Refine
Year of Publication
Document Type
- Peer-Reviewed Article (11)
- Report (9)
- Part of a Book (5)
- Contribution to Periodical (1)
The number of input-output assessments focused on energy has grown considerably in the last years. Many of these assessments combine data from multi-regional input-output (MRIO) databases with energy extensions that completely or partially depict the different stages through which energy products are supplied or used in the economy.
The improper use of some energy extensions can lead to double accounting of some energy flows, but the frequency with which this happens and the potential impact on the results are unknown. Based on a literature review, we estimate that around a quarter of the MRIO-based energy assessments reviewed incurred into double accounting. Using the EXIOBASE MRIO database, we also analyse the effects of double accounting in the absolute values and rankings of different countries' and products' energy footprints.
Building on the insights provided by our analysis, we offer a set of key recommendations to MRIO users to avoid the double accounting problem in the future. Likewise, we conclude that the harmonisation of the energy data across MRIO databases led by experts could simplify the choices of the data users until the provision of official energy extensions by statistical offices becomes a widespread practice.
Technological breakthroughs and policy measures targeting energy efficiency and clean energy alone will not suffice to deliver Paris Agreement-compliant greenhouse gas emissions trajectories in the next decades. Strong cases have recently been made for acknowledging the decarbonisation potential lying in transforming linear economic models into closed-loop industrial ecosystems and in shifting lifestyle patterns towards this direction. This perspective highlights the research capacity needed to inform on the role and potential of the circular economy for climate change mitigation and to enhance the scientific capabilities to quantitatively explore their synergies and trade-offs. This begins with establishing conceptual and methodological bridges amongst the relevant and currently fragmented research communities, thereby allowing an interdisciplinary integration and assessment of circularity, decarbonisation, and sustainable development. Following similar calls for science in support of climate action, a transdisciplinary scientific agenda is needed to co-create the goals and scientific processes underpinning the transition pathways towards a circular, net-zero economy with representatives from policy, industry, and civil society. Here, it is argued that such integration of disciplines, methods, and communities can then lead to new and/or structurally enhanced quantitative systems models that better represent critical industrial value chains, consumption patterns, and mitigation technologies. This will be a crucial advancement towards assessing the material implications of, and the contribution of enhanced circularity performance to, mitigation pathways that are compatible with the temperature goals of the Paris Agreement and the transition to a circular economy.
Consumption-based CO2 emissions, which are commonly calculated by means of environmentally extended input-output analysis, are gaining wider recognition as a way to complement territorial emission inventories. Although their use has increased significantly in the last years, insufficient attention has been paid to the methodological soundness of the underlying environmental extension. This should follow the internationally agreed accounting rules of the System of Environmental-Economic Accounting, which addresses the activities undertaken by the residents of a country, independent from where these take place. Nonetheless, some footprint calculations use extensions that account for all the activities within the territory, which leads to methodological inconsistencies. Thus, this article introduces the most relevant conceptual differences between these accounting frameworks and shows the magnitude of the gap between them building on the data generated for the EXIOBASE model. It concludes that the differences are high for many countries and their magnitude is increasing over time.
The current utilisation of natural resources in Germany and Europe is not sustainable, as inter alia stated by the German government as well as by the European Commission. At the same time, increased resource efficiency could lead to various environmental but also economic benefits. This brief study commissioned by Changing Markets presents developments in the field of resource efficiency policies, analyses the status quo of resource consumption with a special focus on fast moving consumer goods and describes potential effects of resource conservations.