Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull says that the Government's emissions reduction target of 26 to 28 per cent of 2005 levels by 2030 "is comparable to other countries similarly situated". ABC Fact Check investigates.

The international community is meeting in Paris, aiming to achieve a new international agreement to keep global warming below two degrees celsius.

Ahead of the meeting Australia, along with many other countries, has submitted its contribution towards cutting carbon emissions.

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull rejected suggestions by Labor that the Government was not committed to action on climate change.

The claim: Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull says that Australia's carbon emissions reduction targets were comparable to "similarly situated" countries.

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull says that Australia's carbon emissions reduction targets were comparable to "similarly situated" countries. The verdict: The published emissions reduction commitments show that Australia's targets are comparable to most other OECD countries, particularly our major trading partners. However, experts told Fact Check that comparing emissions reductions between countries was very subjective. Mr Turnbull's claim is arguable.

"The Government is absolutely committed and will take to Paris a 26 to 28 per cent cut in emissions, which is comparable to other countries similarly situated," he said during Question Time in the House of Representatives.

In September, ABC Fact Check looked at former prime minister Tony Abbott's claim on how Australia's emissions reduction targets compare.

Since then, more countries have declared their targets ahead of the Paris meeting.

Are Australia's carbon reduction targets comparable to "similarly situated" countries? ABC Fact Check updates the analysis.

'Similarly situated' countries

Mr Turnbull claimed Australia's emissions targets were comparable to countries "similarly situated".

His spokeswoman provided Fact Check with a table comparing Australia's targets with Canada, Japan, the EU and New Zealand.

Fact Check asked experts which countries should be considered similar to Australia with regard to emissions targets.

CSIRO ecologist Pep Canadell told Fact Check that the countries of the OECD was a reasonable comparator.

Kobad Bhavnagari, head of the Australian division of Bloomberg New Energy Finance, an independent research firm of 200 energy and carbon market specialists providing research to banks, governments and energy companies, also told Fact Check OECD countries were the correct comparison, particularly Australia's major trading partners.

Robyn Eckersley, an expert in environmental politics from the University of Melbourne, told Fact Check it was "too easy" for Australia to look only to Canada and the US as comparators, though they were the obvious choices because of their long tradition of fossil fuel dependence.

Comparing with OECD members

All 34 OECD countries have now declared their carbon emissions targets ahead of the Paris meeting.

The four OECD countries to have declared their targets since Fact Check last examined the issue are Israel, Chile, Mexico and Turkey.

The targets of all OECD countries are shown on the map below.

This includes 21 countries of the EU that belong to the OECD, which have all committed to a common EU target, though some, like the UK, have also committed to individual targets.

Absolute emissions reductions

Mr Turnbull referred to Australia's 26 to 28 per cent cut in emissions, which represents Australia's target for absolute reduction in emissions.

A spokeswoman for Mr Turnbull provided data comparing Australia to other countries in terms of absolute emissions, and also per capita and intensity expressed per unit of gross domestic product, both of which are based on the absolute emissions targets.

Fact Check's comparison with other countries is therefore based on absolute emissions reductions, using previous data comparing the developed world's promised targets to a common baseline year of 2005.

The data is shown in the chart below and includes all OECD countries, except Chile, Singapore, Mexico, Israel and Turkey.

These countries have not made commitments to reduce their absolute emissions.

Singapore, Mexico and Turkey have all announced targets involving a reduction from "business as usual" emissions - or doing nothing - but an increase in absolute emissions over the next decade.

Chile's submission is in Spanish but two independent organisations, the Centre for Climate and Energy Solutions, and the Climate Action Tracker, note that Chile's target is expressed in terms of a reduction in emissions per unit of GDP.

The Climate Action Tracker estimates that this target, of a 30 per cent reduction over 2007 levels by 2030, represents an increase over both 1990 and 2010 absolute emissions levels.

Israel's target is expressed as a per capita reduction from 2005 levels and mentions that absolute emissions are expected to be 81.2 mega tonnes of CO2 by 2030.

The UNFCCC database shows Israel's emissions in 2005 were 73.3 mega tonnes, so the target represents an 11 per cent increase up to 2030 and thus Israel has also been excluded from this analysis.

Comparable?

The data shows that Australia's absolute emissions reduction targets are eighth out of the 10 OECD countries, including the EU, that are reducing their emissions.

If Singapore, Chile, Mexico, Israel and Turkey, whose emissions are rising in the next decade, are included, Australia's targets are eighth out of 15 OECD members.

However, Dr Canadell said Australia, which was many times wealthier per capita, should not be compared with Mexico and Turkey.

Mr Bhavnagri said his own analysis suggested that Australia's commitment was "more or less in line with the pledges of our major OECD trading partners".

Australia's top two-way trading partners in the OECD are Japan, the US, South Korea, Singapore, New Zealand, the UK and Germany.

Australia's targets are between eight and 11 percentage points below the US, around six percentage points below Germany and the UK (using the collective EU target), almost the same as New Zealand and Japan and a lot higher than Korea.

Dr Canadell cautioned that finding fairness and comparability between countries was very subjective.

"Having said that, by and large I would agree that [Australia's] effort is comparable to other similarly situated countries. It doesn't make us the leaders, it doesn't perhaps situate us in the middle of the pack either, but certainly comparable," he said.

However, Professor Eckersley said countries needed to justify their targets based on equity, responsibilities and capabilities, including factors like relative GDP and where Australia stood on the human development index.

The verdict

Mr Turnbull claimed that Australia's carbon emissions reduction targets were comparable to "similarly situated" countries.

Experts told Fact Check that similarly situated countries were those in the OECD.

The published emissions reduction commitments show that Australia's targets are comparable to most other OECD countries, particularly our major trading partners.

However, experts told Fact Check that comparing emissions reductions between countries was very subjective.

Mr Turnbull's claim is arguable.

Sources