Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40986359›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2025

Within-country inequality and the shaping of a just global climate policy.

Marie Young-Brun, Francis Dennig, Frank Errickson, Simon Feindt, Aurélie Méjean, Stéphane Zuber

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. What is the general Welfare: Welfare economic perspectives on equity.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  2. Within-country inequality and the shaping of a just global climate policy.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Marie Young-BrunCentre d'Économie de la Sorbonne, University Paris 1 Panthéon Sorbonne and Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris 75013, France.ORCID 0009-0001-0168-4892
Francis DennigWorld Bank Group, Washington, DC 20433.ORCID 0000-0001-7362-1009
Frank ErricksonSchool of Public and International Affairs, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544-1013.
Simon FeindtPotsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Potsdam, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-7419-1346
Aurélie MéjeanCentre International de Recherche sur l'Environnement et le Développement (Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Agro ParisTech, Ponts ParisTech, Ãcole des Hautes Ãtudes en Sciences Sociales, Centre de coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement), Nogent-sur-Marne 94736, France.ORCID 0000-0003-2859-3613
Stéphane ZuberCentre d'Économie de la Sorbonne, University Paris 1 Panthéon Sorbonne and Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris 75013, France.ORCID 0000-0002-4111-2397

Funding

AXIS, funded by FORMAS (SE), DLR/BMBF (DE), AEI (ES) and ANR (FR), with cofunding from the European Union 776608European Union Horizon 2020 821124
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Climate policy design must balance emissions mitigation with concerns for fairness, particularly as climate change disproportionately affects the poorest households within and across countries. Integrated Assessment Models used for global climate policy evaluation have so far typically not considered inequality effects within countries. To fill this gap, we develop a global Integrated Assessment Model representing national economies and subnational income, mitigation cost, and climate damage distribution and assess a range of climate policy schemes with varying levels of effort sharing across countries and households. The schemes are consistent with limiting temperature increases to 2 °C and account for the possibility to use carbon tax revenues to address distributional effects within and between countries. We find that carbon taxation with redistribution improves global welfare and reduces inequality, with the most substantial gains achieved under uniform taxation paired with global per capita transfers. A Loss and Damage mechanism offers significant welfare improvements in vulnerable countries while requiring only a modest share of global carbon revenues in the medium term. The poorest households within all countries may benefit from the transfer scheme, in particular when some redistribution is made at the country level. Our findings underscore the potential for climate policy to advance both environmental and social goals, provided revenue recycling mechanisms are effectively implemented. In particular, they demonstrate the feasibility of a welfare improving global climate policy involving limited international redistribution.

Indexed as

climate changeclimate policyinequalityintegrated assessment

Identifiers

PMID40986359
PMCPMC12501202

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.