10.05.2013 Views

Carmen Bunzl - Universidad Pontificia Comillas

Carmen Bunzl - Universidad Pontificia Comillas

Carmen Bunzl - Universidad Pontificia Comillas

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Chapter 2. Options for future climate change architectures 87<br />

• They lead to real GHG emission reductions. They do not only improve<br />

abatement potentials and costs, but also increase energy efficiency, the<br />

diffusion of new technology and the development of new one.<br />

• They represent a cooperative approach. These are seen to be more<br />

appropriate for a politically difficult and technically complex long-<br />

term issue such as climate change, than the traditional adversary<br />

approach that is now dominant.<br />

“Governments alone will not be able to achieve climate change objectives.<br />

Government efforts need to be combined with efforts by other stakeholder<br />

notably industry and increasingly so financial institutions.” (Egenhofer, 2008)<br />

2.3 Coordinated policies and measures<br />

Instead of setting national emission targets, countries might also agree upon<br />

the joint implementation of policies and measures that reduce the emission of<br />

GHGs. These could include for example agreements on standards on energy<br />

efficiency, carbon efficiency, best available technology (Ninomiya, 2003);<br />

agreements on carbon tax (Cooper, 2001; Nordhaus, 2001); sustainable<br />

development policies and measures (SD PAMs) (Baumert et al. 2005); financial<br />

transfer to developing countries (Schelling, 2002); sector-based approach<br />

(Schmidt et al., 2006). Sectoral policies have been discussed above (see section<br />

2.2), SD PAMs are discussed in section 2.5.<br />

Regarding the proposal for a harmonized tax (Cooper 1998, 2001), all<br />

participating nations – both developed and developing countries – would tax<br />

their domestic carbon usage at a common rate, therefore achieving cost-<br />

effectiveness. There are several problems with this approach: developing<br />

countries could see this common tax as unfair, given the relative welfare and<br />

the relative responsibility; there are little incentives for participation;<br />

governments could change tax codes to neutralize its effects. In addition,<br />

although an equal marginal abatement cost across countries is economically<br />

efficient, it may no be politically feasible: countries that currently apply such<br />

Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingeniería ICAI <strong>Carmen</strong> <strong>Bunzl</strong> Boulet Junio 2008

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!