The aversion to direct cost imposition : selecting climate policy tools in the United States
By: RABE, Barry G
.
Material type: 
ArticlePublisher: Malden : Wiley-Blackwell, oct. 2010Subject(s): Aquecimento Global | Política Ambiental | Meio Ambiente | Poluição | Política Externa | Estados UnidosGovernance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions 23, 4, p. 583-608Abstract: Numerous policy tools could be employed in attempting to mitigate climate change through reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Direct cost imposition through the taxation of carbon content of fossil fuels has long enjoyed support from diverse policy analysts but has proven highly difficult to advance politically in the United States and many other nations. This article considers the evolving American experience in climate policy tool selection, including extended engagement by many states over the past decade and growing federal involvement in recent Congresses. It demonstrates the enduring aversion to direct cost imposition as opposed to other policy options. This includes a brief period in late 2008 and early 2009 when prospects for direct cost imposition heightened markedly at the federal level but collapsed quickly in favor of a mélange of other approaches that are likely to be less efficient but also less direct in their imposition of costs. The article concludes with considerations of other methods to advance direct cost imposition in the American case
Numerous policy tools could be employed in attempting to mitigate climate change through reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Direct cost imposition through the taxation of carbon content of fossil fuels has long enjoyed support from diverse policy analysts but has proven highly difficult to advance politically in the United States and many other nations. This article considers the evolving American experience in climate policy tool selection, including extended engagement by many states over the past decade and growing federal involvement in recent Congresses. It demonstrates the enduring aversion to direct cost imposition as opposed to other policy options. This includes a brief period in late 2008 and early 2009 when prospects for direct cost imposition heightened markedly at the federal level but collapsed quickly in favor of a mélange of other approaches that are likely to be less efficient but also less direct in their imposition of costs. The article concludes with considerations of other methods to advance direct cost imposition in the American case
Click on an image to view it in the image viewer
There are no comments for this item.