There was an initiative on the ballot in Washington State, in the United States, in November 2016, to create a revenue-neutral carbon tax, beginning at $15 per tonne and gradually increasing to $100 per tonne. From the perspective of economic theory, it was an ideal way to reduce carbon emissions. While it was supported by many academics, however, it was opposed by much of the state’s environmental community, not because the tax itself was insufficient, but precisely because it was revenue-neutral (New York Times Editorial Board 2016). In part due to this lack of support from environmental NGOs, it lost, garnering only 42 percent of the vote.
Several elements of this story seem notable in the context of a historical perspective on climate—and more broadly, environmental—governance. First, there seemed to be a general acceptance that the market-based mechanism of a tax was to be preferred to other mechanisms,...