Evaluating Options for U.S. Greenhouse-Gas Mitigation Using Multiple Criteria

Nicholas E. Burger, Liisa Ecola, Thomas Light, Michael Toman

Expert InsightsPublished Apr 3, 2009

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.

Topics

Document Details

  • Availability: Web-Only
  • Year: 2009
  • Pages: 52
  • Document Number: OP-252-RC

Citation

Chicago Manual of Style

Burger, Nicholas E., Liisa Ecola, Thomas Light, and Michael Toman, Evaluating Options for U.S. Greenhouse-Gas Mitigation Using Multiple Criteria. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2009. https://www.rand.org/pubs/occasional_papers/OP252.html.
BibTeX RIS

This publication is part of the RAND occasional paper series. RAND occasional papers were products of RAND from 2003 to 2013 that included informed perspectives on a timely policy issue, discussions of new research methodologies, essays, papers presented at a conference, and summaries of work in progress.

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.

RAND 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.