Appeals to Reason

This article considers how statistical reasoning changes conceptions of evidence and proof. Beginning with three Court of Appeal judgments in which proof is quantified, it traces the implications of statistical ways of thinking about proof through the law of criminal evidence. This leads to the bizarre conclusion that proof is, by and large, impossible. The argument then takes a more constructive turn. The way in which the presumption of innocence is conceptualised in statistical argument is criticised and it is suggested that proof depends on a precondition of trust in the way suspects are selected by the police. For that trust to be deserved, police suspects must be chosen in a legitimate manner.     

Climate Change Policy Implementation: A Cross-Sectional Analysis

Why would countries invest resources to protect the global atmosphere, a global common‐pool resource? After all, this is an open‐access resource with no restrictions on appropriating its benefits. Furthermore, why would they do so under the aegis of a weak global regime (the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, UNFCCC) that has virtually no provisions for sanctioning noncompliance and when the largest contributor to the problem is not participating in the regime? This article examines why a number of countries have implemented the UNFCCC. I hypothesize that countries implement UNFCCC because they corner domestic environmental benefits, namely reduction in local pollution. In my empirical analysis of 127 countries, employing an ordinal logistic regression model, I find that local air pollution is associated with higher levels of implementation of the UNFCCC. Thus, I conclude that the incentives to implement a relatively weak global regime can be found in the domestic political economy.     

Tradable Permits for Common‐Pool Resources: An Assessment

Scholars often attribute deterioration in common‐pool resources (CPRs) to ill‐defined property rights and suggest privatization and tradable permit markets as a solution to the commons problem. CPRs are heterogeneous, differing in physical characteristics and use patterns. Regulating their use requires tailored policy solutions that cohere with these characteristics. This paper examines factors that contribute to a well‐performing tradable permit market. While the literature offers rich empirical analyses of individual tradable permit markets, it has not provided an analytical framework enabling comparative analysis of these markets. This paper develops and employs an analytical framework for comparing across markets. The comparative analysis of market performance suggests that markets are not successful in all environmental problems and all demand situations. Further, it shows that even some markets frequently cited as exemplary successes have been that for nonmarket‐related reasons. On the other hand, this comparative analysis identifies sources of success for markets that partial analytical frameworks would have predicted to fail.     

Investments in Global Warming Mitigation: The Case of “Activities Implemented Jointly”

This paper examines bilateral cooperation between developed countries (home country) and developing countries (host country) to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to enhance carbon dioxide sinks. With the home-host country pair as the unit of analysis, our logistic regression model examines 158 Activities Implemented Jointly (AIJ) investment projects from 1993 until 2002 across 2541 country-pairs. Because the marginal costs of reducing emissions may be lower in developing countries, the AIJ projects served as a policy laboratory to assess whether such investments might be advantageous to both countries in the event future regimes allowed emission credits from such bilateral projects. Instead of investing in home countries where maximum pollution reductions (or carbon sequestration) might be possible, home countries invest in locations where they can conduct their policy experiments at low transaction costs. Prior trade and aid relationships were used as a proxy. Regarding energy projects, location decisions are driven by home countries’ desire to reduce air pollution that they receive from abroad. Geography – proximity of a host country to a home country – in interaction with host country's coal production, is a very important driver of location decision in AIJ energy sector projects. Location of sequestration projects is impacted by the host country's potential for avoiding deforestation as well as by previous aid and trade patterns between a home and a host country. Proximity is not important in this case.     

Policy design and public support for carbon tax: Evidence from a 2018 US national online survey experiment

Public support for policy instruments is influenced by perceptions of how benefits and costs are distributed across various groups. We examine different carbon tax designs outlining different ways to distribute tax revenues. Using a national online sample of 1,606 US respondents, we examine support for a $20/ton carbon tax that is: (1) revenue neutral: revenue is returned to citizens via tax cuts; (2) compensation-focused: revenue is directed to helping actors disproportionately hurt by the tax; (3) mitigation-focused: revenue funds projects reducing carbon emissions; and (4) adaptation-focused: revenue is directed to enhancing community resilience to extreme weather events. We find devoting revenue to mitigation raises overall support for carbon tax by 6.3 per cent versus the control (54.9 per cent) where no information on spending is provided. Other frames raise support in specific subgroups only. Revenue neutrality raises support among lower-income households (+6.6 per cent) and political independents (+9.4 per cent), while compensation increases support among lower-income repondents (+6.1 per cent).     

Rethinking the Privilege Against Self-Incrimination

While recognized in a large number of jurisdictions, the privilegeagainst self-incrimination proves hard to justify. This articleattempts to develop a rationale for the privilege which avoidsthe usual pitfalls. It argues that the most compelling rationalefor the privilege is that it serves as a distancing mechanism,allowing defendants to disassociate themselves from prosecutions.The resulting account has implications for the scope of theprivilege. First, it suggests that no distinction should bedrawn between requirements to speak and requirements to providethe authorities with documents, blood samples and the like.Second, it is argued that recognition of a privilege againstself-incrimination implies that we should recognize a privilegeagainst other incrimination which has similar force. Attentionis also paid to exceptions to the privilege.