3. Decoupling

Of the 39 countries that emitted more than 100 Mt in 2005, 14 have since grown their real GDP while cutting emissions.

Anything below the line grew its economy while cutting emissions. The US grew 46% in real terms while cutting emissions 20% over the same years, and the UK grew 27% and cut 45% of its emissions.

The standing objection is that production moved offshore, so the cut is an accounting artifact of where the factory sits. That is testable, and finding 4 tests it.

So what. This is the national-scale evidence that "grow and cut" is achievable, and it is the same choice a company makes when it sets a target. An absolute reduction target is credible alongside a growth plan, but only where the intensity improvement outruns the growth, and finding 7 shows that isn't automatic.

Who acts: whoever signs the target, which in practice is the CFO rather than the sustainability team. Cost of getting it wrong: committing publicly to an absolute cut the growth plan makes arithmetically impossible, and restating it two years later.