CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 117Climate Change Policy and EconomicsSustainability and Climate Change GovernanceClimate Change and Sustainable Development

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 22 of the 23 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Fusing subnational with national climate action is central to decarbonization: the case of the United States

Open access
Hultman, Nathan E., Clarke, Leon, Frisch, Carla, Kennedy, Kevin, McJeon, Haewon, Cyrs, Tom, Hansel, Pete, Bodnar, Paul, Manion, Michelle, Edwards, Morgan R., Cui, Ryna, Bowman, Christina, Lund, Jessie, Westphal, Michael I., Clapper, Andrew, Jaeger, Joel, Sen, Arijit, Lou, Jiehong, Saha, Devashree, Jaglom, Wendy, Calhoun, Koben, Igusky, Kristin, deWeese, James, Hammoud, Kareem, Altimirano, J. C., Dennis, Margaret, Henderson, Chris, Zwicker, Gill, O’Neill, John·2020·Nature Communications
DOI 10.1038/s41467-020-18903-wPMC PMC7568566
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Approaches that root national climate strategies in local actions will be essential for all countries as they develop new nationally determined contributions under the Paris Agreement. The potential impact of climate action from non-national actors in delivering higher global ambition is significant. Sub-national action in the United States provides a test for how such actions can accelerate emissions reductions. We aggregated U.S. state, city, and business commitments within an integrated assessment model to assess how a national climate strategy can be built upon non-state actions. We find that existing commitments alone could reduce emissions 25% below 2005 levels by 2030, and that enhancing actions by these actors could reduce emissions up to 37%. We show how these actions can provide a stepped-up basis for additional federal action to reduce emissions by 49%—consistent with 1.5 °C. Our analysis demonstrates sub-national actions can lead to substantial reductions and support increased national action.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41467-020-18903-w

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Fig. 1 The group of U.S. coalitions of non-federal actors making commitments to climate goals is large, growing, and globally significant. a States, cities, businesses, universities, faith-based, and other organizations now number greater than 380024. This study assessed the most significant subset of the actors shown in the map, focusing on states and the 285 largest cities. b Growth of the coalition from 2017–19, now representing the equivalent of the world′s second-largest economy (after the entire United States).
Fig. 1 The group of U.S. coalitions of non-federal actors making commitments to climate goals is large, growing, and globally significant. a States, cities, businesses, universities, faith-based, and other organizations now number greater than 380024. This study assessed the most significant subset of the actors shown in the map, focusing on states and the 285 largest cities. b Growth of the coalition from 2017–19, now representing the equivalent of the world′s second-largest economy (after the entire United States).CC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 2 Rapidly expanded bottom-up action could reduce U.S. emissions significantly. Current measures can deliver reductions of 25% below 2005 levels by 2030; enhanced non-federal action can deliver up to 37% reductions, and a comprehensive strategy that layers ambitious federal action on top of state and other sub-national action can deliver up to 49% below 2005 levels by 2030. The gray line shows historical emissions drawn from EPA data. Given large uncertainties and limitations in connecting individual country emissions to global temperature pathways, the shading in the 2 and 1.5 °C bars on the right is indicative.
Fig. 2 Rapidly expanded bottom-up action could reduce U.S. emissions significantly. Current measures can deliver reductions of 25% below 2005 levels by 2030; enhanced non-federal action can deliver up to 37% reductions, and a comprehensive strategy that layers ambitious federal action on top of state and other sub-national action can deliver up to 49% below 2005 levels by 2030. The gray line shows historical emissions drawn from EPA data. Given large uncertainties and limitations in connecting individual country emissions to global temperature pathways, the shading in the 2 and 1.5 °C bars on the right is indicative.CC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 3 Sectoral breakdown of 2030 emission reductions in three scenarios. Much of the near-term impact is realized through power sector decarbonization, primarily via renewables expansion and rapid coal reduction consistent with recent trends. Many building sector and transportation measures are reflected in the power sector emissions reductions. Note: Scale does not go to zero.
Fig. 3 Sectoral breakdown of 2030 emission reductions in three scenarios. Much of the near-term impact is realized through power sector decarbonization, primarily via renewables expansion and rapid coal reduction consistent with recent trends. Many building sector and transportation measures are reflected in the power sector emissions reductions. Note: Scale does not go to zero.CC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 4 The pace of the electricity sector transition between 2020 and 2030 surpasses recent historical experience in the U.S. a Electricity generation in the current measures, enhanced non-federal, and comprehensive scenarios. b Annual power sector capacity additions from 2000 to 2017 and estimated rates of annual additions for the three scenarios.
Fig. 4 The pace of the electricity sector transition between 2020 and 2030 surpasses recent historical experience in the U.S. a Electricity generation in the current measures, enhanced non-federal, and comprehensive scenarios. b Annual power sector capacity additions from 2000 to 2017 and estimated rates of annual additions for the three scenarios.CC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 5 Overview of the modeling process. The economy-wide emissions estimates based on sub-national action are the result of a coupled approach using a state aggregation methodology that is linked to GCAM.
Fig. 5 Overview of the modeling process. The economy-wide emissions estimates based on sub-national action are the result of a coupled approach using a state aggregation methodology that is linked to GCAM.CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 23 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. NewClimate Institute, Data-Driven Lab, PBL, German Development Institute/Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE), Blavatnik & School of Government, University of Oxford. Global Climate Action from Cities, Regions and Businesses: Impact of Individual Actors and Cooperative Initiatives on Global and National Emissions. https://newclimate.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Report-Global-Climate-Action-from-Cities-Regions-and-Businesses_2019.pdf (2019).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–117 of 117

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Hultman, N. E., Clarke, L., Frisch, C., Kennedy, K., McJeon, H., Cyrs, T., Hansel, P., Bodnar, P., Manion, M., Edwards, M. R., Cui, R., Bowman, C., Lund, J., Westphal, M. I., Clapper, A., Jaeger, J., Sen, A., Lou, J., Saha, D., Jaglom, W., Calhoun, K., Igusky, K., deWeese, J., Hammoud, K., Altimirano, J. C., Dennis, M., Henderson, C., Zwicker, G., & O’Neill, J.
Affiliations
  • University of Maryland, College Park (US)
  • Rocky Mountain Institute (US)
  • World Resources Institute (US)
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
Corresponding author
Hultman, Nathan E.
ORCID
Venue
Nature Communications
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2020-10-16
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
5255-5255
ISSN
2041-1723 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1038/s41467-020-18903-w
PMC
PMC7568566
OpenAlex
W3092988441
Cited by
116
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 1
FWCI
11.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Nature Communications (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) (submittedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • Communities in ADDI (University of the Basque Country) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Hispana (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
Funders
Bloomberg Family Foundation
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Climate Change Policy and Economics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Sustainability and Climate Change Governance
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Climate Change and Sustainable Development
Keywords
subnational climate action, national climate strategies, decarbonization, emission reduction, Paris Agreement, Nationally Determined Contributions, corporate climate commitments, integrated assessment models, 1.5°C target, United States climate policy, federal climate policy

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