Green frontrunner or indebted culprit? Assessing Denmark’s climate targets in light of fair contributions under the Paris Agreement

[1]  Andrew L. Fanning,et al.  Compensation for atmospheric appropriation , 2023, Nature Sustainability.

[2]  G. Semieniuk,et al.  Technical comment on “Fairness considerations in global mitigation investments” , 2023, Science.

[3]  Radhika Khosla,et al.  Can ‘Net Zero’ still be an instrument of climate justice? , 2023, Environmental Research Letters.

[4]  Anna Bergek,et al.  Complexity challenges for transition policy: lessons from coastal shipping in Norway , 2023, Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions.

[5]  Eva Boyle.  Rethinking energy studies: Equity, energy and Ivan Illich (1926–2002) , 2023, Energy Research & Social Science.

[6]  C. Cavanagh,et al.  Rescaling the land rush? Global political ecologies of land use and cover change in key scenario archetypes for achieving the 1.5 °C Paris agreement target , 2022, The Journal of Peasant Studies.

[7]  T. Lenton,et al.  Exceeding 1.5°C global warming could trigger multiple climate tipping points , 2022, Science.

[8]  J. Millward-Hopkins.  Inequality can double the energy required to secure universal decent living , 2022, Nature Communications.

[9]  J. Broderick,et al.  What Does the Paris Climate Change Agreement Mean for Local Policy? Downscaling the Remaining Global Carbon Budget to Sub-National Areas , 2022, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[10]  H. Matthews,et al.  Current global efforts are insufficient to limit warming to 1.5°C , 2022, Science.

[11]  M. Mazzucato,et al.  From Competition State to Green Entrepreneurial State: New challenges for Denmark , 2022, Samfundsøkonomen.

[12]  Lukas H. Meyer,et al.  Fairness critically conditions the carbon budget allocation across countries , 2022, Global Environmental Change.

[13]  A. Bjørn,et al.  Can Science-Based Targets Make the Private Sector Paris-Aligned? A Review of the Emerging Evidence , 2022, Current Climate Change Reports.

[14]  C. Flachsland,et al.  Understanding pledge and review: learning from analogies to the Paris Agreement review mechanisms , 2022, Climate Policy.

[15]  P. Ciais,et al.  Indicate separate contributions of long-lived and short-lived greenhouse gases in emission targets , 2022, npj Climate and Atmospheric Science.

[16]  Andrew L. Fanning,et al.  The social shortfall and ecological overshoot of nations , 2021, Nature Sustainability.

[17]  S. Hamburg,et al.  Path to net zero is critical to climate outcome , 2021, Scientific Reports.

[18]  Lukas H. Meyer,et al.  Sharing the effort of the European Green Deal among countries , 2021, Nature Communications.

[19]  N. Höhne,et al.  National ‘fair shares’ in reducing greenhouse gas emissions within the principled framework of international environmental law , 2021, Climate Policy.

[20]  G. Majeau‐Bettez,et al.  Accounting matters: Revisiting claims of decoupling and genuine green growth in Nordic countries , 2021 .

[21]  P. Newell,et al.  Toward transformative climate justice: An emerging research agenda , 2021, WIREs Climate Change.

[22]  D. ürge-Vorsatz,et al.  Urgent need for post-growth climate mitigation scenarios , 2021, Nature Energy.

[23]  J. Brankovic.  Why Rankings Appear Natural (But Aren’t) , 2021, Business & Society.

[24]  M. Lenzen,et al.  1.5 °C degrowth scenarios suggest the need for new mitigation pathways , 2021, Nature Communications.

[25]  William F. Lamb,et al.  Socio-economic conditions for satisfying human needs at low energy use: An international analysis of social provisioning , 2021, Global Environmental Change.

[26]  Peter-Paul Pichler,et al.  The energy and carbon inequality corridor for a 1.5 °C compatible and just Europe , 2021, Environmental Research Letters.

[27]  Wim Carton,et al.  Undoing Equivalence: Rethinking Carbon Accounting for Just Carbon Removal , 2021, Frontiers in Climate.

[28]  J. Roberts,et al.  Ethical choices behind quantifications of fair contributions under the Paris Agreement , 2021, Nature Climate Change.

[29]  S. Jasanoff,et al.  The governance of sociotechnical transformations to sustainability , 2021, Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability.

[30]  A. Bjørn,et al.  From the Paris Agreement to corporate climate commitments: evaluation of seven methods for setting ‘science-based’ emission targets , 2021, Environmental Research Letters.

[31]  Christopher J. Smith,et al.  An integrated approach to quantifying uncertainties in the remaining carbon budget , 2021, Communications Earth & Environment.

[32]  J. Millward-Hopkins,et al.  Global redistribution of income and household energy footprints: a computational thought experiment , 2021, Global Sustainability.

[33]  Michael Zwicky Hauschild,et al.  Downscaling the planetary boundaries in absolute environmental sustainability assessments – A review , 2020, Journal of Cleaner Production.

[34]  J. Canadell,et al.  Opportunities and challenges in using remaining carbon budgets to guide climate policy , 2020, Nature Geoscience.

[35]  Narasimha D. Rao,et al.  Providing decent living with minimum energy: A global scenario , 2020, Global Environmental Change.

[36]  William F. Lamb,et al.  Understanding (and tackling) need satisfier escalation , 2020, Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy.

[37]  Atul K. Jain,et al.  Global Carbon Budget 2020 , 2020, Earth System Science Data.

[38]  Adeniyi P. Asiyanbi,et al.  Negative emissions and the long history of carbon removal , 2020, WIREs Climate Change.

[39]  Helene Dyrhauge.  Political Myths in Climate Leadership: The Case of Danish Climate and Energy Pioneership , 2020 .

[40]  Kenneth W. Abbott,et al.  High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development , 2020, Essential Concepts of Global Environmental Governance.

[41]  H. Buck,et al.  Large-Scale Carbon Dioxide Removal: The Problem of Phasedown , 2020, Global Environmental Politics.

[42]  M. Lenzen,et al.  Scientists’ warning on affluence , 2020, Nature Communications.

[43]  J. Broderick,et al.  A factor of two: how the mitigation plans of ‘climate progressive’ nations fall far short of Paris-compliant pathways , 2020, Climate Policy.

[44]  D. Moellendorf.  Responsibility for Increasing Mitigation Ambition in Light of the Right to Sustainable Development , 2020, Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences.

[45]  J. Roberts,et al.  Twenty-five years of adaptation finance through a climate justice lens , 2019, Climatic Change.

[46]  S. Davis,et al.  Committed emissions from existing energy infrastructure jeopardize 1.5 °C climate target , 2019, Nature.

[47]  D. McCollum,et al.  Implications of various effort-sharing approaches for national carbon budgets and emission pathways , 2019, Climatic Change.

[48]  P. Forster,et al.  Current fossil fuel infrastructure does not yet commit us to 1.5 °C warming , 2019, Nature Communications.

[49]  J. Rockström,et al.  Redefining green growth within planetary boundaries , 2018, Energy Research & Social Science.

[50]  Ing-Britt Persson.  Prioritarianism , 2018, International Encyclopedia of Ethics.

[51]  Peter Christoff,et al.  Co-producing climate policy and negative emissions: trade-offs for sustainable land-use , 2018, Global Sustainability.

[52]  M. Harder,et al.  Entry into force and then? The Paris agreement and state accountability , 2018 .

[53]  O. Edelenbosch,et al.  Alternative pathways to the 1.5 °C target reduce the need for negative emission technologies , 2018, Nature Climate Change.

[54]  D. Morrow.  Fairness in Allocating the Global Emissions Budget , 2017 .

[55]  Matthew J. Burke,et al.  Political power and renewable energy futures: A critical review , 2017 .

[56]  Julia K. Steinberger,et al.  Human well‐being and climate change mitigation , 2017 .

[57]  Eleanor C. Stokes,et al.  Carbon Lock-In: Types, Causes, and Policy Implications , 2016 .

[58]  G. Peters,et al.  The trouble with negative emissions , 2016, Science.

[59]  Oliver Geden,et al.  An actionable climate target , 2016 .

[60]  I. Wallimann-Helmer.  Justice for climate loss and damage , 2015, Climatic Change.

[61]  D. Moellendorf.  Climate Change Justice , 2015 .

[62]  Navroz K. Dubash,et al.  Measuring the Co-Benefits of Climate Change Mitigation , 2014 .

[63]  D. Moellendorf.  The Moral Challenge of Dangerous Climate Change: Values, Poverty, and Policy , 2014 .

[64]  Niklas Höhne,et al.  Regional GHG reduction targets based on effort sharing: a comparison of studies , 2014 .

[65]  C. Knight.  What is grandfathering? , 2013 .

[66]  Christian Barry,et al.  On the concept of climate debt: its moral and political value , 2012 .

[67]  Mathias Frisch.  Climate Change Justice , 2012, Encyclopedia of the UN Sustainable Development Goals.

[68]  Narasimha D. Rao,et al.  Decent Living Emissions: A Conceptual Framework , 2012 .

[69]  Liam Shields.  The Prospects for Sufficientarianism , 2012, Utilitas.

[70]  J. Roberts,et al.  From constraint to sufficiency: The decoupling of energy and carbon from human needs, 1975–2005 , 2010 .

[71]  Lukas H. Meyer,et al.  Climate justice and historical emissions , 2010 .

[72]  S. Caney.  Climate change and the duties of the advantaged , 2010 .

[73]  Keith P. Shine,et al.  The global warming potential—the need for an interdisciplinary retrial , 2009 .

[74]  Eric Kemp-Benedict,et al.  The Greenhouse Development Rights framework , 2009 .

[75]  C. Thornhill,et al.  The Basic Rights , 2008 .

[76]  D. Chandler.  Justice Beyond Borders: A Global Political Theory , 2007, Perspectives on Politics.

[77]  S. Caney.  Environmental Degradation, Reparations, and the Moral Significance of History , 2006 .

[78]  W. Adger,et al.  Fair adaptation to climate change , 2006 .

[79]  S. Caney,et al.  Cosmopolitan Justice, Responsibility, and Global Climate Change , 2005, Leiden Journal of International Law.

[80]  Jason Lowe,et al.  Analysing countries' contribution to climate change: scientific and policy-related choices , 2005 .

[81]  J. Fuglestvedt,et al.  Alternatives to the Global Warming Potential for Comparing Climate Impacts of Emissions of Greenhouse Gases , 2005 .

[82]  D. Smith.  One World: The Ethics of Globalization , 2003, The Professional Geographer.

[83]  L. Greene.  EHPnet: United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change , 2000, Environmental Health Perspectives.

[84]  L. Rajamani.  The Principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibility and the Balance of Commitments under the Climate Regime , 2000 .

[85]  Eric Neumayer,et al.  In Defence of Historical Accountability for Greenhouse Gas Emissions , 2000 .

[86]  Henry Shue,et al.  Global Environment and International Inequality , 1999 .

[87]  Gillian Brock,et al.  Necessary Goods: Our Responsibilities to Meet Others Needs , 1998 .

[88]  Benno C. Schmidt join.  Principle and Prejudice: The Supreme Court and Race in the Progressive Era. Part 3: Black Disfranchisement from the KKK to the Grandfather Clause , 1982 .

[89]  Marilyn Fischer,et al.  Basic Rights: Subsistence, Affluence, and U.S. Foreign Policy , 1982 .

[90]  Benno C. Schmidt join.  Principle and Prejudice: The Supreme Court and Race in the Progressive Era. Part 2: The "Peonage Cases" , 1982 .

[91]  Narasimha D. Rao,et al.  Decent living gaps and energy needs around the world , 2021 .

[92]  J. Seppälä,et al.  AN APPROACH TO NATIONALLY DETERMINED CONTRIBUTIONS CONSISTENT WITH THE PARIS CLIMATE AGREEMENT AND CLIMATE SCIENCE: APPLICATION TO FINLAND AND THE EU , 2019 .

[93]  Anita Talberg.  GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS BUDGETS FOR VICTORIA , 2018 .

[94]  J. Blau.  The Paris Agreement , 2017 .

[95]  P. Friedlingstein,et al.  The cumulative carbon budget and its implications , 2016 .

[96]  M. Ha-Duong,et al.  Climate change 2014 - Mitigation of climate change , 2015 .

[97]  Andrew Moffat.  Environmental Performance Index , 2014 .

[98]  C. Saunders,et al.  Sustainable development and equity , 2009 .

[99]  H. Shue.  Subsistence Emissions and Luxury Emissions , 1993 .