13 + 1: A Comparison of Global Climate Change Policy Architectures

Joseph Aldy, Scott Barrett and Robert Stavins

No 10541, Discussion Papers from Resources for the Future

Abstract: We critically review the Kyoto Protocol and thirteen alternative policy architectures for addressing the threat of global climate change. We employ six criteria to evaluate the policy proposals: environmental outcome, dynamic efficiency, cost effectiveness, equity, flexibility in the presence of new information, and incentives for participation and compliance. The Kyoto Protocol does not fare well on a number of criteria, but none of the alternative proposals fare well along all six dimensions. We identify several major themes among the alternative proposals: Kyoto is "too little, too fast"; developing countries should play a more substantial role and receive incentives to participate; implementation should focus on market-based approaches, especially those with price mechanisms; and participation and compliance incentives are inadequately addressed by most proposals. Our investigation reveals tensions among several of the evaluative criteria, such as between environmental outcome and efficiency, and between cost-effectiveness and incentives for participation and compliance.

Keywords: Environmental; Economics; and; Policy (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Pages: 33
Date: 2003
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (13)

Downloads: (external link)
https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/10541/files/dp030026.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
Working Paper: 13 + 1: A Comparison of Global Climate Change Policy Architectures (2003)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ags:rffdps:10541

DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.10541

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Discussion Papers from Resources for the Future Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by AgEcon Search (aesearch@umn.edu).