Foreign impacts and climate change

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

U.S. administrative agencies now routinely base domestic regulatory decisions upon the expected global impacts of carbon dioxide emissions. This is a startling divergence from traditional regulatory practice, which had been to entirely exclude foreign impacts from domestic regulatory analysis. Even more strikingly, this significant shift in valuation practice has occurred with virtually no legal analysis as to when or whether agencies have the statutory authority to consider foreign impacts. As a result, a number of recent rules proposed on the basis of a globally scoped Social Cost of Carbon ("SCC") are now vulnerable to legal challenge. To insulate future rules against such challenges, agencies should adopt the globally scoped SCC only where they have performed individualized, statute-specific analyses of their own authority to incorporate foreign impacts into their decisions.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)371-421
Number of pages51
JournalHarvard Environmental Law Review
Volume39
Issue number2
StatePublished - Jan 1 2015

Fingerprint

climate change
valuation
carbon dioxide
divergence
carbon
social costs
statute
analysis
decision
social cost

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Environmental Science (miscellaneous)
  • Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law
  • Law

Cite this

Foreign impacts and climate change. / Rowell, Kristen Arden.

In: Harvard Environmental Law Review, Vol. 39, No. 2, 01.01.2015, p. 371-421.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{718fdc48509a405faf898f9cfca0d894,
title = "Foreign impacts and climate change",
abstract = "U.S. administrative agencies now routinely base domestic regulatory decisions upon the expected global impacts of carbon dioxide emissions. This is a startling divergence from traditional regulatory practice, which had been to entirely exclude foreign impacts from domestic regulatory analysis. Even more strikingly, this significant shift in valuation practice has occurred with virtually no legal analysis as to when or whether agencies have the statutory authority to consider foreign impacts. As a result, a number of recent rules proposed on the basis of a globally scoped Social Cost of Carbon ({"}SCC{"}) are now vulnerable to legal challenge. To insulate future rules against such challenges, agencies should adopt the globally scoped SCC only where they have performed individualized, statute-specific analyses of their own authority to incorporate foreign impacts into their decisions.",
author = "Rowell, {Kristen Arden}",
year = "2015",
month = "1",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "39",
pages = "371--421",
journal = "Harvard Environmental Law Review",
issn = "0147-8257",
publisher = "Harvard University",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Foreign impacts and climate change

AU - Rowell, Kristen Arden

PY - 2015/1/1

Y1 - 2015/1/1

N2 - U.S. administrative agencies now routinely base domestic regulatory decisions upon the expected global impacts of carbon dioxide emissions. This is a startling divergence from traditional regulatory practice, which had been to entirely exclude foreign impacts from domestic regulatory analysis. Even more strikingly, this significant shift in valuation practice has occurred with virtually no legal analysis as to when or whether agencies have the statutory authority to consider foreign impacts. As a result, a number of recent rules proposed on the basis of a globally scoped Social Cost of Carbon ("SCC") are now vulnerable to legal challenge. To insulate future rules against such challenges, agencies should adopt the globally scoped SCC only where they have performed individualized, statute-specific analyses of their own authority to incorporate foreign impacts into their decisions.

AB - U.S. administrative agencies now routinely base domestic regulatory decisions upon the expected global impacts of carbon dioxide emissions. This is a startling divergence from traditional regulatory practice, which had been to entirely exclude foreign impacts from domestic regulatory analysis. Even more strikingly, this significant shift in valuation practice has occurred with virtually no legal analysis as to when or whether agencies have the statutory authority to consider foreign impacts. As a result, a number of recent rules proposed on the basis of a globally scoped Social Cost of Carbon ("SCC") are now vulnerable to legal challenge. To insulate future rules against such challenges, agencies should adopt the globally scoped SCC only where they have performed individualized, statute-specific analyses of their own authority to incorporate foreign impacts into their decisions.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84981156316&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84981156316&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84981156316

VL - 39

SP - 371

EP - 421

JO - Harvard Environmental Law Review

JF - Harvard Environmental Law Review

SN - 0147-8257

IS - 2

ER -