Sequestration through forestry and agriculture

Current climate mitigation policies have not fully resolved contentious issues regarding the inclusion of carbon sequestration through changes in forestry and agricultural management practices. Terrestrial carbon sinks could be a low-cost mitigation option that fosters conservation and development, yet issues related to accurately documenting the amount of carbon sequestered undermine confidence that emission offsets through sequestration are equivalent to emission reductions. From an atmospheric perspective, net of CO2 removals through sequestration are equivalent to emission reductions over a given period of time. But carbon will not remain sequestered in biomass or soils indefinitely and investments in sequestration could stifle investments in reducing emissions from other sources. Many international climate agreements cap emissions from some countries or sectors but enable participation of uncapped countries or sectors for forestry and agricultural sequestration. This structure can prompt emission increases in parts of the uncapped entities that weaken the value of emission reductions earned through sequestration. This has been a minor issue under the Clean Development Mechanism of the Kyoto Protocol. Reduced emissions through deforestation and degradation is susceptible to the same problems. The purpose of this article is to review the science, politics, and policy that form the basis of arguments for and against the inclusion forestry and agricultural sequestration as a component of current and future international climate mitigation policies.

Applying an equity lens to tobacco-control policies and their uptake in six western-european countries

We identified policies that may be effective in reducing smoking among socioeconomically disadvantaged groups, and examined trends in their level of application between 1985 and 2000 in six western-European countries (Sweden, Finland, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Germany, and Spain). We located studies from literature searches in major databases, and acquired policy data from international data banks and questionnaires distributed to tobacco policy organisations/researchers. Advertising bans, smoking bans in workplaces, removing barriers to smoking cessation therapies, and increasing the cost of cigarettes have the potential to reduce socioeconomic inequalities in smoking. Between 1985 and 2000, tobacco control policies in most countries have become more targeted to decrease the smoking behaviour of low-socioeconomic groups. Despite this, many national tobacco-control strategies in western-European countries still fall short of a comprehensive policy approach to addressing smoking inequalities.

New media policies

This chapter explores the influence of economic ideas on media policies, particularly the work of John Maynard Keynes, Joseph Schumpeter and Karl Marx. It critically appraises the development of new media policies, and arguments that neo-liberal principles have been the primary driver of such policies.