ArticleNature communications2025
Effect of discontinuous fair-share emissions allocations immediately based on equity.
Article in Nature communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Identifying priority zones for carbon management in the Central Yunnan agglomeration.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
National emissions targets are collectively insufficient to align with the Paris Agreement. The fair-share literature assesses whether these targets are fair and ambitious in comparison to emissions trajectories based on equity principles. Such emissions trajectories commonly start at present-day emissions levels. Here we show that these continuous trajectories inherently reward past inaction and increasingly do so with their iterative updates. We provide an approach to allocating emissions trajectories based on equity principles applied with immediate effect. The resulting discontinuous national trajectories not starting at current emissions levels imply significant immediate international support to fund rapid mitigation globally. Modelling allocations with or without continuity has remarkable consequences for the relative implied contributions to international support among high-income countries. We find that emissions targets of G7 countries, Russia and China are responsible for most of the global 2030 ambition gap, while only some countries align with their 1.5 °C allocation.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.