Abstract

A rapid coal phase-out is needed to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement, but is hindered by serious challenges ranging from vested interests to the risks of social disruption. To understand how to organize a global coal phase-out, it is crucial to go beyond cost-effective climate mitigation scenarios and learn from the experience of previous coal transitions. Despite the relevance of the topic, evidence remains fragmented throughout different research fields, and not easily accessible. To address this gap, this paper provides a systematic map and comprehensive review of the literature on historical coal transitions. We use computer-assisted systematic mapping and review methods to chart and evaluate the available evidence on historical declines in coal production and consumption. We extracted a dataset of 278 case studies from 194 publications, covering coal transitions in 44 countries and ranging from the end of the 19th century until 2021. We find a relatively recent and rapidly expanding body of literature reflecting the growing importance of an early coal phase-out in scientific and political debates. Previous evidence has primarily focused on the United Kingdom, the United States, and Germany, while other countries that experienced large coal declines, like those in Eastern Europe, are strongly underrepresented. An increasing number of studies, mostly published in the last 5 years, has been focusing on China. Most of the countries successfully reducing coal dependency have undergone both demand-side and supply-side transitions. This supports the use of policy approaches targeting both demand and supply to achieve a complete coal phase-out. From a political economy perspective, our dataset highlights that most transitions are driven by rising production costs for coal, falling prices for alternative energies, or local environmental concerns, especially regarding air pollution. The main challenges for coal-dependent regions are structural change transformations, in particular for industry and labor. Rising unemployment is the most largely documented outcome in the sample. Policymakers at multiple levels are instrumental in facilitating coal transitions. They rely mainly on regulatory instruments to foster the transitions and compensation schemes or investment plans to deal with their transformative processes. Even though many models suggest that coal phase-outs are among the low-hanging fruits on the way to climate neutrality and meeting the international climate goals, our case studies analysis highlights the intricate political economy at work that needs to be addressed through well-designed and just policies.

Details

Title
Coal transitions—part 1: a systematic map and review of case study learnings from regional, national, and local coal phase-out experiences
Author
Diluiso, Francesca 1   VIAFID ORCID Logo  ; Walk, Paula 2 ; Manych, Niccolò 3 ; Cerutti, Nicola 1   VIAFID ORCID Logo  ; Chipiga, Vladislav 1 ; Workman, Annabelle 4 ; Ayas, Ceren 4 ; Ryna Yiyun Cui 5 ; Cui, Diyang 5 ; Song, Kaihui 6   VIAFID ORCID Logo  ; Banisch, Lucy A 1 ; Moretti, Nikolaj 1 ; Callaghan, Max W 7   VIAFID ORCID Logo  ; Clarke, Leon 5 ; Creutzig, Felix 1   VIAFID ORCID Logo  ; Hilaire, Jérôme 8 ; Jotzo, Frank 9 ; Kalkuhl, Matthias 10   VIAFID ORCID Logo  ; Lamb, William F 7   VIAFID ORCID Logo  ; Löschel, Andreas 11   VIAFID ORCID Logo  ; Müller-Hansen, Finn 8 ; Nemet, Gregory F 12   VIAFID ORCID Logo  ; Pao-Yu Oei 13 ; Sovacool, Benjamin K 14   VIAFID ORCID Logo  ; Steckel, Jan C 8 ; Thomas, Sebastian 15 ; Wiseman, John 16 ; Minx, Jan C 7   VIAFID ORCID Logo 

 Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change, Torgauer Straße 12–15, EUREF Campus #19, 10829 Berlin, Germany 
 TU Berlin, Str. des 17. Juni 135, 10623 Berlin, Germany 
 Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change, Torgauer Straße 12–15, EUREF Campus #19, 10829 Berlin, Germany; TU Berlin, Str. des 17. Juni 135, 10623 Berlin, Germany 
 Climate and Energy College, University of Melbourne, 187 Grattan Street, Carlton, Victoria 3053, Australia 
 Center for Global Sustainability, University of Maryland, 3101 Van Munching Hall, College Park, MD 20742, United States of America 
 Center for Global Sustainability, University of Maryland, 3101 Van Munching Hall, College Park, MD 20742, United States of America; Department of Geographical Sciences, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20740, United States of America 
 Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change, Torgauer Straße 12–15, EUREF Campus #19, 10829 Berlin, Germany; School of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, United Kingdom 
 Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change, Torgauer Straße 12–15, EUREF Campus #19, 10829 Berlin, Germany; Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), Post Box 601203, 14412 Potsdam, Germany 
 Australian National University, Crawford School of Public Policy, ANU, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia 
10  Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change, Torgauer Straße 12–15, EUREF Campus #19, 10829 Berlin, Germany; Faculty of Economic and Social Sciences, University of Potsdam, August-Bebel-Str. 89, 14482 Potsdam, Germany 
11  Center for Applied Economic Research, University of Münster, Stadtgraben 9, 48143 Münster, Germany 
12  University of Wisconsin-Madison, La Follette School of Public Affairs, 1225 Observatory Drive, Madison, WI 53706, United States of America 
13  TU Berlin, Str. des 17. Juni 135, 10623 Berlin, Germany; Europa-Universität Flensburg, Center for Sustainable Energy Systems (ZNES), Munketoft 3b, 24937 Flensburg, Germany 
14  Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School, BN1 9SL Brighton, United Kingdom 
15  Sustainable Engineering Group, Curtin University, Kent Street, Bentley 6102 Western Australia 
16  Climate and Energy College, University of Melbourne, 187 Grattan Street, Carlton, Victoria 3053, Australia; Melbourne Sustainable Society Institute, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria 3010, Australia 
Publication year
2021
Publication date
Nov 2021
Publisher
IOP Publishing
e-ISSN
17489326
Source type
Scholarly Journal
Language of publication
English
ProQuest document ID
2585952318
Copyright
© 2021. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0 (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.