From the inbox:
There is a lot of mis-information out there about the costs and benefits of such strategies and how such strategies might function. It might be helpful if workshop participants were presented with an array of possible solutions like evaluations of the European experience with cap-and-trade; proposals for cap-and-trade solutions in the US; merits of carbon tax proposals; evaluations of the European carbon tax recycling efforts. ...
... I am aware that you have both an interest and expertise in this area. Moreover, you are apparently one of the few knowledgable agnostics in a field where everybody seems to have a preference. This would make you the perfect candidate to be the person with whom I should initiate discussions.
The first definition of an agnostic at Merriam-Webster's is "a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God the efficiency of alternative policy instruments) is unknown and probably unknowable." That is not quite the way it is. I don't disagree with the current policy instrument thinking:
- a carbon tax is more efficient than carbon cap-and-trade
- carbon cap-and-trade can be designed to mimic the properties of a carbon tax
- etc
The concept that drives my acceptance of a second or third best incentive-based environmental policy instrument is that they are all likely much more efficient than a command and control policy.
Therefore, I guess, I fit the second definition of agnostic: "a person unwilling to commit to an opinion about something."