-- Recycler Dave Miller Entertainment Coordinator Kindred Spirits Fair 2000 drumming, planting, breathing, enjoying life!
attached mail follows:
_______________________________________________________ ******************************************************* GLOBAL FUTURES BULLETIN #106 ---15 Apr, 02000--- ISSN 1328-5157 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Institute for Global Futures Research (IGFR). P.O. Box 263E, Earlville, QLD 4870, Australia. E-mail: <igfr@igfr.org>. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- This bulletin is for the use of IGFR members and GFB subscribers only and is not to be re-posted. ________________________________________________________ ******************************************************** * * INDEX . India - officially one billion . World Charter for Local Self-Government . Highly uncertain potential energy sources . Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) update . ABM and the world order . Calendar * * INDIA - OFFICIALLY ONE BILLION 11 May 2000 was the official day [1] India reached a population of one billion to become the world's second gigapopulace after China. The UN Population Fund estimates India reached one billion in August 1999.
India was the first developing nation to instigate a family planning program (1951). The rate of growth of the population is declining, currently at 1.5% or 15m/an.
According to the Worldwatch Institute, 50% of India's adults are illiterate, 50% of its children undernourished and 33% of people live below the poverty line.
Surprisingly, fertility rates remain the highest in the north, particularly in the city of Delhi (13m) where slums are expanding rapidly and where, by 2001, 57% of residents could be without water, 41% without sewage and 40% without power [2].
Previously India was predicted to surpass China's population by 2050 [3] at 1.6b, but the UNFPA suggests the date will be more like 2040.
India has benefited from sophisticated famine prevention strategies as well as rapid increases in agricultural productivity during the first and second Green Revolutions. However, productivity per hectare now appears to have reached a plateau, and water availability is a key constraint. Also it is claimed that India has already fully cultivated and irrigated its grain-growing areas [4].
Thus technological solutions such as large hydro projects (eg Narmada) and introduction of high-yielding drought-resistant GM crop varieties [5] are given greater consideration, particularly in the absence of adequate funding for education, opportunities for women, family planning programs, and universal elderly pension schemes.
Though there are proposals for more coercive family planning programs as in the 1970s in India, and in China, the general view is that development is the best strategy for population stabilisation.
However, the prospect of the majority of the Indian population benefiting from conventional development strategies (trickledown) over the next few decades such that fertility rates drop from the current 3.5 births per woman today to 2.2 required for zero population growth (ZPG), is remote considering the low baseline of education, literacy etc The prospect of acute water shortages, famine and disease on the otherhand is significant. The high current incidence of subnutrition can be regarded as a type of famine leading to higher mortality rates over the medium term.
It is suggested that India is already in a state of crisis (as are many developing countries whose chronic conditions are simply regarded as 'normal' by wealthy nations), but that greater crises are looming if a new strategy based on community development is not adopted by the government and supported by greater levels of international ODF [6] and appropriate private investment.
A community-based development strategy is exemplified in the state of Kerala where fertility rates are ~1.72, the lowest in India [7] (national av 3.5, highest 5.5 in rural Uttar Pradesh). In Kerala, fertility rates are even lower in rural areas (1.71) than in urban areas (1.74) - the only state in India where this is the case.
Comparative QLIs (1998) Kerala India US [8] per capita GNP (US$) 298 330 22,240 adult literacy (%) 91 52 96 life expectancy (yrs) 70 60 76 infant mort.(per 1,000) 17 85 9
It has been suggested that Kerala has one of the highest suicide rates in India, though higher statistics may be due to more thorough reporting. Other explanations include rapid pace of social change, and transition from extended to nuclear families. * [1] according to India's Census Bureau [2] Bedi, Rahul London Telegraph 14 Aug 1999 [3] 'World population growth rate slows' Global Futures Bulletin #26/27/28 15 Jan 1997 [4] Michael Vlassoff of UNFPA quoted in UN News Wire 10 May 2000 [5] GM - genetically modified [6] ODF - Overseas Development Finance [7] Global Reproductive Health Forum www.hsph.harvard.edu/ Organizations/healthnet/SAsia/suchana/0628/318/table1.html [8] Indicators Update, New Economics Foundation, cited in 'Objective and subjective QLIs' Global Futures Bulletin #64 15 July 1998. * {16 population issues; 1. development issues, theory and paradigms} * * * WORLD CHARTER FOR LOCAL SELF-GOVERNMENT [1] The UN Advisory Committee of Local Authorities (UNCLA) has declared its full support for the recently drafted World Charter for Local Self-Government saying it is 'an important step towards international recognition of the important role played by local authorities in the future of our cities'.
The World Charter for Local Self-Government is part of the Habitat Istanbul +5 process (2001) and it is hoped that it will be accepted by the UN General Assembly as a United Nations Convention on decentralization, local autonomy and participatory democracy.
It reflects the intent of Local Agenda 21 which in turn is a key component of Agenda 21 - a global strategy for sustainable development.
Critics of this broad movement argue it is one which generates parochialism, that devolution of power and responsibility to local government generates inefficiencies, and that it could alienate large enterprise along with its capital resources, high-level expertise, sophisticated organisational structures, and capacity to undertake projects with a long start-up period (of no net profit).
Proponents argue that parochialism is avoided because the movement is intrinsically linked to community development, increasing political and spiritual awareness and ecological/social responsibility, and because networking and collaboration on regional, national and global levels, rather than isolationism/parochialism is also a key element. Large enterprise need not be alienated once the community is recognised as a vital stakeholder. * [1] more info e-mail <Sharad.Shankardass@unchs.org> * {18. urban development and habitat; 33. global conventions and international law} * * * HIGHLY UNCERTAIN POTENTIAL ENERGY SOURCES David Keenan
Regarding the article 'New-energy scenario', (GFB #105 [1], I feel it is inappropriate to list 'collapsed-hydrogen energy', 'MagneGas' and 'high density charge clusters (HDCC)' alongside the other energy sources mentioned, as this would open the list to many more highly uncertain possibilities. The list does not distinguish between 'extant', 'potential' and those with 'highly uncertain potential'.
It is implied that these three examples are all 'methods of tapping space energy (zero-point energy)'. I therefore suspect that they violate currently accepted laws of thermodynamics or other physical laws. That they are expected to be marketed this year of within two years [2] is quite startling, and demands further specific information (such as companies, patent numbers, articles in respected journals etc).
I also suggest that both hot and cold fusion be included in the category of 'highly uncertain potential'. * [1] 'New energy scenario', Global Futures Bulletin #105 01 Apr 2000 [2] Fox, Hal 'Other energy sources likely to eclipse hydrogen' Global Futures Bulletin #105 01 Apr 2000 * {4. energy} * * COMMENT We know most proposed new forms of energy generation will not eventuate, but we also know a few will. Hence it is necessary to keep an open mind. David Keenan is correct in asserting that the list of energy sources is misleading. So the revised lists below attempt to make necessary distinctions. But even here many would disagree on the classification. Some potential energy sources have not been developed because technologies are still under development while other potential energy sources merely require certain economic and political conditions for development.
We know that the structure and nature of matter and the universe is extraordinary. It is likely then, than extraordinary sources of energy will be developed over the next two centuries. Nuclear energy would have seemed an extraordinary source of energy to 19th C society and was ridiculed by many. The litmus tests we have to distinguish possible new theories and technologies from impossible ones - such as the scientific method and peer review in respected journals - are valuable, but we know from the history of science that they do not always work.
It is interesting to note that, regarding cold fusion research, while the University of Utah has allowed its patents relating to cold fusion to lapse and respected journals now avoid the subject, millions of dollars are still being spent in laboratories in at least eight countries [1], including recent funding by the US Dept of Energy [2] (which also funds research into hot fusion, US$20b so far ![3] ) [4].
One argument is that while research into cold fusion, zero point energy etc may prove fruitless, it can hardly be described as illegitimate scientific inquiry.
Another argument says that it is not a question of legitimacy of any particular scientific inquiry, but rather prudence given limited time, human and financial resources.
Some analysts suggest that while zero-point energy sources exist, they are inherently unreliable and therefore unlikely to be of practical use. Hal Fox makes strong claims to the contrary.
Extant - coal, - natural gas - oil, - nuclear fission - biomass, ethanol, methane, biochemicals - hydrogen - wind - solar, solar thermal, photovoltaic, passive solar - megahydro - mini and microhydro - wave - tidal - geothermal,
Potential - coal gasification - oil shales, tar sands - ocean thermal energy conversion OTEC - passive geothermal ('earth energy')
Distant highly uncertain potential - hot fusion - cold fusion - collapsed-hydrogen energy - MagneGas - high density charge clusters (HDCC) * [1] Platt, Charles 'What If Cold Fusion Is Real ?' Wired Magazine Nov 1998 [2] Fox, Hal 'DOE funds low-energy nuclear reaction lab' New Energy News Vol. 6, No. 10, July 1999, pp. 1-2. [3] Walls, Frank 'NASA To Search For Energy' New Energy News Vol. 6, No. 9, May1999 [4] It is also interesting to note NASA's US$600,000 investment in anti-gravity research to attempt to duplicate some controversial Russian experiments by Podkletnov. 'NASA Pledges $600,000 For Antigravity Research, New Energy News Vol. 6, No. 8, Mar. 1999. * {4. energy; 8. megatrends in technology} * * * NUCLEAR NON-PROLIFERATION TREATY (NPT) UPDATE The current NPT Summit (24 Apr-19 May) has seen the declared nuclear states, the US, Russia, France, UK and China, reiterate their 'unequivocal commitment to the ultimate goals of a complete elimination of nuclear weapons and a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international controls' but provided no timetable or details of how complete disarmament will be achieved.
Many regarded the statement as cynical rhetoric, while others applauded the joint declaration (at least).
US Presidential Decision Directive 60 (PDD 60) in 1997 states that nuclear weapons will remain the cornerstone of US security, and includes the right to first use of nuclear weapons.
Russia, France, UK and China all clearly voiced their opposition to the proposed US national missile defence (NMD) project which would violate the 1972 ABM Treaty. China, which has the least number of nuclear weapons of the five weapons states, has said it will need to increase missile deployment so that its arsenal remains a credible threat for the US.
Both US presidential candidates Bush and Gore back the anti-missile project - Gore for a limited NMD system, Bush for a more comprehensive one.
Arab states are lobbying for Israel to sign the NPT. India, Pakistan and Cuba [1] are the only other countries who have not signed the NPT [2].
Critics point out that nuclear weapons programs in Iraq and North Korea, for example, show the futility of the NPT to which these countries are signatories.
187 countries are party to the NPT which states that only the US, Russia, France, UK and China may have nuclear weapons, but only on condition that they work towards reduction and eventual elimination of nuclear weapons. The NPT was first signed in 1968 and came into force in 1970. Since 1970 the number of nuclear weapons in the world has increased from 39,700 to 43,200 in 1995 [3].
Brazil, Egypt, Ireland, Mexico, New Zealand, South Africa, and Sweden have formed a New Agenda Coalition which has put forward a proposed program for the nuclear weapons states to disarm.
It is estimated that 25-30 countries are capable of producing nuclear weapons in a short space of time.
Related issues: - NATO's policy of 'shared use' of nuclear weapons amongst its members - development of a treaty to cease production of plutonium and highly enriched uranium (HEU) (fissile material) - commence START III negotiations (US wishes to limit to no less than 2000-2500 warheads, while Russia wishes to consider 1500 or less). - take strategic missiles off alert status - US to ratify Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) - commence reduction of tactical nuclear weapons - strengthen, not abandon Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty. * [1] Cuba is a party to the Treaty of Tlatelolco, the South American Nuclear Weapon Free Zone Treaty. [2] Plesch, Daniel 'Anarchy in action: Western policy on weapons of mass destruction' British American Security Information Centre http://www.basicint.org/ [3] Carroll, Eugene 'The NPT review - last chance ?' Center for Defense Information http://www.cdi.org/dm/2000/issue3/NPT.html * {2. peace and conflict resolution; 33. global conventions and international law} * * * ABM AND THE WORLD ORDER The US is keen to maintain a credible nuclear arsenal and at the same time limit nuclear proliferation 'by bribing Russia and North Korea, by embargoing Iraq, by pleading publicly with India and Pakistan, and privately with Israel' [1].
Wallerstein describes a possible scenario in the event that the US pushes ahead with its National Missile Defense (NMD) program:
'By 2010, we may have a world in which U.S. nuclear capacity is much more advanced, Western Europe [is] much more unhappy with the U.S., and [there are] many more avowed and secret nuclear powers in the world. East Asia may become an area of intensive nuclear armaments (over and above whatever the U.S. maintains in the region).' [2]
The ABM Treaty refers to strategic missiles. The Patriot anti-ballistic missile system is a theatre missile defence system. It may be in the future, that theatre missile defence systems are used for strategic defence, and national defence.
Japan and Israel are now deeply involved in the US BMD program [3].
If the NPT fails and we have growing nuclear proliferation it may occur mostly in the area of theatre and tactical nuclear weapons. For example, it is claimed Israel plans to deploy small nuclear landmines (neutron bombs) near the Golan Heights [4].
NMD - National Missile Defense program (strategic) BMD - Ballistic Missile Defense system TMD - Theater Missile Defense program THAAD - Theater High Altitude Area Defense program (Army) NTW - Navy Theater-Wide (NTW) missile defence program (Navy)
Long-range missiles are likely to proliferate, and the capacity to switch from conventional to nuclear warheads will remain an attractive military option.
Arguments against: The ABM Treaty was designed to avoid another round in the arms race, which is as true now as it was in 1972.
A US NMD system could increase the likelihood of a first strike by the US in the event of a military crisis, confident of its ability to defend against a reprisal attack.
The huge expense of a US NMD is merely a reflection of the strength of the military-aerospace establishment in the US and the lucrative contracts such funding provides (an estimated US$30b on top of ~US$60b on BMD so far [5] ). It could also be that each new stage of missile defence is more costly than each new stage of thwarting missile defence.
Arguments for: Generally speaking, BMD systems are inherently defensive and could undermine the rationale for missile deployment around the world [6], missiles being the key delivery vehicle for nuclear, chemical and biological weapons.
For the US to completely disarm, it would need an effective national missile defence (NMD) system as it would no longer have a nuclear deterrent. But even a nuclear deterrent is no longer effective against a terrorist nuclear attack since there may be no culprit nation against which a reprisal nuclear strike can be launched.
Russia has violated both the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) and the START Treaty while Iraq and North Korea, and possibly also Iran, have nuclear weapons programs despite being signatories to the NPT [7]. Thus the US cannot depend on arms control agreements alone.
The logic of the US strategy can be understood in terms of: 1. the net result of powerful self-interests in the US, or 2. national self-interest - protecting national wealth and economic growth in a world with increasing inequity, or 3. Pax Americana - that a strong single superpower is the best strategy for world peace, order and prosperity at the current time. Pax Americana is necessary to maintain world order long enough for economic globalisation to flourish, and for virtually all nations to eliminate poverty and achieve affluence. With affluence comes social maturity, and higher levels of democracy, human and civil rights, and the 'democratic peace' (the historical tendency of Western-style democracies not to war with each other).
Explanations 1 and 2 are indefensible in this context since they do not address a global frame of reference.
The main competing view to explanation 3, the Pax Americana world order logic, is that the best strategy for world peace, order and prosperity is one based on democracy, equity and inclusion. The hypocrisy of a nation that expects other countries to renounce weapons of mass destruction while it refuses to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), violates the ABM Treaty, fails to work toward its commitment to nuclear disarmament, and retains a strong and sophisticated nuclear arsenal, will generate resistance and possibly conflict.
The question of affluence and equity may not be resolved through economic globalisation. Evidence to date suggests that economic globalisation has contributed to greater affluence in a number of countries - increasing the number of transitional economies - but little economic growth in most countries. Also, current economic growth is eroding natural capital in a way that the modest gains in affluence in the short term may in fact represent decline (or at least little progress) in quality of life in the long term.
Beyond the question of affluence and equity is the question of values, cultures and multiCivilisations. Western Christian civilisation has dominated the world order for five centuries (with both benefits and harm). There has been an assumption in Western culture that Christian morality and Western science is a superior worldview and that all cultures will discard obsolete traditions and superstitions, and come to emulate 'modern society'.
Instead we are finding that Islamic, Confucian, and Hindu civilisations [8] amongst others, are finding new space for expression and further self-evolution. This trend underpins the desire for global democracy.
One theory suggests that a unipolar world is unstable and another pole or poles will develop. Some point to a possible alliance between Russia and China. Europe can also be seen as a quasi-superpower, and in some respects a rival to the US. Europe also appears to be more sensitive to calls for greater global democracy and cooperation, and is unlikely to support a strengthened Pax Americana world order.
Questions have been raised as to what degree the US Echelon spy satellite network has been used for corporate espionage and given an advantage to US corporations competing for tenders with European corporations. As advanced information systems become a keen leading edge in military superiority, as well as a leading edge between rival corporations, the military-economic nexus may become more pronounced. Europe, as an economic rival to the US, may demand limits to US military expansion and sophistication.
If the prime driver of Pax Americana is explanation 3 and not 1 or 2, then it should be possible for the US to 'test the waters' by helping to work towards an architecture for a more democratic world order, and by reducing somewhat, not extending, its military superiority.
Critics of this view suggest many countries, for example in Europe, in fact rely on the US military umbrella and reap the rewards from their own reduced military budgets. The adventurism of Iraq, and increasing demand for peace-keeping operations around the world - in the Balkans, Africa, East Timor etc, demonstrate the need for adequate military expenditure.
A response to this is that peace-keeping operations represent a fraction of the cost of sophisticated weaponry such as nuclear weapons, submarines, aircraft carriers, long-range bombers etc, which advanced nations could begin to decommission without seriously compromising national defence (post Cold War), and which could be reduced further if support were given to a campaign for multilateral reduction in military expenditure. * [1] Wallerstein, Immanuel "The United States as nuclear champion' Comment No. 39, May 1, 2000 http://fbc.binghamton.edu/commentr.htm [2] Wallerstein op cit. [3] Global Network Space Alert ! No. 7 Fall 1999 www.globenet.free-online.co.uk/ [4] Campbell, M; U Mahnaimi 'Israeli plan for Golan nuclear shield' The Sunday Times: Foreign News 26 March 2000. [5] Hartung W; M Ciarrocca 'Star Wars revisited: still dangerous, costly and unworkable' The Progressive Response 28 April 2000 Vol. 4, No. 18 http://www.foreignpolicy-infocus.org/ [6] Spring, Baker 'Extend the Non-Proliferation Treaty without conditions' Heritage Foundation 1995 http://www.heritage.org/library/archives/talkpoints/tp9.html [7] Plesch, Daniel 'Anarchy in action: Western policy on weapons of mass destruction' British American Security Information Centre http://www.basicint.org/ [8] while the number of religious Hindus is declining as a % of world population, (GFB #76 15 Jan 1999 'Trends in religion') Islamic, Confucian and Hindu refer here to cultures and not religions specifically. * {2. peace and conflict resolution; 5. evolving world order} * * * CALENDAR 3 May 2000 World Press Freedom Day
18-22 June 2000 International Network for Urban Development (INTA), 24th Annual Congress, Bergen, Norway 'The City Region in a World of Globalisation: urban strategies for sustainable development' Speakers include Ministers, Mayors and corporate senior executives from Europe, Africa, Middle East, Latin America and Asia www.inta-net.org
26-30 June 2000 Copenhagen +5 UN General Assembly special session on follow-up to the World Summit for Social Development, Geneva, Switzerland. www.un.org/esa/socdev/geneva2000/
28 June - 2 July 2000 ICLEI World Congress of Local Governments, Sachsen-Anhalt, Germany. Climate protection, water management, environmental management, industrial land revitalization, Local Agenda 21 processes and sustainable development planning et al. Email: <world.congress@iclei.org> Website: http://www.iclei.org/iclei/gc21_ann.htm * * ________________________________________________________ ******************************************************** The Global Futures Bulletin is produced by the Institute for Global Futures Research (IGFR) twice monthly. Readers are welcome to submit material such as succinct letters, articles and other useful information. Indicate whether you would like your name attached to the submitted material. All communications should be directed to the Editor, e-mail <igfr@igfr.org>. Copyright (c) 2000 Institute for Global Futures Research (IGFR). All rights reserved. ________________________________________________________ ******************************************************** ******************************************************** PUBLICATIONS OF THE MONTH ******************************************************** 'Democracy at Risk' Jeff Gates 2000 400 pages
Not since the 1920s has the gap been so wide between the have-nots and the have-everythings. The world's 200 richest people own assets greater than the combined income of the world's 2.5 billion poorest people.
Gates, as a pioneer of employee stock ownership legislation and a lifetime in national politics and corporate finance, proposes initiatives including 'ownership impact reports' (that ensure legislative accountability) and creating a 'capital commons user fee' (that directs funds to the developing world), to sweeping upgrades to our fiscal and monetary policies - all designed to create a more inclusive economic and political system that shares the wealth among all its participants.
Gates is a lawyer, investment banker, political advisor, and a consultant to government, corporate and union leaders worldwide.
'Tom Paine is back and he is not pleased. But he has done his homework. 'Democracy at Risk' is not a book, it is a bible for a powerful populism that will arise after the latest Gilded Age is over...'
- Paul Hawken, author, 'Natural Capitalism, The Ecology of Commerce'
'We all know that in the transition to the 21st century there are many paradigm shifts. Jeff Gates' book helps to understand the new direction.'
- Professor Klaus Schwab, Founder & President, World Economic Forum/Davos
Also endorsed by Noam Chomsky, Ralph Nader, Frances Moore Lappe, Dee Hock, Riane Eisler, Hazel Henderson, and David Brower amongst others.
AUD$55 inc post, US$29 inc post, UKPnd 22 inc post. Add US$3 for post for orders outside Australia, US/Canada or UK. ******************************************************** 'Vanishing Borders: Protecting the Planet in the Age of Globalization' Hilary French 2000 257 pages
Forests are shrinking as the value of global trade in forest products climbs, from $29 billion in 1961 to $139 billion in 1998. Fisheries are collapsing as fish exports rise, growing nearly fivefold in value since 1970 to reach $52 billion in 1997. Human health is also endangered, with pesticide exports increasing nearly ninefold since 1961, to $11.4 billion in 1998.
Ironically, the best way to tackle these problems is by putting globalisation to work for us, instead of against us.
World exports of goods increased 17-fold between 1950 and 1998, from $311 billion to $5.4 trillion; the volume of foreign direct investment has grown almost 15-fold just since 1970, reaching $644 billion in 1998; and the number of transnational corporations worldwide grew from 7,000 in 1970 to some 60,000 today. These trends pose major environmental challenges.
Globalisation is a powerful driving force behind today's unprecedented biological implosion. On any given day, some 2 million people cross international borders, while 3,000 to 10,000 (export) aquatic species are moving around the world in ship ballasts.
Toxic industry is also moving offshore. Approx 41% of U.S. foreign direct investment in the Philippines and 22% in Colombia in 1998 was in chemicals. Semiconductor manufacturing employs hundreds of chemicals, many of which, such as arsenic, benzene, and chromium, are known carcinogens.
Despite the environmental risks, the forces of globalisation can also produce environmental gains, such as helping developing countries leapfrog to the cleaner technologies of tomorrow. China has become the world's largest manufacturer of energy-efficient compact fluorescent light bulbs in recent years, in part through joint ventures with lighting firms based in Hong Kong, Japan, the Netherlands, and Taiwan. And India has become a major manufacturer of advanced wind turbines with the help of technology obtained through joint ventures and licensing agreements with Danish, Dutch, and German firms. Eco-tourism and the emerging market for organic produce are also positive aspects of globalisation.
The number of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) working across international borders soared during the last century, climbing from just 176 in 1909 to more than 23,000 in 1998.
AUD$40 inc post, US$18 inc post, UKPnd 14 inc post. Add US$3 for post for orders outside Australia, US/Canada or UK. ******************************************************** 'Fossil Fuels in a Changing Climate: Impacts of the Kyoto Protocol and Developing Country Participation' Ulrich Bartsch and Benito Muller, Oxford Institute for Energy Studies, 2000 384 pages, 87 tables, 73 figures, index
The Kyoto Protocol raises three major issues:
What will be the impact of an implementation of the Kyoto Protocol on the world petroleum market (that is, on oil production, prices and the revenues of producing countries) and on the two main competing fuels - natural gas and coal ?
Which are the policies that could achieve the required reductions of emissions at the lowest economic cost and the least impact in the markets for oil, gas and coal? Should, for example, energy taxes be preferred to carbon taxes ? And what are the prospects and merits of international trading in emission permits?
How to design a post-Kyoto treaty which will bring in the developing countries to a new climate change agreement ? So far, only the industrialised countries and the former Soviet Union have entered into commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The authors propose an original method for allocating emission caps to both developing and industrialised nations - a method which is equity- based.
The various impacts of climate change policies which may be used to implement the Kyoto protocol and the proposed follow-up agreement are assessed with the use of a general equilibrium model.
AUD$114 inc post, US$68 inc post, UKPnd 43 inc post. Add US$3 for post for orders outside Australia, US/Canada or UK. ******************************************************* PUBLICATION REQUEST FORM Please fill out the following and return it to e-mail: <igfr@igfr.org>, or fax: 61 7 4033 6881, or post: IGFR, PO Box 263E, Earlville, Qld 4870, Australia
My name is.......................................................................... ............
My organisation (if any) is...............................................................
My e-mail address is........................................................................
My mailing address is......................................................................
............................................................................ ............................
I wish to purchase the publication entitled:
............................................................................ ............................
My credit card is [place an X in a) or b) or c)]
a)............Visa, or b)...........Mastercard, or c)..........American Express
Name on creditcard is .....................................................................
Date of expiry is.......................................................................... .....
Creditcard number is .. .. .. .. - .. .. .. .. - .. .. .. .. - .. .. .. ..
Amount I am paying is:...................................
****************************************************** Note: If you are paying by personal cheque from outside Australia, please add US$5 to cover bank processing charges
If you wish to pay by Direct Deposit, please e-mail us for details. ****************************************************** The IGFR is a not-for-profit organisation. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Institute for Global Futures Research (IGFR). P.O. Box 263E, Earlville, QLD 4870, Australia. E-mail: <igfr@igfr.org>. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@cals.ncsu.edu with the command "unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command "unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest". To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@cals.ncsu.edu with the command "subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at: http://www.sare.org/san/htdocs/hypermail
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jul 03 2000 - 12:00:34 EDT