TY - JOUR A1 - Harmsen, Mathijs A1 - Kriegler, Elmar A1 - van Vuuren, Detlef P. A1 - van der Wijst, Kaj-Ivar A1 - Luderer, Gunnar A1 - Cui, Ryna A1 - Dessens, Olivier A1 - Drouet, Laurent A1 - Emmerling, Johannes A1 - Morris, Jennifer Faye A1 - Fosse, Florian A1 - Fragkiadakis, Dimitris A1 - Fragkiadakis, Kostas A1 - Fragkos, Panagiotis A1 - Fricko, Oliver A1 - Fujimori, Shinichiro A1 - Gernaat, David A1 - Guivarch, Céline A1 - Iyer, Gokul A1 - Karkatsoulis, Panagiotis A1 - Keppo, Ilkka A1 - Keramidas, Kimon A1 - Köberle, Alexandre A1 - Kolp, Peter A1 - Krey, Volker A1 - Krüger, Christoph A1 - Leblanc, Florian A1 - Mittal, Shivika A1 - Paltsev, Sergey A1 - Rochedo, Pedro A1 - van Ruijven, Bas J. A1 - Sands, Ronald D. A1 - Sano, Fuminori A1 - Strefler, Jessica A1 - Arroyo, Eveline Vasquez A1 - Wada, Kenichi A1 - Zakeri, Behnam T1 - Integrated assessment model diagnostics BT - key indicators and model evolution JF - Environmental research letters N2 - Integrated assessment models (IAMs) form a prime tool in informing about climate mitigation strategies. Diagnostic indicators that allow comparison across these models can help describe and explain differences in model projections. This increases transparency and comparability. Earlier, the IAM community has developed an approach to diagnose models (Kriegler (2015 Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 90 45–61)). Here we build on this, by proposing a selected set of well-defined indicators as a community standard, to systematically and routinely assess IAM behaviour, similar to metrics used for other modeling communities such as climate models. These indicators are the relative abatement index, emission reduction type index, inertia timescale, fossil fuel reduction, transformation index and cost per abatement value. We apply the approach to 17 IAMs, assessing both older as well as their latest versions, as applied in the IPCC 6th Assessment Report. The study shows that the approach can be easily applied and used to indentify key differences between models and model versions. Moreover, we demonstrate that this comparison helps to link model behavior to model characteristics and assumptions. We show that together, the set of six indicators can provide useful indication of the main traits of the model and can roughly indicate the general model behavior. The results also show that there is often a considerable spread across the models. Interestingly, the diagnostic values often change for different model versions, but there does not seem to be a distinct trend. KW - diagnostics KW - integrated assessment models KW - climate policy KW - Assessment Report IPCC KW - renewable energy KW - migration KW - AR6 Y1 - 2021 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abf964 SN - 1748-9326 VL - 16 IS - 5 PB - IOP Publishing CY - Bristol ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Malik, Aman A1 - Bertram, Christoph A1 - Kriegler, Elmar A1 - Luderer, Gunnar T1 - Climate policy accelerates structural changes in energy employment JF - Energy policy N2 - The employment implications of decarbonizing the energy sector have received far less attention than the technology dimension of the transition, although being of critical importance to policymakers. In this work, we adapt a methodology based on employment factors to project future changes in quantity and composition of direct energy supply jobs for two scenarios - (1) relatively weak emissions reductions as pledged in the nationally determined contributions (NDC) and (2) stringent reductions compatible with the 1.5 °C target. We find that in the near-term the 1.5°C-compatible scenario results in a net increase in jobs through gains in solar and wind jobs in construction, installation, and manufacturing, despite significant losses in coal fuel supply; eventually leading to a peak in total direct energy jobs in 2025. In the long run, improvements in labour productivity lead to a decrease of total direct energy employment compared to today, however, total jobs are still higher in a 1.5 °C than in an NDC scenario. Operation and maintenance jobs dominate future jobs, replacing fuel supply jobs. The results point to the need for active policies aimed at retraining, both inside and outside the renewable energy sector, to complement climate policies within the concept of a “just transition”. KW - energy supply KW - employment KW - just transition KW - political feasibility KW - mitigation pathways KW - integrated assessment models Y1 - 2021 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112642 SN - 0301-4215 VL - 159 PB - Elsevier Science CY - Amsterdam ER -