Show simple item record

AuthorOrthen, Tobias Christiandc.contributor.author
Date of accession2021-09-13T12:21:05Zdc.date.accessioned
Available in OPARU since2021-09-13T12:21:05Zdc.date.available
Year of creation2020dc.date.created
Date of first publication2021-09-13dc.date.issued
AbstractAlthough economic inequality between countries has decreased in recent decades, inequality within countries has either increased or stagnated at a high level since the mid-1980s. At the same time, there is no nation state with an income distribution as unequal as the aggregate income distribution at the global level. Wealth inequality is even higher by several magnitudes and, within most states, as unequally distributed as global income. Economic inequality is also closely linked to the issue of negative externalities, more precisely to environmental and climate impacts, since in the current economic-technical system a high level of economic activity is associated with a high level of greenhouse gas emissions. Therefore, enormous trade-offs exist within major international programs, such as the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the Paris Climate Agreement. This is because creating a high level of prosperity, as envisioned for billions of people, currently goes hand in hand with using fossil fuels, for the most part, and thus with greenhouse gas emissions. In addition, the world’s population continues to grow and there is a large financing gap between what the implementation of the SDGs and the Paris Agreement is expected to cost and what the states have pledged in terms of financing. These conflicting goals are one reason why, after decades of international negotiations by the states, only weak, inadequate climate protection measures have been adopted to date. Other reasons are the nature of the climate problem as a tragedy of the commons, the self-serving interests of individual states and the fact that climate change is addressed almost exclusively at the intergovernmental level. Established principles of justice, such as the polluter-pays principle and the ability-to-pay principle, are not adequately taken into account, with the result that necessary funds for a solution from the private sector cannot be activated. As a result, by 2050, approximately 500 billion tCO2e are expected to be emitted in excess of what would be permissible to meet international targets of limiting global warming to a maximum of 2°C (better 1.5°C). In the medium to long term, humanity needs to transition to an economic-technical system based largely on renewable energy sources and built on improved international cooperation. For this purpose, a reorientation of established justice principles in the context of Thomas Pogge’s conception of global justice will be elaborated on the basis of existing academic literature, in order to adequately introduce the polluter-pays principle and the ability-to-pay principle into the climate and development discourse. In this regard, it is necessary to take so-called top emitters more into account. This allows for promoting a higher degree of justice between individuals worldwide, so that the discourse does not remain at the state level only. Moreover, since funding for international cooperation is scarce, it is argued that the use of such funds should be guided by the needs principle. Moreover, the efficiency in terms of the impact of the funds used for climate protection and development is often very high where also the need is very high, e. g. because people are very poor and local ecosystems are particularly threatened by the effects of climate change. After deriving why top emitters play an important role in solving global problems, the question of who the top emitters actually are is addressed. In a first step, the group of private individuals with high incomes and assets is characterized in terms of greenhouse gas emissions and their ability to (financially) contribute to solving the climate and development issues. This is done using hybrid life cycle assessment methods and the analysis of global income and CO2e distributions. In this context, the conventional approach for calculating individuals’ climate footprints is extended to cover particular greenhouse gas-intensive areas of life such as private air travel and boat use which play a major role for top emitters. The result is an approximation of the annual emissions caused by the biggest top emitters. Results suggest that the biggest top emitters cause greenhouse gas emissions in the mid four-digit range (measured in tCO2e). In a second step, the question of who should be included in the group of top emitters is explored in such a way that the sum of top emitters’ emissions comprises a significant share of the total global emissions. In terms of social cceptability, this group of people is distinguished from those segments of the population that would carry a disproportionate financial burden if they were to pay additional contributions to climate change mitigation and sustainable development. It is proposed to include everyone who generates ≥ 10 tCO2e and who has a disposable income greater than the respective national average. Thus, individuals with high incomes (relative to the national average) are included and individuals with low incomes are excluded. In terms of national income distributions, the group of top emitters defined this way (called type 2) is approximately composed of: the top 30 percent of high-income countries, the top 10 percent of middle-income countries, and the top 1 percent of low-income countries. This amounts to about 700 million people worldwide, who together account for about 45 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions and comprise about 10 percent of the world’s population. This characterization goes beyond the usual discussion of the role of „the world’s richest 10 percent “ as it is more socially acceptable by giving greater consideration to the polluter-pays principle and the ability-to-pay principle being established principles of justice. Because top emitters are often associated with luxurious lifestyles, such as yachts and private jets, it is suggested that this group be referred to as high emitters. The luxurious lifestyle described applies only to the top few percent of high emitters, who further on are suggested to be called top emitters as the subgroup of the highest high emitters. The thesis then elaborates why high and top emitters have a vested interest to voluntarily and substantially engage in international climate change mitigation and sustainable development. High and top emitters benefit most from the current international economic order because they get a large share of the profits. Therefore, the pressures and negative impacts from (a) inadequate climate action and (b) high levels of inequality on this order, on societies, and on high and top emitters are analysed. The physical effects of ongoing global warming, inequality itself, and national populist movements and parties resulting from inequality potentially lead to the destabilization of the international (economic) order, impairment of economic performance, loss of large assets, and curtailment of accustomed energy-intensive lifestyles, e.g. through flight bans. In addition, a vicious circle of poverty would probably also affect large parts of the high and also the top emitters, due to rising costs from adaptation and mitigation of climate change and costs from economic inefficiencies resulting from excessive inequality. These costs compete with expenditures that ensure a functioning efficient economic and social system, such as expenditures on education, research, pensions, the healthcare system, (digital) infrastructure, etc. High and top emitters therefore have a high self-interest to bear a significant part of these costs so that the international economic system continues to function and they can continue to benefit from it. From a justice perspective, they are also fulfilling their negative and positive obligations. If high and top emitters were to take responsibility for all global emissions and pay 30 euros per ton of tCO2e, the total amount would be about 1 trillion Euro, which is in the order of magnitude needed to make significant progress on international climate protection and sustainable development. Such an allocation could be made based on ability in terms of the ratio of disposable income to national average income. The thesis develops a suggestion for such an allocation as well. On the other hand, it is shown that multiple opportunities exist for high and top emitters to deploy their financial and influence-related resources in ways that reduce the pressures of climate change and high inequality on societies and the international order. In addition, a wide range of economic value creation potentials can be tapped for the necessary transition to a new economic-technical and social system based on renewable energy sources and international cooperation. These can be organised in a such a way that promotes sustainable development and international climate protection and thus enables a life in prosperity for about 10 billion people with an intact environment and climate system. If this process is organized wisely, it is also likely to create economic opportunities for high and top emitters as well as for societies worldwide as financial resources can be used effectively, efficiently and fair at the same time. Although economic inequality between countries has decreased in recent decades, inequality within countries has either increased or stagnated at a high level since the mid-1980s. At the same time, there is no nation state with an income distribution as unequal as the aggregate income distribution at the global level. Wealth inequality is even higher by several magnitudes and, within most states, as unequally distributed as global income. Economic inequality is also closely linked to the issue of negative externalities, more precisely to environmental and climate impacts, since in the current economic-technical system a high level of economic activity is associated with a high level of greenhouse gas emissions. Therefore, enormous trade-offs exist within major international programs, such as the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the Paris Climate Agreement. This is because creating a high level of prosperity, as envisioned for billions of people, currently goes hand in hand with using fossil fuels, for the most part, and thus with greenhouse gas emissions. In addition, the world’s population continues to grow and there is a large financing gap between what the implementation of the SDGs and the Paris Agreement is expected to cost and what the states have pledged in terms of financing. These conflicting goals are one reason why, after decades of international negotiations by the states, only weak, inadequate climate protection measures have been adopted to date. Other reasons are the nature of the climate problem as a tragedy of the commons, the self-serving interests of individual states and the fact that climate change is addressed almost exclusively at the intergovernmental level. Established principles of justice, such as the polluter-pays principle and the ability-to-pay principle, are not adequately taken into account, with the result that necessary funds for a solution from the private sector cannot be activated. As a result, by 2050, approximately 500 billion tCO2e are expected to be emitted in excess of what would be permissible to meet international targets of limiting global warming to a maximum of 2°C (better 1.5°C). In the medium to long term, humanity needs to transition to an economic-technical system based largely on renewable energy sources and built on improved international cooperation. For this purpose, a reorientation of established justice principles in the context of Thomas Pogge’s conception of global justice will be elaborated on the basis of existing academic literature, in order to adequately introduce the polluter-pays principle and the ability-to-pay principle into the climate and development discourse. In this regard, it is necessary to take so-called top emitters more into account. This allows for promoting a higher degree of justice between individuals worldwide, so that the discourse does not remain at the state level only. Moreover, since funding for international cooperation is scarce, it is argued that the use of such funds should be guided by the needs principle. Moreover, the efficiency in terms of the impact of the funds used for climate protection and development is often very high where also the need is very high, e. g. because people are very poor and local ecosystems are particularly threatened by the effects of climate change. After deriving why top emitters play an important role in solving global problems, the question of who the top emitters actually are is addressed. In a first step, the group of private individuals with high incomes and assets is characterized in terms of greenhouse gas emissions and their ability to (financially) contribute to solving the climate and development issues. This is done using hybrid life cycle assessment methods and the analysis of global income and CO2e distributions. In this context, the conventional approach for calculating individuals’ climate footprints is extended to cover particular greenhouse gas-intensive areas of life such as private air travel and boat use which play a major role for top emitters. The result is an approximation of the annual emissions caused by the biggest top emitters. Results suggest that the biggest top emitters cause greenhouse gas emissions in the mid four-digit range (measured in tCO2e). In a second step, the question of who should be included in the group of top emitters is explored in such a way that the sum of top emitters’ emissions comprises a significant share of the total global emissions. In terms of social cceptability, this group of people is distinguished from those segments of the population that would carry a disproportionate financial burden if they were to pay additional contributions to climate change mitigation and sustainable development. It is proposed to include everyone who generates ≥ 10 tCO2e and who has a disposable income greater than the respective national average. Thus, individuals with high incomes (relative to the national average) are included and individuals with low incomes are excluded. In terms of national income distributions, the group of top emitters defined this way (called type 2) is approximately composed of: the top 30 percent of high-income countries, the top 10 percent of middle-income countries, and the top 1 percent of low-income countries. This amounts to about 700 million people worldwide, who together account for about 45 % of global greenhouse gas emissions and comprise about 10 percent of the world’s population. This characterization goes beyond the usual discussion of the role of „the world’s richest 10 percent “ as it is more socially acceptable by giving greater consideration to the polluter-pays principle and the ability-to-pay principle being established principles of justice. Because top emitters are often associated with luxurious lifestyles, such as yachts and private jets, it is suggested that this group be referred to as high emitters. The luxurious lifestyle described applies only to the top few percent of high emitters, who further on are suggested to be called top emitters as the subgroup of the highest high emitters. The thesis then elaborates why high and top emitters have a vested interest to voluntarily and substantially engage in international climate change mitigation and sustainable development. High and top emitters benefit most from the current international economic order because they get a large share of the profits. Therefore, the pressures and negative impacts from (a) inadequate climate action and (b) high levels of inequality on this order, on societies, and on high and top emitters are analysed. The physical effects of ongoing global warming, inequality itself, and national populist movements and parties resulting from inequality potentially lead to the destabilization of the international (economic) order, impairment of economic performance, loss of large assets, and curtailment of accustomed energy-intensive lifestyles, e.g. through flight bans. In addition, a vicious circle of poverty would probably also affect large parts of the high and also the top emitters, due to rising costs from adaptation and mitigation of climate change and costs from economic inefficiencies resulting from excessive inequality. These costs compete with expenditures that ensure a functioning efficient economic and social system, such as expenditures on education, research, pensions, the healthcare system, (digital) infrastructure, etc. High and top emitters therefore have a high self-interest to bear a significant part of these costs so that the international economic system continues to function and they can continue to benefit from it. From a justice perspective, they are also fulfilling their negative and positive obligations. If high and top emitters were to take responsibility for all global emissions and pay 30 euros per ton of tCO2e, the total amount would be about 1 trillion Euro , which is in the order of magnitude needed to make significant progress on international climate protection and sustainable development. Such an allocation could be made based on ability in terms of the ratio of disposable income to national average income. The thesis develops a suggestion for such an allocation as well. On the other hand, it is shown that multiple opportunities exist for high and top emitters to deploy their financial and influence-related resources in ways that reduce the pressures of climate change and high inequality on societies and the international order. In addition, a wide range of economic value creation potentials can be tapped for the necessary transition to a new economic-technical and social system based on renewable energy sources and international cooperation. These can be organised in a such a way that promotes sustainable development and international climate protection and thus enables a life in prosperity for about 10 billion people with an intact environment and climate system. If this process is organized wisely, it is also likely to create economic opportunities for high and top emitters as well as for societies worldwide as financial resources can be used effectively, efficiently and fair at the same time.dc.description.abstract
AbstractObwohl sich die ökonomische Ungleichheit in den letzten Jahrzehnten zwischen den Staaten verringert hat, ist die Ungleichheit innerhalb der Staaten seit Mitte der 1980er Jahre entweder gestiegen oder auf einem hohen Niveau stagniert. Dabei existiert kein Nationalstaat, in dem das Einkommen so ungleich verteilt ist, wie auf globaler Ebene. Die Vermögensungleichheit ist um ein Vielfaches höher und innerhalb der meisten Staaten so ungleich verteilt wie das globale Einkommen. Ökonomische Ungleichheit ist dabei eng mit dem Thema negativer Externalitäten, genauer mit Umwelt- und Klimabelastungen verbunden, da im gegenwärtigen wirtschaftlich-technischen System eine hohe ökonomische Aktivität mit einem hohen Maß an Treibhausgas-Emissionen verbunden ist. Daher existieren enorme Zielkonflikte innerhalb der wichtigen internationalen Programme, wie den Nachhaltigkeitszielen der Ver- einten Nationen (Sustainable Development Goals, SDGs) und dem Klimaabkommen von Paris. Denn der Aufbau eines hohen Wohlstandsniveaus, wie es für Milliarden von Menschen angestrebt wird, ist aktuell mit der Nutzung zumeist fossiler Energieträger und damit mit Treibhausgas-Emissionen verbunden. Zudem wächst die Weltbevölkerung weiter und es existiert eine große Finanzierungslücke zwischen dem, was die Umsetzung der SDGs und des Klimaabkommens von Paris voraussichtlich kostet und dem, was die Staaten an Finanzierungszusagen machen. Diese Zielkonflikte sind ein Grund dafür, dass nach Jahrzehnten internationaler staatlicher Verhandlungen bis heute nur schwache unzureichende Klimaschutzmaßnahmen beschlossen wurden. Weitere Gründe sind der Charakter des Klimaproblems als Tragödie der Allgemeingüter, das Interesse der einzelnen Staaten am eigenen Vorteil und der Tatsache, dass der Klimawandel fast ausschließlich auf zwischenstaatlicher Ebene adressiert wird. Dabei werden etablierten Gerechtigkeitsprinzipien, wie das Verursacher- und das Leistungsfähigkeitsprinzip nicht adäquat berücksichtigt, was zur Folge hat, dass notwendige Mittel für eine Lösung aus dem Privatsektor nicht aktiviert werden können. Das führt dazu, dass bis 2050 voraussichtlich 500 Mrd. tCO2e zu viel emittiert werden als zulässig wäre, um die internationalen Ziele, die Erderwärmung auf maximal 2°C (besser 1,5°C) zu begrenzen, zu erreichen. Mittel- bis langfristig muss an einem Übergang zu einem wirtschaftlich-technischen System gearbeitet werden, dass in großen Teilen auf erneuerbaren Energiequellen beruht und auf einer verbesserten internationalen Kooperation aufbaut. Dazu wird auf der Grundlage der Literatur eine Neuausrichtung etablierter Gerechtigkeitsprinzipien im Kontext einer Konzeption globaler Gerechtigkeit von Thomas Pogge erarbeitet, um vor allem das Verursacher- und das Leistungsfähigkeitsprinzip adäquat in den Klima- und Entwicklungsdiskurs einzubringen. Dazu ist es notwendig, sogenannte Top-Emitter stärker mitzuberücksichtigen, um ein höheres Maß an Gerechtigkeit zwischen Individuen weltweit zu fördern, sodass der Diskurs nicht nur auf Staatenebene verbleibt. Da die Finanzmittel für internationale Kooperation knapp sind, wird zudem dafür argumentiert, sich beim Einsatz solcher Mittel nach dem Bedarfsprinzip zu richten. Häufig ist außerdem die Effizienz in Hinblick auf die Wirkung der eingesetzten Gelder für Klimaschutz und Entwicklung dort sehr hoch, wo auch der Bedarf sehr hoch ist, z. B. weil die Menschen sehr arm sind und Ökosysteme besonders durch Auswirkungen des Klimawandels gefährdet sind. Nach der Herleitung, warum Top-Emitter eine wichtige Rolle bei der Problemlösung spielen, wird die Frage beantwortet, wer die Top-Emitter eigentlich sind? In einem ersten Schritt wird dazu die Gruppe der Privatpersonen mit hohen Einkommen und Vermögen in Bezug auf die Verursachung von Treibhausgas-Emissionen und ihre Leistungsfähigkeit, (finanzielle) Beiträge zur Problemlösung beizutragen, charakterisiert. Dies geschieht mithilfe von Methoden der hybriden Ökobilanzierung und der Analyse von globalen Einkommens- und CO2e-Verteilungen. In diesem Kontext wird das Vorgehen zur Berechnung individueller Klimafußabdrücke auf treibhausgasintensive Lebensbereiche, wie z. B. den privaten Flugverkehr und die Nutzung von Booten erweitert, die für die Top-Emitter eine große Rolle spielen. Das Ergebnis ist eine Annäherung an die jährlichen verursachten Emissionen der größten Top-Emitter. Demnach verursachen die größten Top-Emitter Treibhausgas-Emissionen im mittleren vierstelligen Bereich (gemessen in tCO2e). In einem zweiten Schritt wird der Frage nachgegangen, wer zur Gruppe der Top-Emitter zählen sollte, sodass die Summe der Emissionen der Top-Emitter einen signifikanten Anteil der globalen Gesamtemissionen umfasst. Im Sinne der Sozialverträglichkeit wird diese Personengruppe von den Teilen der Bevölkerung abgegrenzt, die in Bezug auf ihre Leistungsfähigkeit u. U. unverhältnismäßig stark belastet würden, wenn sie zusätzliche Beiträge zum Klimaschutz und für nachhaltige Entwicklung entrichten sollten. Es wird vorgeschlagen, alle diejenigen mit zu berücksichtigen, die ≥10 tCO2e verursachen und ein verfügbares Einkommen haben, das größer ist, als der jeweilige nationale Durchschnitt. Personen mit (relativ zum nationalen Durchschnitt) hohen Einkommen werden dabei mitberücksichtigt und Personen mit niedrigen Einkommen ausgeschlossen. Die so charakterisierte Gruppe der Top-Emitter (Typ 2 genannt) setzt sich in Bezug auf die nationalen Einkommensverteilungen zusammen aus: etwa den obersten 30 Prozent der Staaten mit hohen Einkommen, den etwa obersten 10 Prozent der Staaten mit mittleren Einkommen und den obersten 1 Prozent der Staaten mit geringen Einkommen. Das sind etwa 700 Mio. Menschen weltweit, die zusammen für etwa 45 Prozent der weltweiten Treibhausgas-Emissionen verantwortlich sind und etwa 10,8 Prozent der Weltbevölkerung umfassen. Diese Charakterisierung geht über die weit verbreitete Diskussion der Rolle „der reichsten 10 Prozent der Welt“ hinaus, weil sie sozialverträglicher ist, indem die etablierten Gerechtigkeitsprinzipien stärker berücksichtigt werden. Da Top-Emitter häufig mit einem luxuriösen Lebensstil assoziiert werden, z. B. mit Yachten und Privatflugzeugen, wird vorgeschlagen, diese Gruppe als High-Emitter zu bezeichnen. Der beschriebene luxuriöse Lebensstil trifft nur auf die obersten wenigen Prozent der High-Emitter zu, die als Untergruppe der High-Emitter weiterhin Top-Emitter genannt werden. Im Anschluss wird herausgearbeitet, warum High- und Top-Emitter ein Eigeninteresse haben, sich freiwillig und substantiell für internationalen Klimaschutz und nachhaltige Entwicklung zu engagieren. High- und Top-Emitter profitieren am meisten von der gegenwärtige internationalen wirtschaftlichen Ordnung. Deswegen werden die Drücke und negativen Auswirkungen durch unzureichende Klimaschutzmaßnahmen und ein hohes Niveau an Ungleichheit auf dieses System, die Gesellschaften und auf die High- und Top-Emitter analysiert. Die physikalischen Auswirkungen einer fortschreitenden Erderwärmung, die Ungleichheit selbst sowie durch Ungleichheit beförderte national-populistische Bewegungen und Parteien führen potentiell zu einer Destabilisierung der internationalen (wirtschaftlichen) Ordnung, einer Beeinträchtigung der Wirtschaftsleistung, zum Verlust großer Vermögenstitel und zu einer Beschränkung der gewohnten energieintensiven Lebensstile, z. B. durch Flugverbote. Zusätzlich droht eine Armutsspirale, die vermutlich auch weite Teile der High- und auch der Top-Emitter betreffen würde. Das liegt an steigenden Kosten durch Anpassung und Vermeidung an den Klimawandel und Kosten durch zu hohe Ungleichheit, die zu wirtschaftlichen Ineffizienzen führt. Diese Kosten konkurrieren mit Ausgaben, die ein funktionierendes leistungsfähiges Wirtschafts- und Sozialsystem gewährleisten, wie Ausgaben für Bildung, Forschung, Altersvorsorge, das Gesundheitssystem, (digitale) Infrastruktur etc. High- und Top-Emitter haben also ein hohes Eigeninteresse einen signifikanten Teil dieser Kosten zu übernehmen, damit das internationale wirtschaftliche System weiterhin funktioniert und sie weiterhin davon profitieren können. Aus Gerechtigkeitsaspekten erfüllen sie damit außerdem ihre negativen und positiven Pflichten. Wenn High- und Top-Emitter die gesamten weltweiten Emissionen übernehmen und 30 Euro pro Tonne tCO2e entrichten würden, käme man weltweit auf etwa 1 Bio. Euro und damit in die Größenordnung, die für signifikante Fortschritte für internationalen Klimaschutz und nachhaltige Entwicklung notwendig ist. Eine solche Zuteilung könnte entlang der Leistungsfähighkeit in Bezug auf das Verhältnis zwischen verfügbarem Einkommen und nationalem Durchschnittseinkommen vorgenommen werden. Andererseits wird aufgezeigt, dass vielfältige Möglichkeiten für High- und Top-Emitter existieren, ihre finanziellen und einflussbezogenen Ressourcen so einsetzen, dass die Drücke durch den Klimawandel und die hohe Ungleichheit auf die Gesellschaften und die internationale Ordnung reduziert werden. Zudem können für den notwendigen Übergang in ein neues technisches und soziales System basierend auf erneuerbaren Energiequellen und internationaler Kooperation vielfältige wirtschaftliche Wertschöpfungspotentiale erschlossen werden. Diese nachhaltige Entwicklung und internationalen Klimaschutz fördern und damit ein Leben in Wohlstand für etwa 10 Mrd. Menschen bei intakter Umwelt und einem intakten Klimasystem ermöglichen. Wird dieser Prozess klug organisiert, ergeben sich voraussichtlich außerdem ökonomische Chancen für High- und Top-Emitter sowie für die Gesellschaften weltweit, weil Finanzmittel effektiv, effizient und zugleich gerecht eingesetzt werden können.dc.description.abstract
Languagededc.language.iso
PublisherUniversität Ulmdc.publisher
LicenseLizenz Adc.rights
Link to license texthttps://oparu.uni-ulm.de/xmlui/licenseA_v1dc.rights.uri
KeywordGerechtigkeitdc.subject
KeywordTop-Emitterdc.subject
KeywordKlimafußabdruckdc.subject
KeywordUngleichheitdc.subject
KeywordWirtschaftssystemdc.subject
KeywordKlimafinanzierungdc.subject
Dewey Decimal GroupDDC 330 / Economicsdc.subject.ddc
LCSHIncome distributiondc.subject.lcsh
LCSHClimatic changesdc.subject.lcsh
LCSHWealthdc.subject.lcsh
LCSHSustainabilitydc.subject.lcsh
TitleKlimawandel, Ungleichheit und Top-Emitter -- Wirkungszusammenhänge und die Rolle des wohlhabenden Privatsektors für Klimaschutz und eine nachhaltige Zukunftdc.title
Resource typeDissertationdc.type
Date of acceptance2021-05-03dcterms.dateAccepted
RefereeMüller, Martindc.contributor.referee
RefereeRadermacher, Franz Josefdc.contributor.referee
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.18725/OPARU-38785dc.identifier.doi
PPN1770839704dc.identifier.ppn
URNhttp://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bsz:289-oparu-38861-4dc.identifier.urn
GNDKlimaänderungdc.subject.gnd
GNDEinkommensverteilungdc.subject.gnd
GNDVermögendc.subject.gnd
GNDNachhaltigkeitdc.subject.gnd
GNDÖkologischer Fußabdruckdc.subject.gnd
FacultyFakultät für Mathematik und Wirtschaftswissenschaftenuulm.affiliationGeneral
InstitutionInstitut für Nachhaltige Unternehmensführunguulm.affiliationSpecific
InstitutionForschungsinstitut für anwendungsorientierte Wissensverarbeitung/n (FAW/n)uulm.affiliationSpecific
Grantor of degreeFakultät für Mathematik und Wirtschaftswissenschaftenuulm.thesisGrantor
DCMI TypeTextuulm.typeDCMI
CategoryPublikationenuulm.category
FundingTop-Emitter und das 2°C-Ziel / Vector Stiftunguulm.funding
Bibliographyuulmuulm.bibliographie


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record