MARC Record from marc_columbia

LEADER: 04031cam a22003734a 4500
001 6666164
005 20221122044519.0
008 080221s2008 dcua b 001 0 eng
010 $a 2008007999
020 $a9780881324204 (alk. paper)
020 $a0881324205 (alk. paper)
035 $a(OCoLC)ocn212018674
035 $a(OCoLC)212018674
035 $a(NNC)6666164
035 $a6666164
040 $aDLC$cDLC$dYDX$dBTCTA$dBAKER$dYDXCP$dOrLoB-B
043 $an-us---
050 00 $aQC983$b.L48 2008
082 00 $a363.738/74526$222
245 00 $aLeveling the carbon playing field :$binternational competition and US climate policy design /$cTrevor Houser [and others].
260 $aWashington, DC :$bPeterson Institute for International Economics :$bWorld Resources Institute,$c2008.
300 $axxi, 95 pages :$billustrations ;$c23 cm
336 $atext$btxt$2rdacontent
337 $aunmediated$bn$2rdamedia
504 $aIncludes bibliographical references (p. 79-81) and index.
505 00 $g1.$tIntroduction: How Climate and Competitiveness Fit Together -- $tBackground -- $tIdentifying Vulnerable Industries -- $tA Broader View of Competitiveness? -- $tOptions for US Policy Design -- $g2.$tCost Containment Mechanisms -- $tPrice Caps -- $tBorrowing and Banking Allowances -- $tFree Allocation of Allowances -- $tTax Credits -- $tOffsets -- $tExemptions -- $tContaining Noncarbon Costs -- $g3.$tTrade Measures -- $tDesigning a Trade Measure -- $tScenarios for Implementation -- $tEffects on US Producers -- $tImplications for International Engagement -- $g4.$tCoordinated International Action -- $tProspects for International Engagement: The Case of China -- $tModels for Cooperation on Industrial Emissions -- $tNeed for US Leadership -- $tScope for International Agreement -- $g5.$tConclusion -- $tCost Containment Mechanisms -- $tTrade Measures -- $tCoordinated International Action -- $tLooking Forward.
520 1 $a"As the US Congress takes up domestic climate legislation and the administration reengages in multilateral climate negotiations, policymakers are particularly concerned about the effect of climate policy on US carbon-intensive manufacturing industries such as iron and steel, cement, paper, and chemicals. Many of these industries are already under pressure from foreign competition, particularly large emerging economies like China, India, and Brazil that are not bound to reduce emissions under the current international climate framework. US policymakers are looking for ways to avoid putting US industry at a competitive disadvantage lest a decline in industrial emissions at home is simply replaced by increases in emissions abroad. While this would be best achieved through harmonized international climate policy, the differences between countries in levels of economic development, historic emissions, and responsibilities arising from future emissions mean harmonization is still a long way off. How can we level the playing field for US carbon-intensive industries during a period of transition, where trading partners are moving at different speeds and adopting a variety of policies to reduce emissions? Can this be done in a way that does not threaten the prospects of broader international agreement down the road? This book evaluates a wide range of policy options, including trade measures on foreign-produced goods (currently included in draft US legislation and under consideration in the European Union)."--BOOK JACKET.
650 0 $aClimatic changes$xGovernment policy$zUnited States$xEvaluation.
650 0 $aGreenhouse gas mitigation$xGovernment policy$zUnited States.
650 0 $aClimatic changes$xGovernment policy$xInternational cooperation.
650 0 $aGreenhouse gas mitigation$xInternational cooperation.$0http://id.loc.gov/authorities/subjects/sh2009126097
650 0 $aCarbon taxes.$0http://id.loc.gov/authorities/subjects/sh92006715
700 1 $aHouser, Trevor.$0http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/n2008012388
852 00 $boff,bus$hQC983$i.L48 2008