Shutting Down the Fog Machine

Abstract

The RRPE article, “Left Clouds Over Climate Policy Change” (Hahnel 2012a: 83-89), includes stringent and radical proposals to solve two additionality problems in project-level carbon offsets. Its failure suggests carbon offsets are irreparably broken. National penalties for non-additionality, intended to shift regulatory incentives, fail to solve the principal/agent problems addressed. Modifying standards for emission cap measurements in order to solve additionality problems in land use change and forestry (LUCF) overlooks technical obstacles and political consequences.

Keywords

carbon markets clean development mechanism offsets climate crisis climate justice carbon capture and storage sequestration

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abdellaoui

Bleichrodt

Kammoun

2013. Do financial professionals behave according to prospect theory? An experimental study. Theory & Decision 74 (3): 411-429.

Alam

Tang

K. B.

2012. Risk-taking behaviour of Islamic banks: Application of prospect theory. Qualitative Research in Financial Markets 4 (2/3): 156-64.

Alexeew

Bergset

Meyer

Petersen

Schneider

Unger

2010. An analysis of the relationship between the additionality of CDM projects and their contribution to sustainable development. International Environmental Agreements 10 (3): 233-248.

Bone

Hey

Suckling

1999. Are groups more (or less) consistent than individuals? Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 18 (1): 63-81.

Cames

Anger

Böhringer

Harthan

Schneider

2007. Long-term prospects of CDM and JI. Dessau, Germany: The Federal Ministry of the Environment, Nature Conservation, and Nuclear Safety. http://www.umweltdaten.de/publikationen/fpdf-l/3294.pdf.

Carbon Retirement. 2009. The efficiency of carbon offsetting through the CDM. London: Carbon Retirement. http://www.carbonretirement.com/sites/default/files/The%20efficiency%20of%20offsetting%20with%20CDM%20credits.pdf. Accessed 16/Feb/2012.

Chih

H.-L.

Shen

C.-H.

2005. Investor protection, prospect theory, and earnings management: An international comparison of the banking industry. Journal of Banking & Finance 29 (10): 2,675-697.

Chomitz

Akhmetova

Hutton

Demberel

Pinglo

M. E.

Shaliz

Gray

Taylor-Dormond

Wallich

Tenev

Thomas

Chikkatur

Kelly

Salvemini

Liebenthal

Ligot

Mason

Meisner

Nelson

Ozen

Rossi

Schenck

Schneider

Shalizi

Fall

C. M.

Wolf

Zhang

Fan

Zhou

Fuqiu

. 2010. Phase II: The challenge of low-carbon development—Climate change and the World Bank Group. Washington, DC: The World Bank. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTCCPHASEII/Resources/cc2_full_eval.pdf

Environmental Protection Agency. 2013. Inventory of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions and sinks: 1990-1911. Washington, DC: The Environmental Protection Agency. http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/Downloads/ghgemissions/US-GHG-Inventory-2013-Main-Text.pdf

10.

European Commission. 2011. Europa press release: Emissions trading: Commission welcomes vote to ban certain industrial gas credits. Brussels: European Union. http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-11-56_en.htm. Accessed 16/Feb/2013.

11.

Fielding

2010. Chinese renewable firms vent anger at UN over CDM rejections. Business Green 6 Aug. http://www.businessgreen.com/bg/news/1804572/chinese-renewable-firms-vent-anger-un-cdm-rejections. Accessed 16/Jan/2012.

12.

Fiegenbaum

1990. Prospect theory and the risk-return association: An empirical examination in 85 industries. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 14 (2): 187-203.

13.

Gill

Prowse

2012. A structural analysis of disappointment aversion in a real effort competition. American Economic Review 102 (1): 469-503.

14.

Gurevich

Kliger

Levy

2009. Decision-making under uncertainty: A field study of cumulative prospect theory. Journal of Banking and Finance 33 (7): 1,221-229.

15.

Hahnel

2012a. Left clouds over climate change policy. Review of Radical Political Economics 44 (2): 141-159.

16.

Hansen

M. C.

Stehman

S. V.

Potapov

P. V.

2010. Quantification of global gross forest cover loss. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 107 (19): 8,650-55.

17.

Hahnel

2012b. Desperately seeking left unity on international climate policy. Capitalism Nature Socialism 23 (4): 83-89.

18.

Johnson

H. J.

1994. Prospect theory in the commercial banking industry. Journal of Financial and Strategic Decisions 7 (1): 73-89.

19.

Kahneman

Tversky

1984. Choices, values, and frames. American Psychologist 39 (4): 341-350.

20.

Kliger

Levy

2009. Theories of choice under risk: Insights from financial markets. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 71 (2): 330-46.

21.

Kühberger

1998. The influence of framing on risky decisions: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 75 (1): 23-55.

22.

Pearce

2010. Carbon trading tempts firms to make greenhouse gas. New Scientist Dec. 16. http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19878-carbon-trading-tempts-firms-to-make-greenhouse-gas.html. Accessed 16/Jan/2013.

23.

Roht-Arriaza

2010. “First, do no harm”: Human rights and efforts to combat climate change. Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law: Symposium: International Human Rights and Climate Change 38 (3): 593-610.

24.

Ruthner

Johnson

Chatterjee

Lazarus

Fujiwara

Egenhofer

du Monceau

Brohe

2011. Study on the integrity of the clean development mechanism (CDM). Brussels: European Commission, DG Clima. http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/ets/linking/docs/final_report_en.pdf

25.

Schneider

2011. Perverse incentives under the CDM: An evaluation of HFC-23 destruction projects. Climate Policy 11 (2): 851-864.

26.

Szabo

Twidale

2013. Zombie CO2 projects on the rise as CDM hits 7,000. Point Carbon. http://www.pointcarbon.com/news/1.2453540?date=20130709&sdtc=1. Accessed July 12, 2013.

27.

UNEP. 2013. UNEP Risoe CDM/JI pipeline analysis and database: CDM project types. United Nations Environment Programme RIS0 Centre. http://www.cdmpipeline.org/cdm-projects-type.htm. Accessed Jan. 13, 2013.

28.

United States Consulate–Mumbai. 2008. Carbon credits sufficient but not necessary for sustaining clean energy projects of major Indian business groups. Mumbai, India: United States Consulate. http://wikileaks.org/cable/2008/07/08MUMBAI340.html.

29.

United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 2012. Future of America’s forest and rangelands: Forest Service 2010 Resources Planning Act assessment. Washington, DC: USDA.

30.

Whyte

1993. Escalating commitment in individual and group decision making: A prospect theory approach. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 4 (3): 430-55.

31.

World Bank. 2013. World development indicators: GHG net emissions/removals by LUCF (Mt of CO2 equivalent). World databank. Washington, DC: The World Bank. http://databank.worldbank.org/data/views/reports/tableview.aspx. Accessed July10, 2013.

32.

Barberis

N. C.

2013. Thirty years of prospect theory in economics: A review and assessment. Journal of Economic Perspectives 27 (1): 173-96. (Note this is an excellent survey article. Its reference list serves as a good bibliography on economic aspects of the subject.)

33.

Berejikian

2004. International relations under risk: Framing state choice. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

34.

Elms

D. K.

2008. New directions for IPE: Drawing from behavioral economics. International Studies Review 10 (2): 239-65.

35.

Farnham

1992. Roosevelt and the Munich crisis: Insights from prospect theory. Political Psychology 13 (2): 205-35.

36.

Farnham

, ed. 1995. Avoiding losses/taking risks: Prospect theory and international conflict. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. (Its age does not prevent this book from being a good survey of prospect theory in international politics.)

37.

Frank

R. H.

1997. The frame of reference as a public good. The Economic Journal 107 (445): 1,832-1,847.

38.

Jervis

2004. The implications of prospect theory for human nature and values. Political Psychology 25 (2): 163-76.

39.

Kahneman

Tversky

1979. Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47 (2).

40.

Levy

1994. Prospect theory, rational choice, and international relations. International Studies Quarterly 41 (3): 87-112.

41.

McDermott

2001. Risk-taking in international politics: Prospect theory in American foreign policy. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

42.

McInerney

1992. Prospect theory and Soviet policy towards Syria, 1966-1967. Political Psychology 13 (2): 265-82.