Mikiko Kainuma,Fellow,CenterforSocialand

EnvironmentalSystemsResearch,NIES/SeniorResearchAdvisor,IGES

11 March 2015IIASA

Review of modelling approaches

The world in 2050 Interactive Science Meeting (TWI2050)

- AIM Model -

Funded by the Ministry of the Environment, Japan (GERF, S-6) and NIES

http://2050.nies.go.jp/index.html

GHG

 emissions per capita

High CarbonLocked in Society

Low Carbon Locked in Society

Development of Asia LCS Scenarios

Policy Packages for Asia LCS

Low Carbon SocietyBackcasting

Leapfrog‐Development

High Carbon Locked‐in type Development

Climate catastrophe:Significant Damage to   Economy and Eco‐ System

Time

(1) Depicting narrative scenarios for LCS(2) Quantifying future LCS visions(3) Developing robust roadmaps by backcasting 

2

Can Asia Change the World through Leapfrogging?

Elements considered in scenarios and/or roadmapsEnergy Production,

Energy Service Supply 社会インフラ

Human Capital Domestic Institutions

Social Capital, Tradition, rule

Trades

International Policy

Country International

Other Environmental ProblemsSocial Infrastructure

Problems in AsiaEconomic Development, Energy,

Poverty, Environment, etc.

Realization of Low Carbon Society with high quality of live

Making roadmaps toward LCS by backcasting

•Development of qualitative scenarios •Development of actions and roadmaps •Capacity building•Analysis of Asian perspectives

Challenges toward low-carbon societies in Asia

Low Carbon Asia

Research Topics

PresentSituation International

challenges

Future

Examples of issues to be tackled:Economic Leap-frogging development to LCSEnergy: competition of biomass energy and food productionMaterial: Social infrastructure and low materializationLifestyle: Tradition, Diversity in AsiaInstitution: Barriers and policy plans to remove barriersTransportation: Low carbon transportation

Top-down models

Environmentwater, air, land, ...

Environmental damageMaintenance

OutputsEnvironmental indicators, economic development, ...

EconomyProductionConsumptionInvestment Market

Price

Bottom-up models

Issues• Land use• Crop productivity• Municipal solid waste• Water demand• Water availability• Risk of water shortage

• Access to safe water• Risk of hunger• Diarrhea incidence• Air pollutant emission• Urban air quality• Energy system

Environmental serviceFeedback from ecosystem

to socio-economy

Issues

AIM/Energy AIM/Agriculture AIM/MaterialAIM/CGE

AIM/Air AIM/Water AIM/Trend

SDBInnovation options Drivers

GDP, population, technologies, ...

Models of the AIM family

(Strategic Data Base)

2013/05

How to deploy our study to real worldCore research

members

Application and development to actual LCS processes

Development and maintenance of study tools/models

Each country’s domestic/ local research institute

Policy makersCentral/regional

government administrationDevelopment

AgenciesNGOs

Collaboration for LCS scenario development and building roadmaps

Request of more practical, realistic roadmaps and also tractable tools for real world

India

Indonesia

Thailand

Bangladesh

Malaysia

2013/03Cambodia Korea

Japan

China

Vietnam

http://2050.nies.go.jp/LCS

Layers of changes needed in structures, institutions, processes and mechanisms for a low carbon society 

6 GHGs emissions pathways in Asiaand comparison with 2 ℃ target pathways

7

0 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

GHG emission

s in Asia(Gt C

O2e

q)

Reference T50 T100 T200 T400 2 ℃ 2.5 ℃ 3 ℃

‐100%

‐90%

‐80%

‐70%

‐60%

‐50%

‐40%

‐30%

‐20%

‐10%

0%2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

GHG re

ductions ratio  in

 Asia

(% from

 reference)

Source) modified from Hanaoka et al, Environmental Pollution (2014)

Reference 50US$/tCO2 100US$/tCO2 200US$/tCO2 400US$/tCO2

2℃ scenario 2.5 ℃ scenario 3 ℃ scenario

Scenario name 2013 2020 2030 2040 2050Reference 0 0 0 0 0

50 US$/tCO2 3.75 12.5 25 37.5 50100 US$/tCO2 7.5 25 50 75 100200 US$/tCO2 15 50 100 150 200400 US$/tCO2 30 100 200 300 400

Emissions constraints of achieving 2℃‐3℃ were calculated based on UNEP Gap Report Future global economy‐wide carbon prices scenarios (US$/tCO2)

45% reductions from the 2005 levels

Output examples

0 

20 

40 

60 

80 

100 

120 

140 

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 20452050

SO2em

ission

s in Asia(M

t SO2)

0 

20 

40 

60 

80 

100 

120 

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

NOxem

ission

s in Asia(M

t NOx)

Reference T50 T100 T200 T400 2 ℃ 2.5 ℃ 3 ℃

0 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

BCem

ission

s in Asia(M

t BC)

0 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

30 

35 

40 

2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

PMem

ission

s in Asia(M

t PM)

Reference T50 T100 T200 T400 2 ℃ 2.5 ℃ 3 ℃

8

Reference

50US$/tCO2

100US$/tCO2

200US$/tCO2

400US$/tCO2

2℃ scenario

2.5℃ scenario

3℃ scenario

Source) modified from Hanaoka et al, Environmental Pollution (2014)

There are large reduction potentials of air pollutants and SLCPs, due to GHG mitigation actions such as drastic fuel sifts and energy efficiency improvement.(e.g. 60～90% reductions compared to baseline in 2050

Output examplesSLCP & Air pollutants emissions in Asia‐ Cobenefits of implementing CO2 mitigation policies‐

0100200300400500600700800900

2005

2010

2020

2030

2040

2050

2060

2070

2080

2090

2100

Popu

latio

n at risk of h

unger 

[million]

SSP3

SSP4

SSP2

SSP5SSP1

• 21st‐century risk of hunger strongly differs among different socioeconomic conditions

• Regional distribution depends greatly on population growth, equality in food distribution and increase in food consumption

• Regions with greater population  growth face higher risk of hunger.

Risk of hunger in the 21st century

The most pessimistic scenario (SSP3)

Rest of Africa, 39%

India, 23%

Rest of Asia, 16%Middle 

East

Southeast Asia

Rest of South America

China BrazilNorth Africa Former 

Soviet Union

(Relative to 2005)

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

SSP1 SSP2 SSP3 SSP4 SSP5

2005 2100

Land

 use [M

ha] Food crops

Pasture

Grassland

Managed forest

Primary forest

Hasegawa et al., 20150

5001000150020002500300035004000

2005

2010

2020

2030

2040

2050

2060

2070

2080

2090

2100

Carolie intake [kcal /pe

rson

/day]

Food consumption per capita

Land use change

Population at hunger risk

Output examples

Thank you for your attention!

http://2050.nies.go.jp/LCS/