Controlling CO2 emissions for each area in a region: the case of Japan

Abstract Background Global warming is the most serious problem we face today. Each country is expected to ensure international cooperation toward minimizing risk. To evaluate the countermeasures, many researchers have developed integrated assessment models (IAMs). Then, how can each country achieve...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Tetsuya Tamaki, Wataru Nozawa, Shunsuke Managi
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2019-12-01
Series:Carbon Balance and Management
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1186/s13021-019-0135-7
id doaj-55ba4699daa14633822af6a4caeb2981
record_format Article
spelling doaj-55ba4699daa14633822af6a4caeb29812020-12-27T12:02:17ZengBMCCarbon Balance and Management1750-06802019-12-0114111310.1186/s13021-019-0135-7Controlling CO2 emissions for each area in a region: the case of JapanTetsuya Tamaki0Wataru Nozawa1Shunsuke Managi2Faculty of Engineering and Design, Kagawa UniversityDepartment of Economics, Fukuoka UniversityDepartment of Urban and Environmental Engineering, School of Engineering, Urban Institute, Kyushu UniversityAbstract Background Global warming is the most serious problem we face today. Each country is expected to ensure international cooperation toward minimizing risk. To evaluate the countermeasures, many researchers have developed integrated assessment models (IAMs). Then, how can each country achieve its emission quota? This study proposes models that analyze the economic impact of global warming in a region based on the results obtained by the global model. By using these suggested models, we perform a comparative analysis on three policy cases: a different regulations case, a unified regulation case, and an output redistribution case. Results We analyzed Japan as one of the case studies and found that more developed areas should implement stricter regulations in all scenarios. In addition, the case of applying different regulations by area (in a region) is not always preferable to using unified regulations in the region. Alternatively, the output gap between the output redistribution case and the different regulations case is much higher than the gap between the unified regulation case and the different regulations case. In all scenarios, the present values of the output of the output redistribution case are also higher than the other cases. Conclusions The different regulations case and the unified regulation case are based on the model without capital transfer between areas, whereas the output redistribution case is based on the model with free capital transfer between areas. Although both models are extreme situations, the regions close to the without capital transfer situation possibly have an incentive to use the different regulations policy, depending on the emission target. The regions close to the situation with free capital transfer would probably prefer unified regulation.https://doi.org/10.1186/s13021-019-0135-7Climate policyThe RICE model2.5° limit$$\text {CO}_2$$ CO 2 emission reduction
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Tetsuya Tamaki
Wataru Nozawa
Shunsuke Managi
spellingShingle Tetsuya Tamaki
Wataru Nozawa
Shunsuke Managi
Controlling CO2 emissions for each area in a region: the case of Japan
Carbon Balance and Management
Climate policy
The RICE model
2.5° limit
$$\text {CO}_2$$ CO 2 emission reduction
author_facet Tetsuya Tamaki
Wataru Nozawa
Shunsuke Managi
author_sort Tetsuya Tamaki
title Controlling CO2 emissions for each area in a region: the case of Japan
title_short Controlling CO2 emissions for each area in a region: the case of Japan
title_full Controlling CO2 emissions for each area in a region: the case of Japan
title_fullStr Controlling CO2 emissions for each area in a region: the case of Japan
title_full_unstemmed Controlling CO2 emissions for each area in a region: the case of Japan
title_sort controlling co2 emissions for each area in a region: the case of japan
publisher BMC
series Carbon Balance and Management
issn 1750-0680
publishDate 2019-12-01
description Abstract Background Global warming is the most serious problem we face today. Each country is expected to ensure international cooperation toward minimizing risk. To evaluate the countermeasures, many researchers have developed integrated assessment models (IAMs). Then, how can each country achieve its emission quota? This study proposes models that analyze the economic impact of global warming in a region based on the results obtained by the global model. By using these suggested models, we perform a comparative analysis on three policy cases: a different regulations case, a unified regulation case, and an output redistribution case. Results We analyzed Japan as one of the case studies and found that more developed areas should implement stricter regulations in all scenarios. In addition, the case of applying different regulations by area (in a region) is not always preferable to using unified regulations in the region. Alternatively, the output gap between the output redistribution case and the different regulations case is much higher than the gap between the unified regulation case and the different regulations case. In all scenarios, the present values of the output of the output redistribution case are also higher than the other cases. Conclusions The different regulations case and the unified regulation case are based on the model without capital transfer between areas, whereas the output redistribution case is based on the model with free capital transfer between areas. Although both models are extreme situations, the regions close to the without capital transfer situation possibly have an incentive to use the different regulations policy, depending on the emission target. The regions close to the situation with free capital transfer would probably prefer unified regulation.
topic Climate policy
The RICE model
2.5° limit
$$\text {CO}_2$$ CO 2 emission reduction
url https://doi.org/10.1186/s13021-019-0135-7
work_keys_str_mv AT tetsuyatamaki controllingco2emissionsforeachareainaregionthecaseofjapan
AT watarunozawa controllingco2emissionsforeachareainaregionthecaseofjapan
AT shunsukemanagi controllingco2emissionsforeachareainaregionthecaseofjapan
_version_ 1724369490113724416