This was good to read. You’ve done a good job of avoiding culture wars rhetoric, and helped me to understand, and be more hopeful that civilization might survive this challenge.
Your aside on corruption is not really aside, because corruption (real or perceived) is the biggest threat to effective standards bodies. The general discussion of how to measure corruption obviously leads to ideas on how to limit its growth, and that should be front and center for any standards body.
My own cynicism says that standards bodies are always captured by the industries they regulate. In this case that would be not only emitters of carbon, but also the credits market. What most encourages me in your post is the thought that standards on corruption might help development of standards on everything else.
A Bi-Partisan Carbon Tax? [Part I]
This was good to read. You’ve done a good job of avoiding culture wars rhetoric, and helped me to understand, and be more hopeful that civilization might survive this challenge.
Your aside on corruption is not really aside, because corruption (real or perceived) is the biggest threat to effective standards bodies. The general discussion of how to measure corruption obviously leads to ideas on how to limit its growth, and that should be front and center for any standards body.
My own cynicism says that standards bodies are always captured by the industries they regulate. In this case that would be not only emitters of carbon, but also the credits market. What most encourages me in your post is the thought that standards on corruption might help development of standards on everything else.