Institutionalizing a policy by any other name: in the City of Vancouver’s Greenest City Action Plan, does climate change policy or sustainability policy smell as sweet?

2015 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 354-370 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meg Holden ◽  
Majken Toftager Larsen
Author(s):  
Peter Taylor ◽  
Geoff O'Brien ◽  
Phil O'Keefe

Current climate change policy is necessary but insufficient. This is because the basic modus operandi – presenting scientific evidence to states for them to take action - misrepresents the complex process of anthropogenic climate change. The ‘anthropo’ bit is neglected in a misconceived supply-side (carbon) interpretation. The key question is, why is there so much demand for this carbon in the first place? This book introduces a demand-side interpretation bringing cities to the fore as central players in both generating climate changes and for finding solutions. Jane Jacobs’ urban analysis is combined with William F. Ruddiman’s historical tracing of greenhouse gases to provide a new understanding and narrative of anthropogenic climate change. The conclusion is that we are locked into a path to terminal consumption, which is accelerating as a consequence of Chinese urban growth, historically unprecedented in its sheer scale. To counter this we need to harness the power of cities in new ways, to steer urban demand away from its current destructive path. This is nothing less than re-inventing the city: not mitigation (the resilient city, necessary but not sufficient), not adaptation (sustainable city, also necessary but not sufficient) but stewardship, a process of dynamic stability creating the posterity city in sync with nature.


Author(s):  
Osada Vishvajith Peiris

Climate Change (CC) is universally recognized as a major global threat due to its nature of impacts. Island nations are known to be the most vulnerable to CC impacts where many countries have initiated mitigation and adaptation actions through sector-based policy measures. Singapore and Sri Lanka are two Asian island nations with CC induced threats. Two countries are different in terms of economic development, but similar developing countries in the CC agenda. In this context, both the countries have initiated mitigation and adaptation actions through policy measures. This study compares the key climate driven performance indicators with historical data to evaluate the performance of climate change policy of each country. Generally, policy evaluation has been conducted by adopting scientific and non-scientific tools, but it is seldom see that the relation of climate driven indicators along with CC policy. Also the policy research was mostly based on European case studies and Asian island nations were not easy to find in this context. The comparison of two countries in terms of CC policy is to determine the key vulnerable sectors where intervention is necessary for island nations. Mitigation policies are evaluated in Singapore and Sri Lanka using GHG emission pathways under twelve (12) indicators and adaptation policies are measured under the national expenditure of key sectors of the economy under seven (07) indicators. The analysis further elaborated by comparing both countries with key economic sectors that has positive and negative influence on CC impacts. Finally, the analysis outcome is used for lessons to learn from each other in improving the CC policy of Singapore and Sri Lanka. As every country has a unique set of strategies to minimize contributions to CC impacts, unique features that are common to both countries are chosen as variables for the comparison. Policy recommendations are provided to implement solid action plan for post 2020. The study expects to assist island countries to strengthen the CC policy as a national priority to manage unforeseen impacts posed by CC phenomena


2010 ◽  
pp. 115-132 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Agibalov ◽  
A. Kokorin

Copenhagen summit results could be called a failure. This is the failure of UN climate change policy management, but definitely the first step to a new order as well. The article reviews main characteristics of climate policy paradigm shifts. Russian interests in climate change policy and main threats are analyzed. Successful development and implementation of energy savings and energy efficiency policy are necessary and would sufficiently help solving the global climate change problem.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guido Godínez-Zamora ◽  
Luis Victor-Gallardo ◽  
Jam Angulo-Paniagua ◽  
Eunice Ramos ◽  
Mark Howells ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ross Gittell ◽  
Josh Stillwagon

<p>This paper explores the influence of US state-level policies meant to address climate change on clean technology industry development. The largest influence of climate change policies is identified as being on energy research employment. Only some policies seem to contribute positively to clean tech employment while other policies appear to discourage employment growth. The magnitudes of the short term effects, even when statistically significant, are modest. Negative impacts on employment are identified for several mandate-oriented, so called command and control, policies including vehicle greenhouse gas standards, energy efficiency resource standards, and renewable portfolio standards with the former two having increasing negative effects over time. The findings suggest that climate change policy advocates should be careful to not assume that there will be positive clean tech employment benefits from state-level energy and environmental policies. Instead, the benefits from these policies may derive primarily from other considerations beyond the scope of this paper, including health and environmental benefits and reduction of dependence on foreign energy sources.</p>


AJIL Unbound ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 115 ◽  
pp. 80-85
Author(s):  
Daniel Bodansky

After four years of not simply inaction but significant retrogression in U.S. climate change policy, the Biden administration has its work cut out. As a start, it needs to undo what Trump did. The Biden administration took a step in that direction on Day 1 by rejoining the Paris Agreement. But simply restoring the pre-Trump status quo ante is not enough. The United States also needs to push for more ambitious global action. In part, this will require strengthening parties’ nationally determined contributions (NDCs) under the Paris Agreement; but it will also require actions by what Sue Biniaz, the former State Department climate change lawyer, likes to call the Greater Metropolitan Paris Agreement—that is, the array of other international actors that help advance the Paris Agreement's goals, including global institutions such as the International Maritime Organization (IMO), the Montreal Protocol, and the World Bank, as well as regional organizations and non-state actors. Although the Biden administration can pursue some of these international initiatives directly through executive action, new regulatory initiatives will face an uncertain fate in the Supreme Court. So how much the Biden Administration is able to achieve will likely depend significantly on how much a nearly evenly-divided Congress is willing to support.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marlene Kammerer ◽  
Paul M. Wagner ◽  
Antti Gronow ◽  
Tuomas Ylä‐Anttila ◽  
Dana R. Fisher ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document