Books by Ricardo S Coelho
Upsetting the Offset engages critically with the political economy of carbon markets. It presents... more Upsetting the Offset engages critically with the political economy of carbon markets. It presents a range of case studies and critiques from around the world, showing how the scam of carbon markets affects the lives of communities. But the book doesn’t stop there. It also presents a number of alternatives to carbon markets which enable communities to live in real low-carbon futures.
Papers by Ricardo S Coelho
Public decisions concerning large projects with detrimental environmental or heritage impacts inv... more Public decisions concerning large projects with detrimental environmental or heritage impacts involve value conflicts which stem from the diverse interests and variety of ways of evaluating the costs and benefits of such projects. They are also framed by institutionalised procedures and practices which favour certain concerns to the detriment of others. This paper aims to contribute towards a better understanding of how these procedures and practices, namely decision support tools such as the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), tend to shape public decision-making processes in particular ways. It draws on a study of the public controversy surrounding the Foz Tua dam in Portugal, with a focus on the values upheld by the different parties in the controversy and their interplay in the production of justifications, specifically the actors' positions on values and value conflicts and the restrictions posed by institutionalised public
decision-making procedures on the expression and consideration of certain values.
Conference Presentations by Ricardo S Coelho
What is veganism? Veganism is a lifestyle based on the rejection of the exploitation of animals. ... more What is veganism? Veganism is a lifestyle based on the rejection of the exploitation of animals. Vegans don't eat meat, fish, eggs or dairy and don't consume products with animal-based ingredients. The word vegan was coined by Donald Watson (1910-2005), founder of the Vegan Society, who argued: " We can see quite plainly that our present civilisation is built on the exploitation of animals, just as past civilisations were built on the exploitation of slaves, and we believe the spiritual destiny of man is such that in time he will view with abhorrence the idea that men once fed on the products of animals' bodies. " (Vegan News, no 1, November 1994). Veganism makes economic sense since it is a more efficient means of feeding the world. Meat, eggs, dairy and fish production are only economically viable at a large scale due to the fact that the livestock and fishing sectors don't pay their external costs and are usually heavily subsidized. Organic and sustainable production can help to reduce the environmental footprint of an omnivore diet, but it isn't a feasible option for many, as the products are very expensive. Eating animal products from sustainable small-scale farming is a half-step towards the right direction, if it is accompanied by a reduction in the amount of animal products consumption. Still, this doesn't solve the other objections to eating animals, namely those related to ethical concerns.
"Rent-seeking behavior results in a waste of resources and leads to corruption and un-democratic ... more "Rent-seeking behavior results in a waste of resources and leads to corruption and un-democratic decision-making. This concept is, therefore, useful in dissecting the zero-sum game that is the creation of markets with fictitious environmental commodities and the subsequent allocation of allowances.
We analyze empirical evidence on the UN climate negotiations, highlighting the role of corporate lobbying, to shed some light on the reasons for the capitulation of the international community to the US pretension of allowing carbon trading to be introduced in the Kyoto Protocol. More specifically, the paper will deal with the volte-face of the EU, that went from carbon trading opponent to an international leader in carbon markets creation.
To understand how carbon markets were devised, we look into the political process of negotiating a climate agreement and how corporate lobbying influences the outcome. Also, we contextualize carbon markets creation in the light of the conflict of interest that arises when its mentors are traders and other market players. Finally, we discuss the proposals for regulation of carbon credits generation, given the possibility that it will lead to regulator capture in a “lemons market”.
We conclude by analyzing the recent developments in climate negotiations, including the clash between left wing Latin American governments and the US caused by divergences on the future role of carbon markets."
Reports by Ricardo S Coelho
Presently there is an estimated oversupply of permits in the EU ETS of over two billion, yet the ... more Presently there is an estimated oversupply of permits in the EU ETS of over two billion, yet the EU only approved a temporary set-aside of 900 million permits. This oversupply is reinforced by the possibility of using offset credits for compliance. In addition, unused offset credits can be swapped for permits until March 2015.
Book Chapters by Ricardo S Coelho
Como reorganizar um país vulnerável? , 2020
Citação: Coelho, R. (2020). As vulnerabilidades ambientais e os meios de as resolver: Um Green Ne... more Citação: Coelho, R. (2020). As vulnerabilidades ambientais e os meios de as resolver: Um Green New Deal para Portugal. In J. Reis (Ed.), Como reorganizar um país vulnerável? (pp. 549-581). Conjuntura Actual.
Rent seeking and corporate lobbying in the CDM
PhD Thesis by Ricardo S Coelho
Carbon trading, as a market-based climate policy that allows polluters to comply with emissions r... more Carbon trading, as a market-based climate policy that allows polluters to comply with emissions reductions commitments with tradable pollution rights, is presented by its proponents as the most cost-efficient alternative for climate change mitigation, while critics counter that the cost-efficiency argument ignores the harms that result from commodifying carbon. This thesis contributes to this debate, which is fundamental for the future of environmental policies, by exposing the social costs of carbon trading and making the case against its inclusion in the climate policy-mix. The argument developed here draws from theoretical contributions on the social costs of private activities and on value conflicts, as well as critical perspectives on the neoliberalization of nature and the limits of the market.
Emissions trading was firstly proposed as an alternative to efficiency-maximizing or pigouvian environmental taxation. Based on the property rights approach to social costs, emissions trading would allow regulators to escape the impossible task of calculating the optimal level of pollution and offer instead a cost-efficient way to achieve an exogenously determined level of pollution. This theoretical shift would allow economics to be centred on discussing the best means to achieve given ends and relived it of discussing ends. The ends-means dichotomy, however, does not hold outside textbook economics, as well as the description of emissions trading as a simple and efficient alternative to direct regulation. As the US experience with emissions trading shows, creating markets for tradable pollution rights requires government investment in a regulatory apparatus that is no less complex than what is required for direct regulation or taxation. This experience also illustrates how the purported efficiency of emissions trading systems is a flip side of their weak environmental performance and their disregard for social justice and democratic participation.
Carbon trading schemes created under the Kyoto Protocol raise additional problems. Compared to “cap and trade” schemes based on a single pollutant and a restricted number of sources, schemes like the EU Emissions Trading System are more complex and require further government intervention. Furthermore, flexibility instruments like the Clean Development Mechanism allow industrialized countries to pollute beyond their emissions commitments and raise issues with the disputable integrity of methodologies that account for emissions reductions from offset projects relative to an arbitrary baseline. The dismal performance of these schemes is illustrated by their inability to provide an incentive to decarbonization, while distributing rents to polluters and creating new sources of corruption.
These issues are not reducible to discussions on accounting procedures and other technicalities. Opening the “black box” of carbon quantification and commensuration reveals that its calculations sideline relevant uncertainties and assume a degree of accuracy that scientific knowledge and technology cannot deliver in the present. Yet, since accounting for emissions increases or reductions requires political decisions on what is to be accounted for, what is the relevant metric and what is an acceptable degree of uncertainty, further scientific and technological developments are not enough to make it possible to produce the unambiguous numbers that carbon trading requires.
Going further on the discussion of the implications of carbon commensuration and abstraction, this thesis presents an argument against the inclusion of carbon trading in the climate policy-mix based on four normative critiques. With the support of critical literature, it is argued that carbon trading is ineffective, undemocratic, unjust and unethical and that, for these reasons, it can only be considered as a cost-effective policy when its social costs are ignored. An argument against carbon trading reformism is then presented by illustrating how trying to mitigate the negative effects of carbon markets by imposing restrictions on trading leads to the erosion of these markets. A better alternative is claimed to be supporting climate policies that foster a plurality of values and deliver social benefits.
The thesis concludes by advocating a shift in the climate policy debate to a discussion on the values that are fostered or hindered by each policy. A general framework is proposed that respects value pluralism and acknowledges conflicts between incommensurable values, which is not compatible with market-based policies.
Uploads
Books by Ricardo S Coelho
Papers by Ricardo S Coelho
decision-making procedures on the expression and consideration of certain values.
Conference Presentations by Ricardo S Coelho
We analyze empirical evidence on the UN climate negotiations, highlighting the role of corporate lobbying, to shed some light on the reasons for the capitulation of the international community to the US pretension of allowing carbon trading to be introduced in the Kyoto Protocol. More specifically, the paper will deal with the volte-face of the EU, that went from carbon trading opponent to an international leader in carbon markets creation.
To understand how carbon markets were devised, we look into the political process of negotiating a climate agreement and how corporate lobbying influences the outcome. Also, we contextualize carbon markets creation in the light of the conflict of interest that arises when its mentors are traders and other market players. Finally, we discuss the proposals for regulation of carbon credits generation, given the possibility that it will lead to regulator capture in a “lemons market”.
We conclude by analyzing the recent developments in climate negotiations, including the clash between left wing Latin American governments and the US caused by divergences on the future role of carbon markets."
Reports by Ricardo S Coelho
Book Chapters by Ricardo S Coelho
PhD Thesis by Ricardo S Coelho
Emissions trading was firstly proposed as an alternative to efficiency-maximizing or pigouvian environmental taxation. Based on the property rights approach to social costs, emissions trading would allow regulators to escape the impossible task of calculating the optimal level of pollution and offer instead a cost-efficient way to achieve an exogenously determined level of pollution. This theoretical shift would allow economics to be centred on discussing the best means to achieve given ends and relived it of discussing ends. The ends-means dichotomy, however, does not hold outside textbook economics, as well as the description of emissions trading as a simple and efficient alternative to direct regulation. As the US experience with emissions trading shows, creating markets for tradable pollution rights requires government investment in a regulatory apparatus that is no less complex than what is required for direct regulation or taxation. This experience also illustrates how the purported efficiency of emissions trading systems is a flip side of their weak environmental performance and their disregard for social justice and democratic participation.
Carbon trading schemes created under the Kyoto Protocol raise additional problems. Compared to “cap and trade” schemes based on a single pollutant and a restricted number of sources, schemes like the EU Emissions Trading System are more complex and require further government intervention. Furthermore, flexibility instruments like the Clean Development Mechanism allow industrialized countries to pollute beyond their emissions commitments and raise issues with the disputable integrity of methodologies that account for emissions reductions from offset projects relative to an arbitrary baseline. The dismal performance of these schemes is illustrated by their inability to provide an incentive to decarbonization, while distributing rents to polluters and creating new sources of corruption.
These issues are not reducible to discussions on accounting procedures and other technicalities. Opening the “black box” of carbon quantification and commensuration reveals that its calculations sideline relevant uncertainties and assume a degree of accuracy that scientific knowledge and technology cannot deliver in the present. Yet, since accounting for emissions increases or reductions requires political decisions on what is to be accounted for, what is the relevant metric and what is an acceptable degree of uncertainty, further scientific and technological developments are not enough to make it possible to produce the unambiguous numbers that carbon trading requires.
Going further on the discussion of the implications of carbon commensuration and abstraction, this thesis presents an argument against the inclusion of carbon trading in the climate policy-mix based on four normative critiques. With the support of critical literature, it is argued that carbon trading is ineffective, undemocratic, unjust and unethical and that, for these reasons, it can only be considered as a cost-effective policy when its social costs are ignored. An argument against carbon trading reformism is then presented by illustrating how trying to mitigate the negative effects of carbon markets by imposing restrictions on trading leads to the erosion of these markets. A better alternative is claimed to be supporting climate policies that foster a plurality of values and deliver social benefits.
The thesis concludes by advocating a shift in the climate policy debate to a discussion on the values that are fostered or hindered by each policy. A general framework is proposed that respects value pluralism and acknowledges conflicts between incommensurable values, which is not compatible with market-based policies.