The Paradox of Measurable Counterfactuals and the Fall of Emissions Trading

What we want to stress is the epistemological ambivalence and the contradictions of neo-liberalism — the ways that the fallibility of expert knowledge are alternately highlighted and downplayed — are marshalled as a vital defence mechanism against unwanted governmental intervention. (Davies and McGoey, 2012: 73)

If we remain stuck in the short time frame of the now we are also likely to become bereft in the imagination of futures. (Back and Puwar, 2012: 8)

Counterfactuals are speculations about the future; literally thought experiments in possibility. At base they are ‘if X then Y statements’. In this sense, they are essential inputs to and outputs from economic modelling: potential futures must be speculated upon to make them calculable. Modellers themselves are all too aware of the limits of their tools; however, these tools must be understood by policymakers who have their own agendas and rationales (MacKenzie, 1983). The paradox of measurable counterfactuals lies in the ambivalent epistemology of emissions reductions against some imagined ‘command-and-control’ future. At base, the paradox is:

The emissions reductions are objective and therefore beyond politics.… We agreed on how to measure the Baseline against which emissions are to be reduced.