Energy & Climate
‘A textbook case of climate injustice’
Climate change and La Niña combine to create ‘perfect storm’ in deadly Southern Africa floods.
29 January 2026
Global climate mitigation scenarios shape real-world policy choices about who cuts emissions, who pays and who benefits from climate action.
A new essay, led by IIASA (International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis) and published in PLOS Climate, identifies how these influential tools address equity and justice, with implications for perceptions of fairness and public trust in climate policy.
Drawing on a broad grassroots community process, the study identifies practical ways to advance equity and justice in climate mitigation pathways, supporting fair, feasible and politically credible climate action.
The research brings together growing evidence that current scenarios fall short in reflecting unequal responsibilities, capacities and development needs across regions, and proposes a roadmap for integrating fairness into future climate pathways.
According to lead author Shonali Pachauri, Transformative Institutional and Social Solutions Research Group Leader at IIASA, the study was motivated by the need to bring together fragmented critiques of climate mitigation modelling and modellers, and to move the discussion forward on how to integrate fairness into future scenarios.
‘We wanted to bring together existing critiques, assess where current approaches fall short and where current scenarios already go further than some critiques suggest, and to set out a clear agenda for embedding equity and justice into climate mitigation futures.’
SHONALI PACHAURI
Lead author, Transformative Institutional and Social Solutions Research Group Leader at IIASA
Instead of asking whether models should address equity, the authors focus on how to do so in practice.
‘We focus on what needs to change in scenario design, modelling practices and research processes’, notes coauthor Caroline Zimm, a senior research scholar in the Transformative Institutional and Social Solutions Research Group at IIASA.
The paper identifies three broad types of limitation in current climate mitigation scenarios:
structural limitations, relating to who builds models and whose perspectives count; methodological issues, arising from a strong emphasis on cost efficiency, which often sidelines fairness and distributional impacts, and epistemological limitations, referring to challenges in representing justice at policy-relevant scales.
‘We highlight a research agenda that combines incremental improvements, deeper structural reforms and participatory approaches that is designed to be practical as well as ambitious’, says coauthor Joeri Roglj, a senior researcher in the IIASA Energy, Climate, and Environment Program, Director of Research at the Grantham Institute and Professor of Climate Science and Policy at the Centre for Environmental Policy at Imperial College London.
Importantly, the authors emphasise that many of the advances can be pursued within existing modelling efforts, while others point toward longer term structural changes in the field.
Rather than offering a single technical fix, the study reframes climate mitigation modelling and scenario development itself. The authors clearly distinguish between incremental improvements and fundamentally new approaches, while recognising the limits of models in resolving political questions of justice.
‘Models are indispensable tools, but they cannot replace deliberative negotiation or moral judgment. Transparency, pluralism and co-production are just as important as technical sophistication.’
SHONALI PACHAURI
Lead author, Transformative Institutional and Social Solutions Research Group Leader at IIASA
The implications of this work are significant for both policymakers and the public. For policymakers, the findings underscore that climate scenarios are not value-neutral and should be interpreted with a clear understanding of the normative assumptions embedded within them.
Embedding equity directly into scenarios could help governments design fairer climate targets, estimate climate finance needs more accurately and build stronger international cooperation grounded in shared responsibility.
The work also highlights that climate pathways are not just technical exercises but also inform choices about how the burdens and benefits of climate action are shared, shaping livelihoods, development opportunities and intergenerational justice.
Without fairness, even technically feasible climate pathways may fail politically. Equity-focused scenarios can strengthen trust, reduce conflict and unlock broader public support for climate action.
By offering concrete pathways to integrate justice concerns into modelling, the paper aims to strengthen the relevance and credibility of climate science at a time when global cooperation is both essential and fragile.
‘Climate mitigation scenarios shape what policymakers believe is possible and acceptable. They are visions of who gets what future. Greater attention to equity can help ensure these pathways are robust, transparent, and socially grounded.’
KEYWAN RIAHI
Study coauthor and IIASA Energy, Climate and Environment Program Director
Climate change and La Niña combine to create ‘perfect storm’ in deadly Southern Africa floods.
Climate change-fuelled extreme weather events disproportionately hit poor communities in 2025.
Over half of global coastal settlements are retreating inland due to intensifying climate risks.
2025’s Adaptation Gap Report reveals slow climate adaptation is threatening lives and economies.
