The primary reduction strategy under the Kyoto Protocol is a trading system that essentially makes carbon credits a commodity like oil or gas.

This means essentially the lack of any particular reduction strategy - with regard to reducibility, "all bets are off".

The advantage of the "core reduction strategy" was more and thinner flakes per mass of cores.

The lambda calculus, a formal system for the study of functions, has often been used to model evaluation strategies, where they are usually called reduction strategies.

If the goal of the reduction strategy is to produce flakes, the remnant lithic core may be discarded once it has become too small to use.

They may have internal reduction strategies, or they may be tied in with national targets.

Furthermore, it has also been demonstrated that very different core reduction strategies can produce seemingly diagnostic Levallois blanks.

This is the only attribute, which both reduction strategies have in common.

There are many examples demonstrating that reduction is possible, and a gradual reduction strategy could have been introduced without endangering the industry and jobs.

It seems to me that we need more information on this link in order to be able to develop an appropriate reduction strategy.