Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of figures
- List of tables
- List of contributors
- Foreword
- 1 Introduction: International policy architecture for global climate change
- Part I Targets and timetables
- Part II Harmonized domestic actions
- Part III Coordinated and unilateral policies
- Part IV Synthesis and conclusion
- 8 Epilogue: Architectures for agreement
- 9 Architectures for an international global climate change agreement: lessons for the policy community
- Glossary and abbreviations
- Index
8 - Epilogue: Architectures for agreement
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 June 2012
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of figures
- List of tables
- List of contributors
- Foreword
- 1 Introduction: International policy architecture for global climate change
- Part I Targets and timetables
- Part II Harmonized domestic actions
- Part III Coordinated and unilateral policies
- Part IV Synthesis and conclusion
- 8 Epilogue: Architectures for agreement
- 9 Architectures for an international global climate change agreement: lessons for the policy community
- Glossary and abbreviations
- Index
Summary
The participants took the title seriously – “architecture.” Most authors are architects, some are architectural critics. The architects are of two kinds – two philosophies, two methodologies, two approaches to international institutions. One kind – the “true” architects – design complete integral systems, whole systems, leaving nothing out. They need no supplementary structures.
By “whole systems” I mean structures to cover all gases, all nations, all industries, all uses, and institutions that endogenize all incentives. The residual role of government is to enforce the rules; and the rules specify emission quotas and markets for purchase and sale of unused quotas. All the parts hang together. They are intellectually satisfying; they leave nothing out. There is a potential vulnerability here: if part of the system fails the rest may fail with it. But it all fits together economically and even aesthetically.
The second “architectural” approach, which I would not characterize as architecture but the authors do and I yield to their terminology, provides a set of substantially independent principles. The principles fit together with some completeness, but what I find to be their most attractive character is that the individual principles can stand alone, they have “separability”; if one fails it doesn't collapse a structure. The argument for each principle – the virtue of each principle – is independent of the arguments for the others.
Most of the complete architectures – the holistic, integral architectures – are dual, a domestic regime and an international. But the two display identical principles.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Architectures for AgreementAddressing Global Climate Change in the Post-Kyoto World, pp. 343 - 349Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2007
- 2
- Cited by