Editing IPCC:AR6/WGIII/Chapter-3 (section)

==== 3.4.1.1 Demand and Supply Strategies ====

<div id="h3-7-siblings" class="h3-siblings"></div>

Most IAM pathways rely heavily on supply-side mitigation strategies, including fuel switching, decarbonisation of fuels, and CDR ( [[#Creutzig--2016|Creutzig et al. 2016]] ; [[#Bertram--2018|Bertram et al. 2018]] ; [[#Rogelj--2018|Rogelj et al. 2018]] b; [[#Mundaca--2019|Mundaca et al. 2019]] ). For demand-side mitigation, IAMs incorporate changes in energy efficiency, but many other demand-side options (e.g., behaviour and lifestyle changes) are often excluded from models ( [[#van%20Sluisveld--2015|van Sluisveld et al. 2015]] ; [[#Creutzig--2016|Creutzig et al. 2016]] ; [[#van%20den%20Berg--2019|van den Berg et al. 2019]] ; [[#Wilson--2019|Wilson et al. 2019]] ). In addition, this mitigation is typically price-driven and limited in magnitude ( [[#Yeh--2017|Yeh et al. 2017]] ; [[#Luderer--2018|Luderer et al. 2018]] ; [[#Wachsmuth--2019|Wachsmuth and Duscha 2019]] ; [[#Sharmina--2020|Sharmina et al. 2020]] ). In contrast, bottom-up modelling studies show considerable potential for demand-side mitigation ( [[#Creutzig--2016|Creutzig et al. 2016]] ; [[#Yeh--2017|Yeh et al. 2017]] ; [[#Mundaca--2019|Mundaca et al. 2019]] ; [[#Wachsmuth--2019|Wachsmuth and Duscha 2019]] ) (Chapter 5), which can slow emissions growth and/or reduce emissions ( [[#Creutzig--2016|Creutzig et al. 2016]] ; [[#Samadi--2017|Samadi et al. 2017]] ).

A small number of mitigation pathways include stringent demand-side mitigation, including changes in thermostat set points ( [[#van%20Sluisveld--2016|van Sluisveld et al. 2016]] ; [[#van%20Vuuren--2018|van Vuuren et al. 2018]] ), more efficient or smarter appliances ( [[#van%20Sluisveld--2016|van Sluisveld et al. 2016]] ; [[#Grubler--2018|Grubler et al. 2018]] ; [[#Napp--2019|Napp et al. 2019]] ), increased recycling or reduced industrial goods ( [[#Liu--2018|Liu et al. 2018]] ; [[#van%20Sluisveld--2016|van Sluisveld et al. 2016]] ; [[#Grubler--2018|Grubler et al. 2018]] ; [[#van%20de%20Ven--2018|van de Ven et al. 2018]] ; [[#Napp--2019|Napp et al. 2019]] ), telework and travel avoidance ( [[#Grubler--2018|Grubler et al. 2018]] ; [[#van%20de%20Ven--2018|van de Ven et al. 2018]] ), shifts to public transit ( [[#van%20Sluisveld--2016|van Sluisveld et al. 2016]] ; [[#Grubler--2018|Grubler et al. 2018]] ; [[#van%20Vuuren--2018|van Vuuren et al. 2018]] ), reductions in food waste ( [[#van%20de%20Ven--2018|van de Ven et al. 2018]] ) and less meat-intensive diets ( [[#Liu--2018|Liu et al. 2018]] ; [[#van%20de%20Ven--2018|van de Ven et al. 2018]] ; [[#van%20Vuuren--2018|van Vuuren et al. 2018]] ). These pathways show reduced dependence on CDR and reduced pressure on land ( [[#Grubler--2018|Grubler et al. 2018]] ; [[#Rogelj--2018|Rogelj et al. 2018]] a; [[#van%20de%20Ven--2018|van de Ven et al. 2018]] ; [[#van%20Vuuren--2018|van Vuuren et al. 2018]] ) ( [[IPCC:Wg3:Chapter:Chapter-5#5.3.3|Section 5.3.3]] ). However, the representation of these demand-side mitigation options in IAMs is limited, with most models excluding the costs of such changes ( [[#van%20Sluisveld--2016|van Sluisveld et al. 2016]] ), using stylised assumptions to represent them ( [[#van%20den%20Berg--2019|van den Berg et al. 2019]] ), and excluding rebound effects ( [[#Krey--2019|Krey et al. 2019]] ; [[#Brockway--2021|Brockway et al. 2021]] ). Furthermore, there are questions about the achievability of such pathways, including whether the behavioural changes included are feasible ( [[#Azevedo--2021|Azevedo et al. 2021]] ) and the extent to which development and demand can be decoupled ( [[#Steckel--2013|Steckel et al. 2013]] ; [[#Brockway--2021|Brockway et al. 2021]] ; [[#Keyßer--2021|Keyßer and Lenzen 2021]] ; [[#Semieniuk--2021|Semieniuk et al. 2021]] ).

Figure 3.18 shows indicators of supply- and demand-side mitigation in the IMPs, as well as the range across the database. Two of these IMPs ( ''IMP-SP'' , ''IMP-LD'' ) show strong reductions in energy demand, resulting in less reliance on bioenergy and limited CDR from energy supply. In contrast, ''IMP-Neg'' has higher energy demand, depending more on bioenergy and net negative CO 2 emissions from energy supply.

<div id="_idContainer055" class="_idGenObjectStyleOverride-1"></div>

[[File:31b52d10bd8df0667b8030b9cad2c666 IPCC_AR6_WGIII_Figure_3_18.png]]

'''Figure 3.18 | Indicators of demand and supply-side mitigation in the Illustrative Pathways (lines) and the 5–95% range of Reference, 1.''' '''5°C and 2°C scenarios (shaded areas).'''

<div id="3.4.1.2" class="h3-container"></div>

<span id="sectoral-emissions-strategies-and-the-timing-of-net-zero"></span>