<oai_dc:dc xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd"><dc:coverage>United States, Georgia, Clarke County, Athens, 33.96095, -83.37794</dc:coverage><dc:creator>Bodansky, Daniel M.</dc:creator><dc:date>2007-11-01</dc:date><dc:description>ARCHITECTURES FOR AGREEMENT: ADDRESSING GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE IN THE POST-KYOTO WORLD, edited by Joseph E. Aldy and Robert N. Stavins (Cambridge Univ. Press 2007), pp. 57-66</dc:description><dc:description>From a policy perspective, a climate architecture based on economy-wide, binding emissions targets, combined with emissions trading, has many virtues. But even such an architecture represents good climate policy, it is far more questionable whether it represents good climate politics -- at least in the near-term, for the upcoming "post-2012" negotiations. Given the wide range of differences in national perspectives and preferences regarding climate change, a more flexible, bottom-up approach may be needed, which builds on the efforts that are already beginning to emerge, by allowing different countries to assume different types of international commitments – not only absolute targets, but also indexed targets, taxes, efficiency standards, and so forth. Such an approach would not provide a long-term solution to the climate change problem; the more costly climate change mitigation is, the more states will want greater assurance that their efforts are being reciprocated by other states. But a bottom-up approach might help break the current impasse and get the ball rolling. It reflects, not ideal policy, but rather less than ideal politics.</dc:description><dc:description>Environmental Law -- International Law</dc:description><dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format><dc:rights>http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/</dc:rights><dc:subject>University of Georgia. School of Law</dc:subject><dc:subject>Law--Study and teaching</dc:subject><dc:subject>University of Georgia--Faculty</dc:subject><dc:title>Targets and Timetables: Good Policy But Bad Politics?</dc:title><dc:type>Text</dc:type></oai_dc:dc>