By Corey Allan, Research Analyst, Motu Economic and Public
Policy Research
How should we compare efforts to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions across countries? The Kyoto Protocol focuses on production emissions,
which are the emissions resulting from the production of goods and services.
But what is the point of production? Would we produce goods if there was no one
to consume them? In a globalised world, production will move from one country
to another if there is still sufficient demand for the output. So is a country
really contributing to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions as much as it
appears if their production emissions are falling, but their consumption of
emissions-intensive goods remains unchanged?
Researchers at Motu, and a student intern from
Stanford, have just released a preliminary
analysis of the emissions associated with household consumption in New Zealand. The analysis shows that the composition of
consumption emissions can differ significantly from the composition
of production emissions. The difference
is particularly salient for food emissions, as you can see from the two charts
below:
Emission shares in an average New Zealand household’s
consumption bundle in 2007
|
New Zealand’s ‘production’ emissions profile 2012
|
While non-CO2 greenhouse gas emissions from
agriculture comprise 46%
of NZ’s total emissions when calculated under a production-based approach,
food accounts for only 32% of emissions from consumption even when emissions
from energy use throughout the value chain are included. While ‘agriculture’ and ‘food’ differ in the
emissions attributed to each sector, the difference in share can largely be
attributed to the fact that New Zealand exports the majority of its
agricultural production.
In general, households with higher levels of expenditure have
higher levels of emissions. While it
matters how much we spend, more careful choices of what we spend our money on
will be an important first step to reducing our consumption emissions. Maybe we could spend less money travelling
and spend more on recreational or cultural activities. Within the consumption bundle, as well as
food choices, where and how you travel is a critical area – the share of
emissions from travel rise rapidly with income.
Food (red meat and dairy products), travel and electricity use not only
contribute most emissions, but they are also the most emissions intensive per
dollar spent so if you are looking to make small changes in your consumption
patterns to help the climate, these are the places to look.
Production and consumption emissions are complementary
measures of contribution to reducing global GHG emissions. More detailed analysis of each measure will
also reveal different mitigation opportunities.
A wide range of actors, from managers making decisions about production
processes and fuels, to consumers shifting consumption patterns, are needed for
New Zealand to move successfully to a low emissions future. The more we know about how our actions impact
the environment, the more likely we will be to make more climate-friendly
choices.
Household emissions are mostly explained by total expenditure – suggesting that a key option, for those who are not struggling with their basic needs, is to choose a lifestyle with more leisure, family time and non-material pleasures such as sport, music and arts. We know from the literature on well-being that above a certain income level, these actually matter more for happiness for most of us than extra consumption.
ReplyDelete