08.11.2014 Views

Innovations, Energy for Change, Fall 2009.pdf - Renewable and ...

Innovations, Energy for Change, Fall 2009.pdf - Renewable and ...

Innovations, Energy for Change, Fall 2009.pdf - Renewable and ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

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

Thomas C. Schelling<br />

International Coordination to<br />

Address the Climate Challenge<br />

Climate change is real, but its future is marked with uncertainties. We cannot predict<br />

the kinds of societies that will be faced with the most severe impacts of climate<br />

change fifty years or a century from now: What sort of lives will people lead? What<br />

kinds of technologies will they use?<br />

Still, we do know some things about the future effects of climate change, <strong>and</strong><br />

with high confidence. Above all, we know that “developing” countries will experience<br />

the greatest impacts from climate change. (I put “developing” in quotes<br />

because many of the places to which this term refers are, in fact, not developing:<br />

today they are, regrettably, simply poor.) For the countries most vulnerable to climate<br />

change, the most reliable defense lies in economic development itself. The<br />

advanced industrial countries that have been primarily responsible <strong>for</strong> bringing<br />

about climate change will most likely not experience its most severe impacts. They<br />

have a responsibility to assist both poor <strong>and</strong> genuinely developing countries to find<br />

a path of development that does not exacerbate global harm. More urgent, it is<br />

unlikely that China, India, Brazil, Indonesia, <strong>and</strong> other large emitters of greenhouse<br />

gases can be induced to participate in massive changes in energy supply <strong>and</strong><br />

use without substantial assistance from the countries that can af<strong>for</strong>d to assist.<br />

Bilateral aid is probably not the right approach <strong>for</strong> mobilizing such aid <strong>and</strong><br />

directing it toward the most promising investments. For example, a bilateral relation<br />

between China <strong>and</strong> the United States to help finance Chinese energy improvements<br />

would probably get tangled in other issues like Taiwan, North Korea, civil<br />

rights, exchange rates <strong>and</strong> trade policy. Institutions that isolate energy <strong>and</strong> climate<br />

from other politics will certainly be preferred.<br />

Thomas Schelling is the Lucius N. Littauer Professor of Political Economy, emeritus,<br />

at Harvard University <strong>and</strong> a Distinguished University Professor, emeritus, at the<br />

University of Maryl<strong>and</strong>. From 1948 to 1953 he worked in Europe <strong>and</strong> with the<br />

Executive Office of the President in support of the Marshall Plan in Europe. During<br />

the Carter administration he was selected to chair a committee of the National<br />

Academy of Sciences on global warming. In 2005 he received the Nobel Prize in economics,<br />

shared with Robert Aumann, <strong>for</strong> “having enhanced our underst<strong>and</strong>ing of conflict<br />

<strong>and</strong> cooperation through game-theory analysis.”<br />

© 2009 Thomas C. Schelling<br />

innovations / fall 2009 13

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!