Full Document

Full Document

FormatFile SizeNotes
PDF file 0.3 MB

Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.

Summary Only

FormatFile SizeNotes
PDF file 0.1 MB

Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.

Choosing a set of policy responses to mitigate greenhouse gases (GHGs) responsible for climate change is one of the great challenges that the United States faces in the coming years. Many policy options emphasize overall cost-effectiveness in reducing GHG emissions. In the search for options that are effective and politically feasible, however, other concerns have comparable importance. Mitigating GHGs in practice will require balancing cost-effectiveness and other objectives that reflect the institutional and political realities of passing major federal legislation with widespread impacts on U.S. producers and consumers. This paper develops a framework for evaluating GHG-mitigation policy in the United States that balances several criteria. It draws on conceptual analysis and examples from U.S. energy policy to motivate an evaluative framework that incorporates a range of views of what constitutes “good” policy. It should be of interest to stakeholders in the GHG policymaking process and especially to those responsible for crafting U.S. climate policy.

Table of Contents

  • Chapter One


  • Chapter Two

    Lessons from Previous Energy Policies: Three Examples

  • Chapter Three

    Normative Criteria for Evaluating GHG Policy Instruments

  • Chapter Four

    Illustrative Comparison of Nominal Policy Packages

  • Chapter Five

    Conclusions and Implications

This Occasional Paper results from the RAND Corporation's continuing program of self-initiated independent research. Support for such research is provided, in part, by the generosity of RAND's donors and by the fees earned on client-funded research.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation Occasional paper series. RAND occasional papers may include an informed perspective on a timely policy issue, a discussion of new research methodologies, essays, a paper presented at a conference, or a summary of work in progress. All RAND occasional papers undergo rigorous peer review to help ensure that they meet high standards for research quality and objectivity.

Permission is given to duplicate this electronic document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Copies may not be duplicated for commercial purposes. Unauthorized posting of RAND PDFs to a non-RAND Web site is prohibited. RAND PDFs are protected under copyright law. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit the RAND Permissions page.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.