Critical adjustment of land mitigation pathways for assessing countries’ climate progress

Giacomo Grassi*, Elke Stehfest, Joeri Rogelj, Detlef van Vuuren, Alessandro Cescatti, Jo House, Gert Jan Nabuurs, Simone Rossi, Ramdane Alkama, Raúl Abad Viñas, Katherine Calvin, Guido Ceccherini, Sandro Federici, Shinichiro Fujimori, Mykola Gusti, Tomoko Hasegawa, Petr Havlik, Florian Humpenöder, Anu Korosuo, Lucia PeruginiFrancesco N. Tubiello, Alexander Popp

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle (Academic Journal)peer-review

66 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Mitigation pathways by Integrated Assessment Models (IAMs) describe future emissions that keep global warming below specific temperature limits and are compared with countries’ collective greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction pledges. This is needed to assess mitigation progress and inform emission targets under the Paris Agreement. Currently, however, a mismatch of ~5.5 GtCO2 yr−1 exists between the global land-use fluxes estimated with IAMs and from countries’ GHG inventories. Here we present a ‘Rosetta stone’ adjustment to translate IAMs’ land-use mitigation pathways to estimates more comparable with GHG inventories. This does not change the original decarbonization pathways, but reallocates part of the land sink to be consistent with GHG inventories. Adjusted cumulative emissions over the period until net zero for 1.5 or 2 °C limits are reduced by 120–192 GtCO2 relative to the original IAM pathways. These differences should be taken into account to ensure an accurate assessment of progress towards the Paris Agreement.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)425-434
Number of pages10
JournalNature Climate Change
Volume11
Issue number5
Early online date26 Apr 2021
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 May 2021

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2021, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Critical adjustment of land mitigation pathways for assessing countries’ climate progress'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this