The key of this new research is trying to reason in terms of individuals rather than countries, because lifestyles determine to a good extent carbon emissions, apart from the fact of being in China, in the US or in Europe. A group of researchers from Princeton (among them Massimo Tavoni, senior CMCC and FEEM researcher) have launched a study making a proposal which could be decisive to overcome the impasse of a global agreement on climate currently dividing rich countries’ and developing countries’ positions.

The article was published for the first time on July 6th 2009 on the important review Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , with the following title “Sharing Global CO2 Emissions Reductions Among One Billion High Emitters”, then it was followed by the American press.  The article describes a new system  that the authors hope could gain global decision makers’ trust to offer a concrete contribution towards the definition of a global agreement on climate which, at the moment, seems to be very far yet.

One of the main elements braking the agreement is the sharing of responsibilities on carbon emissions and the consequent limits and burdens to be fixed for each country. The research proposes to go beyond the per capita calculation of emissions and suggests a different calculation based on the worldwide distribution of high emitters.

In other words, the authors have designed a method considering the emissions produced by every single individual as the best and more accurate way to calculate, better, more precisely and more fairly than they do today, the responsibility of each nation in cutting its own emissions.

This doesn’t mean that every single individual has to take part of the calculation of emissions, but those calculations would be the base for a more fairly formula. Among the strategies currently used, those using national averages of energetic consumption are considered as widely incorrect because they don’t take into account the emissions produced by those polluting more or less than the considered average.

Most of CO2 emissions comes from sectors of population with a medium-high income whose lifestyle is characterized by, for example, air travels, intensive use of car and large consumption systems to heat or cool huge houses.

“According to our calculations – the researchers claim – half of the emissions of greenhouse gas produced in 2008 came from only 700 million people”.
Using World Bank’s data on the income distribution and using the existing link between quantity of emissions and income level, the authors have been able to determine how individual emissions are distributed, both at national and global level. 
Then, making projections on 2030 based on emissions forecasts and demographic growth forecasts, the researchers can figure out the way emissions will be distributed in the future among 8.1 billion people.  
It is a method that more than others can establish a uniform limit on the emission that single individuals should not overcome.
For example, if they get to a global agreement imposing, in 2030, to maintain almost the same levels of carbon in the atmosphere we have today, according to the calculations made by the authors, the needed global reduction of emissions would be obtained if the individual emissions do not exceed an annual limit of 11 tons of CO2.   
Calculating the emissions for those who are projected to overcome this limit, it is possible to come to an emissions reduction goal for each country. Going back to the previous example, it is possible to forecast that in 2030 there will be about 1 billion high emitters equally divided between the US, the rest of the OCSE countries, China and the rest of developing countries.

The article shows that it is possible to fight against poverty apart from strategies on  emissions reduction. In fact the authors calculate that fighting extreme poverty, making it possible for 3 billion people to satisfy their own energetic basic needs with fossil fuels, won’t influence the global system for reducing emissions produced by fossil sources. It would be rather needed some additional work from those producing more emissions.

The study, one of whose authors are Professor Stephen Pacala and Robert Socolow (known by the general public since Al Gore mentioned their study on the “stabilization wedge”) and Italian Eonomist Massimo Tavoni, is part of the project called Carbon Mitigation Initiative, based in Princeton, which represents an example of collaboration between young researchers specialized in different subjects (physics, economy, political sciences) counting on “strategic interferences” on the part of veterans
of the research. Massimo Tavoni is also Senior Researcher at Eni Enrico Mattei Foundation (FEEM) and at the Euro-Mediterranean Centre for Climate Change (CMCC).

 For more information:

• Presentation of the research (pdf) made by Massimo Tavoni at the 2009 International Energy Workshop
• American Press Review (pdf) on the article published on PNAS
• Newsweek’s article published on July the 7th 2009 (pdf)