About the Author
Robert N. Stavins is the Albert Pratt Professor of Business and Government, Director of the Harvard Environmental Economics Program, and Chairman of the Environment and Natural Resources Faculty Group.
Disclaimer
The views expressed are solely those of the author and do not imply endorsement by Harvard University, the Kennedy School of Government, or the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs. This blog is based in part on columns published by The Environmental Forum, published by the Environmental Law Institute.Important Links:
Email Updates
Categories
- Climate Change Policy
- Corporate Social Responsibility
- Economic Policy
- Economic Stimulus Policy
- Energy Economics
- Energy Policy
- Environmental Economics
- Environmental Policy
- Fisheries Policy
- Forest Policy
- Health Policy
- Natural Resource Economics
- Natural Resource Policy
- Politics
- Positive Political Economy
- Water Policy
- Wine Economics
Other Blogs:
- Dot Earth
- Economics Unbound
- Economist’s View
- Economix
- Environmental Economics
- Financial Times Blogs
- Grasping Reality with Both Hands (Brad DeLong)
- Greed, Green and Grains
- Green Inc.
- Greg Mankiw’s Blog
- Jeff Frankel’s Weblog
- Law & The Environment
- National Journal Online: Energy & Environment
- regulation2point0
- RGE Monitor
- The Business Desk
- The Energy Collective
- The Huffington Post
- Urbanomics
- Vox
Archives
Tag Archives: Clean Development Mechanism
The Promise and Problems of Pricing Carbon
Friday, October 21st was a significant day for climate change policy worldwide and for the use of market-based approaches to environmental protection, but it went largely unnoticed across the country and around the world, outside, that is, of the State … Continue reading
Posted in Climate Change Policy, Economic Policy, Energy Economics, Energy Policy, Environmental Economics, Environmental Policy, Politics, Positive Political Economy
Tagged AB 32, Alberta, Australia, British Columbia, California, California Air Resources Board, cap-and-trade, carbon taxes, Clean Development, Clean Development Mechanism, Clean Energy Standards, collateral damage, common property resources, cost-effectiveness, distributional equity, efficiency, emission reduction credits, environmental politics, EU ETS, European Union, externalities, fossil fuel subsidies, free rider problem, global climate policy, harmonized carbon taxes, Harvard Kennedy School, international carbon tax, international tradable permits, Japan, Joseph Aldy, Journal of Environment and Development, Kyoto Protocol, leaded gasoline, linkage, linkage of cap-and-trade systems, Maria Damon, market failure, market-based environmental policies, New York Review of Books, New Zealand, North American Climate Initiative, Obama Administration, offsets, Ontario, political polarization, public goods, Quebec, regulation, Resources for the Future, revenue-neutral taxes, sulfur dioxide, tarnishing of cap-and-trade, Thomas Sterner, U.S. House of Representatives, U.S. Senate, Waxman-Markey legislation, William Nordhaus
3 Comments
A Wave of the Future: International Linkage of National Climate Change Policies
The latest rage in Washington policy discussions these days (that’s relevant to climate change) is renewed interest in renewable electricity standards, this time in the form of so-called “clean energy standards.” I’ve written about this policy approach recently at this … Continue reading
Posted in Climate Change Policy, Energy Economics, Energy Policy, Environmental Economics, Environmental Policy, Positive Political Economy
Tagged Australia, California, cap-and-trade, China, Clean Development Mechanism, Clean Energy Standards, COP-15, Copenhagen Accord, cost-effectiveness, environmental politics, EPRI, European Union, global climate policy, IETA, India, Japan, Korea, linkage of cap-and-trade systems, market-based environmental policies, New Zealand, Obama Administration, regulation, renewable electricity standard, Renewable Portfolio Standard, revenue-neutral taxes, U.S. House of Representatives, U.S. Senate, Waxman-Markey legislation
4 Comments
