Climate policy design must balance emissions mitigation with concerns for fairness, particularly as climate change disproportionately affects the poorest households within and across countries. Integrated Assessment Models used for global climate policy evaluation have so far typically not considered inequality effects within countries. To fill this gap, we develop a global Integrated Assessment Model representing national economies and subnational income, mitigation cost, and climate damage distribution and assess a range of climate policy schemes with varying levels of effort sharing across countries and households. The schemes are consistent with limiting temperature increases to 2 °C and account for the possibility to use carbon tax revenues to address distributional effects within and between countries. We find that carbon taxation with redistribution improves global welfare and reduces inequality, with the most substantial gains achieved under uniform taxation paired with global per capita transfers. A Loss and Damage mechanism offers significant welfare improvements in vulnerable countries while requiring only a modest share of global carbon revenues in the medium term. The poorest households within all countries may benefit from the transfer scheme, in particular when some redistribution is made at the country level. Our findings underscore the potential for climate policy to advance both environmental and social goals, provided revenue recycling mechanisms are effectively implemented. In particular, they demonstrate the feasibility of a welfare improving global climate policy involving limited international redistribution.

Vietnam, a lower-middle-income economy, faces severe climate risks from heat waves, sea-level rise, and tropical cyclones, which are expected to intensify under ongoing global warming. Using a dynamic general equilibrium model, we analyze economic transition dynamics from 2015 to 2100, incorporating heat-induced labor productivity losses, agricultural land loss, and cyclone-related property damage. We compare a Paris-compatible scenario limiting warming to below 2 °C with a high-emission scenario reaching 4–5 °C. While output and investment impacts remain highly uncertain and statistically indistinguishable across scenarios until 2100, consumption losses are significantly larger under high emissions, mainly driven by heat-related productivity declines, with cyclones contributing most to uncertainty. These findings underscore the importance of considering multiple impact channels beyond output damages in climate-development research.