David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Among climate scientists, there is no longer any serious debate about whether greenhouse gas emissions from human activity are altering the earth's climate. There is also a broad consensus on two issues related to reducing emissions. First, developing countries must be full participants in global emissions control, because they will be most heavily impacted by global warming, and because they are rapidly approaching parity with developed countries in the scale of their emissions. Second, efficient emissions control will require carbon pricing via market-based instruments (charges or cap-and-trade). These points of consensus are sufficient to establish a clear way forward, despite continued disagreements over the choice of specific instrument and the appropriate carbon charge level. Since all market-based systems that regulate emissions sources require the same emissions information, the international community should immediately establish an institution mandated to collect, verify and publicly disclose information about emissions from all significant global carbon sources. Its mandate should extend to best-practice estimation and disclosure of emissions sources in countries that initially refuse to participate. This institution will serve four purposes. First, it will lay the necessary foundation for implementing any market-based system of emissions source regulation. Second, it will provide an excellent credibility test, since a country's acceptance of full disclosure will signal its true willingness to participate in globally-efficient emissions reduction. Third, global public disclosure will itself reduce carbon emissions, by focusing stakeholder pressure on major emitters and providing reputational rewards for clean producers. Fourth, disclosure will make it very hard to cheat once market-based instruments are implemented. This will be essential for preserving the credibility of an international agreement to reduce emissions.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Kristin Sharon Shrader-Frechette (2009). Data Trimming, Nuclear Emissions, and Climate Change. Science and Engineering Ethics 15 (1):19-23.
Lauren Hartzell (2011). Responsibility for Emissions: A Commentary on John Nolt's 'How Harmful Are the Average American's Greenhouse Gas Emissions?'. Ethics, Policy and Environment 14 (1):15-17.
Jeremy Galbreath (2011). To What Extent is Business Responding to Climate Change? Evidence From a Global Wine Producer. Journal of Business Ethics 104 (3):421-432.
Edna Sussman, Energy Charter Treaty's Investor Protection Provisions: Potential to Foster Solutions to Global Warming and Promote Sustainable Development.
Robyn Eckersley (2010). The Politics of Carbon Leakage and the Fairness of Border Measures. Ethics and International Affairs 24 (4):367-393.
Simon Caney & Cameron Hepburn (2011). Carbon Trading: Unethical, Unjust and Ineffective? Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 69:201-234.
Stephen J. DeCanio (1992). Carbon Rights and Economic Development. Critical Review 6 (2-3):389-410.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads2 ( #258,346 of 1,089,063 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #69,801 of 1,089,063 )
How can I increase my downloads?