scholarly journals Climate Change Policy and Carbon Trading Scheme and in Japan:Features and Lessons

2010 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 77-102
Author(s):  
이수철
2015 ◽  
Vol 55 (2) ◽  
pp. 418
Author(s):  
Tim Nelson

In the past decade, Australia’s approach to climate change policy has been erratic. Both major political parties announced support for a domestic emissions trading scheme (ETS) in 2007, but bipartisan agreement evaporated in 2009. An ETS was established in 2011, but was repealed in 2014. The Commonwealth Government has subsequently introduced a Direct Action climate change policy. There is absence of bipartisan agreement about the best long-term policy approach. This extended abstract provides some insights for future Australian climate change policy using the lessons provided from previous policies and international experience. Strategically, Australia would be well placed to consider how best to manage the risks associated with potential substitution of coal and gas in power generation globally, given the strategic importance of these export industries for Australia.


Subject China's climate change policy after US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement. Significance Beijing is seen as a potential global leader on climate change following US President Donald Trump’s June 2 announcement that Washington will pull out from Paris Agreement. China, the world’s largest greenhouse gas emitter, has already won applause simply by promising to honour existing commitment to the international climate accord. Impacts China prefers to aid developing countries through its South-South fund, so it is unlikely to contribute to the Green Climate Fund. Concerns over competitiveness, especially in export industries, will weaken the national carbon trading scheme due to launch this year. China will negotiate energy sector deals with the United States on economic criteria rather than environmental or climate impacts.


2010 ◽  
pp. 115-132 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Agibalov ◽  
A. Kokorin

Copenhagen summit results could be called a failure. This is the failure of UN climate change policy management, but definitely the first step to a new order as well. The article reviews main characteristics of climate policy paradigm shifts. Russian interests in climate change policy and main threats are analyzed. Successful development and implementation of energy savings and energy efficiency policy are necessary and would sufficiently help solving the global climate change problem.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guido Godínez-Zamora ◽  
Luis Victor-Gallardo ◽  
Jam Angulo-Paniagua ◽  
Eunice Ramos ◽  
Mark Howells ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ross Gittell ◽  
Josh Stillwagon

<p>This paper explores the influence of US state-level policies meant to address climate change on clean technology industry development. The largest influence of climate change policies is identified as being on energy research employment. Only some policies seem to contribute positively to clean tech employment while other policies appear to discourage employment growth. The magnitudes of the short term effects, even when statistically significant, are modest. Negative impacts on employment are identified for several mandate-oriented, so called command and control, policies including vehicle greenhouse gas standards, energy efficiency resource standards, and renewable portfolio standards with the former two having increasing negative effects over time. The findings suggest that climate change policy advocates should be careful to not assume that there will be positive clean tech employment benefits from state-level energy and environmental policies. Instead, the benefits from these policies may derive primarily from other considerations beyond the scope of this paper, including health and environmental benefits and reduction of dependence on foreign energy sources.</p>


AJIL Unbound ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 115 ◽  
pp. 80-85
Author(s):  
Daniel Bodansky

After four years of not simply inaction but significant retrogression in U.S. climate change policy, the Biden administration has its work cut out. As a start, it needs to undo what Trump did. The Biden administration took a step in that direction on Day 1 by rejoining the Paris Agreement. But simply restoring the pre-Trump status quo ante is not enough. The United States also needs to push for more ambitious global action. In part, this will require strengthening parties’ nationally determined contributions (NDCs) under the Paris Agreement; but it will also require actions by what Sue Biniaz, the former State Department climate change lawyer, likes to call the Greater Metropolitan Paris Agreement—that is, the array of other international actors that help advance the Paris Agreement's goals, including global institutions such as the International Maritime Organization (IMO), the Montreal Protocol, and the World Bank, as well as regional organizations and non-state actors. Although the Biden administration can pursue some of these international initiatives directly through executive action, new regulatory initiatives will face an uncertain fate in the Supreme Court. So how much the Biden Administration is able to achieve will likely depend significantly on how much a nearly evenly-divided Congress is willing to support.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marlene Kammerer ◽  
Paul M. Wagner ◽  
Antti Gronow ◽  
Tuomas Ylä‐Anttila ◽  
Dana R. Fisher ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document