The political roots of divergence in carbon market design: implications for linking

References

• Bailey, I., & Inderberg, T. J. (2018). Domestic politics, diffusion and emissions trading as a technical and political project. In J. Wettestad, & L. H. Gulbrandsen (Eds.), The evolution of carbon markets: Design and diffusion (pp. 124–144). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Bang, G., Victor, D. G., & Andresen, S. (2018). California’s cap and trade programme: The role of diffusion. In J. Wettestad, & L. H. Gulbrandsen (Eds.), The evolution of carbon markets: Design and diffusion (pp. 67–87). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Barrett, S., & Stavins, R. N. (2003). Increasing participation and compliance in international climate change agreements. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 3(4), 349–376. doi: 10.1023/B:INEA.0000005767.67689.28
   Google Scholar
• Bodansky, D., Hoedl, S., Metcalf, G., & Stavins, R. N. (2016). Facilitating linkage of climate policies through the Paris outcome. Climate Policy, 16(8), 956–972. doi: 10.1080/14693062.2015.1069175
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Börzel, T. A., & Risse, T. (2012). From Europeanisation to diffusion: Introduction. West European Politics, 35, 1–19. doi: 10.1080/01402382.2012.631310
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burtraw, D., Palmer, K., Munnings, C., Weber, P., & Woerman, M. (2013). Linking by degrees: Incremental alignment of cap-and-trade markets. (RFF Discussion Paper 13-04). Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.
   Google Scholar
• Büthe, T., & Mattli, W. (2011). The new global rulers: The privatization of regulation in the world economy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cullenward, D. (2014). How California’s carbon market actually works. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 70(5), 35–44. doi: 10.1177/0096340214546834
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cullenward, D. (2015). The limits of administrative law as regulatory oversight in linked carbon markets. UCLA Journal of Environmental Law & Policy, 34, 1–41.
   Google Scholar
• Downs, G. W., & Rocke, D. M. (1990). Tacit bargaining, arms races, and arms control. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
   Google Scholar
• Duan, M., Qi, S., & Wu, L. (2018). Designing China’s national carbon emissions trading system in a transitional period. Climate Policy, 18(sup1), 1–6. doi: 10.1080/14693062.2018.1477288
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elkins, Z., & Simmons, B. (2005). On waves, clusters and diffusion: A conceptual framework. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 598, 33–51. doi: 10.1177/0002716204272516
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flachsland, C., Edenhofer, O., Jakob, M., & Steckel, J. (2008). Developing the international carbon market. Linking options for the EU ETS. Potsdam: Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research.
   Google Scholar
• Flachsland, C., Marschinski, R., & Edenhofer, O. (2009a). Global trading versus linking: Architectures for international emissions trading. Energy Policy, 37, 1637–1647. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2008.12.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flachsland, C., Marschinski, R., & Edenhofer, O. (2009b). To link or not to link: Benefits and disadvantages of linking cap-and-trade systems. Climate Policy, 9(4), 358–372. doi: 10.3763/cpol.2009.0626
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilardi, F. (2013). Transnational diffusion: Norms, ideas, and policies. In W. Carlsnaes, T. Risse, & B. A. Simmons (Eds.), Handbook of international relations (pp. 453–477). London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Goulder, L. H., & Morgenstern, R. D. (2018). China’s rate-based approach to reducing CO2 emissions: Attractions, limitations and alternatives. American Economic Association (AEA) Papers and Proceedings, 108, 458–462.
   Google Scholar
• Goulder, L. H., & Schein, A. R. (2013). Carbon taxes versus cap and trade: A critical review. Climate Change Economics, 4(3), doi: 10.1142/S2010007813500103
   Google Scholar
• Green, J. (2017). Don’t link carbon markets. Nature, 543(23 March), 484–486. doi: 10.1038/543484a
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Green, J., Sterner, T., & Wagner, G. (2014). A balance of bottom-up and top-down in linking climate policies. Nature Climate Change, 4(4), 1064–1067. doi: 10.1038/nclimate2429
   Google Scholar
• Gulbrandsen, L. H., Underdal, A., Victor, D. G., & Wettestad, J. (2018). Theory and method. In J. Wettestad, & L. H. Gulbrandsen (Eds.), The evolution of carbon markets: Design and diffusion (pp. 13–29). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Haites, E. (2018). Carbon taxes and greenhouse gas emissions trading systems: What have we learned? Climate Policy, 18(8), 955–966. doi: 10.1080/14693062.2018.1492897
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hawkins, S., & Jegou, I. (2014). Linking emissions trading schemes – considerations and recommendations for a joint EU-Korean carbon market (ICTSD Issue Paper No.3, 2014).
   Google Scholar
• Holzinger, K., Knill, C., & Sommerer, T. (2008). Environmental policy convergence? The impact of international harmonization transnational communication, and regulatory competition. International Organization, 62, 553–587. doi: 10.1017/S002081830808020X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Inderberg, T. J., Bailey, I., & Harmer, N. (2018). Adopting and designing New Zealand’s emissions trading scheme. In J. Wettestad, & L. H. Gulbrandsen (Eds.), The evolution of carbon markets: Design and diffusion (pp. 105–123). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Jaffe, J., Ranson, M., & Stavins, R. N. (2009). Linking tradable permit systems: A key element of emerging international climate policy architecture. Ecology Law Quarterly, 36(4), 789–808.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jaffe, J., & Stavins, R. N. (2008). Linkage of tradable permit systems in international climate policy architecture. Faculty Research Working Papers Series. Cambridge, MA: John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University.
   Google Scholar
• Jevnaker, T., & Wettestad, J. (2016). Linked carbon markets: Silver bullet or castle in the air? Climate Law, 6(1–2), 142–151. doi: 10.1163/18786561-00601010
   Google Scholar
• Jevnaker, T., & Wettestad, J. (2017). Ratcheting up carbon trade: The politics of reforming EU emissions trading. Global Environmental Politics, 17, 105–124. doi: 10.1162/GLEP_a_00403
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lazarus, M., Schneider, L., Lee, C., & van Asselt, H. (2015). Options and issues for restricted linking of emissions trading systems. ICAP, September 2015, Berlin, Germany.
   Google Scholar
• Mehling, M. A. (2009). Linking of emissions trading systems. In D. Freestone, & C. Streck (Eds.), Legal aspects of carbon trading: Kyoto, Copenhagen and beyond (pp. 108–133). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mehling, M. A., Metcalf, G. E., & Stavins, R. N. (2017). Linking heterogenous climate policies (consistent with the Paris agreement) (Discussion paper ES 17-6). The Harvard Project on Climate Agreements. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Kennedy School.
   Google Scholar
• Mehling, M. A., Metcalf, G. E., & Stavins, R. N. (2018). Linking climate policies to advance global mitigation. Science, 359(6379), 997–998. doi: 10.1126/science.aar5988
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Metcalf, G. E., & Weisbach, D. A. (2010). Linking policies when tastes differ: Global climate policy in a heterogeneous world. (Discussion paper 10-38). The Harvard Project on International Climate Agreements. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Kennedy School.
   Google Scholar
• Narassimhan, E., Gallagher, K. S., Koester, S., & Rivera Alejo, J. (2018). Carbon pricing in practice: A review of existing emissions trading systems. Climate Policy, 18(8), 967–991. doi: 10.1080/14693062.2018.1467827
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Partnership for Market Readiness (PMR) and International Carbon Action Partnership (ICAP). (2016). Emissions trading in practice: A handbook on design and implementation. Washington, DC: World Bank.
   Google Scholar
• Paterson, M., Hoffman, M., Betsill, M., & Bernstein, S. (2014). The micro foundations of policy diffusion toward complex global governance: An analysis of the transnational carbon emission trading network. Comparative Political Studies, 47, 420–449. doi: 10.1177/0010414013509575
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ranson, M., & Stavins, R. N. (2016). Linkage of greenhouse gas emissions trading systems: Learning from experience. Climate Policy, 16(3), 284–300. doi: 10.1080/14693062.2014.997658
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rose, A., Wei, D., Miller, N., Vandyck, T., & Flachsland, C. (2018). Policy brief – achieving Paris climate agreement pledges: Alternative designs for linking emissions trading systems. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 12(1), 170–182. doi: 10.1093/reep/rex029
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenzweig, R. H. (2016). Global climate change policy and carbon markets: Transition to a new era. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Schmalensee, R., & Stavins, R. N. (2017). Lessons learned from three decades of experience with cap and trade. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 11(1), 59–79. doi: 10.1093/reep/rew017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shipan, C. R., & Volden, C. (2008). The mechanisms of policy diffusion. American Journal of Political Science, 52(4), 840–857. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5907.2008.00346.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simmons, B., Dobbin, F., & Garrett, G. (2006). Introduction: The international diffusion of liberalism. International Organization, 60(4), 781–810. doi: 10.1017/S0020818306060267
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simmons, B., & Elkins, Z. (2004). The globalization of liberalization: Policy diffusion in the international political economy. American Political Science Review, 98(1), 171–189. doi: 10.1017/S0003055404001078
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stavins, R. N. (1988). Project 88 – harnessing market forces to protect our environment: Initiatives for the New president. Washington, DC. Retrieved from https://scholar.harvard.edu/stavins/publications/project-88-harnessing-market-forces-protect-our-environment-initiatives-new
   Google Scholar
• Stensdal, I., Heggelund, G., & Duan, M. (2018). China’s carbon market: In it to learn it. In J. Wettestad, & L. H. Gulbrandsen (Eds.), The evolution of carbon markets: Design and diffusion (pp. 180–207). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Stewart, R. B., & Sands, P. (2001). The legal and institutional framework for a plurilateral greenhouse gas emissions trading system. In UNCTAD (Ed.), Greenhouse gas market perspectives: Trade and investment implications of the climate change regime (pp. 5–38). New York and Geneva: UNCTAD.
   Google Scholar
• Tangen, K., & Hasselknippe, H. (2005). Converging markets. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 5(1), 47–64. doi: 10.1007/s10784-004-3681-7
   Google Scholar
• Tuerk, A., Mehling, M., Klinsky, S., & Wang, X. (2013). Emerging carbon markets: Experiences, trends, and challenges. London: Climate Strategies Working Paper.
   Google Scholar
• Victor, D. G. (2011). Global warming gridlock: Creating more effective strategies for protecting the planet. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Victor, D. G. (2015). Why Paris worked: A different approach to climate diplomacy, Yale Environment 360, 15 December. Retrieved from http://e360.yale.edu/features/why_paris_worked_a_different_approach_to_climate_diplomacy
   Google Scholar
• Victor, D. G., House, J. C., & Joy, S. (2005). A Madisonian approach to climate policy. Science, 309(5742), 1820–1821. doi: 10.1126/science.1113180
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vogel, D. (1995). Trading up: Consumer and environmental regulation in a global economy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wettestad, J., & Gulbrandsen, L. H. (Eds.). (2018). The evolution of carbon markets: Design and diffusion. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• World Bank/Ecofys. (2018). State and trends of carbon pricing 2018. Washington, DC: World Bank.
   Google Scholar