Ship-source greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions could increase by up to 250% from 2012 levels by 2050 owing to increasing global freight volumes. Binding international legal agreements to regulate GHGs, however, are lacking as technical solutions remain expensive and crucial industrial support is absent. In 2003, IMO adopted Resolution A.963 (23) to regulate shipping CO2 emissions via technical, operational, and market-based routes. However, progress has been slow and uncertain; there is no concrete emission reduction target or definitive action plan. Yet, a full-fledged roadmap may not even emerge until 2023. In this policy analysis, we revisit the progress of technical, operational, and market-based routes and the associated controversies. We argue that 1) a performance-based index, though good-intentioned, has loopholes affecting meaningful CO2 emission reductions driven by technical advancements; 2) using slow steaming to cut energy consumption stands out among operational solutions thanks to its immediate and obvious results, but with the already slow speed in practice, this single source has limited emission reduction potential; 3) without a technology-savvy shipping industry, a market-based approach is essentially needed to address the environmental impact. To give shipping a 50:50 chance for contributing fairly and proportionately to keep global warming below 2°C, deep emission reductions should occur soon.
Ship-source greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions could increase by up to 250% from 2012 levels by 2050 owing to increasing global freight volumes. Binding international legal agreements to regulate GHGs, however, are lacking as technical solutions remain expensive and crucial industrial support is absent. In 2003, IMO adopted Resolution A.963 (23) to regulate shipping CO2 emissions via technical, operational, and market-based routes. However, progress has been slow and uncertain; there is no concrete emission reduction target or definitive action plan. Yet, a full-fledged roadmap may not even emerge until 2023. In this policy analysis, we revisit the progress of technical, operational, and market-based routes and the associated controversies. We argue that 1) a performance-based index, though good-intentioned, has loopholes affecting meaningful CO2 emission reductions driven by technical advancements; 2) using slow steaming to cut energy consumption stands out among operational solutions thanks to its immediate and obvious results, but with the already slow speed in practice, this single source has limited emission reduction potential; 3) without a technology-savvy shipping industry, a market-based approach is essentially needed to address the environmental impact. To give shipping a 50:50 chance for contributing fairly and proportionately to keep global warming below 2°C, deep emission reductions should occur soon.
Background:Ecstasy (3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA)) has a relatively low harm and low dependence liability but is scheduled on List I of the Dutch Opium Act (‘hard drugs’). Concerns surrounding increasing MDMA-related criminality coupled with the possibly inappropriate scheduling of MDMA initiated a debate to revise the current Dutch ecstasy policy.Methods:An interdisciplinary group of 18 experts on health, social harms and drug criminality and law enforcement reformulated the science-based Dutch MDMA policy using multi-decision multi-criterion decision analysis (MD-MCDA). The experts collectively formulated policy instruments and rated their effects on 25 outcome criteria, including health, criminality, law enforcement and financial issues, thematically grouped in six clusters.Results:The experts scored the effect of 22 policy instruments, each with between two and seven different mutually exclusive options, on 25 outcome criteria. The optimal policy model was defined by the set of 22 policy instrument options which gave the highest overall score on the 25 outcome criteria. Implementation of the optimal policy model, including regulated MDMA sales, decreases health harms, MDMA-related organised crime and environmental damage, as well as increases state revenues and quality of MDMA products and user information. This model was slightly modified to increase its political feasibility. Sensitivity analyses showed that the outcomes of the current MD-MCDA are robust and independent of variability in weight values.Conclusion:The present results provide a feasible and realistic set of policy instrument options to revise the legislation towards a rational MDMA policy that is likely to reduce both adverse (public) health risks and MDMA-related criminal burden.
MULTIFILE
