Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorKeppo, I
dc.contributor.authorButnar, I
dc.contributor.authorBauer, N
dc.contributor.authorCaspani, M
dc.contributor.authorEdelenbosch, O
dc.contributor.authorEmmerling, J
dc.contributor.authorFragkos, P
dc.contributor.authorGuivarch, C
dc.contributor.authorHarmsen, M
dc.contributor.authorLefèvre, J
dc.contributor.authorLe Gallic, T
dc.contributor.authorLeimbach, M
dc.contributor.authorMcDowall, W
dc.contributor.authorMercure, J-F
dc.contributor.authorSchaeffer, R
dc.contributor.authorTrutnevyte, E
dc.contributor.authorWagner, F
dc.date.accessioned2022-01-29T01:26:29Z
dc.date.available2022-01-29T01:26:29Z
dc.date.issued2021-05-01
dc.date.submitted2020-11-18
dc.identifier.issn1748-9318
dc.identifier.othererlabe5d8
dc.identifier.otherabe5d8
dc.identifier.othererl-110261.r2
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/333417
dc.description.abstract<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title> <jats:p>Integrated assessment models (IAMs) have emerged as key tools for building and assessing long term climate mitigation scenarios. Due to their central role in the recent IPCC assessments, and international climate policy analyses more generally, and the high uncertainties related to future projections, IAMs have been critically assessed by scholars from different fields receiving various critiques ranging from adequacy of their methods to how their results are used and communicated. Although IAMs are conceptually diverse and evolved in very different directions, they tend to be criticised under the umbrella of ‘IAMs’. Here we first briefly summarise the IAM landscape and how models differ from each other. We then proceed to discuss six prominent critiques emerging from the recent literature, reflect and respond to them in the light of IAM diversity and ongoing work and suggest ways forward. The six critiques relate to (a) representation of heterogeneous actors in the models, (b) modelling of technology diffusion and dynamics, (c) representation of capital markets, (d) energy-economy feedbacks, (e) policy scenarios, and (f) interpretation and use of model results.</jats:p>
dc.languageen
dc.publisherIOP Publishing
dc.subjectTopical Review
dc.subjectintegrated assessment model
dc.subjectheterogeneity
dc.subjecttechnology diffusion
dc.subjectenergy-economy feedback
dc.subjectfinance
dc.subjectpolicy scenarios
dc.subjectmodel interpretation
dc.titleExploring the possibility space: taking stock of the diverse capabilities and gaps in integrated assessment models
dc.typeArticle
dc.date.updated2022-01-29T01:26:28Z
prism.issueIdentifier5
prism.publicationNameEnvironmental Research Letters
prism.volume16
dc.identifier.doi10.17863/CAM.80840
dcterms.dateAccepted2021-02-12
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.1088/1748-9326/abe5d8
rioxxterms.versionVoR
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
dc.contributor.orcidKeppo, I [0000-0003-3109-1243]
dc.contributor.orcidButnar, I [0000-0001-9908-220X]
dc.contributor.orcidEdelenbosch, O [0000-0002-6588-5255]
dc.contributor.orcidEmmerling, J [0000-0003-0916-9913]
dc.contributor.orcidFragkos, P [0000-0003-3596-0661]
dc.contributor.orcidGuivarch, C [0000-0002-9405-256X]
dc.contributor.orcidHarmsen, M [0000-0001-6755-1569]
dc.contributor.orcidMcDowall, W [0000-0002-4238-0692]
dc.contributor.orcidSchaeffer, R [0000-0002-3709-7323]
dc.contributor.orcidTrutnevyte, E [0000-0002-1716-6192]
dc.identifier.eissn1748-9326
pubs.funder-project-idEuropean Commission (821124)
cam.issuedOnline2021-04-29


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record