IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fem/femwpa/2003.64.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Thirteen Plus One: A Comparison of Global Climate Policy Architectures

Author

Listed:
  • Joseph E. Aldy

    (Department of Economics, Harvard University)

  • Scott Barrett

    (Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University)

  • Robert N. Stavins

    (John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University and 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.

Suggested Citation

  • Joseph E. Aldy & Scott Barrett & Robert N. Stavins, 2003. "Thirteen Plus One: A Comparison of Global Climate Policy Architectures," Working Papers 2003.64, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
  • Handle: RePEc:fem:femwpa:2003.64
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.feem.it/m/publications_pages/NDL2003-064.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Warwick J. McKibbin & Peter J. Wilcoxen, 1997. "A Better Way to Slow Global Climate Change," Economics and Environment Network Working Papers 9702, Australian National University, Economics and Environment Network.
    2. Scott Barrett & Robert Stavins, 2003. "Increasing Participation and Compliance in International Climate Change Agreements," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 3(4), pages 349-376, December.
    3. Thomas Schelling, 1998. "Costs and Benefits of Greenhouse Gas Reduction," Books, American Enterprise Institute, number 51097, September.
    4. Stavins, Robert & Hahn, Robert, 1999. "What Has Kyoto Wrought? The Real Architecture of International Tradable Permit Markets," Discussion Papers dp-99-30, Resources For the Future.
    5. Barbara Buchner & Carlo Carraro & Igor Cersosimo & Carmen Marchiori, 2002. "Back to Kyoto? US Participation and the Linkage between R&D and Climate Cooperation," CESifo Working Paper Series 688, CESifo.
    6. Robert W. Hahn, 1998. "The Economics & Politics of Climate Change," Books, American Enterprise Institute, number 51123, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Barbara Buchner & Carlo Carraro, 2004. "Economic and environmental effectiveness of a technology-based climate protocol," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(3), pages 229-248, September.
    2. Aldy, Joseph E. & Barrett, Scott & Stavins, Robert N., 2003. "13 + 1: A Comparison of Global Climate Change Policy Architectures," Discussion Papers 10541, Resources for the Future.
    3. Scott Barrett & Robert Stavins, 2003. "Increasing Participation and Compliance in International Climate Change Agreements," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 3(4), pages 349-376, December.
    4. Stavins, Robert, 2004. "Can an Effective Global Climate Treaty be Based on Sound Science, Rational Economics, and Pragmatic Politics?," Working Paper Series rwp04-020, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    5. Buchner, Barbara & Carraro, Carlo, 2005. "Regional and Sub-Global Climate Blocs. A Game-Theoretic Perspective on Bottom-up Climate Regimes," CEPR Discussion Papers 5034, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    6. Olmstead, Sheila & Stavins, Robert, 2006. "An International Architecture for the Post-Kyoto Era," Working Paper Series rwp06-009, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    7. Johan Eyckmans & Michael Finus, 2006. "New roads to international environmental agreements: the case of global warming," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 7(4), pages 391-414, December.
    8. Edward J. Balistreri & Daniel T. Kaffine & Hidemichi Yonezawa, 2019. "Optimal Environmental Border Adjustments Under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 74(3), pages 1037-1075, November.
    9. Sudhir A. Shah, 2000. "An Economic Theory of Emission Cap Determination by an International Agreement," Working papers 88, Centre for Development Economics, Delhi School of Economics.
    10. David M. Newbery & David M. Reiner & Robert A. Ritz, 2018. "When is a carbon price floor desirable?," Working Papers EPRG 1816, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    11. Seidman, Laurence & Lewis, Kenneth, 2009. "Compensations and contributions under an international carbon treaty," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 341-350, May.
    12. Newell, Richard G. & Pizer, William A., 2003. "Regulating stock externalities under uncertainty," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(2, Supple), pages 416-432, March.
    13. Gilbert E. Metcalf & David Weisbach, 2012. "Linking Policies When Tastes Differ: Global Climate Policy in a Heterogeneous World," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 6(1), pages 110-129.
    14. Milan Ščasný & Emanuele Massetti & Jan Melichar & Samuel Carrara, 2015. "Quantifying the Ancillary Benefits of the Representative Concentration Pathways on Air Quality in Europe," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 62(2), pages 383-415, October.
    15. McKibbin, Warwick J. & Wilcoxen, Peter J., 2004. "Estimates of the costs of Kyoto: Marrakesh versus the McKibbin-Wilcoxen blueprint," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 467-479, March.
    16. Flachsland, Christian & Marschinski, Robert & Edenhofer, Ottmar, 2009. "Global trading versus linking: Architectures for international emissions trading," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 1637-1647, May.
    17. Bosetti, Valentina & Carraro, Carlo & Massetti, Emanuele & Tavoni, Massimo, 2008. "International energy R&D spillovers and the economics of greenhouse gas atmospheric stabilization," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 2912-2929, November.
    18. Adrian Amelung, 2016. "Das "Paris-Agreement": Durchbruch der Top-Down-Klimaschutzverhandlungen im Kreise der Vereinten Nationen," Otto-Wolff-Institut Discussion Paper Series 03/2016, Otto-Wolff-Institut für Wirtschaftsordnung, Köln, Deutschland.
    19. Richard Schmalensee & Robert N. Stavins, 2017. "Lessons Learned from Three Decades of Experience with Cap and Trade," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 11(1), pages 59-79.
    20. Seraina Buob & Gunter Stephan, 2008. "Global Climate Change and the Funding of Adaptation," Diskussionsschriften dp0804, Universitaet Bern, Departement Volkswirtschaft.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Policy architecture; Kyoto Protocol; Efficiency; Cost effectiveness; Equity; Participation; Compliance;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q2 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation
    • Q3 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Nonrenewable Resources and Conservation
    • Q4 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:fem:femwpa:2003.64. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feemmit.html .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: barbara racah The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask barbara racah to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feemmit.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.