Do the Military and Development Mix?
Commentary
Measuring economic development in Afghanistan by the same yardstick as a Pentagon mission is a recipe for disaster.
Commentary
Measuring economic development in Afghanistan by the same yardstick as a Pentagon mission is a recipe for disaster.
World Beat
Hope isn't lost for those who believe that art can transform our world
Commentary
Activists, both in and out of Honduras, continue to work for justice.
Op-Ed
The UN donors' conference is an opportunity to help Haitians rebuild in a manner that respects their humanity and enables them to become more productive.
The debate in the United States on global climate change is shifting from whether to do something about the problem to what to do. The conventional wisdom focuses on "cap and trade," also known as tradable emissions permits. The Kyoto protocol, for instance, has instituted a cap-and-trade system for greenhouse gases (GHGs).
But this conventional focus on cap and trade is inhibiting progress on combating global warming. It is extremely difficult to figure out the economic and environmental effects of an economy-wide cap-and-trade system for GHGs. To avoid negative economic impact, most such cap-and-trade proposals are extremely modest and thus would likely accomplish very little. Also, cap and trade would not work well on a global basis.
A more viable strategy relies on performance standards for new sources of GHG emissions. These standards would strictly regulate the pollutants from direct sources of emissions such as power plants and autos. They would also mandate greater efficiency for new capital such as appliances and buildings that rely on fossil fuel combustion for the generation of electricity, heating, and cooling.
The United States should take the first steps by:
For the full article, go to A New Standard for Preventing Global Warming.
Hoff Stauffer, "Global Warming: A Viable Strategy" (Washington, DC: Foreign Policy In Focus, October 4, 2006)