Publications by Year: 2016

2016
Stavins, Robert N.What Does Trump’s Victory Mean for Climate Change Policy?PBS NewsHour, 2016. Publisher's Version

D-147

Stavins, Robert N.Goodbye to the Climate.” The New York Times, 2016, sec. Op-Ed. Publisher's VersionAbstract

If Trump lives up to his campaign rhetoric, the country’s efforts to reverse climate change will themselves be reversed....

D-146

Goulder, Lawrence H., and Robert N. Stavins. “New Emissions Targets Make Cap and Trade the Best Low-Cost, Market-Based Approach.” The Sacramento Bee, 2016. Publisher's Version

D-145

Stavins, Robert N.A Key Challenge for Sustained Success of the Paris Agreement.” The Environmental Forum 33, no. 6 (2016): 15. column_75.pdf

D-144

Stavins, Robert N.Cap-and-Trade: How California Can Lead on Climate Policy.” The Environmental Forum 33, no. 5 (2016): 15. column_74.pdf

D-143

Stavins, Robert N.The Ever-Evolving Interrelationship Between GDP and Carbon Dioxide.” The Environmental Forum 33, no. 4 (2016): 17. column_73.pdf

D-142

Stavins, Robert N.The Paris Agreement Lays a Good Foundation for Climate Progress.” The Environmental Forum 33, no. 3 (2016): 13. column_72.pdf

D-141

Stavins, Robert N.The Paris Agreement – A Good Foundation for Meaningful Progress.” Green Fiscal Policy Network Newsletter, no. 4 (2016): 1–4. Publisher's Version

D-140

Stavins, Robert N.State’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard Doesn’t Cut Net Emissions.” Capitol Weekly (2016). Publisher's Version

D-139

Stavins, Robert N.Trade Talks Can Follow Path of Paris Climate Change Agreement.” The Environmental Forum 33 (2016): 15. column_71.pdf

D-138

Chan, Gabriel, Carlo Carraro, Ottmar Edenhofer, Charles Kolstad, and Robert Stavins. “Reforming the IPCC’s Assessment of Climate Change Economics.” Climate Change Economics 7 (2016). Publisher's VersionAbstract

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is broadly viewed as the world’s most legitimate scientific assessment body that periodically assesses the economics of climate change (among many other topics) for policy audiences. However, growing procedural inefficiencies and limitations to substantive coverage have made the IPCC an increasingly unattractive forum for the most qualified climate economists. Drawing on our observations and personal experience working on the most recent IPCC report, published last year, we propose four reforms to the IPCC’s process that we believe will lower the cost for volunteering as an IPCC author: improving interactions between governments and academics, making IPCC operations more efficient, clarifying and strengthening conflict of interest rules, and expanding outreach. We also propose three reforms to the IPCC’s substantive coverage to clarify the IPCC’s role and to make participation as an author more intellectually rewarding: complementing the IPCC with other initiatives, improving the integration of economics with other disciplines, and providing complete data for policymakers to make decisions. Despite the distinct characteristics of the IPCC that create challenges for authors unlike those in any other review body, we continue to believe in the importance of the IPCC for providing the most visible line of public communication between the scholarly community and policymakers.

chan_et_al_reforming_the_ipcc.pdf

A-86

Stavins, Robert N.Are the Pope’s Critiques of Markets on Point or Somewhat Misguided?The Environmental Forum 33 (2016): 15. column_70.pdf

D-133