Abstract
Negotiating reductions in greenhouse gas emission involves the allocation of emissions and of emission reductions to specific agents, and notably, within the current UN framework, to associated countries. As production takes place in supply chains, increasingly extending over several countries, there are various options available in which emissions originating from one and the same activity may be attributed to different agents along the supply chain and thus to different countries. In this way, several distinct types of national carbon accounts can be constructed. We argue that these accounts will typically differ in the information they provide to individual countries on the effects their actions have on global emissions; and they may also, to varying degrees, prove useful in supporting the pursuit of an effective and just climate policy. None of the accounting systems, however, prove 'best' in achieving these aims under real-world circumstances; we thus suggest compiling reliable data to aid in the consistent calculation of multiple carbon accounts on a global level.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Relevant articles
Open Access articles citing this article.
-
Reducing environmental impacts through socioeconomic transitions: critical review and prospects
Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering Open Access 20 October 2022
-
The risk of carbon leakage in global climate agreements
International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics Open Access 16 September 2020
-
Mapping global carbon footprint in China
Nature Communications Open Access 07 May 2020
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$209.00 per year
only $17.42 per issue
Rent or buy this article
Get just this article for as long as you need it
$39.95
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References
The Kyoto Protocol to the Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC, 1997); http://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol/items/2830.php
Davis, S. J., Peters, G. P. & Caldeira, K. The supply chain of CO2 emissions. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 18554–18559 (2011).
Lenzen, M. & Murray, J. Conceptualising environmental responsibility. Ecol. Econ. 70, 261–270 (2010).
Marques, A., Rodrigues, J., Lenzen, M. & Domingos, T. Income-based environmental responsibility. Ecol. Econ. 84, 57–65 (2012).
Peters, G. & Hertwich, E. G. Post-Kyoto greenhouse gas inventories: Production versus consumption. Clim. Change 86, 51–66 (2008).
Davis, S. J. & Caldeira, K. Consumption-based accounting of CO2 emissions. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 5687–5692 (2010).
Kondo, Y., Moriguchi, Y. & Shimizu, H. CO2 emissions in Japan: Influences of imports and exports. Appl. Energy 59, 163–174 (1998).
Munksgaard, J. & Pedersen, K. CO2 accounts for open economies: Producer or consumer responsibility? Energy Policy 21, 327–334 (2001).
Ferng, J.-J. Allocating the responsibility of CO2 over-emissions from the perspectives of benefit principle and ecological deficit. Ecol. Econ. 46, 121–141 (2003).
Bastianoni, S., Pulselli, F. M. & Tiezzi, E. The problem of assigning responsibility for greenhouse gas emissions. Ecol. Econ. 49, 253–257 (2004).
Lenzen, M., Murray, J., Sack, F. & Wiedmann, T. Shared producer and consumer responsibility: Theory and practice. Ecol. Econ. 61, 27–42 (2007).
Rodrigues, J., Domingos, T., Giljum, S. & Schneider, F. Designing an indicator of environmental responsibility. Ecol. Econ. 59, 256–266 (2006).
Feinberg, J. The Moral Limits of the Criminal Law Volume 1: Harm to Others (Oxford Univ. Press, 1984).
Coleman, J. L. Risks and Wrongs (Cambridge Studies in Philosophy and Law, Cambridge Univ. Press, 1992).
McKinnon, C. Climate Change and Future Justice: Precaution, Compensation and Triage (Routledge, 2011).
Gosseries, A. Historical emissions and free riding. Ethic. Persp. 11, 36–60 (2004).
Caney, S. Environmental degradation, reparations, and the moral significance of history. J. Social Phil. 37, 464–482 (2006).
Meyer, L. H. & Roser, D. Climate justice and historical emissions. Crit. Rev. Int. Social Polit. Phil. 13, 229–253 (2010).
Meyer, L. H. Why historical emissions should count. Chicago J. Int. Law 13, 597–685 (2013).
De-Shalit, A. Why Posterity Matters: Environmental Policies and Future Generations (Routledge, 1995).
Thompson, J. Historical injustice and reparation: Justifying claims of descendants. Ethics 112, 114–135 (2001).
Thompson, J. Intergenerational Justice: Rights and Responsibilities in an Intergenerational Polity (Taylor & Francis, 2009).
Miller, D. Holding nations responsible. Ethics 114, 240–268 (2004).
Butt, D. On benefiting from injustice. Can. J. Phil. 37, 129–152 (2007).
Parfit, D. Reasons and Persons Ch. 2 (Clarendon, 1984).
Sinnott-Armstrong, W. in Advances in the Economics of Environmental Research Vol. 5 Perspectives on Climate Change: Science, Economics, Politics, Ethics (ed. Sinnott-Armstrong, W. & Howarth, R. B.) 293–315 (Elsevier, 2005).
Kagan, S. Do I make a difference? Phil. Public Affairs 39, 105–141 (2011).
Sandberg, J. My emissions make no difference. Environ. Ethics 33, 229–248 (2011).
Nefsky, J. Consequentialism and the problem of collective harm: A reply to Kagan. Phil. Public Affairs 39, 364–395 (2012).
Maltais, A. Radically non-ideal climate politics and the obligation to at least vote green. Environ. Values 22, 589–608 (2013).
May, L. & Hoffman, S. (eds) Collective Responsibility: Five Decades of Debate in Theoretical and Applied Ethics (Rowman & Littlefield, 1991).
Mellema, G. Collective responsibility and contributing to an outcome. Crim. Justice Ethics 25, 17–22 (2006).
Parfit, D. Reasons and Persons Ch. 16 (Clarendon, 1984).
Heyd, D. Genethics: Moral Issues in the Creation of People (Univ. California Press, Berkeley, 1992).
Birnbacher, D. in Intergenerational Justice (eds Gosseries, A. & Meyer, L. H.) 273–300 (Oxford Univ. Press, 2009).
Gardiner, S. M. A Perfect Moral Storm: The Ethical Tragedy of Climate Change (Oxford Univ. Press, 2011).
Meyer, L. H. & Sanklecha, P. Individual expectations and climate change. Anal. Krit. Z. Sozialtheor. 32, 449–471 (2011).
Meyer, L. H. & Sanklecha, P. How legitimate expectations matter in climate justice. Polit. Phil. Econ. 13, 369–393 (2014).
Jamieson, D. Global responsibilities: Ethics, public health, and global environmental change. Indiana J. Glob. Legal Studies 5, 99–119 (1997).
Shue, H. Global environment and international inequality. Int. Affairs 75, 531–545 (1999).
Caney, S. Climate change and the duties of the advantaged. Crit. Rev. Int. Social Polit. Phil. 13, 203–228 (2010).
Whalley, J. & Wigle, R. in Global Warming: Economic Policy Responses (eds Dornbusch, R. & Poterba, J.) 233–263 (MIT, 1991).
Lininger, C. Consumption-Based Approaches in International Climate Policy (Springer, 2015).
Böhringer, C., Balistreri, E. & Rutherford, T. The role of border carbon adjustment in unilateral climate policy: Overview of an Energy Modeling Forum study (EMF29). Energy Econ. 34 (Suppl. 2), S97–S110 (2012).
Mattoo, A., Subramanian, A., van der Mensbrugghe, D. & He, J. Reconciling Climate Change and Trade Policy World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 5123 (World Bank, 2009).
Kolstad, C. et al. in Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change (eds Edenhofer, O. et al.) 207–282 (IPCC, Cambridge Univ. Press, 2014).
Steininger, K. W. et al. Justice and cost effectiveness of consumption-based versus production-based approaches in the case of unilateral climate policies. Glob. Environ. Change 24, 75–87 (2014).
Peters, G. P. & Hertwich, E. G. Post-Kyoto greenhouse gas inventories: Production versus consumption. Clim. Change 86, 51–66 (2008).
Droege, S. et al. Tackling Leakage in a World of Unequal Carbon Prices Climate Strategies Report (Cambridge, 2009).
Girod, B. Product-oriented climate policy: Learning from the past to shape the future. J. Cleaner Prod. (in the press).
Babiker, M. H. & Rutherford, T. F. The economic effects of border measures in subglobal climate agreements. Energy J. 26, 99–126 (2005).
Kuik, O. & Hofkes, M. Border adjustment for European emissions trading: competitiveness and carbon leakage. Energy Policy 38, 1741–1748 (2010).
Fischer, C. & Fox, A. K. Comparing policies to combat emissions leakage: Border carbon adjustments versus rebates. J. Environ. Econ. Managem. 64, 199–216 (2012).
Bednar-Friedl, B., Schinko, T. & Steininger, K. W. The relevance of process emissions for carbon leakage: A comparison of unilateral climate policy options with and without border carbon adjustment. Energy Econ. 34 (Suppl. 2), S168–S180 (2012).
Antimiani, A., Costantini, V., Martini, C., Salvatici, L. & Tommasino, M. C. Assessing alternative solutions to carbon leakage. Energy Econ. 36, 299–311 (2013).
Ismer, R. & Neuhoff, K. Border tax adjustment: A feasible way to support stringent emission trading. Eur. J. Law Econ. 24, 137–164 (2007).
Monjon, S. & Quirion, P. How to design a border adjustment for the European Union emissions trading system? Energy Policy 98, 5199–5207 (2010).
Cosbey, A. et al. A Guide for the Concerned: Guidance on the Elaboration and Implementation of Border Carbon Adjustment Policy Report 03 (Entwined, 2012); http://www.iisd.org/pdf/2012/bca_guidance.pdf
Gros, D., Egenhofer, C., Fujiwara, N., Georgiev, A. & Guerin, S. S. Climate Change and Trade: Taxing Carbon at the Border? (Centre for European Policy Studies, 2010).
European Parliament and the Council of the EU. Directive 2009/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 amending Directive 2003/87/EC so as to improve and extend the greenhouse gas emission allowance trading scheme of the Community. Offic. J. Eur. Union L140, 63–86 (5 June 2009).
Harstad, B. Buy coal! A case for supply-side environmental policy. J. Polit. Econ. 120, 77–115 (2012).
Markusen, J. R. International externalities and optimal tax structures. J. Int. Econ. 5, 15–29 (1975).
Felder, S. & Rutherford, T. F. Unilateral action and carbon leakage: The consequences of international trade in oil and basic materials. J. Environ. Econ. Managem. 25, 162–176 (1993).
Quirion, P. in Climate Change Policies: Global Challenges and Future Prospects (eds Cerda, E. & Labandeira, X.) 105–122 (Edward Elgar, 2010).
Kanemoto, K., Moran, D., Lenzen, M. & Geschke, A. International trade undermines national emission reduction targets: New evidence from air pollution. Glob. Environ. Change 24, 52–59 (2014).
Burniaux, J.-M. & Oliveira Martins, J. Carbon leakages: A general equilibrium view. Econ. Theory 49, 473–495 (2012).
Boehringer, C., Bye, B., Faehn, T., Rosendahl, K. E. Alternative designs for tariffs on embodied carbon: A global cost-effectiveness analysis. Energy Econ. 34, 143–153 (2012).
Whalley, J. & Wigle, R., Cutting CO2 emissions: The effects of alternative policy approaches. Energy J. 12, 109–124 (1991).
Kander, A., Jiborn, M., Moran, D. D. & Wiedmann, T. O. National greenhouse-gas accounting for effective climate policy on international trade. Nature Clim. Change 5, 431–435 (2015).
Compilation of Economy-Wide Emission Reduction Targets to be Implemented by Parties Included in Annex I to the Convention FCCC/SBSTA/2014/INF.6 (UNFCCC, 2014).
Compilation of Information on Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions to be Implemented by Developing Country Parties FCCC/SBI/2013/INF.12/Rev.3 (UNFCCC, 2013).
Lieberman, D. et al. (eds) Accounting for Climate Change. Uncertainty in Greenhouse Gas Inventories: Verification, Compliance, and Trading (Springer, 2007).
White, T. et al. (eds) Greenhouse Gas Inventories: Dealing With Uncertainty (Springer, 2011).
Ometto, J. P., Bun, R., Jonas, M. & Nahorski, Z. Uncertainties in Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventories (Springer, 2015).
Bellassen, V. et al. Monitoring, reporting and verifying emissions in the climate economy, Nature Clim. Change 5, 319–328 (2015).
Andres, R. J. et al. A synthesis of carbon dioxide emissions from fossil-fuel combustion. Biogeosciences 9, 1845–1871 (2012).
Liu, Z. et al. Reduced carbon emission estimates from fossil fuel combustion and cement production in China. Nature 524, 335–338 (2015).
Wilting, H. C. Sensitivity and uncertainty analysis in MRIO modelling; some empirical results with regard to the Dutch carbon footprint. Econ. Syst. Res. 24, 141–171 (2012).
Inomata, S. & Owen, A. (eds) A comparative evaluation of multi-regional input–output databases (special issue). Econ. Syst. Res. 26 (2014).
Peters, G. P., Davis, S. J. & Andrew, R. A synthesis of carbon in international trade. Biogeosciences 9, 3949–4023 (2012).
Matthews, H. D. et al. National contributions to observed global warming. Environ. Res. Letters 9, 014010 (2014).
Davis, S. J. & Socolow, R. H. Commitment accounting of CO2 emissions. Environ. Res. Lett. 9, 084018 (2014).
Davis, S. J., Caldeira, K. & Matthews, H. D. Future CO2 emissions and climate change from existing energy infrastructure. Science 329, 1330–1333 (2010).
Raupach, M. R. et al. Sharing a quota on cumulative carbon emissions. Nature Clim. Change 4, 873–879 (2014).
Skelton, A. EU corporate action as a driver for global emissions abatement: A structural analysis of EU international supply chain carbon dioxide emissions. Glob. Environ. Change 23, 1795–1806 (2013).
Heede, R. Tracing anthropogenic carbon dioxide and methane emissions to fossil fuel and cement producers, 1854–2010. Clim. Change 122, 229–241 (2014).
Chakravarty, S. et al. Sharing global CO2 emission reductions among one billion high emitters. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106, 11884–11888 (2009).
Andrew, R., Davis, S. J. & Peters, G. P. Climate policy and dependence on traded carbon. Environ. Res. Lett. 8, 034011 (2013).
Matthews, H. D. Quantifying historical carbon and climate debts among nations. Nature Clim. Change http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2774 (2015).
Peters, G. Managing carbon leakage. Carbon Managem. 1, 35–37 (2010).
Edenhofer, O. & Minx, J. Mapmakers and navigators, facts and values. Science 354, 37–38 (2014).
Springmann, M. Carbon tariffs for financing clean development. Clim. Policy 13, 20–42 (2013).
Asheim, G. B. A distributional argument for supply-side climate policies. Environ. Res. Econ. 56, 239–254 (2013).
Böhringer, C. & Behrens, M. Interactions of emission caps and renewable electricity support schemes. J. Regul. Econ. 48, 74–96 (2015).
Bartelmus, P., Stahmer, C. & van Tongeren, J. Integrated environmental and economic accounting: Framework for a SNA satellite system. Rev. Income Wealth 37, 111–148 (1991).
Integrated Environmental and Economic Accounting Publication E.93.XVII.12 (Studies in Methods No. 61, UN Statistics Division, 1993).
Handbook of National Accounting. Integrated Environmental and Economic Accounting: An Operational Manual (Studies in Methods Series F No. 78, UN Statistics Division/UNEP, 2000).
Lenzen, M., Moran, D., Kanemoto, K. & Geschke, A. Building Eora: A global multi-regional input–output database at high country and sector resolution. Econ. Syst. Res. 25, 20–49 (2013).
Acknowledgements
The research was supported by research grants from the Austrian Climate and Energy Fund within the Austrian Climate Research Programme (projects INNOVATE and RE-ADJUST). We thank D. Crawford-Brown, G. Kirchengast and A. Richter for comments on earlier versions, and S. Tschuertz for her work on the figures.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors contributed to the study design. K.W.S. and C.L. took the lead in writing the paper and L.H.M. did so for the section on responsibility. P.M. and T.S. assisted the writing of the whole paper. T.S. and P.M. collected and processed data and P.M. analysed data, with assistance from K.W.S. and T.S. K.W.S. edited the paper.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
Supplementary information
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Steininger, K., Lininger, C., Meyer, L. et al. Multiple carbon accounting to support just and effective climate policies. Nature Clim Change 6, 35–41 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2867
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2867
This article is cited by
-
Reducing environmental impacts through socioeconomic transitions: critical review and prospects
Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering (2023)
-
Unstable decoupling of CO2 emissions from sectoral economic growth calls for decarbonization policies based on multi-perspective accounting: a case study of Zhejiang, China
Environmental Science and Pollution Research (2023)
-
International trade, CO2 emissions, and re-examination of “Pollution Haven Hypothesis” in China
Environmental Science and Pollution Research (2022)
-
Consumption-based CO2 emissions accounting and scenario simulation in Asia and the Pacific region
Environmental Science and Pollution Research (2022)
-
Implementing the material footprint to measure progress towards Sustainable Development Goals 8 and 12
Nature Sustainability (2021)