Long-term economic growth projections in the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways
01 Jan 2017-Global Environmental Change-human and Policy Dimensions (Pergamon)-Vol. 42, Iss: 42, pp 200-214
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present a consistent methodology to derive (per capita) GDP trend pathways on a country basis, based on a convergence process and places emphasis on the key drivers of economic growth in the long run: population, total factor productivity, physical capital, employment and human capital.
Abstract: Long-term economic scenarios (up to 2100) are needed as a basis to explore possible different futures for major environmental challenges, including climate change. Given the high level of uncertainty involved, such scenarios would need to span a wide range of possible growth trajectories. The recently developed storylines of the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) provide a basis for making such projections. This paper describes a consistent methodology to derive (per capita) GDP trend pathways on a country basis. The methodology is based on a convergence process and places emphasis on the key drivers of economic growth in the long run: population, total factor productivity, physical capital, employment and human capital, and energy and fossil fuel resources (specifically oil and gas). The paper uses this methodology to derive country-level economic growth projections for 184 countries. The paper also investigates the influence of short-term growth rate estimates on the long-term income levels in various countries. It does so by comparing long-term projections based on short-term forecasts from 2011 with the projections based on forecasts from 2013. This highlights the effects of the recent economic crisis and uncertainty in short term developments on longer term growth trends. The projections are subject to large uncertainties, particularly for the later decades, and disregard a wide range of country-specific drivers of economic growth that are outside the narrow economic framework, such as external shocks, governance barriers and feedbacks from environmental damage. Hence, they should be interpreted with sufficient care and not be treated as predictions.
Citations
More filters
Keywan Riahi1, Detlef P. van Vuuren2, Elmar Kriegler3, Jae Edmonds4, Brian C. O'Neill5, Shinichiro Fujimori6, Nico Bauer3, Katherine Calvin4, Rob Dellink7, Oliver Fricko1, Wolfgang Lutz1, Alexander Popp3, Jesus Crespo Cuaresma1, Samir Kc8, Samir Kc1, Marian Leimbach3, Leiwen Jiang5, Tom Kram2, Shilpa Rao1, Johannes Emmerling9, Kristie L. Ebi10, Tomoko Hasegawa6, Petr Havlik1, Florian Humpenöder3, Lara Aleluia Da Silva9, Steve Smith4, Elke Stehfest2, Valentina Bosetti9, Valentina Bosetti11, Jiyong Eom4, Jiyong Eom12, David E.H.J. Gernaat2, Toshihiko Masui6, Joeri Rogelj1, Jessica Strefler3, Laurent Drouet9, Volker Krey1, Gunnar Luderer3, Mathijs Harmsen2, Kiyoshi Takahashi6, Lavinia Baumstark3, Jonathan C. Doelman2, Mikiko Kainuma6, Zbigniew Klimont1, Giacomo Marangoni9, Hermann Lotze-Campen13, Hermann Lotze-Campen3, Michael Obersteiner1, Andrzej Tabeau14, Massimo Tavoni15, Massimo Tavoni9 •
International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis1, Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency2, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research3, Joint Global Change Research Institute4, National Center for Atmospheric Research5, National Institute for Environmental Studies6, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development7, Shanghai University8, Eni9, University of Washington10, Bocconi University11, KAIST12, Humboldt University of Berlin13, Wageningen University and Research Centre14, Polytechnic University of Milan15
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present the overview of the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) and their energy, land use, and emissions implications, and find that associated costs strongly depend on three factors: (1) the policy assumptions, (2) the socioeconomic narrative, and (3) the stringency of the target.
Abstract: This paper presents the overview of the Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) and their energy, land use, and emissions implications. The SSPs are part of a new scenario framework, established by the climate change research community in order to facilitate the integrated analysis of future climate impacts, vulnerabilities, adaptation, and mitigation. The pathways were developed over the last years as a joint community effort and describe plausible major global developments that together would lead in the future to different challenges for mitigation and adaptation to climate change. The SSPs are based on five narratives describing alternative socio-economic developments, including sustainable development, regional rivalry, inequality, fossil-fueled development, and middle-of-the-road development. The long-term demographic and economic projections of the SSPs depict a wide uncertainty range consistent with the scenario literature. A multi-model approach was used for the elaboration of the energy, land-use and the emissions trajectories of SSP-based scenarios. The baseline scenarios lead to global energy consumption of 400–1200 EJ in 2100, and feature vastly different land-use dynamics, ranging from a possible reduction in cropland area up to a massive expansion by more than 700 million hectares by 2100. The associated annual CO 2 emissions of the baseline scenarios range from about 25 GtCO 2 to more than 120 GtCO 2 per year by 2100. With respect to mitigation, we find that associated costs strongly depend on three factors: (1) the policy assumptions, (2) the socio-economic narrative, and (3) the stringency of the target. The carbon price for reaching the target of 2.6 W/m 2 that is consistent with a temperature change limit of 2 °C, differs in our analysis thus by about a factor of three across the SSP marker scenarios. Moreover, many models could not reach this target from the SSPs with high mitigation challenges. While the SSPs were designed to represent different mitigation and adaptation challenges, the resulting narratives and quantifications span a wide range of different futures broadly representative of the current literature. This allows their subsequent use and development in new assessments and research projects. Critical next steps for the community scenario process will, among others, involve regional and sectoral extensions, further elaboration of the adaptation and impacts dimension, as well as employing the SSP scenarios with the new generation of earth system models as part of the 6th climate model intercomparison project (CMIP6).
2,644 citations
Cites background or methods from "Long-term economic growth projectio..."
...There are three sets of economic (GDP) projections for each SSP (Crespo Cuaresma, 2016; Dellink et al., 2016; Leimbach et al., 2016)....
[...]
...For each SSP, a single population, education (KC and Lutz, 2016) and urbanization projection (Jiang and O’Neill, 2016) was developed, while three different economic modeling teams participated in the development of the GDP projections (Crespo Cuaresma, 2016; Dellink et al., 2016; Leimbach et al., 2016)....
[...]
..., 2016a) and associated quantitative descriptions for key scenario drivers, such as population (KC and Lutz, 2016), economic growth (Crespo Cuaresma, 2016; Dellink et al., 2016; Leimbach et al., 2016), and urbanization (Jiang and O’Neill, 2016)....
[...]
Brian C. O'Neill1, Claudia Tebaldi1, Detlef P. van Vuuren2, Detlef P. van Vuuren3, Veronika Eyring4, Pierre Friedlingstein5, George C. Hurtt6, Reto Knutti7, Elmar Kriegler8, Jean-Francois Lamarque1, Jason Lowe9, Gerald A. Meehl1, Richard H. Moss6, Keywan Riahi10, Keywan Riahi11, Benjamin M. Sanderson1 •
National Center for Atmospheric Research1, Utrecht University2, Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency3, German Aerospace Center4, University of Exeter5, University of Maryland, College Park6, ETH Zurich7, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research8, Met Office9, Graz University of Technology10, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis11
TL;DR: The Scenario Model Intercomparison Project (ScenarioMIP) as discussed by the authors is the primary activity within Phase 6 of the Coupled Model Comparison Project (CMIP6) that will provide multi-model climate projections based on alternative scenarios of future emissions and land use changes produced with integrated assessment models.
Abstract: . Projections of future climate change play a fundamental role in improving understanding of the climate system as well as characterizing societal risks and response options. The Scenario Model Intercomparison Project (ScenarioMIP) is the primary activity within Phase 6 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6) that will provide multi-model climate projections based on alternative scenarios of future emissions and land use changes produced with integrated assessment models. In this paper, we describe ScenarioMIP's objectives, experimental design, and its relation to other activities within CMIP6. The ScenarioMIP design is one component of a larger scenario process that aims to facilitate a wide range of integrated studies across the climate science, integrated assessment modeling, and impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability communities, and will form an important part of the evidence base in the forthcoming Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessments. At the same time, it will provide the basis for investigating a number of targeted science and policy questions that are especially relevant to scenario-based analysis, including the role of specific forcings such as land use and aerosols, the effect of a peak and decline in forcing, the consequences of scenarios that limit warming to below 2 °C, the relative contributions to uncertainty from scenarios, climate models, and internal variability, and long-term climate system outcomes beyond the 21st century. To serve this wide range of scientific communities and address these questions, a design has been identified consisting of eight alternative 21st century scenarios plus one large initial condition ensemble and a set of long-term extensions, divided into two tiers defined by relative priority. Some of these scenarios will also provide a basis for variants planned to be run in other CMIP6-Endorsed MIPs to investigate questions related to specific forcings. Harmonized, spatially explicit emissions and land use scenarios generated with integrated assessment models will be provided to participating climate modeling groups by late 2016, with the climate model simulations run within the 2017–2018 time frame, and output from the climate model projections made available and analyses performed over the 2018–2020 period.
1,758 citations
Cites background from "Long-term economic growth projectio..."
..., 2015) as well as quantitative descriptions for key elements including population (KC and Lutz, 2014), economic growth (Dellink et al., 2015), and urbanization (Jiang and O’Neill, 2015)....
[...]
Brian C. O'Neill1, Elmar Kriegler2, Kristie L. Ebi3, Eric Kemp-Benedict4, Keywan Riahi5, Dale S. Rothman6, Bas van Ruijven1, Detlef P. van Vuuren7, Detlef P. van Vuuren8, Joern Birkmann9, Kasper Kok10, Marc A. Levy11, William Solecki12 •
National Center for Atmospheric Research1, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research2, University of Washington3, Stockholm Environment Institute4, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis5, University of Denver6, Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency7, Utrecht University8, University of Stuttgart9, Wageningen University and Research Centre10, Columbia University11, Hunter College12
TL;DR: The SSP narratives as discussed by the authors is a set of five qualitative descriptions of future changes in demographics, human development, economy and lifestyle, policies and institutions, technology, and environment and natural resources, which can serve as a basis for integrated scenarios of emissions and land use, as well as climate impact, adaptation and vulnerability analyses.
Abstract: Long-term scenarios play an important role in research on global environmental change. The climate change research community is developing new scenarios integrating future changes in climate and society to investigate climate impacts as well as options for mitigation and adaptation. One component of these new scenarios is a set of alternative futures of societal development known as the shared socioeconomic pathways (SSPs). The conceptual framework for the design and use of the SSPs calls for the development of global pathways describing the future evolution of key aspects of society that would together imply a range of challenges for mitigating and adapting to climate change. Here we present one component of these pathways: the SSP narratives, a set of five qualitative descriptions of future changes in demographics, human development, economy and lifestyle, policies and institutions, technology, and environment and natural resources. We describe the methods used to develop the narratives as well as how these pathways are hypothesized to produce particular combinations of challenges to mitigation and adaptation. Development of the narratives drew on expert opinion to (1) identify key determinants of these challenges that were essential to incorporate in the narratives and (2) combine these elements in the narratives in a manner consistent with scholarship on their inter-relationships. The narratives are intended as a description of plausible future conditions at the level of large world regions that can serve as a basis for integrated scenarios of emissions and land use, as well as climate impact, adaptation and vulnerability analyses.
1,606 citations
Cites background from "Long-term economic growth projectio..."
...Other papers in this special issue describe the quantitative elements of the SSPs, including population and educational composition (KC and Lutz, 2014), urbanization (Jiang and O’Neill, 2014), and economic growth pathways (Crespo Cuaresma, 2014; Leimbach et al., 2014; Dellink et al., 2014)....
[...]
TL;DR: This work converts the general SSP storylines into demographic scenarios for 195 countries, cross-classified by age, gender and level of education, and finds that future fertility and hence population growth will depend on female education.
Abstract: This paper applies the methods of multi-dimensional mathematical demography to project national populations based on alternative assumptions on future, fertility, mortality, migration and educational transitions that correspond to the five shared socioeconomic pathways (SSP) storylines. In doing so it goes a significant step beyond past population scenarios in the IPCC context which considered only total population size. By differentiating the human population not only by age and sex -- as is conventionally done in demographic projections -- but also by different levels of educational attainment the most fundamental aspects of human development and social change are being explicitly addressed through modeling the changing composition of populations by these three important individual characteristics. The scenarios have been defined in a collaborative effort of the international Integrated Assessment Modeling community with the medium scenario following that of a major new effort by the Wittgenstein Centre for Demography and Global Human Capital (IIASA, OEAW, WU) involving over 550 experts from around the world. As a result, in terms of total world population size the trajectories resulting from the five SSPs stay very close to each other until around 2030 and by the middle of the century already a visible differentiation appears with the range between the highest (SSP3) and the lowest (SSP1) trajectories spanning 1.5 billion. The range opens up much more with the SSP3 reaching 12.6 billion in 2100 and SSP1 falling to 6.9 billion which is lower than today's world population.
823 citations
Arnulf Grubler1, Charlie Wilson2, Charlie Wilson1, Nuno Bento1, Nuno Bento3, Benigna Boza-Kiss1, Volker Krey1, David L. McCollum1, Narasimha D. Rao1, Keywan Riahi1, Keywan Riahi4, Keywan Riahi5, Joeri Rogelj6, Joeri Rogelj1, Simon De Stercke6, Simon De Stercke1, Jonathan M. Cullen7, Stefan Frank1, Oliver Fricko1, Fei Guo1, Matthew Gidden1, Petr Havlik1, Daniel Huppmann1, Gregor Kiesewetter1, Peter Rafaj1, Wolfgang Schoepp1, Hugo Valin1 •
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors developed a narrative of future change based on observable trends that results in low energy demand and showed how changes in the quantity and type of energy services drive structural change in intermediate and upstream supply sectors (energy and land use).
Abstract: Scenarios that limit global warming to 1.5 °C describe major transformations in energy supply and ever-rising energy demand. Here, we provide a contrasting perspective by developing a narrative of future change based on observable trends that results in low energy demand. We describe and quantify changes in activity levels and energy intensity in the global North and global South for all major energy services. We project that global final energy demand by 2050 reduces to 245 EJ, around 40% lower than today, despite rises in population, income and activity. Using an integrated assessment modelling framework, we show how changes in the quantity and type of energy services drive structural change in intermediate and upstream supply sectors (energy and land use). Down-sizing the global energy system dramatically improves the feasibility of a low-carbon supply-side transformation. Our scenario meets the 1.5 °C climate target as well as many sustainable development goals, without relying on negative emission technologies. Achieving sustainable development goals while meeting the 1.5 °C climate target requires radical changes to how we use energy. A scenario of low energy demand shows how this can be done by down-sizing the global energy system to enable feasible deployment rates of renewable energy resources.
680 citations
References
More filters
TL;DR: In this paper, a model of long run growth is proposed and examples of possible growth patterns are given. But the model does not consider the long run of the economy and does not take into account the characteristics of interest and wage rates.
Abstract: I. Introduction, 65. — II. A model of long-run growth, 66. — III. Possible growth patterns, 68. — IV. Examples, 73. — V. Behavior of interest and wage rates, 78. — VI. Extensions, 85. — VII. Qualifications, 91.
20,482 citations
TL;DR: The authors examined whether the Solow growth model is consistent with the international variation in the standard of living, and they showed that an augmented Solow model that includes accumulation of human as well as physical capital provides an excellent description of the cross-country data.
Abstract: This paper examines whether the Solow growth model is consistent with the international variation in the standard of living. It shows that an augmented Solow model that includes accumulation of human as well as physical capital provides an excellent description of the cross-country data. The paper also examines the implications of the Solow model for convergence in standards of living, that is, for whether poor countries tend to grow faster than rich countries. The evidence indicates that, holding population growth and capital accumulation constant, countries converge at about the rate the augmented Solow model predicts. This paper takes Robert Solow seriously. In his classic 1956 article Solow proposed that we begin the study of economic growth by assuming a standard neoclassical production function with decreasing returns to capital. Taking the rates of saving and population growth as exogenous, he showed that these two vari- ables determine the steady-state level of income per capita. Be- cause saving and population growth rates vary across countries, different countries reach different steady states. Solow's model gives simple testable predictions about how these variables influ- ence the steady-state level of income. The higher the rate of saving, the richer the country. The higher the rate of population growth, the poorer the country. This paper argues that the predictions of the Solow model are, to a first approximation, consistent with the evidence. Examining recently available data for a large set of countries, we find that saving and population growth affect income in the directions that Solow predicted. Moreover, more than half of the cross-country variation in income per capita can be explained by these two variables alone. Yet all is not right for the Solow model. Although the model correctly predicts the directions of the effects of saving and
14,402 citations
[...]
7,907 citations
7,426 citations
TL;DR: This paper showed that differences in physical capital and educational attainment can only partially explain the variation in output per worker, and that a large amount of variation in the level of the Solow residual across countries is driven by differences in institutions and government policies.
Abstract: Output per worker varies enormously across countries. Why? On an accounting basis, our analysis shows that differences in physical capital and educational attainment can only partially explain the variation in output per worker--we find a large amount of variation in the level of the Solow residual across countries. At a deeper level, we document that the differences in capital accumulation, productivity, and therefore output per worker are driven by differences in institutions and government policies, which we call social infrastructure. We treat social infrastructure as endogenous, determined historically by location and other factors captured in part by language.
7,208 citations
Related Papers (5)
Keywan Riahi, Detlef P. van Vuuren, Elmar Kriegler, Jae Edmonds, Brian C. O'Neill, Shinichiro Fujimori, Nico Bauer, Katherine Calvin, Rob Dellink, Oliver Fricko, Wolfgang Lutz, Alexander Popp, Jesus Crespo Cuaresma, Samir Kc, Samir Kc, Marian Leimbach, Leiwen Jiang, Tom Kram, Shilpa Rao, Johannes Emmerling, Kristie L. Ebi, Tomoko Hasegawa, Petr Havlik, Florian Humpenöder, Lara Aleluia Da Silva, Steve Smith, Elke Stehfest, Valentina Bosetti, Valentina Bosetti, Jiyong Eom, Jiyong Eom, David E.H.J. Gernaat, Toshihiko Masui, Joeri Rogelj, Jessica Strefler, Laurent Drouet, Volker Krey, Gunnar Luderer, Mathijs Harmsen, Kiyoshi Takahashi, Lavinia Baumstark, Jonathan C. Doelman, Mikiko Kainuma, Zbigniew Klimont, Giacomo Marangoni, Hermann Lotze-Campen, Hermann Lotze-Campen, Michael Obersteiner, Andrzej Tabeau, Massimo Tavoni, Massimo Tavoni
Detlef P. van Vuuren, Detlef P. van Vuuren, Jae Edmonds, Mikiko Kainuma, Keywan Riahi, Allison M. Thomson, Kathy Hibbard, George C. Hurtt, George C. Hurtt, Tom Kram, Volker Krey, Jean-Francois Lamarque, Toshihiko Masui, Malte Meinshausen, Nebojsa Nakicenovic, Nebojsa Nakicenovic, Steven J. Smith, Steven K. Rose