Abstract Business associations are currently calling for Germany’s target year for achieving climate neutrality to be postponed from 2045 to 2050, thereby aligning the national target with the European Union’s climate-neutrality goal. There are good reasons for this demand, as explained in this article–most notably the immense cost savings for the German economy. A postponement would also be advisable because effective climate policy that has a real impact on a global scale is only possible through international cooperation, not through unilateral national action (Ockenfels, Schmidt 2019). In view of the challenges associated with a very ambitious timeline for climate policy, the question arises as to why Germany should take on the associated risks and costs if the resulting reductions in greenhouse gas emissions can, by their very nature, achieve only limited effects on a global scale. This question becomes even more pressing given that assuming a pioneering role may have serious counterproductive repercussions for Germany, above all the potential loss of public acceptance for climate policy.
Manuel Frondel (Fri,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: