Cited by 228Climate Change Policy and EconomicsEnvironmental Impact and SustainabilityEnergy, Environment, Economic Growth

Consumption‐based carbon accounting: does it have a future?

Open access
Afionis, Stavros, Sakai, Marco, Scott, Kate, Barrett, John, Gouldson, Andy·2017·WIREs Climate Change

Abstract

Internationally, allocation of responsibility for reducing greenhouse gas emissions is currently based on the production‐based (PB) accounting method, which measures emissions generated in the place where goods and services are produced. However, the growth of emissions embodied in trade has raised the question whether we should switch to, or amalgamate PB accounting, with other accounting approaches. Consumption‐based (CB) accounting has so far emerged as the most prominent alternative. This approach accounts for emissions at the point of consumption, attributing all the emissions that occurred in the course of production and distribution to the final consumers of goods and services. This review has a fourfold objective. First, it provides an account of the logic behind attributing responsibility for emissions on the basis of consumption instead of production. Issues of equity and justice, increased emissions coverage, encouragement of cleaner production practices, and political benefits are considered. Second, it discusses the counterarguments, focusing in particular on issues of technical complexity, mitigation effectiveness, and political acceptability. Third, it presents the spectrum of implementation possibilities—ranging from the status quo to more transformative options—and considers the implications for international climate policy that would accrue under various scenarios of adopting CB accounting in practice. Fourth, it looks at how CB accounting may be adjusted to fit with current political realities and it identifies policy mechanisms that could potentially be utilized to directly or indirectly address CB emissions. Such an approach could unlock new opportunities for climate policy innovation and for climate mitigation. WIREs Clim Change 2017, 8:e438. doi: 10.1002/wcc.438 This article is categorized under: Climate Economics > Economics of Mitigation

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/wcc.438

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • For policy instruments to successfully build on product carbon footprinting, rigorous standards must ensure robust embodied emission assessments.

    “For policy instruments to successfully build on product carbon footprinting, rigorous standards must ensure robust embodied emission assessments (57).”

    From Carbon Leakage, Consumption, and Trade (2022) · cites this paper as [57]

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 118 · Cited by 228

Authors
Afionis, S., Sakai, M., Scott, K., Barrett, J., & Gouldson, A.
Affiliations
University of Leeds (GB)
Corresponding author
Afionis, Stavros
Venue
WIREs Climate Change
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2016-11-16
Volume
8
Issue
1
ISSN
  • 1757-7780 (ISSN-L)
  • 1757-7799
OpenAlex
W2549877311
Cited by
228
References
118
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 30 · 2019: 31 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 7
FWCI
35.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Climate Change (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
  • Keele Research Repository (Keele University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (submittedVersion)
  • ORCA Online Research @Cardiff (Cardiff University) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Research Councils UK
  • UK Energy Research Centre (EP/L024756/1)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Climate Change Policy and Economics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Environmental Impact and Sustainability
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Energy, Environment, Economic Growth
Keywords
consumption-based carbon accounting, production-based accounting, embodied emissions in trade, international climate policy, equity and justice, cleaner production, mitigation effectiveness, political acceptability

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review