1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Corporate emissions targets and the neglect of future innovators

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Targets can distort competition in favor of incumbent firms

          Abstract

          Widely recognized as key partners for achieving international climate goals ( 1 , 2 ), businesses like to indicate that their targets and activities are “Paris-aligned.” In response, research and initiatives have emerged to guide and assess whether companies’ targets represent an adequate mitigation effort to achieve the Paris Agreement. Here, we highlight conceptual limitations of effort-sharing approaches applied to companies and argue that the fundamental assumption of using emission-reduction targets as the central and often sole metric for setting or benchmarking individual corporations’ climate action ambition is simply insufficient because future innovators are neglected. Although emissions targets can help curb emissions, we detail the risks of relying on individual corporation’s emissions targets to guide and track progress in aligning the economy with the Paris Agreement goals. Last, we clarify the distinct roles of companies as agents of innovation and of market regulators and supervisors as either definers or enforcers of market-wide objectives for sustainability.

          Related collections

          Most cited references10

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Net-zero emissions targets are vague: three ways to fix

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Warming assessment of the bottom-up Paris Agreement emissions pledges

            Under the bottom-up architecture of the Paris Agreement, countries pledge Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). Current NDCs individually align, at best, with divergent concepts of equity and are collectively inconsistent with the Paris Agreement. We show that the global 2030-emissions of NDCs match the sum of each country adopting the least-stringent of five effort-sharing allocations of a well-below 2 °C-scenario. Extending such a self-interested bottom-up aggregation of equity might lead to a median 2100-warming of 2.3 °C. Tightening the warming goal of each country’s effort-sharing approach to aspirational levels of 1.1 °C and 1.3 °C could achieve the 1.5 °C and well-below 2 °C-thresholds, respectively. This new hybrid allocation reconciles the bottom-up nature of the Paris Agreement with its top-down warming thresholds and provides a temperature metric to assess NDCs. When taken as benchmark by other countries, the NDCs of India, the EU, the USA and China lead to 2.6 °C, 3.2 °C, 4 °C and over 5.1 °C warmings, respectively.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Downscaling the planetary boundaries in absolute environmental sustainability assessments – A review

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Science
                Science
                American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)
                0036-8075
                1095-9203
                April 26 2024
                April 26 2024
                : 384
                : 6694
                : 388-390
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands.
                [2 ]Centre for Environmental Policy, Imperial College London, London, UK.
                [3 ]Grantham Institute for Climate Change and the Environment, Imperial College London, London, UK.
                [4 ]Energy, Climate, and Environment Program, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria.
                [5 ]Data-Driven EnviroLab, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, USA.
                [6 ]PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, Den Haag, Netherlands.
                [7 ]Smurfit Graduate Business School, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
                [8 ]Platform for Sustainable Finance, Directorate-General for Financial Stability, Financial Services and Capital Markets Union (DG FISMA), European Commission, Brussels, Belgium.
                Article
                10.1126/science.adl5081
                bbe80b5a-87f7-46b5-b6be-54911e20ff8d
                © 2024
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article