Search

Social tipping points are promising levers for accelerating progress towards net-zero greenhouse gas emission targets. They describe how social, political, economic or technological systems can move rapidly into a new state if cascading positive feedback mechanisms are triggered. Analysing the potential for social tipping requires considering the inherent complexity of social systems and their feedbacks. Here, drawing on insights from an expert elicitation workshop, we outline a dynamic systems approach that entails i) a systems outlook involving interconnected feedback mechanisms alongside cross-system and cross-scale interactions, ii) directed data collection efforts to provide empirical evidence and monitoring of social tipping dynamics, and iii) global, integrated, descriptive modelling to project future dynamics and provide ex-ante evidence for interventions aiming to trigger positive feedback mechanisms. We argue how and why this approach will strengthen the climate policy relevance of research on social tipping.

Social tipping points are promising levers to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emission targets. They describe how social, political, economic or technological systems can move rapidly into a new state if cascading positive feedback mechanisms are triggered. Analysing the potential of social tipping for rapid decarbonization requires considering the inherent complexity of social systems. Here, we identify that existing scientific literature is inclined to a narrative-based account of social tipping, lacks a broad empirical framework and a multi-systems view. We subsequently outline a dynamic systems approach that entails (i) a systems outlook involving interconnected feedback mechanisms alongside cross-system and cross-scale interactions, and including a socioeconomic and environmental injustice perspective (ii) directed data collection efforts to provide empirical evidence for and monitor social tipping dynamics, (iii) global, integrated, descriptive modelling to project future dynamics and provide ex-ante evidence for interventions. Research on social tipping must be accordingly solidified for climate policy relevance.

Achieving the collective goal of limiting warming to below 2 degrees C or 1.5 degrees C compared to pre-industrial levels requires a transition towards a fully decarbonized world. Annual greenhouse gas emissions on such a path in 2025 or 2030 can be allocated to individual countries using a variety of allocation schemes. We reanalyse the IPCC literature allocation database and provide country-level details for three approaches. At this stage, however, it seems utopian to assume that the international community will agree on a single allocation scheme. Here, we investigate an approach that involves a major-economy country taking the lead. In a bottom-up manner, other countries then determine what they consider a fair comparable target, for example, either a 'per-capita convergence' or 'equal cumulative per-capita' approach. For example, we find that a 2030 target of 67% below 1990 for the EU28, a 2025 target of 54% below 2005 for the USA or a 2030 target of 32% below 2010 for China could secure a likely chance of meeting the 2 degrees C target in our illustrative default case. Comparing those targets to post-2020 mitigation targets reveals a large gap. No major emitter can at present claim to show the necessary leadership in the concerted effort of avoiding warming of 2 derees C in a diverse global context.

The international climate negotiations acknowledge that ambition to reduce greenhouse gas emissions must be increased in the short term in order to maintain climate change at safe levels. Existing reduction commitments from countries play an essential role, but are not sufficient to close the gap between expected emissions and a two degree pathway. It is therefore imperative to identify areas with high mitigation potential as well as co-benefits; generate opportunities for action in these areas based on best practice experiences; provide matching support in terms of finance, capacity building and technologies; and encourage countries to sign up for such combinations of greenhouse gas mitigation and support.

This paper evaluates the influence of different policy-related and scientific choices on the calculated regional contributions to global climate change (the "Brazilian Proposal"). Policy-related choices include the time period of emissions, the mix of greenhouse gases and different indicators of climate change impacts. The scientific choices include historical emissions and model representations of the climate system. We generated and compared results of several simple climate models. We find that the relative contributions of different nations to global climate change-from emissions of greenhouse gases alone-are quite robust, despite the varying model complexity and differences in calculated absolute changes. For the default calculations, the average calculated contributions to the global mean surface temperature increase in 2000 are about 40% from OECD, 14% from Eastern Europe and Former Soviet Union, 24% from Asia and 22% from Africa and Latin America. Policy-related choices, such as time period of emissions, climate change indicator and gas mix generally have larger influence on the results than scientific choices. More specifically, choosing a later attribution start date (1990 instead of 1890) for historical emissions, decreases the contributions of regions that started emitting early, such as the OECD countries by 6 percentage points, whereas it increases the contribution of late emitters such as Asia by 8 percentage points. However, only including the fossil CO, emissions instead of the emissions of all Kyoto gases (fossil and land use change), increases the OECD contributions by 21 percentage points and decreases the contribution of Asia by 14 percentage points. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.