A core question still remains after the Paris Agreement: who receives how much of the remaining CO2 budget (resource/burden/effort sharing), so that the increase in the global average temperature is kept to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels? If converging per capita emissions serve as a possible answer to this question, the discussion focuses primarily on the approach ‘Contraction and Convergence’ (C&C). The Regensburg Model now offers a further option for the mathematical implementation of converging per capita emissions. The authors identify features common to C&C and differences from C&C. They show that, of the convergence models they examined, the Regensburg Model is the most favourable option for industrialized countries.Policy relevanceIn politics, the concept of converging per capita emissions is often accepted at the abstract level. Civil society in particular can then take politicians at their word wherever they take values calculated using the Regensburg Model as points of reference; then prosperous developed countries in particular whose nationally determined contributions do not come up even to these reference values will find it difficult to justify their contributions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sargl et al. (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: