Unfortunately, this does not mean that the right sort of agreement will emerge. The policies we employ must be as effective and efficient as possible. What does that mean? I would emphasise three criteria.
　　遗憾的是，这并不意味着我们将达成正确的共识。我们采取的政策必须尽可能有效且高效。这意味着什么？我想强调三条标准。

　　First, we need prices for carbon that apply over relevant planning horizons. That price cannot be fixed forever, but must change with events. But it needs to be far more stable than in the European Union's market for permits (see chart). A tax seems more attractive to me than “cap and trade”, for this reason.
　　首先，我们需要适用于相应规划阶段的碳价格。这一价格不能永远保持不变，而是应该随着情况的改变而调整，但其稳定性必须远高于欧盟的许可证交易市场（见表格）。正因为此，在我看来，征税似乎比“限量及交易”更具吸引力。

　　Second, where the abatement occurs must be separated from who pays for it. Abatement needs to happen where it is most efficient. That is why emissions of developing countries must be included. But the cost should fall on the wealthy. This is as much because they can afford it as because they produced the bulk of past emissions.
　　其次，减排的发生地应与成本支付方相分离。我们需要在最能产生成效的地方实施减排。这就是为什么要把发展中国家纳入其中的原因所在。但减排成本应由富国承担。这不仅是因为它们有能力承担，也是因为它们产出了过去的大部分排放量。

　　Finally, we need to develop and apply innovations in all relevant technologies. A paper from the Bruegel think-tank argues, persuasively, that merely raising prices on carbon emissions would reinforce the position of established technologies. We need large-scale subsidies for innovation as well.**
　　最后，我们需要在所有相关技术领域开发和应用创新成果。欧洲智库Bruegel的一份报告极具说服力地提出，仅仅提高碳排放价格，会巩固成熟技术的地位。我们还需对创新进行大规模补贴。

　　Tackling the risk of climate change is the most complex collective challenge humanity has ever confronted. Success requires costly and concerted action among many countries to deal with a distant threat, on behalf of people as yet unborn, under unavoidable uncertainty about the costs of not acting. We have reached the point, however, where a broad consensus exists on the nature of the threat and the sorts of policies we need to follow to deal with it. We may not reach a deal in Copenhagen. But the time for decision has come. Either we act soon – or we finally discover whether the sceptics are right. If we fail to act, as seems likely, I hope they are. But I very much doubt it.
　　应对气候变化的风险，是人类有史以来面临的最复杂的集体挑战。要想取得成功，需要由多个国家，代表尚未出生人的利益，在不采取行动的成本势必难以确定的情况下，为应对一个遥远的威胁而采取成本高昂且协调一致的行动。不过，我们已经取得了一定进展：对于这一威胁的性质以及我们所需采取的应对政策，目前已经存在广泛共识。我们可能无法在哥本哈根达成协议，但做出决定的时刻已经到来。我们要么尽快行动，要么等着最终揭开怀疑论者正确与否的谜底。如果我们没能采取行动——这似乎很有可能——那么我希望他们是正确的，但我对此深感怀疑。

　　* “Taking stock”, 17 November 2009, www.project-catalyst.info
　　*“评估与反思”(Taking stock)，2009年11月17日，www.project-catalyst.info

　　** “No green growth without innovation”, www.bruegel.org
　　**“绿色增长离不开创新”(No green growth without innovation)，www.bruegel.org

上一页  [1] [2] [3]