert A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar T1 - Developing the international carbon market post-2012: Options and the cost of delay T2 - Global Climate Governance Beyond 2012: Architecture, Agency and Adaptiveness Y1 - 2010 SN - 9780521180924 PB - Cambridge University Press CY - Cambridge ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Flachsland, Christian A1 - Marschinski, Robert A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar T1 - Global Trading versus Linking: Architectures for international emissions trading JF - Energy Policy Y1 - 2009 VL - 37 SP - 1637 EP - 1647 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Flachsland, Christian A1 - Marschinski, Robert A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar T1 - To link or not to link: Benefits and disadvantages of linking cap-and-trade systems JF - Climate Policy Y1 - 2009 IS - 9 SP - 358 EP - 372 ER - TY - RPRT A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar A1 - Flachsland, Christian A1 - Marschinski, Robert T1 - Towards a Global CO2 Market : An economic analysis ; Expertise for the Policy Planning Staff in the Federal Foreign Office Y1 - 2007 UR - https://www.pik-potsdam.de/members/flachs/publikationen/towards-a-global-co2-market N1 - Free online Access / Freier online Zugriff: https://www.pik-potsdam.de/members/flachs/publikationen/towards-a-global-co2-market VL - May, 2007 ER - TY - RPRT A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar A1 - Flachsland, Christian A1 - Lessmann, K. T1 - RECCS : Strukturell-ökonomisch-ökologischer Vergleich regenerativer Energietechnologien (RE) mit Carbon Capture and Storage(CCS) Y1 - 2006 N1 - Free online Access / Freier online Zugriff: http://elib.dlr.de/69910/1/RECCS_Langfassung.pdf ER - TY - RPRT A1 - Neuhoff, Karsten A1 - Dröge, Susanne A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar A1 - Flachsland, Christian T1 - Translating model results to economic policies T2 - PIK-Potsdam RECIPE Working paper Y1 - 2009 ER - TY - RPRT A1 - Flachsland, Christian A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar A1 - Jakob, Michael A1 - Steckel, Jan T1 - Developing the International Carbon Market : Linking Options for the EU ETS ; Report to the Policy Planning Staff in the Federal Foreign Office Y1 - 2008 UR - http://climatestrategies.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/working-paper-linking-1.pdf ER - TY - RPRT A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar A1 - Luderer, Gunnar A1 - Flachsland, Christian A1 - Füssel, Hans-Martin T1 - A global contract on climate change : Potsdam Institute for Climate Change Impact Research, Policy paper prepared for the conference on A global contract based on climate justice ; the need for a new approach concerning international relations, Potsdam, November Y1 - 2008 UR - http://www.guengl.eu/uploads/_old_cms_files/GlobalContract_Backgroundpaper_11_11_08.pdf N1 - Free online Access / Freier online Zugriff: http://www.guengl.eu/uploads/_old_cms_files/GlobalContract_Backgroundpaper_11_11_08.pdf ER - TY - RPRT A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar A1 - Flachsland, Christian A1 - Stavins, Robert A1 - Stowe, Robert T1 - Identifying Options for a New International Climate Regime Arising from the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action: Policy Brief, Harvard Project on Climate Agreements, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School and Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change Y1 - 2013 ER - TY - RPRT A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar A1 - Flachsland, Christian A1 - Jakob, Michael A1 - Lessmann, Kai T1 - The Atmosphere as a Global Commons – Challenges for International Cooperation and Governance. MCC working paper 1-2013, and Discussion Paper 2013-58, Harvard Project on Climate Agreements, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School Y1 - 2013 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar A1 - Flachsland, Christian T1 - Laudato si’: Concern for our global commons JF - Thinking Faith Y1 - 2015 UR - thinkingfaith.org ER - TY - CHAP A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar A1 - Kowarsch, Martin A1 - Flachsland, Christian ED - Stiftung Mercator, T1 - Cartography of Policy Paths: A New Role for Science in Policy T2 - nterfaces of Science and Policy and the Role of Foundations Y1 - 2015 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar A1 - Minx, Jan C. T1 - Mapmakers and navigators, facts and values JF - Science Y1 - 2014 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1255998 VL - 345 IS - 6192 SP - 37 EP - 38 ER - TY - CHAP A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar A1 - Pichs-Madruga, Ramón A1 - Minx, Jan C. T1 - Summary for Policymakers T2 - Climate change 2014 : Mitigation of climate change ; working group III contribution to the fifth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Y1 - 2014 SN - 978-1-107-65481-5 SP - 1 EP - 30 PB - Cambridge University Press CY - Cambridge ER - TY - CHAP A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar A1 - Pichs-Madruga, Ramón A1 - Sokona, Youba A1 - Minx, Jan C. T1 - Technical Summary T2 - Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Y1 - 2014 SN - 978-1-107-05821-7 SP - 33 EP - 107 PB - Cambridge University Press CY - Cambridge ER - TY - RPRT A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar T1 - Euro - CASE Policy Position Paper. Reform Options for the European Em issions Trading System (EU ETS) Y1 - 2014 ER - TY - RPRT A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar A1 - Stern, Nicholas A1 - Bauer, Nico T1 - Towards a Global Green Recovery. Recommendations for Immediate G20 Action. Report submitted to the G20 London Summit Y1 - 2009 UR - https://www.pik-potsdam.de/members/edenh/publications-1/global-green-recovery_pik_lse ER - TY - RPRT A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar A1 - Carraro, Carlo A1 - Hourcade, Jean-Charles A1 - Flachsland, Christian T1 - RECIPE – The Economics of Decarbonization. Synthesis Report Y1 - 2009 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Ueckerdt, Falko A1 - Hirth, Lion A1 - Luderer, Gunnar A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar T1 - System LCOE: What are the costs of variable renewables? JF - Energy N2 - Levelized costs of electricity (LCOE) are a common metric for comparing power generating technologies. However, there is criticism particularly towards evaluating variable renewables like wind and solar PV power based on LCOE because it ignores variability and integration costs. We propose a new metric System LCOE that accounts for integration and generation costs. For this purpose we develop a new mathematical definition of integration costs that directly relates to economic theory. As a result System LCOE allow the economic comparison of generating technologies and deriving optimal quantities in particular for VRE. To demonstrate the new concept we quantify System LCOE from a simple power system model and literature values. We find that at high wind shares integration costs can be in the same range as generation costs of wind power and conventional plants in particular due to a cost component “profile costs” captured by the new definition. Integration costs increase with growing wind shares and might become an economic barrier to deploying VRE at high shares. System LCOE help understanding and resolving the challenge of integrating VRE and can guide research and policy makers in realizing a cost-efficient transformation towards an energy system with potentially high shares of variable renewables. KW - Renewable energy KW - Integration costs KW - Levelized costs of electricity (LCOE) KW - Power generation economics KW - Market integration Y1 - 2013 UR - https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:kobv:b1570-opus4-22942 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2013.10.072 SN - 0360-5442 VL - 63 SP - 61 EP - 75 PB - Elsevier Ltd ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar A1 - Hirth, Lion A1 - Knopf, Brigitte A1 - Pahle, Michael A1 - Schlömer, Steffen A1 - Schmid, Eva A1 - Ueckerdt, Falko T1 - On the Economics of Renewable Energy Sources JF - Energy Economics N2 - With the global expansion of renewable energy (RE) technologies, the provision of optimal RE policy packages becomes an important task. We review pivotal aspects regarding the economics of renewables that are relevant to the design of an optimal RE policy, many of which are to date unresolved. We do so from three interrelated perspectives that a meaningful public policy framework for inquiry must take into account. First, we explore different social objectives justifying the deployment of RE technologies, including potential co-benefits of RE deployment, and review modelbased estimates of the economic potential of RE technologies, i.e. their socially optimal deployment level. Second, we address pivotal market failures that arise in the course of implementing the economic potential of RE sources in decentralized markets. Third, we discuss multiple policy instruments curing these market failures. Our framework reveals the requirements for an assessment of the relevant options for real-world decision makers in the field of RE policies. This review makes it clear that there are remaining white areas on the knowledge map concerning consistent and socially optimal RE policies. KW - Energy KW - Mitigation KW - Integrated assessment modeling KW - Variable renewables KW - Electricity market design KW - Renewable policy Y1 - 2013 UR - https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:kobv:b1570-opus4-22965 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2013.09.015 SN - 0140-9883 N1 - This is a post-peer-review, pre-copyedit version of an article published in Energy Economics. The final authenticated version is available online at: DOI 10.1016/j.eneco.2013.09.015 VL - 40 IS - S1 SP - S12 EP - S23 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Hirth, Lion A1 - Ueckerdt, Falko A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar T1 - Integration Costs Revisited – An economic framework for wind and solar variability JF - Renewable Energy N2 - The integration of wind and solar generators into power systems causes “integration costs” – for grids, balancing services, more flexible operation of thermal plants, and reduced utilization of the capital stock embodied in infrastructure, among other things. This paper proposes a framework to analyze and quantify these costs. We propose a definition of integration costs based on the marginal economic value of electricity, or market value – as such a definition can be more easily used in economic cost-benefit assessment than previous approaches. We suggest decomposing integration costs intro three components, according to the principal characteristics of wind and solar power: temporal variability, uncertainty, and location-constraints. Quantitative estimates of these components are extracted from a review of 100 + published studies. At high penetration rates, say a wind market share of 30–40%, integration costs are found to be 25–35 €/MWh, i.e. up to 50% of generation costs. While these estimates are system-specific and subject to significant uncertainty, integration costs are certainly too large to be ignored in high-penetration assessments (but might be ignored at low penetration). The largest single factor is reduced utilization of capital embodied in thermal plants, a cost component that has not been accounted for in most previous integration studies. KW - Wind power KW - Solar power KW - Integration cost KW - Variable renewables Y1 - 2015 UR - https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:kobv:b1570-opus4-22878 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2014.08.065 SN - 0960-1481 VL - 74 SP - 925 EP - 939 PB - Elsevier Ltd ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Hirth, Lion A1 - Ueckerdt, Falko A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar T1 - Why Wind is not Coal: On the Economics of Electricity Generation JF - The Energy Journal N2 - Electricity is a paradoxical economic good: it is highly homogeneous and heterogeneous at the same time. Electricity prices vary dramatically between moments in time, between location, and according to lead-time between contract and delivery. This three-dimensional heterogeneity has implication for the economic assessment of power generation technologies: different technologies, such as coal-fired plants and wind turbines, produce electricity that has, on average, a different economic value. Several tools that are used to evaluate generators in practice ignore these value differences, including "levelized electricity costs", "grid parity", and simple macroeconomic models. This paper provides a rigorous and general discussion of heterogeneity and its implications for the economic assessment of electricity generating technologies. It shows that these tools are biased, specifically, they tend to favor wind and solar power over dispatchable generators where these renewable generators have a high market share. A literature review shows that, at a wind market share of 30-40%, the value of a megawatt-hour of electricity from a wind turbine can be 20-50% lower than the value of one megawatt-hour as demanded by consumers. We introduce "System LCOE" as one way of comparing generation technologies economically. KW - Power generation KW - Electricity sector KW - Integrated assessment modeling KW - Wind power KW - Solar power KW - Variable renewables KW - Integration costs KW - Welfare economics KW - Power economics KW - Levelized electricity cost KW - LCOE KW - Grid parity Y1 - 2016 UR - https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:kobv:b1570-opus4-22828 U6 - https://doi.org/10.5547/01956574.37.3.lhir SN - 1944-9089 VL - 37 IS - 3 SP - 1 EP - 27 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Minx, Jan C. A1 - Callaghan, Max W. A1 - Lamb, William F. A1 - Garard, Jennifer A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar T1 - Learning about climate change solutions in the IPCC and beyond JF - Environmental science & policy Y1 - 2017 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2017.05.014 SN - 1462-9011 N1 - In Press, Corrected Proof When the final article is assigned to volumes/issues of the Publication, the Article in Press version will be removed and the final version will appear in the associated published volumes/issues of the Publication. The date the article was first made available online will be carried over. PB - Elsevier CY - Amsterdam [u.a.] ER - TY - CHAP A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar A1 - Kadner, Susanne A1 - Von Stechow, Christoph A1 - Minx, Jan C. T1 - Beyond the 2°C limit: Facing the economic und technological challenges T2 - Towards a Workable und Effective Climate Regime Y1 - 2015 SN - 978-1-907142-95-6 SP - 49 EP - 68 PB - CEPR Press ER - TY - CHAP A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar A1 - Flachsland, Christian A1 - Lorentz, Bernhard T1 - The Atmosphere as a Global Commons T2 - The Wealth of the Commons. A World beyond Market and State Y1 - 2013 PB - Levellers Press ER - TY - CHAP A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar A1 - Flachsland, Christian T1 - Transforming the Global Energy System - Pathways Towards a Sustainable Energy Supply T2 - Global Trends 2013. Peace – Development – Environment Y1 - 2012 SP - 53 EP - 71 PB - Stiftung Entwicklung und F rieden (SEF) CY - Bonn ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Steckel, Jan Christoph A1 - Jakob, Michael A1 - Flachsland, Christian A1 - Kornek, Ulrike A1 - Lessmann, Kai A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar T1 - From climate finance towards sustainable development finance JF - WIREs Climate Change N2 - 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. Y1 - 2016 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.437 VL - 8 IS - 1 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - von Stechow, Christoph A1 - McCollum, David A1 - Riahi, Keywan A1 - Minx, Jan C. A1 - Kriegler, Elmar A1 - van Vuuren, Detlef P. A1 - Jewell, Jessica A1 - Robledo-Abad, Carmenza A1 - Hertwich, Edgar A1 - Tavoni, Massimo A1 - Mirasgedis, Sevastianos A1 - Lah, Oliver A1 - Roy, Joyashree A1 - Mulugetta, Yacob A1 - Dubash, Navroz K. A1 - Bollen, Johannes A1 - Ürge-Vorsatz, Diana A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar T1 - Integrating climate change mitigation with other sustainability objectives: an assessment JF - Annual Reviews of the Environment and Resources Y1 - 2015 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-021113-095626 VL - 40 SP - 363 EP - 394 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Pahle, Michael A1 - Burtraw, Dallas A1 - Flachsland, Christian A1 - Kelsey, Nina A1 - Meckling, Jonas A1 - Biber, Eric A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar A1 - Zysman, John T1 - Sequencing to ratchet up climate policy stringency JF - Nature Climate Change N2 - The Paris Agreement formulates the goal of GHG neutrality in the second half of this century. Given that Nationally Determined Contributions are as yet insufficient, the question is through which policies can this goal be realized? Identifying policy pathways to ratchet up stringency is instrumental, but little guidance is available. We propose a policy sequencing framework and substantiate it using the cases of Germany and California. Its core elements are policy options to overcome barriers to stringency over time. Such sequencing can advance policy design and hopefully reconcile the controversy between first-best and second-best approaches. Y1 - 2018 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0287-6 SN - 1758-6798 VL - 8 SP - 861 EP - 867 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Fuss, Sabine A1 - Flachsland, Christian A1 - Koch, Nicolas A1 - Kornek, Ulrike A1 - Knopf, Brigitte A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar T1 - A Framework for Assessing the Performance of Cap-and-Trade Systems: Insights from the European Union Emissions Trading System JF - Review of Environmental Economics and Policy N2 - The performance of the European Union (EU) Emissions Trading System (ETS) and other cap-and-trade schemes has been under scrutiny because of their inability to create a stable price for greenhouse gas emissions. This article seeks to inform the often confusing debate about the economic performance of cap-and-trade systems over time, with a focus on the EU ETS. Based on a simple intertemporal framework of emissions trading and a review of the literature, we show that different frameworks and notions of efficiency result in both different assessments of performance and different recommended strategies for improving performance. More specifically, we argue that if cap-and-trade systems have temporal flexibility (i.e., they include banking and borrowing of emissions allowances), it can be highly misleading to base the economic assessment on short-term efficiency. We seek to draw attention to the concept of long-term economic performance, which takes into account the intertemporal nature of emissions trading systems. In particular, we identify market and government distortions (e.g., myopia, lack of policy credibility, excessive discounting) that may depress allowance prices and hamper intertemporal efficiency. We then examine whether the recently adopted Market Stability Reserve and the alternative price collar are likely to address these distortions. Y1 - 2018 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1093/reep/rey010 SN - 1750-6816 VL - 12 IS - 2 SP - 220 EP - 241 ER - TY - CHAP A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar A1 - Flachsland, Christian A1 - Schmid, Lisa Katharina ED - Angrick, Michael ED - Kühleis, Christoph ED - Landgrebe, Jürgen ED - Weiß, Jan T1 - Decarbonization and EU ETS Reform: Introducing a price floor to drive low-carbon investments BT - Stocktaking and perspectives for effective climate protection T2 - 12 Years of European Emissions Trading in German N2 - The EU ETS is in a crisis. There is a fundamental concern that persistently low allowance prices will fail to incentivize the investments in low-carbon capital stock and technology research and development (R&D) required to achieve long-term European decarbonization targets in the context of the Paris Agreement. Attainment of these targets is at risk. Introducing a carbon price floor can re-affirm the role of the EU ETS as the central pillar in the European effort towards decarbonization. Such a price floor should start at an economically significant level and rise over time. Many observers argue that it is misguided to focus on the EU ETS allowance (EUA) price, since the emissions cap determines environmental effectiveness and the allowance market works well in technical terms. Four interrelated considerations underpin our concern over the persistently low EUA price: First, the EU ETS cap is not cast in stone. It might be relaxed in the future if the costs of maintaining it become politically unacceptable. This could be the case if allowance prices escalate, which can be expected to result from a high-carbon capital stock building up in presence of persistently low allowance prices. Second, there is emerging scientific evidence that the EUA price is distorted as the carbon market does not operate cost-efficiently in a long-term perspective due to private sector short-sightedness and regulatory uncertainty. Third, the EU ETS has so far not allowed the effective expression of different climate policy preferences across EU member states. Without compensatory measures, voluntary unilateral emission reductions within member states (e.g. UK carbon price support, potential German coal power exit) dampen short-term allowance prices and shift emissions in space and time. Finally, all ambitious short-term climate policy measures required for embarking on long-term decarbonization pathways face significant political opposition. This opposition can be expected to come not only from reluctant EU member states, but also industry constituencies concerned about impacts on competitiveness, businessmodels and jobs. These distributional challenges need to be tackled more effectively by strategically allocating allowance value, providing limited compensation to adversely affected constituencies, promoting low carbon R&D to reduce future costs of decarbonization, and fostering public support for ambitious climate policy. The recent EU ETS reform effort offers an entry point to tackle these concerns, but does not sufficiently address the underlying problems. The magnitude and direction of its impact on the EUA price is highly uncertain. More fundamental change will be required to reaffirm the role of the EU ETS as the central pillar of European decarbonization efforts. In particular, a carbon price floor that rises over time can provide a clearer policy signal for guiding short-and mid-term capital stock and technology R&D investment decisions towards low-carbon options, and can thus enable cost-efficient achievement of long-term decarbonization targets. If designed accordingly, it allows member states with a higher preference for ambitious climate policy to effectively achieve additional emission reductions. In addition, targeted and transitory compensation models for particularly affected constituencies, and public investments into the development of new technologies and related business models will be required to ensure short-and long-term political support and reinforce policy credibility. Companion policies can play an important role in fostering low-carbon investment, but are inadequate substitutes to effective long-term carbon pricing. Ideally, a carbon price floor will be implemented at the EU-level. An alternative is to start with a coalition of countries including Germany (also in view of attaining its 2020 climate targets), France and others, and to expand it over time Y1 - 2019 SN - 978-3-7316-1375-6 SP - 207 EP - 232 PB - Metropolis CY - Marburg ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar A1 - Knopf, Brigitte A1 - Burghaus, Kerstin A1 - Flachsland, Christian A1 - Jakob, Michael A1 - Koch, Nicolas T1 - Shifting Paradigms in Carbon Pricing JF - Intereconomics N2 - Carbon pricing is essential to achieve a reduction in global CO2 emissions. A carbon price can either be set directly via a carbon tax (price control) or be achieved through a cap-and-trade system (quantity control). While there has been much debate about the relative merits of each approach, cap-and-trade systems have been favoured in the political arena. In principle, they offer the most straightforward way to achieve a country’s emission reduction target by simply setting the cap at the remaining emission budget. Existing emissions trading schemes (ETSs) can be found in Europe, California and Québec, for example. Y1 - 2018 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1007/s10272-018-0735-6 VL - 53 IS - 3 SP - 135 EP - 140 ER - TY - CHAP A1 - Dasgupta, Purnamita A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar A1 - Amezquita, Adriana Mercedes Avendano A1 - Bento, Antonio M. A1 - Caney, Simon A1 - De la Croix, David A1 - Fosu, Augustin Kwasi A1 - Jakob, Michael A1 - Saam, Marianne A1 - Shrader-Frechette, Kristin A1 - Flachsland, Christian A1 - Weyant, John A1 - You, Liangzhi A1 - Delgado-Ramos, Gian A1 - Dorsch, Marcel J. A1 - Klenert, David A1 - Lempert, Robert A1 - Leroux, Justin A1 - Lessmann, Kai A1 - Liu, Junguo A1 - Mattauch, Linus A1 - Perrings, Charles A1 - Schwerhoff, Gregor A1 - Seyboth, Kristin A1 - Streckel, Jan T1 - Economic Growth, Human Development, and Welfare T2 - Rethinking Society for the 21st Century Report of the International Panel on Social Progress N2 - Economic Growth, Human Development, and Welfare" of the 2018 Report of the International Panel on Social Progress (IPSP). Mission of the IPSP: The International Panel on Social Progress (IPSP) will harness the competence of hundreds of experts about social issues and will deliver a report addressed to all social actors, movements, organizations, politicians and decision-makers, in order to provide them with the best expertise on questions that bear on social change. The Panel will seek consensus whenever possible but will not hide controversies and will honestly present up-to-date arguments and analyses, and debates about them, in an accessible way. The Panel will have no partisan political agenda, but will aim at restoring hope in social progress and stimulating intellectual and public debates. Different political and philosophical views may conceive of social progress in different ways, emphasizing values such as freedom, dignity, or equality. The Panel will retain full independence from political parties, governments, and organizations with a partisan agenda. While the Panel will primarily work for the dissemination of knowledge to all relevant actors in society, it will also foster research on the topics it will study and help to revive interest for research in social long-term prospective analysis Y1 - 2018 SN - 9781108399661 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108399661 SP - 139 EP - 184 PB - Cambridge University Press ER - TY - RPRT A1 - Flachsland, Christian A1 - Pahle, Michael A1 - Burtraw, Dallas A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar A1 - Elkerbout, Milan A1 - Fischer, Carolyn A1 - Tietjen, Oliver A1 - Zetterberg, Lars T1 - Five myths about an EU ETS carbon price floor N2 - This policy briefbuilds on theworkshop EU ETS Reform: Taking Stock and Examining Carbon Price Floor Options,held at the Centrefor European Policy Studies (CEPS) in Brussels on July 3, 2018. The workshop was cosponsored by CEPS and the AHEAD and Mistra CarbonExit projects. While the brief draws on insights from workshop discussions, its views are solely those of the authors. The brief outlinesdifferent perspectives on thepast performanceof the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS)in terms of its allowance price (Section 1), analyzes how the recent reform respondedto related challenges(Section 2), and considers the case for introducinga carbon pricefloor in the EU ETS(Section 3). The main part of the brief (Section 4) identifies five myths in the debate of an EU ETSpricefloorand criticallyconfrontsthem. Section 5 concludes by discussing potential entry points for introducing a carbon price floor in the context of the upcoming EU climate policy process Y1 - 2018 UR - https://www.ceps.eu/publications/five-myths-about-eu-ets-carbon-price-floor ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Flachsland, Christian A1 - Pahle, Michael A1 - Burtraw, Dallas A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar A1 - Elkerbout, Milan A1 - Fischer, Carolyn A1 - Tietjen, Oliver A1 - Zetterberg, Lars T1 - How to avoid history repeating itself: the case for an EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) price floor revisited JF - Climate Policy N2 - Several years of very low allowance prices in the EU emissions trading scheme (ETS) have motivated calls to introduce a price floor to correct potential underlying distortions and design flaws, including (i) the political nature of allowance supply and related credibility issues, (ii) potential myopia of market participants and firms, and (iii) waterbed and rebound effects resulting from policy interactions. In the wake of the recent EU ETS reform, allowance prices have sharply increased. This raises the question of whether the case for introducing a price floor in the EU ETS remains valid. We argue that such a price floor, also adopted in several other greenhouse gas cap-and-trade systems worldwide, remains an important improvement in the design of the system, as long as the above-mentioned distortions and design flaws persist. An EU ETS price floor can safeguard against these issues and provides more explicit guidance on the minimum allowance price policymakers consider acceptable. Either as a complement or substitute to the current Market Stability Reserve (MSR), a price floor would thus make the EU ETS less prone to future revision in case of unexpectedly low prices. We identify and confront four prominent arguments against the introduction of an EU ETS price floor. Key policy insights: - An EU ETS price floor would be an important institutional innovation enhancing political and economic stability, and predictability of the EUA price - The recent Market Stability Reserve (MSR) reform has not removed the need for a carbon price floor. - Introducing an element of price responsiveness into the so far purely quantitative design of the EU ETS would help to preserve its integrity - In contrast to conventional wisdom, legal analysis reveals that an EU ETS price floor can be legally feasible - Political support for a carbon price floor is gaining traction across Europe KW - EU ETS KW - price floor KW - market stability reserve KW - policy credibility Y1 - 2020 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2019.1682494 VL - 20 IS - 1 SP - 133 EP - 142 ER - TY - CHAP A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar A1 - Roolfs, Christiana A1 - Gaitan, Beatriz A1 - Nahmacher, Paul A1 - Flachsland, Christian ED - Parry (et al.), Ian T1 - Agreeing on an EU ETS minimum price to foster solidarity, subsidiarity and efficiency in the EU T2 - Energy Tax and Regulatory Policy in Europe: Reform Priorities Y1 - 2017 UR - http://edoc.gfz-potsdam.de/pik/get/7159/0/42f7af08e2731825736c92935e134f85/7159oa.pdf SP - 31 EP - 61 PB - MIT Press CY - Cambridge, MA ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Jakob, Michael A1 - Lamb, William F. A1 - Steckel, Jan Christoph A1 - Flachsland, Christian A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar T1 - Understanding different perspectives on economic growth and climate policy JF - WIREs Climate Change N2 - 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. KW - Climate Economics KW - degrowth KW - sustainability KW - transformation KW - well-being Y1 - 2020 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.677 SP - 1 EP - 17 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Kornek, Ulrike A1 - Flachsland, Christian A1 - Kardish, Chris A1 - Levi, Sebastian A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar T1 - What is important for achieving 2 °C? UNFCCC and IPCC expert perceptions on obstacles and response options for climate change mitigation JF - Environmental Research Letters N2 - Global mitigation efforts remain insufficient to limit the global temperature increase to well below 2 °C. While a growing academic literature analyzes this problem, perceptions of which obstacles inhibit goal attainment and which responses might be most effective seem to differ widely. This makes prioritization and agreement on the way forward difficult. To inform prioritization in global climate policy and research agendas, we present quantitative data on how 917 experts from the IPCC and the UNFCCC perceive the importance of different obstacles and response options for achieving 2 °C. On average, respondents consider opposition from special interest groups the most important obstacle and technological R&D the most important response. Our survey also finds that the majority of experts perceives a wide range of issues as important, supporting an agenda that is inclusive in terms of coverage. Average importance ratings differ between experts from the Global North and South, suggesting that balanced representation in global fora and regionally differentiated agendas are important. In particular, opposition from special interest groups is a top priority among experts from North America, Europe and Oceania. Investigating the drivers of individual importance ratings, we find little difference between experts from the IPCC and the UNFCCC, while expert's perceptions correlate with their academic training and their national scientific, regulatory, and financial contexts. Y1 - 2020 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab6394 VL - 15 SP - 1 EP - 10 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Döbbeling-Hildebrandt, Niklas A1 - Miersch, Klaas A1 - Khanna, Tarun M. A1 - Bachelet, Marion A1 - Bruns, Stephan B. A1 - Callaghan, Max A1 - Edenhofer, Ottmar A1 - Flachsland, Christian A1 - Forster, Piers M. A1 - Kalkuhl, Matthias A1 - Koch, Nicolas A1 - Lamb, William F. A1 - Ohlendorf, Nils A1 - Steckel, Jan Christoph A1 - Minx, Jan C. T1 - Systematic review and meta-analysis of ex-post evaluations on the effectiveness of carbon pricing JF - Nature Communications N2 - 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. Y1 - 2024 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-48512-w SN - 2041-1723 VL - 15 PB - Springer Science and Business Media LLC ER -