Climate Change Politics and Policy · 2017-05-09 · 1 Climate Change Politics and Policy Prof....
Transcript of Climate Change Politics and Policy · 2017-05-09 · 1 Climate Change Politics and Policy Prof....
1
Climate Change Politics and Policy
Prof. Todd M. La Porte
Associate Professor
Founders Hall 552
Office hours: Tuesday 1-3 pm, and by appt.
(202) 903-6464 (please no calls after 8 pm)
tlaporte *at* gmu.edu (preferred)
Fall Semester, 2016
GOV 319
EVPP xxx
Mondays, 4:30-7:10 pm
Room: TBA (possibly Robinson 246)
DRAFT Revised: 8/12/16
Climate change has been called the most significant public policy problem the world has ever faced.
Scientific work dating back to the late 19th century began to establish a link between human industrial
activity and increased global temperatures. However, it wasn’t until the 1980s that the issue of global
warming was raised convincingly by environmental activists and taken seriously by political leaders.
Since then, progress in illuminating the precise causes of climate and other global environmental changes
has accelerated. Important policies have been implemented, such as the Montreal Protocol to control
ozone-depleting chemicals, the Kyoto Protocol to control greenhouse gases.
The recent Paris agreement on climate change establishes for the first time a comprehensive, if
controversial, regime to limit global average temperature increases to no more than 2° Celsius; scientific
consensus that a better target is no greater than a 1.5° Celsius rise.
However, as climate scientists continue to uncover evidence of “dangerous anthropogenic climate
change,” climate politics is contentious, particularly in the United States. Resistance to aggressive climate
response in Congress is strong, the main action is in states, such as California, and cities and
communities, such as New York, Seattle, Chicago and even Arlington, Virginia.
Why is this so? What is it about climate change that produces such anxiety about what to do? Isn’t there a
moral case for action that should motivate everyone to act? What about the economic case, that it’s
cheaper to deal with the problems now than later? How are our politics responding to the multiple threats
associated with climate change? And what are the policies that might help us get a handle on it, once and
for all? Is technology the answer?
This course is designed to address the most important facets of climate politics and policy through an
advanced introduction to the issues of climate change science and policy. The course will be run as
a discussion seminar. Students will take a major role in reading and discussing the current literature.
The course also aims for a high level of practical policy training, along with a rigorous examination of the
climate science and policy literature.
The course deliverable is a group project on a selected climate policy issue, to be discussed in our first
class. The idea will be to prepare briefing materials for the next presidential administration, including
briefing papers and presentations. Some possible project topics include:
Energy system transition: Some countries, are shifting to a new energy paradigm by doubling down
on alternative energy sources, or in the case of Germany, even eliminating nuclear power: what
would such goals mean for the United States energy system?
Cutting carbon emissions: what issues would result from a goal to reduce, for example, agricultural
2
or transportation carbon emissions to half current levels by mid-century?
Pricing carbon: Economists generally agree that an accurate and widely accepted price for carbon
dioxide would help reduce carbon emissions and provide clear signals for technological innovation.
What might a U.S. pricing system look like, and how might it be implemented? Is a carbon tax a
viable candidate? What are the alternatives?
Adaptation on the front lines: how are, and how should, public officials in towns and cities doing to
prepare for climate challenges in the next 25 to 50 years, the lifetime of many public assets and
program time-horizons?
Low-carbon development: how can the developed world, especially the United States, help the
developing world achieve higher standards of living without the usual increases in carbon emissions?
What examples of successful strategies or cases do we have, and what are their strengths and
limitations?
Learning outcomes
Course learning objectives include:
Understand the principle climate science, politics and policy issues
Identify policy, political, and institutional issues that present barriers to effective policy
development, program design, and implementation
Understand the role of technologies in addressing climate concerns and their environmental,
economic and institutional ramifications
Understand basic professional policy analysis practices and techniques, and use them in a
simulation of a real-world policy setting
The course teaches students pertinent approaches to the study of climate science, climate policy-making
and climate politics, as a specific and important example of the interaction of science and policy. By the
end of the course, students will be well positioned to pursue further work on climate policy.
Requirements, Grades and Examinations
There are five main requirements for the course:
Blackboard posting and discussion 30%
Participation in class discussions 20%
Group project contribution 40%
Project presentation contribution 10%
Participation in class discussion is essential. You will be expected to review carefully in advance the
material assigned for each class and be prepared to discuss the important aspects of the readings in class
(see “Blackboard Posting and Reading Discussion” section below). My role in this process will be to get
the discussion started, assist the class with specific observations, pose questions, and help the class to
discover general principles running through the literature that are relevant to the issues we are taking up.
Texts
There is no required textbook for the course. All readings will be available through the Library or on
Blackboard.
3
Syllabus
Readings and Blackboard postings must be completed before each class session.
Week 1
Introduction: Read before first class session
Group A post Start Off Comments, Group B post Response Comments
We’ll set the stage for this course with a brief encounter with some provocative statements about the
problems the world faces: the challenge of climate change and the nexus of climate and energy. We’ll
also watch (before class) several recent popular media presentations that raise questions about climate
change and energy in easily accessible ways.
You may have already seen the 2007 film starring Al Gore, An Inconvenient Truth, which jumpstarted the
public conversation about climate change. If so, watch at the first episode of the 2014 documentary series,
Years of Living Dangerously, a Showtime production. We will revisit the subject of climate and risk
communications later, but these films are worth watching as we kick off the semester.
Be prepared to discuss the following:
1. McKibben argues societies need to keep in the ground a large quantity of already-discovered fossil
fuels if the planet is to avoid a climate catastrophe. In other writing he has argued that Earth has been
irrevocably changed by humankind, that our traditional reliance on economic growth is a source of
our environmental problems, and that we need new ways to think about the place of humans on it.
How does he support his reasoning? What are his conclusions? Does he make a persuasive case? Why
or why not?
2. How do the films and video for this week compare as climate risk communication vehicles? What
rhetorical or tactical approaches does each take? What social effects do the filmmakers hope will
occur because of their film?
McKibben, Bill, “Global warming’s terrifying new math,” Rolling Stone, July 19, 2012,
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/global-warmings-terrifying-new-math-20120719
An Inconvenient Truth. (2006). David Guggenheim, director, Lawrence Bender Productions, Participant
Media, (1:26:00).
Years of Living Dangerously. (2014). Simcha Jacobovici, director, The Years Project, Showtime, (59:11),
http://yearsoflivingdangerously.com/watch-years/
Week 2
What is climate? What is climate change? How does it happen? How do we know?
Group B post Start Off Comments, Group A post Response Comments
This week we will get some climate science basics under our belts. The U.S. Global Change Research
Program is the most authoritative U.S. synthesis climate science and human implications of climate
change. The science actually matters here, so even though it may seem overwhelming, immerse yourself
in the data and the scientific findings. The payoff will come over the course of the semester. Right now
we’re just taking the measure of the magnitude and complexity of the problem that is climate chane.
Urry, John, Climate Change and Society, (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2011), pp. 18-35.
Climate Reality Project, “Climate 101,” https://www.climaterealityproject.org/climate-101
4
U.S. Global Change Research Program, Climate Literacy: The Essential Principles of Climate Science,
(Washington, DC; U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2009, pp. 1-18,
https://downloads.globalchange.gov/Literacy/climate_literacy_highres_english.pdf
U.S. Global Change Research Program, National Climate Assessment, “Appendix 3: Climate Science
Supplement,” (Washington, DC; U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2014), pp. 735-789,
http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/system/files_force/downloads/high/NCA3_Full_Report_Append
ix_3_Climate_Science_Supplement_HighRes.pdf
Week 3
Human impacts on the environment and climate
Group A post Start Off Comments, Group B post Response Comments
This week we still dig deeper into the human dimensions of climate change, and consider the extent to
which human activity is, for better or worse, irreversibly changing the biology, chemistry, and habitability
of Earth. Are humans now overwhelming the forces of nature? What does that mean for policy and for
policymaking? What are the big choices that human societies are going to have to make?
Rockström, Johan, et al., “A safe operating space for humanity,” Nature, vol. 461, September 29, 2009,
http://steadystate.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/Rockstrom_Nature_Boundaries.pdf
Steffen, Will, Paul Crutzen and John McNeill, “The anthropocene: Are humans now overwhelming the
great forces of nature?” Ambio, vol. 36, no. 8, Dcember 2007, pp. 614-621, https://www.pik-
potsdam.de/news/public-events/archiv/alter-net/former-ss/2007/05-
09.2007/steffen/literature/ambi-36-08-06_614_621.pdf
U.S. Global Change Research Program, National Climate Assessment, “Overview,” (Washington, DC;
U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2014), pp. 1-68,
http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/system/files_force/downloads/high/NCA3_Overview_HighRes.
pdf. In addition, choose three regions to discuss in detail from remainder of the document, pp.
69-97.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2014). “Summary for Policymakers,” in Climate change
2014: the physical science basis, Fifth Assessment Report. WGI Technical Summary. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, UK,
http://www.climatechange2013.org/images/report/WG1AR5_SPM_FINAL.pdf
Week 4
Climate change, responsibility and ethics
Group B post Start Off Comments, Group A post Response Comments
Considerations of ethics and justice, as well as costs and economics, underlie a good deal of climate
politics. The two domains, ethics and economics are, in fact, inextricably linked. Pope Francis weighed in
on this debate last year with an important statement that was discussed around the world.
Ethical issues are about fairness: the developed countries produced nearly all the greenhouse gas
emissions as they industrialized, yet the burden of global warming falls mostly on poor countries that
have historically produced nearly no carbon pollution.
Moreover, any limitations on energy use to limit future global warming would fall most heavily on the
poor, who need more energy to improve their welfare.
So, what role should ethics play in shaping the politics and policy of energy and climate? How should the
hardship of mitigating and adapting to a climate-constrained world be allocated? What principles of
5
climate justice should we use rely on to guide individual and collective action? If ethical principles on
their own are difficult to agree on, does religion offer an answer to politics, as it often does in other areas?
Garvey outlines the major arguments arising from an ethical consideration of climate and energy.
Maniates raises questions about individual responsibility for addressing a global problem. NOW, the PBS
public affairs program by Bill Moyers, examines climate change from the perspective of Christian
religious leaders. We will take on the economic arguments about climate change later in the semester.
Garvey, James. (2008). “Responsibility,” ch. 3, “Doing Nothing,” ch. 4, “Doing Something,” ch. 5, in The
Ethics of Climate Change. Continuum, London, pp. 57-87, 88-112, 113-135.
Maniates, Michael F., “Individualization: plant a tree, ride a bike, save the world?” Global Environmental
Politics, vol. 1, no. 3, 2001, pp. 31-52.
NOW with Bill Moyers, “God and Global Warming,” Public Broadcasting Service, October 26, 2007,
http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/343/
Pope Francis. 2015. Laudato Si’: On Care for Our Common Home [Encyclical], selected quotations,
http://www.catholicclimatecovenant.org/LiteratureRetrieve.aspx?ID=137795. For full encyclical,
see: http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/encyclicals/documents/papa-
francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si.html.
Week 5
Climate change and the politics of denial
Group A post Start Off Comments, Group B post Response Comments
While scientists identified the mechanisms of climate change decades ago, public opinion and political
acceptance of the problem has waxed and waned. Some even deny that a problem even exists; more and
better information about climate effects seems not to help.
How can public attitudes be changed to support climate-friendly and energy-conserving policies? How
can individual behavior change be effected? Appeals to reason, ethics and religion may make some
difference intellectually or spiritually, but something more is needed to shift whole societies in a
particular direction.
We’ll begin our work this week by revisiting An Inconvenient Truth and Years of Living Dangerously.
This session explores a variety of communications research issues and strategies, including use of art and
literature, that may more effectively help shape climate and energy politics.
As noted for week 1, if you’ve seen An Inconvenient Truth, watch any two episodes of the 2014
Showtime series Years of Living Dangerously: a comparison of the two will be instructive on how
climate communications have evolved.
Hulme, M. (2009) “The things we fear,” ch. 6 and “The communication of risk,” ch. 7 in Why We
Disagree About Climate Change: Understanding Controversy, Inaction and Opportunity,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 178-210, 211-247.
Oreskes, Naomi and Erik M. Conway, Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the
Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming, (New York: Bloomsbury Press, 2010),
pp. 169-215, 240-265.
Dunlap, Riley E., and Aaron M. McCright. "Organized climate change denial." The Oxford handbook of
climate change and society (2011): 144-160.
Oreskes, Naomi, and Erik M. Conway. "Defeating the merchants of doubt." Nature 465, no. 7299 (2010):
686-687.
6
Last Week Tonight with John Oliver, season 1, episode 3, “Climate Change Debate,” (4:23),
http://www.hbo.com/last-week-tonight-with-john-oliver/episodes/01/03-may-11-
2014/video/climate-change-debate.html
Skeptical Science, http://www.skepticalscience.com/
Week 6
Climate politics: many colors of green
Group B post Start Off Comments, Group A post Response Comments
So if the case for doing something about climate change is clear, it still remains to ask: how do we go
about acting on it? Individual action is fine, as far as it goes, but for real change, societies have to change
the rules that govern how our economies work, and that reflect a new set of values about humans’
relationship to each other and to nature. This is the work of politics: solving collective action problems.
The reading this week covers some of the (many) discussion about what “green politics” might be, and
how we might structure our collective decision-making processes.
Carter, Neil, The Politics of the Environment: Ideas, Activism, Policy, 2nd ed., (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2001, 2007), “The environment as a policy problem,” ch. 7, and “Sustainable
development and ecological modernisation,” ch. 8, pp. 173-206, 207-239.
Shellenberger, Michael and Nordhaus, Ted. (2004). The Death of Environmentalism: Global Warming
Politics in a Post-Environmental World. The Breakthrough Institute, Oakland, CA,
http://grist.org/article/doe-reprint/
Nijhuis, Michelle, “Is the “ecomodernist manifesto” the future of environmentalism?” The New Yorker,
June 2, 2105, http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/is-the-ecomodernist-manifesto-the-
future-of-environmentalism
Week 7
The energy-climate policy challenge: energy system transition
Group A post Start Off Comments, Group B post Response Comments
In this session we’ll dig deeper into the nature of the climate problem and into how it is linked to the
energy systems we depend on. Holdren is a physicist and served as science advisor to President Obama.
He has long been working on energy and environment issues, as a professor both at UC Berkeley and
Harvard. He observes, “energy is the most difficult part of the environment problem, and environment is
the most difficult part of the energy problem.” Energy is central to the functioning of societies. But until
the late 20th century, dealing with the consequences of energy exploitation was largely an afterthought.
Energy systems are human artifacts, constructed over decades by people and organizations. This session
will also look at energy systems, and introduce the idea of “energy wedges,” a proposal by Pacala and
Socolow to address the challenge of climate change by targeting “all of the above” energy strategies in a
systematic way.
And to bring the abstractions of climate and energy down to earth, we will all be measuring our own
energy use and climate impacts in an informal homework assignment. Be prepared to share your results
with the class.
7
Holdren, John P. (2008). Meeting the Climate Change Challenge. Eighth Annual John H. Chafee
Memorial Lecture on Science and the Environment. Washington, DC: National Council for
Science and the Environment, http://ncseonline.org/sites/default/files/Chafee08final.pdf
Deutsch, John M. (2011). The Crisis in Energy Policy. (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press), ch.
2, “Energy and Climate,” pp. 29-59.
German Energy Transition, “Energiewende,” Heinrich Böll Foundation, July 2015,
http://energytransition.de/. Full text available at: http://energytransition.de/wp-
content/themes/boell/pdf/en/German-Energy-Transition_en.pdf
Authoritative energy references
U.S. Energy Information Agency, “World Energy Demand and Economic Outlook,” International Energy
Outlook 2013, (Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Energy),
http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/ieo/world.cfm
BP Statistical Review of Energy, 2014, http://bp.com/statisticalreview
Week 8
Climate policies: the economics of climate change
Group B post Start Off Comments, Group A post Response Comments
Much of the case for action on climate change rests on economic costs. What will climate changes cost,
and over what time scale? What measures would be most cost effective in avoiding harm, and how
should they be financed? How should those most affected by climate change be compensated?
The path-breaking Stern Report provided the first comprehensive statement of climate costs and benefits;
this session will review that work and responses by critics of it, such as Nordhaus.
But a more fundamental aspect of the economics of climate change is the nature of market failures, and
how “normal” economics contributes to large-scale ecological harm through un-internalized economic
costs. The interconnected nature of human affairs has long been realized by ecologists, but contemporary
political economics often neglects climate externalities, to humanity’s common cost. Thiele argues that
“full cost accounting,” wherein all costs should be included in prices, would be acceptable to liberals and
conservatives, as it would reflect market principles much more fully than at present.
Speth, James Gustave, The Bridge at the Edge of the World: Capitalism, the Environment, and Crossing
From Crisis to Sustainability, (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2008), chs. 1-2, 5-6, pp. 17-
66, 107-146.
Thiele, Leslie Paul, Indra’s Net and the Midas Touch, (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2011), ch. 4,
“Economics,” pp. 131-168.
Stern, N. (ed.) (2006). “Economic modeling of climate change impacts,” ch. 6 in The economics of
climate change: the Stern review. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. See also the
Summary of conclusions and the Executive Summary,
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.hm-
treasury.gov.uk/stern_review_report.htm
Nordhaus, William D. (2006). “The ‘Stern Review’ on the Economics of Climate Change.” National
Bureau of Economic Research, NBER Working Paper No. W12741, December,
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=948654
8
Week 9
Climate policies: Mitigation, regulations, taxes, incentives
Group A post Start Off Comments, Group B post Response Comments
Economic instruments will likely play a key role in reducing carbon pollution and thereby mitigate, even
if they do not eliminate the threat of climate change. Carbon markets, carbon prices, carbon taxes are all
potentially powerful policy instruments to effect change – yet there is still little agreement on the
feasibility, design, implementation or consequences of such policies.
In addition, many observers see an important role for business in mitigating climate change, and advocate
for approaches that enlist businesses support, rather than alienating them. Some go so far as to worry that
the United States is losing the potentially lucrative, and inevitable, race to provide low- or no-carbon
technologies and services to an energy hungry planetary market.
Spaargaren, Gert, and Arthur P. J. Mol. “Carbon flows, carbon markets, and low-carbon lifestyles:
reflecting on the role of markets in climate governance.” Environmental Politics 22, no. 1 (2013):
174-193.
Frank, Charles, “Pricing carbon: a carbon tax or cap-and-trade?” Brookings, August 12, 2014,
http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/planetpolicy/posts/2014/08/12-pricing-carbon-frank
Kossoy, Alexandre et al.. 2015. State and trends of carbon pricing 2015. World Bank Group.
Washington, D.C., http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2015/09/25053834/state-trends-
carbon-pricing-2015, pp. 10-18.
Patchell, Jerry, and Roger Hayter. "How big business can save the climate." Foreign Affairs, vol. 92, no.
5, (2013), pp. 17-22.
New York Times, Room for Debate, “Why isn’t the U.S. a leader in green technology?”
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/09/20/why-isnt-the-us-a-leader-in-green-
technology
Week 10
Climate policies: Technology to the rescue? Opportunities and risks of low-carbon energy
strategies, and the “Stabilization Wedge Game”
Group B post Start Off Comments, Group A post Response Comments
This session addresses several types of technologies that receive policy attention for their potential to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions or otherwise help reduce the risk of dangerous climate change. Each
requires specific technical, operational and institutional requirements to be successful, and further
requires adequate public support.
While considerable research has been done on many of these technologies, much still remains to
demonstrate economic and political feasibility over the long term. We will discuss the opportunities and
risks of each of these, and will attempt to construct an analytic framework applicable to all that will help
to focus policy attention where it will be most effective.
In addition to the reading and class discussion, this week we will play a version of the “Stabilization
Wedge Game,” based on the work of Socolow and Pacala.
Socolow, Robert, Roberta Hotinski, Jeffery B. Greenblatt and Stephen Pacala. 2004. “Solving the Climate
Problem: Technologies available to curb CO2 emissions,” Environment, vol. 46, no. 10, pp. 8-19.
9
Kammen, Daniel, M. (2006). “The rise of renewable energy,” Scientific American, May, pp. 84-93.
Ochs, Alexander and Shakuntala Makhijani, Sustainable Energy Roadmaps: Guiding the Global Shift to
Domestic Renewables, Worldwatch Institute, no. 187, pp. 6-24,
http://www.worldwatch.org/system/files/EWP187_0.pdf
Moniz, Ernest. "Why we still need nuclear power: making clean energy safe and affordable." Foreign
Affairs, 90 (2011): 83.
R. Kunzig. (2008). “Geoengineering: how to cool earth--at a price” Scientific American, November, pp.
46-55.
Week 11
Adaptation to climate changes
Group A post Start Off Comments, Group B post Response Comments
With international efforts to limit greenhouse gas emissions seemingly ineffective, at least for now,
attention is growing on adaptation to climate changes. Many observers now feel that it is no longer a
question of if the climate is changing, but when, where and how much. In this view, efforts to avoid rapid
warming of the planet have failed, and thus the prudent approach is to manage the changes that are
inevitably coming.
This session will review briefly the main aspects of climate adaptation, from Fussel’s succinct conceptual
framework to Oxfam’s assessment of how climate changes will affect the poor and what to do about it,
and then from the perspective of international climate policy. Finally, we’ll turn to the issue of adaptation
is it concerns local government officials in the United States. The capacity to govern effectively turns out
to be one of the most important aspects of successful adaptation, rather than only physical barriers or
changes in livelihoods.
Füssel, H-M. (2007). “Adaptation planning for climate change: concepts, assessment approaches and key
lessons.” Sustainability Science 2, 265-275.
Oxfam International, “Adapting to climate change: What’s needed in poor countries, and who should
pay,” Oxfam Briefing Paper 104, May 29, 2007,
http://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/adapting%20to%20climate%20change.pdf
Khan, Mizan R., and J. Timmons Roberts. "Adaptation and international climate policy." Wiley
Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change 4.3 (2013): 171-189.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Local Government Climate Adaptation Training,”
https://www.epa.gov/communityhealth/local-government-climate-adaptation-training
Week 12
Climate change, energy and developing nations
Group B post Start Off Comments, Group A post Response Comments
Energy and climate change pose particularly acute dilemmas for developing counties, as has already been
suggested. Economic development implies increased use of energy; yet this would contribute to global
warming. This session explores the broad contours of the problem of development and climate change.
Adapting to a changing climate is inevitable. But how will it be done? Who will pay? How can rich
countries help poorer ones?
Resource wars are another aspect of climate and environmental change, as Homer-Dixon and the Center
for Naval analysis, among others have argued: these are just two of a growing number of international
security analyses about climate change. A compelling example is depicted in Abramson’s “Where the
Water Ends,” about climate-induced water scarcity in East Africa.
10
Hulme, M. (2009). “The challenges of development,” ch. 8 in Why we disagree about climate change:
understanding controversy, inaction and opportunity, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,
pp. 248-283.
Oxfam International, “Adapting to climate change: What’s needed in poor countries, and who should
pay,” Oxfam Briefing Paper 104, May 29, 2007,
http://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/adapting%20to%20climate%20change.pdf
Roberts, J. T. and Parks, B. C. (2007) “Introduction,” ch. 1 in A climate of injustice: global inequality,
North-South politics and climate policy, MIT Press, Cambridge MA, pp. 1-24.
Homer-Dixon, Thomas. (2007). “Terror in the Weather Forecast,” New York Times, April 24, p. A25,
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/24/opinion/24homer-dixon.html?_r=0
Center for Naval Analysis. (2014). National Security and the Accelerating Risks of Climate Change.
Washington, DC: CNA Corporation, https://www.cna.org/cna_files/pdf/MAB_5-8-14.pdf,
webcast, https://www.wilsoncenter.org/event/national-security-and-the-accelerating-risks-
climate-change
Abramson, Evan, “When the Water Ends,” MediaStorm and Yale Environment 360, October 26, 2010,
http://e360.yale.edu/feature/when_the_water_ends_africas_climate_conflicts/2331/#video
Week 13
Governance of climate change: International negotiations, national interests and state and
local responses
Group A post Start Off Comments, Group B post Response Comments
Since climate change is a global problem arising from unrestrained and uncoordinated national activities,
it makes sense that the only way to curb greenhouse gas emissions is to secure a strong if not binding
international agreement, particularly among the principal emitting countries. Despite the flurry of activity
at the United Nations, beginning in the early 1990s, and the promulgation of the Kyoto Protocol,
international efforts have stalled, and now appear to be largely dead.
This failure is due principally to recalcitrance by the United States, which after shaping much of the
climate change response refused to ratify Kyoto, because of concerns that developing countries were
unfairly escaping emissions limits, thereby stealing competitive economic advantage from the developed
countries.
“Conference of Party” meetings to plan for a post-Kyoto regime in Bali, Copenhagen, Durban, Rio,
Warsaw, among others, have produced some procedural accomplishments toward a global climate
regime. However, there are many outstanding issues that many think may not be resolved without
fundamental changes to the way international agreements are hammered out. In the United States, the
action has therefore shifted toward states and localities, which may signal a deeper and more complex
recasting of way governments pursue international agreements.
Gupta reviews the history of international climate change policy, and by periodizing it, shows how the
policy dynamics have so dramatically changed since global warming was shown to be occurring. Haas, a
noted scholar of international relations and the environment, suggests in his piece that the nature of global
environmental problems makes them difficult to address at the nation-state level, but that new multi-level
governance mechanisms are likely to be more successful, even if they are still hard to describe.
Betsill and Rabe dig deeper into the notions of governance, showing that while national governments may
be having difficulty orchestrating and negotiation policies at the international level, states and local
governments are having more success.
11
Finally, as a homework assignment, spend some time with C-LEARN, climate policy simulation
software, to see whether you have any better luck than international negotiators have had figuring out
how to keep the Earth from warming more than 2° C.
Gupta, J. (2010). “A history of international climate change policy.” WIREs Climate Change 1(5): 636-
653.
Haas, Peter M. (2004). “Addressing the global governance deficit.” Global Environmental Politics, 4(4),
1-15.
Betsill, Michelle and Rabe, Barry G. (2009). “Climate Change and Multilevel Governance: The Evolving
State and Local Roles,” ch. 8 in Toward Sustainable Communities, 2nd ed. Mazmanian and Kraft,
eds. The MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, pp. 201-225.
Homework assignment
Use C-LEARN climate simulation software to experiment with different scenarios for greenhouse gas
emission reductions, and deforestation and afforestation rates, http://www.climateinteractive.org/tools/c-
learn/simulation/
What rates are required to achieve CO2 levels below 550 ppm? Can CO2 levels be driven lower? If so,
how? If not, why not? What challenges for negotiators does this model point to?
If there is sufficient interest and number of participants, we will consider a full-scale climate negotiation
using Climate Interactive’s “World Climate” simulation: http://www.climateinteractive.org/tools/world-
climate/
Week 14
Behavior change: Climate change communication strategies and social movements
Group B post Start Off Comments, Group A post Response Comments
Communications strategies are key to changing public attitudes, and social and political movements are
key to changing laws and social structures. These two domains are especially pertinent in the case of
climate change. We’ll be closing out the semester with a look at key issues of communication and social
movement organization, and with a debate about what future approaches to climate might entail.
Maibach, et al. describe their work analyzing the audiences for climate messages; Maibach has already
begun to apply insights from this research in applied settings. Moser at al. are all prominent researchers
on climate communications, and provide a good overview of the field: when reading this piece, ask
yourself: “What works? What doesn’t?” The Cape Farewell project is an example of alternative ways of
communicating the urgency of responding to climate challenges: come to class with ideas of your own.
Can communications on its own solve climate politics problems? What else is needed?
As for our debate, we’ll divide into teams in class and debate the pros and cons of the divestment
movement, and entertain other ideas for social movement activism. To prepare, read the Jamison piece on
social movements, and skim the rest under the social movements topic. Also pay attention to the Fossil
Fuel Divestment Network, 350.org and Climate CoLab websites: they are key resources for climate
social movements.
Communications
Maibach, E. W., Roser-Renouf, C. and Leiserowitz, A., “Global warming’s six Americas.” Yale Project
on Climate Change and George Mason University, 2009 and recent updates,
http://climatecommunication.yale.edu/about/projects/global-warmings-six-americas/
12
Moser, Susanne C., Lisa Dilling, John S. Dryzek, Richard B. Norgaard, and David Schlosberg. 2011.
“Communicating Climate Change: Closing the Science-Action Gap.” In The Oxford Handbook of
Climate Change and Society, 161–174. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.
Vezirgiannidou, Sevasti-Eleni. “Climate and energy policy in the United States: the battle of ideas.”
Environmental Politics, vol. 22, no. 4 (2013), pp. 593-609.
Cape Farewell Project, http://www.capefarewell.com/. Browse the entire website.
Social Movements: A Debate
Jamison, Andrew. "Climate change knowledge and social movement theory." Wiley Interdisciplinary
Reviews: Climate Change 1, no. 6 (2010): 811-823.
Maxmin, Chloe, “The future of fossil-fuel divestment,” The Nation, May 18, 2016,
http://www.thenation.com/article/the-future-of-fossil-fuel-divestment/
Lenferna, Alex, “Why fossil fuel divestment is working,” Ethics and International Affairs, Carnegie
Council, October 14, 2014, http://www.ethicsandinternationalaffairs.org/2014/why-fossil-fuel-
divestment-is-working/
Gitlin, Todd, “The climate change movement is not wishful thinking anymore,” Mother Jones, October 6,
2014, http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/10/climate-change-movement-peoples-
march-wishful
Wisor, Scott, “Why climate change divestment will not work,” Ethics and International Affairs, Carnegie
Council, September 22, 2014, http://www.ethicsandinternationalaffairs.org/2014/why-climate-
change-divestment-will-not-work/
Fossil Fuel Divestment Student Network, http://www.studentsdivest.org/
350.org, http://350.org
Climate CoLab, http://climatecolab.org/
Week 15
Future of climate policy: how should climate be governed?
Group A post Start Off Comments, Group B post Response Comments
The future of climate policy is slowly coming into focus, even though it may still be difficult to see: the
agreement struck in Paris in December 2015 was hard-fought, and is broadly considered insufficient.
Often the prospects for making a meaningful dent in the problem seem hopeless, absent a climate
catastrophe of some kind. Nevertheless, there are some bases for optimism. This session will address
prospects for climate governance, as discussed in the following readings, but also building on the work
we’ve done throughout the semester.
Hulme, M. (2009). Why we disagree about climate change: understanding controversy, inaction and
opportunity, (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge), “The way we govern,” ch. 9, pp. 284-
321, and “Beyond climate change,” ch. 10, pp. 322-366.
“Maarten Hajer on Fix it! The Energetic Society as a New Perspective on Governance for a Clean
Economy,” PICNIC Festival 2011, https://vimeo.com/31424124
Urry, John, Climate Change and Society, (New York: Polity Press, 2011), pp. TBD.
Tollefson, Jeff, “Nations adopt historic global climate accord,” Nature, vol. 528, December 17, 2015,
315-16.