{"id":118102,"date":"2026-10-16T02:29:00","date_gmt":"2026-10-16T00:29:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.sonnenseite.com\/?p=118102"},"modified":"2026-10-16T09:44:03","modified_gmt":"2026-10-16T07:44:03","slug":"a-world-map-of-climate-policy-who-stands-to-gain-most","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.sonnenseite.com\/en\/politics\/a-world-map-of-climate-policy-who-stands-to-gain-most\/","title":{"rendered":"A world map of climate policy: Who stands to gain most?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Countries highly vulnerable to the phase-out of oil, gas and coal account for just 6 percent of global economic output, countries in Africa stand to benefit from their vast solar energy potential, and the economic interests of the US, Europe and China are affected by climate policy in surprisingly similar ways. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

A study by the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) published in Nature Sustainability now shows, for 169 countries around the world, how the fight against global heating affects national assets \u2013 and what geopolitical challenges and opportunities arise as a result.<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"<\/a>
Five clusters: countries might experience losses (orange), be strong winners (purple, pink, green), or expect relatively moderate impacts (blue). Image: Pan et al, Nature Sustainability<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

The unprecedentedly comprehensive dataset compiled by the research team shows how climate policy affects national assets in four ways: (1) it reduces demand of fossil fuels, potentially leading to losses in oil, gas and coal revenues; (2) it reduces climate-related damage to the national economy; (3) it creates new economic opportunities for solar and wind energy development; and (4) it increases the value of a country\u2019s capacity to absorb and store CO\u2082 from the atmosphere \u2013 whether \u201cnaturally\u201d via forests or \u201cmanaged\u201d through the stewardship of natural areas.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cBased on our data analysis, we can map how countries could gain or lose from different aspects of decarbonisation by the end of this century, depending on the level of ambition in climate policy,\u201d reports Guanna Pan, PIK researcher and lead author of the study. \u201cWe explore geopolitical tensions that may arise from some countries experiencing losses, but we also show how national interests can foster international cooperation, and how this can be further strengthened through targeted incentives.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Five groups of countries with similar interests<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

To better understand potential economic gains and losses across countries, the research team has identified clusters \u2013 that is, groups of states in which climate policy generates similar economic opportunities and risks, and potentially shared interests. According to the study, 19 fossil fuel-dependent countries would potentially oppose ambitious measures. By contrast, 51 countries in the Global South have a strong interest in a rapid climate transition as they would otherwise face particularly severe climate damages. Likewise, 13 countries \u201cwith high potential for renewable energy\u201d \u2013 the majority of which are in Africa \u2013 and 17 countries \u201cwith high carbon sequestration capacity\u201d would also naturally favour swift action in the fight against global heating.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, these four clusters do not carry all that much political weight: the group of oil, gas and coal-dependent countries accounts for only 6 percent of global economic output, and the three groups of countries that especially stand to benefit from climate protection account for only 13 percent combined. The remaining 81 percent of economic output is accounted for by the fifth cluster \u2013 the 69 \u201ceconomies with moderate impacts\u201d \u2013 which includes the EU, China and the US. In this group of countries, the economic benefits of climate policy are, in absolute terms, considerable in many cases, particularly due to avoided climate damage. Calculated as a percentage, however, it is not as large as in the three clusters of strong winners.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Climate policy safeguards long-term prosperity<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

In summary, the research team notes that humanity as a whole must take a collective interest in climate action, but that the differences in gains and losses between countries need to be fully understood. The study provides the necessary guidance and concludes with the recommendation that, where interests diverge, climate cooperation should be strengthened through \u201cpackage deals\u201d. This means that concessions on climate protection for hesitant countries should be linked with promises regarding trade or research and development; it could also mean simply offsetting losses through financial transfers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cIn view of the current resurgence of opposition to a committed climate policy, it is important to recognise that climate policy does not merely devalue certain assets \u2013 namely those of fossil fuel suppliers,\u201d emphasises Ottmar Edenhofer, PIK Director and one of the co-authors. \u201cOur study also demonstrates quite precisely how new assets are simultaneously being built up. Overall, climate policy revalues the capital stock of economies in a new and sustainable way, thereby safeguarding long-term prosperity.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n