İklim Değişikliğinin Bilim ve Ekonomi Perspektifinden Analizi

Öz

Anahtar Kelimeler

• -

İKLİM DEĞİŞİKLİĞİNİN BİLİM VE EKONOMİ PERSPEKTİFİNDEN ANALİZİ

Öz

Bu çalışmada, iklim değişikliği konusu bilim ve ekonomi perspektifinden ele alınmıştır. Literatürde iklim değişikliğinin bilimsel temellerinin geçerliğine ilişkin ortak bir görüşten söz etmek zordur. İklim değişliğinin ekonomik cephesi ise, Kyoto Protokolü’nde ifade edilen emisyon indirimleri çerçevesinde emisyon ticaretine dayanmaktadır. Üç farklı piyasa yapısına göre, emisyon ticaretinin emisyon indirimlerinden doğacak maliyetleri en aza indireceği düşünülmektedir

Anahtar Kelimeler

• İklim Değişikliği, Kyoto Protokolü, Emisyon Ticareti

Kaynakça

1. 1. ANDERSON, R. (1996), “Questionnaire on the Politics of Global Warming by the Research Manager,” American Petroleum Institute.
2. 2. BABIKER, M. H. D. vd. (2001) “The Welfare Costs of Hybrid Carbon Policies in the Europen Union,” MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change Report, No: 74, Cambridge, MA.
3. 3. BABIKER, M. H. D. vd. (2002), “The Evolution of a Climate Regime:Kyoto to Marrakech,” Environmental Science and Policy, 5(3), 195-206.
4. 4. BABIKER, M. H. D. ve R. S. ECKAUS (2002) “Rethinking the Kyoto EmissionsTargets,” Climatic Change, 54, 399-414.
5. 5. BATE, R. (2001), “The Political Economy of Climate Change Science: A Discernible Human Influence on Climate Documents”, http://accessible.iea.org.uk/files/upld-article3pdf?pdf (16.05.2005).
6. 6. BABIKER, M. H. D. vd. (2004), “Is International Emissions Trading Always Beneficial,” The Energy Journal, 25(2), 33-56.
7. 7. BÖHRİNGER, C. ve A. LÖSCHEL (2003), “Market Power and Hot Air in International Emissions Trading: the Impacts of US withdrawal from the Kyoto Protocol,” Applied Economics, 35, 651-63.
8. 8. BRADLEY, R. L. (2003), Climate Alarmism Reconsidered, The Institute of Economic Affairs, London.

9. 9. COLE, M. A. (2003), “Environmental Optimists, Environmental Pessimists and the Real State of the World – An Article Examining the Skeptical Environmentalist: Measuring the Real State of the World by Bjorn Lomborg”, The Economic Journal, 111, 362-380.
10. 10. DAMRO, C. ve P. L. MENDEZ (2003), “Emissions Trading at Kyoto: From EU Resistance to Union Innovation,” Environmental Poltics, 12(2), 71-94.
11. 11. DOBES, L. (1999), “Kyoto: Tradable Greenhouse Emission Permits in the Transport Sector,” Transport Review, 19(1), 81-97.
12. 12. EDWARDS, P. N. (1999), “Global Climate Science, Uncertainty and Politics: Data-Laden Models, Model-Filtered Data”, Science as Culture 8 (4), 437-472.
13. 13. ELLERMAN, A. D. (1999), “Obstacles to Global CO2 Trading: A Familiar Problem,” MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, Report No: 42, Cambridge, MA.
14. 14. ELLERMAN, A. D. vd. (1998), “The Effect on Developing Countries of the Kyoto Protocol and CO2 Emission Trading,” MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, Report No: 41, Cambridge, MA.
15. 15. ELLERMAN, A. D. ve I. S. WİNG (2000), “Supplementarity: An Invitation for Monopsony?,” The Energy Journal, 21(4), 29-59. 16. ENDS Report (1992), “Carbon Friendly Industrialists,” Nisan: 207.
16. 17. GRUBB, M. (1989), “The Greenhause Effect: Negotiating Targets,” Royal Institute of International Affairs, London. 18. HARE, B. (2005), “Communication on Global Warming: The Ball is Now in the US Court”, Global Change, Peace and Security, 17 (1), 87- 94.
17. 19. HULME, M. ve J. TURNPENNY (2004), “Understanding and Managing Climate Change: The UK Experience”, The Geographical Journal, 170 (2), 105-115.
18. 20. KELLOW, A. (2005), “The Greenhouse and the Garbage Can: Uncertainty and Problem Construction in Climate Policy”, Uncertainty and Climate Change: The Challenge for Policy, Occasional Paper 2/2005, Ed: Zillman, J. W., McKibbin, W. J. ve Kellow, A., Academy off Social Sciences in Australia, Canberra, ss.50-64.
19. 21. LAROCHELLE, M. ve P. SPENCER (2001), “Global Warming Science: Facts vs. Fiction” Consumers’ Research, July 2001, 10-14.
20. 22. LUCARINI, V. (2002), “Towards a Definition of Climate Science” Int. J. Environment and Pollution, 18 (5), 413-422.
21. 23. MANNE, A. ve R. RICHELS (1999), “The Kyoto Protocol: A CostEffective Strategy for Meeting Environmental Objectives?,” The Costs of the Kyoto Protocol: A Multi-Model Evaluation.The Energy Journal, (Special Issue): 1-23.
22. 24. MATTHEWS, K. ve M. PATERSON (2005), “Boom or Bust? The Economic Engine Behind the Drive for Climate Change Policy,” Global Change, Peace and Security, 7(1), 59-83.
23. 25. MICHAELOWA, A. ve T. KOCH (2001), “An International Registration and Tracking System for Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading: Elements, Possibilities, Problems and Issues for Furter Discussion,” Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning, 3, 233-44.
24. 26. NEWEL, P. ve M. PATERSON (1998), “A Climate for Business: Global Warming, the State and Capital,” Review of International Political Economy, 5(4), 679-703.
25. 27. Nordhause, W. D. ve G. YOHE (1983), “Futur Paths of Energy and Carbon Dioxide emissions,” İçinde: Changing Climate, National Academy Press, Washington DC.
26. 28. O’KEEFE, W. ve J. KUETER, (2004), “Politics and Science: Is Science Politicized?”, G. C. Marshall Institute Policy Outlook, May 2004, www.marshall.org/pdf/materials/213.pdf (16.05.2005).
27. 29. OECD. (2004), “OECD Global Forum on Susutainable Development Emissions Trading,” CATEP Coutry Forum, Paris.
28. 30. PIELKE, R. A. (2004), “What is Climate Change?” http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/admin/publication-files/resourse-486- 2004.09.pdf (16.05.2004).
29. 31. REILLY, J. vd. (1987), “Monte Carlo Analysis of the IEA/ORAU Enerji/Carbon Emissions Model,” The Enerji Journal, 8(3), 1-29.
30. 32. RIIA Report (2003), “EU Emissions Trading Challenges and Implication of Natioanl mplementation,” Kasım.
31. 33. RIIA Report (2003), “EU Emissions Trading Challenges and Implication of Natioanl mplementation,” Kasım.
32. 34. ROBINSON, J. ve A. SHAW (2004), “Imbued Science: Science-Policy Interaction in the IPCC”, Proceedings of the 2002 Berlin Conference on the Human Dimension of Global Environmental Change ‘Knowledge for the Sustainability Transition The Challenge for Social Science’ Global Governance Project, Ed: Biermann, F., Campe, S. ve Jacob, K., Amsterdam, 143-153.
33. 35. SALORANTA, T. M. (2001), “Post Normal Science and the Global Climate Change Issue”, Climatic Change, 50, 395-404.
34. 36. SARGET, P. vd. (2004), “The Cost of Kyoto Protocol Targets: The Case of Japon”, MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, Report No:112, Cambridge, MA.
35. 37. UNCTAD. (1992), “Tradeable Entitlements for Carbon Emissions Abatement,” Genova.
36. 38. Von STORCH, H. Ve vd. (2001), “Noise in the Climate SystemUbiquitous, Constitutive and Concealing”, Mathematics Unlimited-2001 and Beyond, Part II, Ed. Engquist, B. Ve Schmid, W., Springer Verlag.
37. 39. WALFSON, R. ve S. H. SCHNEIDER (2002), “Understanding Climate Science”, Climate Change Policy: A Survey, Ed: Schneider, S. H., Rosencranz, A. ve Niles, J. O., Island Press, Washington DC, 3-51.
38. 40. WALFSON, R. ve S. H.CHNEIDER (2002), “Understanding Climate Science”, Climate Change Policy: A Survey, Ed: Schneider, S. H., Rosencranz, A. ve Niles, J. O., Island Press, Washington DC, ss.3-51.
39. 41. WALFSON, R. ve S.H. SCHNEIDER (2002), “Understanding Climate Science”, Climate Change Policy: A Survey, Ed: Schneider, S. H., Rosencranz, A. ve Niles, J. O., Island Press, Washington DC, 3-51.
40. 42. WEYANT, J. P. (1999), “The cost of the Kyoto Prtocol: A Multi- Model Evaluation”, The Enerji Journal, (Special Issue).
41. 43. WEYANT, J.P. and J. HİLL (1999), “Introduction and Overview,” The Costs of the Kyoto Protocol:A Multi-Model Evaluation,” The Energy Journal (Special Issue): vii-xııv.
42. 44. WIKIPEDIA (2005), “Global Warming Controversy”, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming_contraversy (09.05.2005).
43. 45. WIKIPEDIA (2005), “Global Warming Controversy”, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming_contraversy (09.05.2005).
44. 46. YANG, Z., vd. (1996), “The MIT Emissions Prediction and Policy Analysis (EPPA) Model,” MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change Report, No: 6, Cambridge, MA.
45. 47. ZHANG, Z. (2000) “Estimating the Size of the Potential Market for the Kyoto Flexibility Mechanisms,” FEEM Working Papers, No: 8, http/papers.ssrn.com/.