Search

China is facing challenges to tackle the threat of climate change while reducing social inequality. Poverty eradication requires improvement in the living conditions of low-income households, which leads in turn to higher carbon footprints and may undermine the efforts of climate change mitigation. Previous studies have assessed the climate impacts of poverty eradication, but few have quantified how the additional carbon emissions of poverty eradication are shared at the subnational level in China and the impact on China's climate targets. We investigated the recent trend of carbon footprint inequality in China's provinces and estimated the climate burden of different poverty reduction schemes, measured by increased carbon emissions. The results indicate that poverty eradication will not impede the achievement of national climate targets, with an average annual household carbon footprint increase of 0.1%–1.2%. However, the carbon emissions growth in less developed provinces can be 4.0%, five times that in wealthy regions. Less developed regions suffer a greater climate burden because of poverty eradication, which may offset carbon reduction efforts. Therefore, interregional collaboration is needed to coordinate inequality reduction with investments in low-carbon trajectories in all provinces. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

[Display omitted] China is playing an increasing role in global climate change mitigation, and local authorities need more city-specific information on the emissions trends and patterns when designing low-carbon policies. This study provides the most comprehensive CO 2 emission inventories of 287 Chinese cities from 2001 to 2019. The emission inventories are compiled for 47 economic sectors and include energy-related emissions for 17 types of fossil fuels and process-related emissions from cement production. We further investigate the state of the emission peak in each city and reveal hidden driving forces. The results show that 38 cities have proactively peaked their emissions for at least five years and another 21 cities also have emission decline, but passively. The 38 proactively peaked cities achieved emission decline mainly by efficiency improvements and structural changes in energy use, while the 21 passively emission declined cities reduced emissions at the cost of economic recession or population loss. We propose that those passively emission declined cities need to face up to the reasons that caused the emission to decline, and fully exploit the opportunities provided by industrial innovation and green investment brought by low-carbon targets to achieve economic recovery and carbon mitigation goals. Proactively peaked cities need to seek strategies to maintain the downward trend in emissions and avoid an emission rebound and thus provide successful models for cities with still growing emissions to achieve an emission peak. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]