05.03.2014 Views

Emissions Scenarios - IPCC

Emissions Scenarios - IPCC

Emissions Scenarios - IPCC

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Technical Summary 33<br />

Table TS-1: Income per capita in the world and by SRES region for the IS92 (Leggett et al, 1992) and four marker scenarios by<br />

2050 and 2100, measured by GDP per capita in 1000 US dollars (at 1990 prices and exchange rates).<br />

Income per Capita by World and Regions<br />

(103 1990US$ per capita)<br />

Regions<br />

Year Scenario OECD90 REF IND ASIA ALM DEV WORLD<br />

1990 SRES MESSAGE 19.1 2.7 13.7 0.5 1.6 0.9 4.0<br />

2050 IS92a,b 49.0 23.2 39.7 3.7 4.8 4.1 9.2<br />

IS92c 35.2 14.6 27.4 2.2 2.9 2.5 6.3<br />

IS92d 54.4 25.5 43.4 4.1 5.4 4.6 10.5<br />

IS92e 67.4 38.3 56.9 5.9 7.7 6.6 13.8<br />

IS92f 43.9 21.5 35.8 3.3 4.1 3.6 8.1<br />

AlB* 50.1 29.3 44.2 14.9 17.5 15.9 20.8<br />

A2 34.6 7.1 26.1 2.6 6.0 3.9 7.2<br />

Bl 49.8 14.3 39.1 9.0 13.6 10.9 15.6<br />

B2 39.2 16.3 32.5 8.9 6.9 8.1 11.7<br />

2100 IS92a,b 85.9 40.6 69.5 15.0 14.2 14.6 21.5<br />

IS92c 49.2 17.6 36.5 6.4 5.8 6.1 10.1<br />

IS92d 113.9 51.3 88.8 20.3 17.7 19.1 28.2<br />

IS92e 150.6 96.6 131.0 34.6 33.0 33.8 46.0<br />

IS92f 69.7 31.3 54.9 11.9 10.7 11.4 16.8<br />

AlB* 109.2 100.9 107.3 71.9 60.9 66.5 74.9<br />

A2 58.5 20.2 46.6 7.8 15.2 11.0 16.1<br />

Bl 79.7 52.2 72.8 35.7 44.9 40.2 46.6<br />

B2 61.0 38.3 54.4 19.5 16.1 18.0 22.6<br />

* The two additional illustrative scenarios AlFI and AIT share similar assumptions with AlB. See also Appendix VII for more details<br />

possibilities for development "catch-up" and for narrowing<br />

per capita income gaps in particular explain the wide range in<br />

projected future gross world product levels. Given a<br />

qualitatively negative relationship between population growth<br />

and per capita income growth discussed in Chapters 2 and 3,<br />

uncertainties in future population growth rates tend to narrow<br />

the range of associated gross world product projections. High<br />

population growth would, ceteris paribus, lower per capita<br />

income growth, whereas low population growth would tend to<br />

increase it. This relationship is evident in empiric data - high<br />

per capita income countries are generally also those that have<br />

completed their demographic transition. The affluent live long<br />

and generally have few children. (Exceptions are some<br />

countries with small populations, high birth rates, and<br />

significant income from commodity exports.) This<br />

relationship between affluence and longevity again identiñes<br />

development as one of the most important indicators of human<br />

well being. Yet even assuming this relationship holds for an<br />

extended time into the future, its quantification is subject to<br />

considerable theoretic and empkic uncertainties (Alcamo et<br />

ai, 1995).<br />

Two of the SRES scenario families, AI and Bl, explicitiy<br />

explore alternative pathways to gradually close existing income<br />

gaps. As a reflection of uncertainty, development catch-up<br />

diverges in terms of geographically distinct economic growth<br />

patterns across the four SRES scenario families. Table TS-I<br />

summarizes per capita income for SRES and IS92 scenarios for<br />

the four SRES world regions. SRES scenarios indicate a smaller<br />

difference between the now industrialized and developing<br />

countries compared with the IS92 scenarios. This tendency<br />

toward a substantially narrower income "gap" compared with<br />

the IS92 scenarios overcomes one of the major shortcomings of<br />

the previous <strong>IPCC</strong> scenarios cited in the literature (Parikh,<br />

1992).<br />

8.3. Structural and Technological Change<br />

In this brief summary of the SRES scenarios, structural and<br />

technological changes are illustrated by using energy and land<br />

use as examples. These examples are characteristic for the<br />

driving forces of emissions because the energy system and land<br />

use are the major sources of GHG and sulfur emission.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!