Comments from experts on outline
editAs part of the Wikipedia:Meetup/SDGs/Communication of environment SDGs project, I’m proposing some minor revisions to this article. This would include minor revision to the structure, some content suggestions, and the incorporation of a broader set of references. These suggestions are based on comments from Michael Grubb, convening Lead Author for Chapter 1 of the IPCC AR6 WGIII report.
Organizational issues:
- A new section, dealing with the evolution in practice, the empirical lessons, and those implications would be helpful. It could be located between current Sections 2 (Economic theory) and 3 (Impacts).
- Section 4 (Supporters) should be shortened.
Other general comments:
- Disciplinary bias. Its mostly a text of economics, and written partly in economese which others may find hard to access. It doesn’t address much at all the other social science perspectives.
- Lack of balance. Most of the core text appears to be written by economists advocating carbon taxes – even when it strays into non-economic issues. In truth, almost every attempt to introduce carbon taxes has encountered severe public (and business) opposition. And there are plenty of academic articles now charting political opposition (not just of industry …) as the prime challenge.
- Regional bias. The coverage seems overly focused on the US, with brief nods to the few places that have actually implemented carbon taxes (Scandinavia, British Colombia, others with a range of energy taxation policies).