IMAGE framework summary/Policy issues: Difference between revisions

From IMAGE
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with "{{FrameworkSummaryPartTemplate |Status=On hold |PageLabel=Policy issues |Sequence=3 }}")
 
No edit summary
Line 3: Line 3:
|PageLabel=Policy issues
|PageLabel=Policy issues
|Sequence=3
|Sequence=3
|Description=The IMAGE model can be used to explore various types of policy questions, and a variety of areas. The first divide concerns questions on possible impacts in the absence of policy responses, versus the evaluation of (the potential of)  policy interventions. Obviously, for IMAGE the focus is on providing an integrated perspective on policy responses, i.e. consider options in various part of human and earth system and to be able to evaluate their impact also from more than one perspective. Key areas where policy responses can be introduced in the model are:
*Climate policy (global targets, regional efforts, costs and benefits)
* Energy policies (air pollution, energy access, energy security and bio-energy)
*      Agriculture and land use policies (food, nature conservation)
* Human development policies (malnutrition, health)
* Policies to reduce the loss of biodiversity (protection, drivers)
* Measures to reduce the imbalance of nutrient and water cycles.
In Chapters 4 through-7, we provide detailed examples of IMAGE applications that explore the effectiveness of responses. In addition, we discuss in more detail the three areas for which the system has been used most: climate policy, agricultural and land-use policy and energy policy.
===Climate policy===
A main focus area of the IMAGE model is to look at climate change mitigation strategies. For this, the IMAGE model is linked to the FAIR modeling framework. (chapter 8.1). This link allows to consider detailed climate policy configuration in support of negotiation processes, and also to do intertemporal optimization of mitigation strategies For this purpose, the [[FAIR model|FAIR]] system receives information from various parts of the main IMAGE system, including information on baseline emissions from energy, land use and industrial sources, the potential for reforestation and the costs to abate emissions in the energy system. The latter is provided in the form of dynamic marginal abatement cost ([[MAC]]) curves for different regions, gases and sources. Using demand and supply curves, the model determines the carbon price on the international trade market with buyers and sellers by volume, and the resulting  net abatement costs for each region. Long-term reduction strategies can be determined by minimizing cumulative discounted mitigation costs. The FAIR calculations are fed back into the core IMAGE model to calculate impacts on the energy and land use systems. This implies that the system can evaluate measures in industry against those in land use, e.g. relevant for increased bio-energy production. But  also to look into the potential impacts of climate policy such as avoided damages and co-benefits for air pollution..
===Energy policies===
The IMAGE framework can account for a wider set of energy policies than climate policy alone, including measures to promote access to modern energy and to improve energy security Moreover, it also possible to constrain or even ban the use of specific technologies in [[TIMER model|TIMER]] such as bio-energy, nuclear power or [[CCS]]. As before, the strength of IMAGE analysis is to look at linkages, synergy and trade-off across global change processes. Examples include the link between energy use and land-use for bio-energy, and the consequences of air pollution for human health.
===Agriculture and land use policies===
Agricultural policies can also be introduced in different subcomponents of the IMAGE model. This includes the agricultural economy model (trade policies, yield improvements, subsidies and taxes and dietary preferences) and the land use allocation system (restriction on certain land use types). As a coupled system, IMAGE is able to describe the consequences of measures that are introduced, including key trade-offs and feedbacks, such as for instance the consequences for the nutrient cycle, biodiversity and hunger. Key examples include the evaluation of dietary changes with respect to biodiversity, land-use and greenhouse gas emissions, and the evaluation of more stringent land-use planning on biodiversity conservation and food security..
}}
}}

Revision as of 12:14, 11 December 2013