《巴黎协定》与“搭便车”

Q4 Economics, Econometrics and Finance Economics and Policy of Energy and the Environment Pub Date : 2017-08-01 DOI:10.3280/EFE2016-003003
C. Perthuis
{"title":"《巴黎协定》与“搭便车”","authors":"C. Perthuis","doi":"10.3280/EFE2016-003003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"With the announcement on 1 June 2017 of the withdrawal of the United States from the Paris Agreement, Donald Trump acted in accordance with his strategy of support for fossil energies. The withdrawal in no way facilitates the reorientation of federal energy policy, which will come up against many domestic barriers and economic laws. In the medium term, the risk is that through a contagion effect, other major fossil energy producers will turn away from the agreement, thereby increasing the number of free riders. On the other hand, this withdrawal could be the catalyst for renewed solidarity among the countries remaining in the agreement, leading variously to a rapid strengthening of monitoring and reporting rules, particularly in emerging countries; the extension of carbon pricing, promoted perhaps by a reinvigorated Europe determined to put an end to the disintegration of its CO2 trading system; and an increased financial effort to offset the likely drying up of US contributions. A paradox of history: this new American turnaround could possibly result in the correction of the weaknesses of an agreement based too exclusively on reliance on mutual trust and the goodwill of its parties.","PeriodicalId":38445,"journal":{"name":"Economics and Policy of Energy and the Environment","volume":"1 1","pages":"31-44"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Paris Agreement and the \\\"free rider\\\"\",\"authors\":\"C. Perthuis\",\"doi\":\"10.3280/EFE2016-003003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"With the announcement on 1 June 2017 of the withdrawal of the United States from the Paris Agreement, Donald Trump acted in accordance with his strategy of support for fossil energies. The withdrawal in no way facilitates the reorientation of federal energy policy, which will come up against many domestic barriers and economic laws. In the medium term, the risk is that through a contagion effect, other major fossil energy producers will turn away from the agreement, thereby increasing the number of free riders. On the other hand, this withdrawal could be the catalyst for renewed solidarity among the countries remaining in the agreement, leading variously to a rapid strengthening of monitoring and reporting rules, particularly in emerging countries; the extension of carbon pricing, promoted perhaps by a reinvigorated Europe determined to put an end to the disintegration of its CO2 trading system; and an increased financial effort to offset the likely drying up of US contributions. A paradox of history: this new American turnaround could possibly result in the correction of the weaknesses of an agreement based too exclusively on reliance on mutual trust and the goodwill of its parties.\",\"PeriodicalId\":38445,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Economics and Policy of Energy and the Environment\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"31-44\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Economics and Policy of Energy and the Environment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3280/EFE2016-003003\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Economics, Econometrics and Finance\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Economics and Policy of Energy and the Environment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3280/EFE2016-003003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Economics, Econometrics and Finance","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

随着2017年6月1日美国宣布退出《巴黎协定》,唐纳德·特朗普按照他支持化石能源的战略采取了行动。退出绝不能促进联邦能源政策的重新定位,这将遇到许多国内障碍和经济法律。从中期来看,风险在于,通过传染效应,其他主要化石能源生产国将退出该协议,从而增加搭便车者的数量。另一方面,这一退出可能促使仍留在协定内的国家重新团结一致,从而迅速加强监测和报告规则,特别是在新兴国家;延长碳定价,这或许是由重新焕发活力、决心终结其二氧化碳交易体系解体的欧洲推动的;以及加大财政努力,以抵消美国捐款可能枯竭的影响。历史的悖论:美国的这种新转变可能会纠正一项过于完全依赖于相互信任和各方善意的协议的弱点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Paris Agreement and the "free rider"
With the announcement on 1 June 2017 of the withdrawal of the United States from the Paris Agreement, Donald Trump acted in accordance with his strategy of support for fossil energies. The withdrawal in no way facilitates the reorientation of federal energy policy, which will come up against many domestic barriers and economic laws. In the medium term, the risk is that through a contagion effect, other major fossil energy producers will turn away from the agreement, thereby increasing the number of free riders. On the other hand, this withdrawal could be the catalyst for renewed solidarity among the countries remaining in the agreement, leading variously to a rapid strengthening of monitoring and reporting rules, particularly in emerging countries; the extension of carbon pricing, promoted perhaps by a reinvigorated Europe determined to put an end to the disintegration of its CO2 trading system; and an increased financial effort to offset the likely drying up of US contributions. A paradox of history: this new American turnaround could possibly result in the correction of the weaknesses of an agreement based too exclusively on reliance on mutual trust and the goodwill of its parties.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Economics and Policy of Energy and the Environment
Economics and Policy of Energy and the Environment Economics, Econometrics and Finance-Economics and Econometrics
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
期刊最新文献
An assessment of the Iberian Exception to control electricity prices Mapping the empirical relationship between environmental performance and social preferences: Evidence from macro data Public perception of residential solar energy in Minnesota's urban areas Strategy for the implementation of sustainable green fuels in Indonesia Is reuse always better than recycling? A critical analysis of the proposed European Regulation on Packaging and Packaging Waste and a debunking of its Impact Assessment study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1