Climate Policy in the United States and Japan: Prospects in 2005 and Beyond, Workshop Summary

Resources for the Future and the Institute for Global Environmental Strategies convened a one and one-half day workshop on domestic and international climate policy May 11–12, 2005, in Tokyo, Japan. The first day included 49 participants hearing presentations from 13 speakers and discussing domestic activities, economics, and politics. The second day included a smaller group of participants listening to a panel of four experts and discussing opportunities for future international climate regimes. Participants included government officials from the Japanese Ministry of the Environment; the Japanese Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry; the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; the U.S. Department of State; and the Massachussetts Department of Commonwealth Development; representatives from business and environmental groups; and academic experts. Over the course of both days, it was clear that great opportunities exist for regularly informing experts from both countries on recent policy developments, economic analyses, and political nuances in the other country. For example, U.S. participants had an opportunity to learn the process through which Japanese technology standards are set and implemented, the subtle evolution of mandatory policy discussions, and details of current policies on voluntary trading and an emission registry. Japanese participants benefited from a frank discussion with U.S. experts of how and why it would be difficult to link different domestic emissions trading markets, the current process to establish a regional emissions trading program, and the evolving dynamics in the U.S. Senate. Looking forward, important lessons may be taken from past negotiating experiences. A small group of national leaders, including large emitters of greenhouse gases and major economies, addressing not only climate change but also developmental issues, could be a useful vehicle for meaningful international efforts. Such a small-group process should be carried out in parallel with the multilateral United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change process. In addition, policies in both the United States and Japan reflect a strong emphasis on technology development and commercialization; this may be an area where bilateral cooperation could be particularly beneficial.climate change, global warming, United States, Japan, Kyoto

Comparative Study of the Role of Institutions in Shaping Inventive Activity in Mid-Range Emerging Economies

The objective of this paper is to investigate the effects of institutions on national rates of inventive activity. Invention, part of the innovation process, is acknowledged as one of the driving forces behind economic growth, and patent statistics are frequently used as a measurable indicator of inventive output. Thus this paper explores the relationship between national patent statistics and measures of institutional quality. As a result of our research, the effect of the “threshold of inventive activity” was observed. This effect demonstrates that when countries reach a certain level of institutional development and attain a general institutional climate conducive to inventive activity, the number of patent applications begins to sharply increase. The paper contributes to the body of evidence that confirms that a combination of fundamental institutions like the rule of law or freedom of expression, which are not necessarily aimed at boosting innovation, create an overall environment conducive to patenting. We demonstrate that “mid-range emerging economies”,2 including those in Central and Eastern Europe3 (CEE), where the quality of institutions is lagging behind more developed counterparts and/or their influence is weak or sporadic, have not yet reached the threshold of inventive activity yet. However, those CEE countries that have acceded to the European Union first have made visible progress with respect to institutional quality and invention

Doing Biopolitics Differently? Radical Potential in the Post-2015 MDG and SDG Debates

Post print On institutional repository or subject-based repository after a 18 months embargo, withdraw

Global Governance and Human Development: Promoting Democratic Accountability and Institutional Experimentation

This paper seeks to critically examine recent debates on global governance, albeit from a human development perspective. In doing so it identifies and describes two important principles for building institutions for the advancing of human development: what may be termed the imperative of democratic accountability (most closely associated with the work of Amartya Sen) and the imperative of institutional experimentation (which has been theorized most extensively by Roberto Unger). The paper discusses these two principles in light of some of the major challenges that can and do affect the international community as a whole. It reviews some of the decentralized forms of governance which are evolving as developing countries assert themselves in debates on institutional organization. It then focuses more extensively on the global financial crisis as a case study in the inadequacies of current global governance. Finally, it uses the two imperatives mentioned to review the lessons that the crisis has provided, before describing specific proposals to redesign systems of global economic governance. Chief among these are the reforms advocated by the Commission of Experts of the President of the United Nations General Assembly on Reforms of the International Monetary and Financial System.Human Development, Economic Development, Inequality, Human Rights, Capabilities, Health, Governance

Democracy and Growth Reconsidered: Why Economic Performance of New Democracies is not Encouraging

There are two innovations as compared to the previous literature on democratization and growth. First, not only the level of democracy is taken into account, but also changes in this level in the 1970s-1990s as measured by the political rights indices of the Freedom House. Second, the distinction is made between the rule of law and democracy, the rule of law being defined as the ability to ensure order based on legal rules; it is measured by the rule of law, investors’ risk and corruption indices. It is found that democratization in countries with strong rule of law (liberal democracies) stimulates economic growth, whereas in countries with poor rule of law (illiberal democracies) democratization undermines growth. In illiberal democracies institutions are weaker, shadow economy is larger and macroeconomic policy is less prudent.Economic growth; democracy; rule of law

10-01 "Climate-Resilient Industrial Development Paths: Design Principles and Alternative Models"

Global climate change is here. According to recent scientific reports, the earth has warmed by nearly half a degree centigrade over the last twenty five years. Even with robust mitigation efforts, the global climate could warm by up to 4 degrees centigrade due to past emissions. Under a business-as-usual, high consumption fossil fuel-based development path, it could warm even more, resulting in catastrophic and life-threatening destruction of earth’s eco-systems. The “climate imperative”—the urgent need to both mitigate and adapt to global climate change—has important implications for economic development paths in general and industry and energy policies in particular. Development models and practice historically have treated climate—and indeed, the natural environment in general—as exogenous. Future development models will need to incorporate both climactic uncertainty and the economic threats and opportunities arising from an evolving global climate regime. Developing countries, which are especially vulnerable to climate instability, will need to design energy and industry policies which aim to achieve not only economic and social objectives but which also enhance climate resilience. This paper explores the broad contours of climate resilient industrial development paths. It defines development as an increase in local capacities for production and innovation and argues that the overarching goal of development is the generation of sustainable livelihoods. It suggests that. to be climate resilient, industry policies should have four key design features: 1) they are pro-active; 2) they promote industrial diversification; 3) they focus on mobilizing investment in environmentally sustainable industries and infrastructure, including low-carbon and renewable energy; 4) they are highly responsive to local geo-physical conditions and are based on principles of adaptive management; and 5) they are designed, implemented and governed via accountable partnerships involving government, business, and community actors. The paper evaluates three development macro-models—neo-liberal, sustainable globalization, and new developmental—against the five design principles and finds that aspects of both climate vulnerability and climate-resilience are embodied in each. The paper concludes that responding to the climate imperative will require not a new synthesized one-size-fits-all model but a multiplicity of economic development paths. The effort to articulate the theory and praxis of such paths has barely begun.

Infrastructure for sustainable development: the role of national development banks

This repository item contains a policy brief from the Boston University Global Economic Governance Initiative. The Global Economic Governance Initiative (GEGI) is a research program of the Center for Finance, Law & Policy, the Frederick S. Pardee Center for the Study of the Longer-Range Future, and the Frederick S. Pardee School of Global Studies. It was founded in 2008 to advance policy-relevant knowledge about governance for financial stability, human development, and the environment.Development banks are increasingly becoming relied upon to help finance sustainable infrastructure in the 21st century. Much of the emphasis has been on the role of the existing multi-lateral development banks (MDBs), but lesser attention has been paid to the role of national development banks (NDBs). To help fill this gap, Boston University’s Global Economic Governance initiative (GEGI) and the Brookings Institution’s Global Economy and Development program convened a Task Force on Development Banks and Sustainable Development to examine the extent to which development banks are becoming catalysts for achieving a climate friendly and more socially inclusive world economy

SOME REFLECTIONS ON CLIMATE CHANGE, GREEN GROWTH ILLUSIONS AND DEVELOPMENT SPACE

Many economists and policy makers advocate a fundamental shift towards “green growth” as the new, qualitatively-different growth paradigm, based on enhanced material/resource/energy efficiency and drastic changes in the energy mix. “Green growth” may work well in creating new growth impulses with reduced environmental load and facilitating related technological and structural change. But can it also mitigate climate change at the required scale (i.e. significant, absolute and permanent decline of GHG emissions at global level) and pace? This paper argues that growth, technological, population-expansion and governance constraints as well as some key systemic issues cast a very long shadow on the “green growth” hopes. One should not deceive oneself into believing that such evolutionary (and often reductionist) approach will be sufficient to cope with the complexities of climate change. It may rather give much false hope and excuses to do nothing really fundamental that can bring about a U-turn of global GHG emissions. The proponents of a resource efficiency revolution and a drastic change in the energy mix need to scrutinize the historical evidence, in particular the arithmetic of economic and population growth. Furthermore, they need to realize that the required transformation goes beyond innovation and structural changes to include democratization of the economy and cultural change. Climate change calls into question the global equality of opportunity for prosperity (i.e. ecological justice and development space) and is thus a huge developmental challenge for the South and a question of life and death for some developing countries (who increasingly resist the framing of climate protection versus equity).

Fisheries and Aquaculture and Their Potential Roles in Development: An Assessment of the Current Evidence

Commissioned by the International Sustainability Unity, this report investigates a number of innovative solutions that have been developed to deal with five key challenges that are impeding progress in achieving sustainable fisheries: overcapacity; perverse subsidies; poor governance; lack of data; and by-catch and discards. These key challenges are interlinked and affect the sustainability of fisheries both directly as well as indirectly by undermining instances of good management. Through 22 case studies demonstrating good practice, we explore how these challenges have been addressed around the world and how these approaches might be scaled up and applied in other fisheries. Each case study draws on published material and interviews with key people involved in the fishery. The main report draws lessons from these case studies