154,845 hits on GCI Web-site in a single day. Ten times above normal - must have been hacked.
27 December 2011 - Sudan Vision - "The C&C Approach"
The Contraction and Convergence approach to global climate policy would work by defining a global stabilization target for greenhouse gas concentrations, and then sharing out the resulting global carbon budget on the basis of convergence to equal per capita entitlements to by some negotiated date. Entitlements would be tradable, allowing countries to sell unused allowances providing low income countries, with their low per capita emissions, with a major new source of finance for development. The Greenhouse Development Rights approach is another attempt to solve the question of how to share out a global emissions budget.
Of course, the twentieth century saw both socialism and communism attempting in different ways to achieve equality of outcome– not always with obvious success. Here, however, it is also worth distinguishing between projects that are redistributive in scope (e.g. progressive taxation) versus those based on equitable allocations of a newly privatized resource that can be regarded as having been a commons up to that point (e.g. the atmosphere, state-owned oil resources).
This distinction between minimal and maximal approaches is in some ways comparable to the debate in international development between advocates of tackling absolute or dollar per day poverty and advocates of a more ambitious approach centred on reducing inequality.
Alula Berhe Kidani
27 December 2011 - Sri Lanka Daily News - "C&C Gaining Support."
One approach gaining increasing support is based on the principle that an equal quota of GHG emissions should be allocated for every person on the planet. Originated by the Global Commons Institute, the proposal, dubbed "contraction and convergence", states that rich countries should "contract" their emissions with the aim that global emissions "converge" at equal levels based on the amount of pollution, scientists think the planet can accommodate. Although many commentators say it is not realistic, its supporters include the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the European Parliament. Daily News - Lanka Gazette
23 December 2011 - Vegan Permaculture - "C&C priority plank for Green Political Administration."
The design principle I recommend for the sign of Capricorn is,“work in a relaxed, steadfast way for earned prosperity within limits that are safe and fair.” The associated Green Key Value is “Future Focus and Sustainability.” The priority plank for Green political administration is Contraction and Convergence; the world region is the Antarctic; and the world tree of this sign is the resilient and exceptionally long-lived spruce.
23 December 2011 - Media Lens - The Durban Deal, "A Death Sentence for Africa."
Karl Hood of Grenada, chair of the Alliance of Small Island States, responded to the Durban deal with damning words: "Must we accept our annihilation?" Aubrey Meyer, originator of the ‘contraction and convergence’ policy that would, if adopted by the UN, reduce greenhouse gases to safe levels, was also scathing:
"The islands are being annihilated and we all are now become their assassins. We have informally known this but with this “Durban-Deal” we all have now formally crossed that threshold."
22 December 2011 - Helga-JaneScarwell - "EcoFiscalite Séverine Frère."
Carbon as Public Policy - Contraction and Convergence
Contraction and Convergence: the framework for the reduction of GHG emissions was proposed in 1990 by the Global Commons Institute and developed by Aubrey Meyer. He has since received support from several governments, NGOs and international organizations like the World Bank and the IPCC, which considers both essential basic principles to organize the fight against climate change. EcoFiscalite Séverine Frère, Helga-Jane Scarwell
21 December 2011 - Climate Action Tracker - "Another view of the Emissions GAP post COP-17."
19 December 2011 - James Garvey - C&C in "Enlightened Reason."
If there are ‘safe’ emissions levels, if we can think clearly about the planet’s sinks as common resources to be divided up equally, then it follows pretty sharply that everyone on the planet has an equal right to emit within those safe limits. Perhaps you think in terms of a greenhouse budget, that some maximum concentration of greenhouses gasses in the atmosphere is acceptable, and we must divvy up the shares that remain equally, and take care to stay under that limit. (Here’s Peter Singer, arguing for a ‘fair deal on climate change’; you can read more details in ‘One Atmosphere’ in his book, One World.) Whichever of these lines you choose to take, given the enormous levels of emission per capita in the West, it’s been argued on almost all sides that the West has an obligation to reign in its consumption, bringing it down and in line with others whose use of the planet’s common resources is less reckless.
This, anyway, is part of the thinking behind such things as the contraction and convergence model, advocated with gusto by Aubrey Meyer and the Global Commons Institute and endorsed by a very large number of people and organizations, as a means to stabilize greenhouse gas emissions equitably. The idea is that some safe global emissions ceiling is set, everyone has an equal right to emit greenhouse gasses beneath that ceiling, and countries get emissions budgets based on population. High per capita emissions in the developed world contract, leaving room for the developing world to develop its way out of poverty, while levels converge beneath some safe threshold and, together, wind down and avoid the worst of climate change. The plan has many supporters – these quotations are from the Global Commons Institute’s website. James Garvey Enlightened Reason
20 December 2011 - Jo Abbess - "C&C on her prolific, expert and highly focused web-site."
Jo Abbess picks up on the C&C dimension of COP-17 in Durban, on her prolific and focused web-site. The article was commissioned by Damian Carrington of the Guardian but refused by him with no reasons given. Jo Abbess' web-site - Energy Change for Climate Control - has a wealth of analysis and comment related to 'Keeping the Climate Stable'
"Over 20 years ago, the debate on what to do to tackle global warming and still maintain good international relations was already won, by the commonsense approach of Contraction and Convergence – fair shares for all. Each country should count on their fair share of carbon emissions based on their population – and we would get there by starting from where we are now and agreeing mutual cuts. The big emitters would agree to steeper cuts than the lower emitters – and after some time, everybody in the world would have the same, safe emissions rights. You ignore it at our peril." Urbanity Durbanity Enery Change for Climate Control - Jo Abbess
19 December 2100 - Jozef Keulartz - "Kyoto and the Ethics of Flexibility."
The Contraction and Convergence Approach
The principle that is generally considered the most just and fair
is the principle of equal per capita entitlements to a share of the
capacity of the atmospheric sink. This egalitarian principle,
which is also endorsed in Singer’s One World, is based on the
assumption that the atmosphere is a common resource and a
global public good to which all are equally entitled. According to this principle, emission permits should be distributed
among countries in proportion to their population size. Because C&C would lead to lower emissions allowances for industrialized
countries and higher allowances for developing countries, compared to
current levels, it is no wonder that it is especially popular among
developing countries. Kyoto and the Ethics of Flexibility Jozef Keulartz
18 December 2011 - Emissions-Gap Report - "UNEP's Contraction Curves."
For this tangle, as can clearly be seen here, they have gathered a range of data curves for: -
 2 degrees and 1.5 dgrees and
 separated in into Integrated Assessment Models [IAMs] and 'stylized' . . .
This can be addressed with a view to untangling it and stylizing: -
 Contraction curves for 1.5 and 2.0 degrees and
 Plugging different convergence rates into those
If science-media and policy-makers are interested in 'C&C' on the basis of citing this UNEP 'Gap' Report, in a way where they don't feel the 'authority' of this UNEP report has been unacceptably morphed [or something?], they will need to decide what approach to 'untangling' this, is going to work with them.
e.g. where are the concentrations values?
are we doing this both temperature levels?
e.g. since contraction path-integrals vary widely [some fully contract even for 2 degrees by ~2050] a range of convergence rates faster than that will need to be shown
Here's an earlier clarification of what was table at COP-15. It is an animated example of C&C and various convergence rates, post the COP-15 debacle: -http://www.gci.org.uk/public/COP_15_C&C.swf
Download and in 'menu' go to Chapter '8' and go through. It is worth noting that this file has been downloaded around 100,000 times in the last 24 months - in other words there is an audience . . . .
17 December 2011 - Climate Change & Ethics - "C&C defended by Singer, Jamieson & Nanda."
Moreover, principles are also needed for the allocation and restriction of carbon emissions and the emission of carbon-equivalent gases. Whatever an acceptable level of greenhouse gases may be, it is difficult, if not impossible, to justify any human being having a greater entitlement than any other to emit these gases (the principle of equality). The fact that one's ancestors emitted more such gases before the theory of anthropogenic global warming came to light in the 1980s fails in my view to justify reducing this entitlement, since those emissions were discharged in ignorance and not known to take place at others' expense. Equally, the fact that the status quo and the current world economic system implicate much greater emissions for developed countries than this principle would recognize fails to justify these countries or their peoples retaining this differential, or being allowed differential entitlements. So, if countries are allowed to act and to exercise responsibilities on behalf of their populations, then the entitlements of countries should be proportional to their populations (as calculated at some agreed date). An international regime should, if so, be introduced to give effect to such entitlements, a regime that would authorize countries not using their full entitlement to trade the unused component with countries wishing to exceed their entitlement. This would clearly be a redistributive system, even if the acceptable total were to be steadily reduced to stabilize total emissions. This is the system of Contraction and Convergence proposed by Aubrey Meyer, and variously defended by Peter Singer, Dale Jamieson and myself (Meyer 2005; Singer 2002; Jamieson 2005; Attfield 2003, 179-181). Climate Change and Environmental Ethics -
Ved P Nanda
16 December 2011 - Dr Harley Wright The Economist - "Why don't we use C&C?"
15 December 2011 - Richard Starkey Tyndall Centre - "One answer, the well-known
The commons and fair allocation
"What would constitute a fair initial allocation of this commodity within an emissions trading
scheme that included all nations of the world?1 One answer is provided by the well-known
Contraction and Convergence proposal (Meyer 2000) developed in the early 1990s. Under
Contraction and Convergence, the nations of the world converge to a situation under which
rights to the contracting quantity of permitted global emissions are allocated on an equal per
capita basis. That is to say, they converge to a situation under which the quantity of available
emissions rights allocated to each of them in a given year is calculated by dividing the rights to
the permitted global emissions for that year by the global population in that year (or an agreed
base year) and then multiplying this quotient by each nation’s population in that year (or the base
year) (Meyer 2004)." Richard Starkey Tyndall Centre
14 December 2011 - The Ocean Engine - "COP-17 should include C&C."
"The Durban summit could be looked back on as a success if the negotiations on a treaty outlined in the talks are implemented. So what could this include? Contraction and Convergence This is the idea proposed by Meyer (2000) that the largest emitters of greenhouse gases contract the level of pollution towards an agreed per capita emissions total. For example, the US CO2 emissions/person are 10 times that of China. As a global community, we need to try and keep the amount emitted per person the same. Therefore, every country has to contract their emissions, some more than others. For the developed world, this means a low-carbon economy is a serious alternative. This agreement should be open and transparent and include the developing world in order to invoke the concept." The Ocean Engine
Inclusivity trumped urgency and equity at COP-17. As of today [11 December 2011] with this 'Durban Deal',
AOSIS voices are summarised by Karl Hood of Grenada [AOSIS Chairman] like this now: -
. . . "Must we accept our annihilation?"
. . . "While they develop, we die; and why should we accept this?"
13 December 2011 - COP-17 Outcome - "The Economics of Genocide Continues."
Inclusivity trumped urgency and equity at COP-17. As of today [11 December 2011] with this 'Durban Deal',
AOSIS voices are summarised by Karl Hood of Grenada [AOSIS Chairman] like this now: "Must we accept our annihilation?" - "While they develop, we die; and why should we accept this?"As the numbers clearly show - everybody could see this and everybody knew this.
The islands are being annihilated and we all are now become their assassins.
We have informally known this but with this 'Durban-Deal' we all have now formally crossed that threshold.
A Dark Day - the Economics of Genocide continues
12 December 2011 - UNEP Sustainability Institute - "Tough Contraction and Convergence"
There is a new wave of optimism sweeping across Africa as growth rates climb, consumer
spending rises and returns on investment escalate higher than most other parts of the world
since the onset of the economic recession in 2007.
Tough contraction and convergence (Freeze at 2000 levels and converge)
In this scenario, the target level of global resource consumption in 2050 equals that of the
year 2000. Metabolic rates of industrial countries decrease and those of developing
Resource use -
Human well-being -
Economic activity (GDP) -
Environmental impact -
Resource decoupling -
Impact decoupling -
countries increase, converging at around 6 tons per capita. This requires significant
measures to reduce resource use in industrialised countries in order to reduce their
metabolic rates by a factor of 3-5, and relative decoupling by developing countries to reduce
average metabolic rates by 10-20%. This would require extreme restraint and
unprecedented innovation, but it would allow for population growth without increases in environmental pressure beyond 2000 levels. Global emissions would stay constant at 2000 levels of 6.7 GtC/yr, approximately 20% above recommended levels (GCI 2003).
07 December 2011 - Karl Hood from Grenada & AOSIS Chairman - "Must We Die so You can Live?"
Game-changer. This is the single most important statement at COP-17. Speaking at the COP-17 climate talks in Durban, Grenada environment minister and Alliance of Small Island States Chairman Karl Hood responded to a reporter who said climate scientists believe its now impossible to keep global warming below 1.5C above pre-industrial levels, and that this threatens the future inhabitability of the small island states of the world. Chairman Hood asked if that is a prescription for “annihilation“ - So effectively the charge has been laid - must we die so that you can live?
06 December 2011 - AOSIS future carbon budget that might keep to the 1.5 degree temperature ceiling.
Here is the AOSIS future carbon budget that might keep to the 1.5 degree ceiling.
05 December 2011 - China Times - "Low Carbon Blog."
減量責任的再思考：CCPI中所提出的『目標績效比較』一項上，是基於『共同但有差異的責任』，採用類似『縮減與收斂（Contraction and Convergence）』的方法，在抑制增溫2度的狀況下，估算出各國的減量責任。進而分析若要達到此目標時，各國應遵循的理想減量路徑。其在將該國當前的排放趨勢，與此理想減量路徑相比較，並依兩者之間的落差，作為評分依據。而在此原則下，台灣的減量責任是等同於已開發國家，當前已無排碳量增加的空間。(6)但目前的減量目標以及政策的規劃，在未來五年間，排碳量仍預估會成長。此舉均將使台灣的氣候政策績效，持續於後端班中徘徊。 Low Carbon Blog CHINA TIMES
04 December 2011 - SARGASSO - "Contraction and Convergence at COP-17."
Een nieuwe morele dimensie
Is het niet eerlijker om uit te gaan van een rechtvaardige gelijke verdeling van de hulpbronnen die er nog zijn? Dit is de basis van het Contraction and Convergence-model. In dit model mochten de ontwikkelde landen vanaf 2000 niet méér uitstoten dan daarvoor, terwijl de minder ontwikkelde landen tot 2030 de ruimte kregen, zodat hun economische ontwikkeling niet in de knop gebroken zou worden en levensomstandigheden van de bevolking nog konden verbeteren. Voorstanders van dit model zijn er al jaren onder alle gezindten: Jan Pronk al in 2000, recent de premier van India en ook Merkel en Sarkozy. Sargasso at COP-17
03 December 2011 - Climate Finance Stamp Out Poverty - "GCI has detailed the rates of C&C."
"The ‘Contraction & Convergence’ proposal, developed by the Global Commons
Institute (GCI) here an overall budget is set and allocations are ‘grandfathered’
within this to nations on the basis of current emissions. However ‘contraction’ refers to
the progressive reductions in the overall global ‘budget’, while ‘convergence’ describes the
process where allocations move from allocations based on current emissions to those based
on an equal per capita share of emission rights. Unlike Cap & Share, however, these remain
at the level of the nation state – which then has to determine how the national ‘budget’
is allocated within their own borders – rather than with the individual citizen. Contraction
and Convergence is clearly dynamic in nature, moving from the status quo to what could
be considered an equitable international allocation. Over the last twenty years, in an effort to help negotiators at the UNFCCC on how they might agree an effective and equal global deal, GCI has developed detailed proposals for contraction and convergence rates." Climate Finance IDS & Stamp Out Poverty
02 December 2011 - Richard Murphy - "The Courageous State."
01 December 2011 - BODHI - "C&C Key Element of Reawakening."
On the positive side, emerging technologies
and old-fashioned human courage suggest
ways that could reduce these problems. The
Arab Spring has seen an encouraging reaction
against repressive autocracies. The Occupy
movements illustrate an overdue response
to the stranglehold of big money and big
corporations. What is really needed is a Global
Spring, an overthrowing of old-world thinking
which 1) keeps the world wedded to a toxic
cocktail of profligate fossil-fuel use and 2)
promotes the hedonic treadmill (the fruitless
pursuit of material and status goods as the
way to happiness). Key elements of this reawakening
will be contraction and convergence
(less ecological waste by the rich and more
consumption of materials and information by
the poor), particularly through global education
and rights-based family planning. From the Medical Director's Desk
Benevolent Organisation for Development, Health & Insight [BODHI]
Founding Patron His Holiness XIV Dalai Lama Founded in 1989
07 December 2011 - International Business Times - "C&C Climate Justice without vengeance"
Durban Climate Talks: A Wasted Opportunity?
Aubrey Meyer, director of the Global Commons Institute (GCI), an independent environmental campaign group, said negotiators at the climate change conference in Durban are wasting time.
"They're absolutely wasting the time they've got... But the larger picture is that we are all collectively wasting time, because we continue to cause this problem faster than we prevent it."
Meyer said the "guesswork approach" at the climate talks is simply accelerating the path to failure. "This is suicidal," he said in exasperation.
Meyer has called for an agreement that he termed "climate justice without vengeance". The GCI conceived a contraction and convergence model as a proposed global framework for reducing greenhouse gas emissions to combat climate change. The model, intended to form the basis of an international agreement which will reduce carbon dioxide emissions to avoid dangerous climate change, is expressed as a simple mathematical formula that can be used as a way for the world to stabilise carbon levels.
Meyer said he was doubtful that any positive progress or agreements would come out of Durban before the end of this week, but stressed that the need to adopt a second period of the Kyoto Protocol was, "more urgent than ever".
01 December 2011 - Transition Movement - "International C&C National TEQs Local Energy Descent Plans."
04 December 2011 - Nature Climate Change - "Fiddling with climate change."
Composer and string musician, turned award-winning environmentalist, Aubrey Meyer tells Nature Climate Change why he is campaigning for countries to adopt his 'contraction and convergence' model of global development to avoid dangerous climate change.
Why do you think contraction &
convergence will save us from dangerous
The whole essence of contraction and
convergence is conflict prevention.
don’t want this to end in nations tearing
each other’s throats out.
and convergence is Mandela: - Iit’s truth
and reconciliation, and justice without
29 November 2011 - Guardian; Its a serious question - "Can a Violinist Save the World?"
Aubrey Meyer - Guardian Hero 2008 "Can a 60-year-old South African violinist living in a flat in Willsesden, north London, actually change the world? It’s a serious question because the odds are increasing that over the next two years rich and poor countries will come round to Aubrey Meyer's way of thinking if they are to negotiate a half-decent global deal to reduce climate change emissions. The long years of single-minded lobbying mean that Meyer’s idea now has some powerful backers, including, in Britain, the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution. 168 MPs have supported it in an early day motion, and the government, equivocal so far, is moving towards a version of it. It has become official policy in India, China and most African countries, Germany and India are expected to run with it in UN meetings. Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, has backed C&C publicly. Other proposals are emerging and it will take two more years to thrash out a system that will please everyone. But few have the elegance of C&C. “It's the least unfair of all the proposals that have been put forward,” Meyer says. "It secures survival by correcting both fatal poverty and fatal climate change in the same arrangement.” Meyer still plays the violin every day, but seldom with an orchestra. “I just did not realise that it would take quite so long to change the world,” he says.”
28 November 2011 - Henry Nicholls - "The Way of the Panda."
28 December 2011 - Larry Elliott in the Guardian - "Blueprint to Avert Global Disaster."
The US government has never sought to deny that climate change is a problem, simply that Kyoto is the wrong way of dealing with it. In particular, Washington has argued that a global problem needs a global solution, which means including countries in the developing world, too. Fortunately, a blueprint exists which not only answers the US objections to Kyoto but offers a coherent strategy for cutting greenhouse gases. The plan, known as contraction and convergence, is simpler than Kyoto's Byzantine complexity, offers a way of getting the Americans to come on board, has built-in flexibility, and a market mechanism built into it. Although C&C was the brainchild of green activists, the irony is that it would be good for business. It is hardly surprising that it is winning new supporters all the time, including Michael Meacher, the environment minister. Blueprint to avert global disaster
Larry Elliott the Guardian
24 November 2011 - Nicholas Shaxson - "Treasure Islands" " . . . will leave you gasping."
Tyrannosaurus Rex is the deregulator here and the enormity of the financial gaming of this predator that Shaxson lays bare will leave you gasping - worse than before - all over again. Deregulation on this scale is sucking infinities into our operational-model-of-the-world at an accelerating rate. This guarantees the explosion that is now becoming globally eco-cidal in scale. It is terrifying.
People who carefully write books like "Capitalism as if the World Mattered" need to reappraise and be more focused and more resolved about what they and we all are really up against, if fatally dangerous rates of climate change are to be averted.
Just as C&C is "inevitably required" to achieve UNFCCC-compliance and survival, climate-calamity and extincition are the inevitable consequences of no C&C. As things stand, this is the only credible threat to these 'off-shore'-Treasure Islands' dinosaurs - the 'men who stole the world' are actually killing it [themselves included].
That's the choice that 'Capitalism' faces. Fighting to ensure that the right choice - the survival choice - is made is the fight we cannot avoid. If primarily we measure in money, the fight is lost, the 'world doesn't matter' and sadly we're doomed. Shaxson doesn't directly address this, but with the intensity of white light, realizing this is the inevitable consequence of what he has exposed.
Principal US 'Climate Ethicist' Prof Don Brown of PENN STATE University.
Aubrey Meyer comments to Don Brown November 24, 2011 "Hi Don - There's little doubt the Fossil Fuel interests are behind much/most [?] of the disinformation campaign you mention. There's also credulity in the 'commentariat' who just play along, as though 'mediating' that was the major issue.
Negotiating the 'rate of convergence' inter-regionally is the only reconciliation lever left, if we intend UNFCCC-compliance. If we don't, we might as well kiss the kids goodnight, because if recognizing - and acting on - urgency isn't yet the number one driver, we're done for."
Don Brown replies: - "Aubrey: I have felt that since you explained to me in the mid-1990s C&C- that it was the best hope for some agreement. I still feel that way. My take on getting over the brinksmanship is to turn up the volume on those nations that have been the major barriers. It, of course, may not work but it is at least a strategy."
Just Sustainabilities - "The equitable alternative would be the “Contraction and Convergence” scenario promoted by GCI."
C&C The Proportionate Response to Climate Change - Climate Action"It becomes possible to go beyond the aspirational character of the current
debate around the UNFCCC, to
communicating the rationale
and constitutional calculus
The Sustainability Mirage - John Foster strong C&C advocacy; "It is with the climate war as Benjamin Franklin famously reminded the Continental Congress preparing to sign the US Declaration ofIndependencc: we must hang together, or we shall assuredly hang separately. That is now the hard unvarnished truth for global humanity."
"Of course God plays Dice - he designed them." Dealism by Jelle Hielkema
One of the 4 approaches stood out to me. The strategy in question was proposed by India, China and the Group of 77 and has been endorsed by France, Switzerland and the EU. It is called the “Per-capita” strategy by Roberts and Parks. This approach is embodied in the emissions management model called “Contraction & Convergence” developed by the Global Commons Institute and it was introduced by the Indian government in 1995. The concept is very simple. First, a maximum acceptable atmospheric CO2 concentration is calculated. Then, it is divided by the number of the people in the world. So each person has an allocated amount of emissions, so each country is responsible to stay below the allocated amount of their entire population. Seems fair, right? I thought so. It made perfect sense to me, each person gets an equal share of the pie and no one can complain. This won't be easy folks -
Dickinson to Durban
Mattoo/Subramanian, World Bank - The proposals in Stern (2007) and in UNDP (2008), which use 1990 as a base for
calculating emissions reductions going forward are implicitly “grandfathering” existing
emissions allocations, and are in spirit attempting to give weight to adjustment costs by softening
the impact of emissions reductions on those who have to make the largest reductions. It is worth
noting here that the Stern (2007) and UNDP (2008) proposals are very close in spirit to the
“contraction and convergence” ideas first proposed by Meyer (2000), which involves the global
carbon budget contracting consistent with climate change goals, with rich countries converging down, and poor countries converging up, to a common emissions per capita target in the long run.
Banque Mondial Contraction et convergence
L’approche par contraction et convergence
attribue à chaque être humain un droit
égal à émettre des gaz à eff et de serre.
Tous les pays devraient donc avoir les
mêmes émissions par habitant. Les
émissions totales diminueraient dans
le temps et les émissions par habitant
convergeraient pour devenir identiques.
La valeur de convergence réelle, la
trajectoire de convergence et le moment où cet objectif doit être atteint seraient négociables. [Meyer 2001].
World Bank The Contraction and Convergence model developed by the Global Commons Institute estimates that to contain global warming to 2°C increase,
which is typically associated in climate models with a CO2e concentration of 400-500 ppm, emissions per capita must come down to 2 tC02e per capita by 2050. The Institute has advocated for an egalitarian sharing of emissions abatement costs under which every country brings emissions per capita to the same level.