11 Items

Discussion Paper - Harvard Project on Climate Agreements

International Cooperation to Reduce Methane Emissions

| November 2022

In recognition of the urgency of reducing methane emissions, several voluntary international multiparty agreements and initiatives have recently been concluded to accelerate collective action and establish formal mechanisms for monitoring the implementation of methane-related commitments. While these initiatives reflect ambition on the part of public, private, and civil society actors with regard to methane, the implementation of these initiatives presents challenges for governments, emitting sectors, and other parties.

Report - Harvard Project on Climate Agreements

Subnational Climate Change Policy in China

| February 2020

This volume of briefs examines subnational climate-change policy in China — including how Chinese provinces and municipalities work with the central government to implement policy. The volume focuses to a considerable degree on how China’s subnational (pilot) emissions-trading systems can inform the emerging national carbon-pricing system.

Report - Harvard Project on Climate Agreements

Governance of the Deployment of Solar Geoengineering

The Harvard Project on Climate Agreements has released a volume of 26 briefs that explores a range of topics related to how we might govern the deployment of solar geoengineering.

Report Chapter - Asia Society Policy Institute

The Paris Agreement's Article 6 and Cooperation in Northeast Asia to Address Climate Change

| July 2018

This chapter explores how Article 6 of the Paris Agreement may support international cooperation to address climate change, with particular reference to Northeast Asia. The chapter focuses especially on Article 6.2, which provides the opportunity for countries to apply emissions reductions from other jurisdictions to the attainment of their own nationally determined contributions.

Paper - Harvard Project on Climate Agreements

Bilateral Cooperation between China and the United States: Facilitating Progress on Climate-Change Policy

| February 2016

The Harvard Project has released a paper on China-U.S. cooperation on climate-change policy—jointly authored with researchers at China's National Center for Climate Change Strategy and International Cooperation.

Discussion Paper - Harvard Project on Climate Agreements, Belfer Center

An Assessment of the Energy-Efficiency Gap and its Implications for Climate-Change Policy

| November 2014

Improving end-use energy efficiency—that is, the energy-efficiency of individuals, households, and firms as they consume energy—is often cited as an important element in efforts to reduce greenhouse-gas (GHG) emissions. Arguments for improving energy efficiency usually rely on the idea that energy-efficient technologies will save end users money over time and thereby provide low-cost or no-cost options for reducing GHG emissions. However, some research suggests that energy-efficient technologies appear not to be adopted by consumers and businesses to the degree that would seem justified, even on a purely financial basis.

May 24, 2006: Brooktrout Lake near Speculator, N.Y. in the Adirondacks. Brooktrout Lake was once a "dead" lake devastated by acid rain and is now a symbol of nature's ability to heal itself once pollutants are curbed.

AP Photo

Report - Harvard Environmental Economics Program

The SO2 Allowance Trading System and the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990: Reflections on Twenty Years of Policy Innovation

| January 2012

The introduction of the U.S. SO2 allowance-trading program to address the threat of acid rain as part of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 is a landmark event in the history of environmental regulation. The program was a great success by almost all measures. Ironically, cap and trade seems especially well suited to addressing the problem of climate change, in that emitted greenhouse gases are evenly distributed throughout the world's atmosphere. Recent hostility toward cap and trade in debates about U.S. climate legislation may reflect the broader political environment of the climate debate more than the substantive merits of market-based regulation.