The international diplomacy of climate change is the most implausible and unpromising initiative since the disarmament talks of the 1930s, and for many of the same reasons; that the Kyoto Protocol and its progeny are the climate diplomacy equivalent of the Kellogg-Briand Pact of 1928 that promised to end war (a treaty that is still on the books, by the way), and finally, that future historians are going to look back on this whole period as the climate policy equivalent of wage and price controls to fight inflation in the 1970s.

The 1992 Rio Earth Summit produced an important, common sense consensus in favor of avoiding "dangerous interference" with the global climate. Rio, however, led to the Kyoto Protocol, which abandoned the focus on reliable science and effective policy in favor of arbitrary, unrealistic targets and timetables. Kyoto, for all practical...

At the UN conference on climate change,concerns about impending climate change will be interspersed with attacks on the United States for not ratifying the Kyoto Protocol.

At the UN conference on climate change, concern about the consequences for humanity from impending change to our climate will be interspersed with attacks on the United States.

Anew book from the AEI Press provides insight into the precautionary principle and how it has been used in one prominent legal system.

Climate change might pose a grave threat, but emissions containment is both costly and politically impractical, so climate engineering is beginning to look like the last best hope.

UN Framework Convention on Climate Change produced a protocol for reducing emissions of several greenhouse gases widely believed to contribute to global warming.

International agreements that go beyond the rules of international trade and finance should receive the intense scrutiny of the treaty process, regardless of their policy merits.