The International Energy Agency's World Energy Outlook (1982) reports on the results of an ambitious and comprehensive international energy study. The report represents a major step forward in the coordination and communication of energy policy analyses among the 21 IE A member countries. A major conclusion of the study is that the current softness of the world oil market is not likely to last out the current decade, particularly without fundamentally new policy initiatives on the part of the major oil importers. One could argue with the various assumptions and analyses that are employed to arrive at this conclusion, but on the whole the IE A's analysis appears to be carefully and consistently done, particularly for a study involving a high degree of cooperation between analysts from countries who are basically allies, but often have goals and objectives that differ in particular areas. Although we are in broad agreement with the conclusions of the analysis that is at the foundation of the World Energy Outlook, in our opinion the policy recommendations that are drawn from them are incomplete. The IEA argues that since the world oil market will eventually tighten, policy measures designed to reduce the level of oil imports should be high on the energy policy agenda of the member nations. Nowhere though, is an attempt made to evaluate these import reductions, and thus important questions remain unanswered. If fewer oil imports are better, are none best? Are all import reductions equally desirable? The concept of an import premium could have been exploited to focus the discussion on import-reduction policies and provide some guidance for national policy in this area. As defined by Kline (1981), for example, the import premium measures the difference between the total cost of oil to importing countries and the world price. Estimates of the premium value thus provide guidance in how far governments should be willing to go in encouraging import-reducing activities. The IEA report is unnecessarily vague in this regard.