Introduction

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-18
Author(s):  
Joseph Heath
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Public Policy ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
Anthropogenic Climate Change ◽  
Normative Framework ◽  
Policy Debates ◽  
Change Policy ◽  
Social Discounting

Although philosophers have spent a great deal of time debating what “justice” requires, they have struggled when pressed to specify the implications that any particular conception of justice has for concrete questions of public policy. As a result, policy debates over the problem of anthropogenic climate change have been dominated by the normative framework of utilitarianism (or variants of the welfare consequentialism favored by economists), not for its intrinsic merits, but because it can easily be applied to the question, and generates plausible recommendations in most cases. This introduction presents the outlines of a “minimally controversial contractualism,” intended to serve as an alternative normative framework for developing climate change policy. It endorses the same plausible policy prescriptions in the standard cases while offering better resources for addressing the question of social discounting.

Informing Climate Change Policy Through Economics and Engineering Perspectives on Energy Efficiency

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Priya Sreedharan ◽  
Alan H. Sanstad ◽  
Joe Bryson
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Public Policy ◽  
Energy Efficiency ◽  
Policy Process ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
Ghg Emissions ◽  
Clean Energy ◽  
Change Policy ◽  
State And Local ◽  
End Use

Energy “sustainability” and energy supply have again emerged as central public policy issues and are at the intersection of the economic, environmental, and security challenges facing the nation and the world. The goal of significantly reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with energy production and consumption, while maintaining affordable and reliable energy supplies, is one of the most important issues. Among the strategies for achieving this goal, increasing the efficiency of energy consumption in buildings is being emphasized to a degree not seen since the 1970s. “End-use” efficiency is the core of the State of California’s landmark effort to reduce its GHG emissions, of other state and local climate-change initiatives, and is emphasized in emerging federal GHG abatement legislation. Both economic and engineering methods are used to analyze energy efficiency, but the two paradigms provide different perspectives on the market and technological factors that affect the diffusion of energy efficiency. These disparate perspectives influence what is considered the appropriate role and design of public policy for leveraging not just efficient end-use technology, but other sustainable energy technologies. We review the two approaches and their current roles in the GHG policy process by describing, for illustrative purposes, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s assessment of energy efficiency in the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 Discussion Draft. We highlight opportunities and needs for improved coordination between the engineering, economic and policy communities. Our view is that a better understanding of disciplinary differences and complementarities in perspectives and analytical methods between these communities will benefit the climate change policy process.

Cities Demanding the Earth

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Taylor ◽  
Geoff O'Brien ◽  
Phil O'Keefe
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
Anthropogenic Climate Change ◽  
Sustainable City ◽  
Jane Jacobs ◽  
The Earth ◽  
Change Policy ◽  
Complex Process ◽  
The City

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.

ROLLING THE DICE IN THE CORRIDORS OF POWER: WILLIAM NORDHAUS’S IMPACTS ON CLIMATE CHANGE POLICY

2020 ◽  
pp. 2040001
Author(s):  
JOSEPH E. ALDY ◽  
ROBERT N. STAVINS
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Public Policy ◽  
Global Climate Change ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
Change Analysis ◽  
Direct Contribution ◽  
Climate Change Analysis ◽  
Change Policy ◽  
Long Run

The seminal contributions of William Nordhaus to scholarship on the long-run macroeconomics of global climate change are clear. Much more challenging to identify are the impacts of Nordhaus and his research on public policy in this domain. We examine three conceptually distinct pathways for that influence: his personal participation in the policy world; his research’s direct contribution to the formulation and evaluation of public policy; and his research’s indirect role informing public policy. Many of the themes that emerge in this assessment of the contributions of one of the most important economists to have worked in the domain of climate change analysis apply more broadly to the roles played by other leading economists in this and other policy domains.

Copenhagen Agreement - A New Paradigm of Climate Problem Solving

2010 ◽  
pp. 115-132 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Agibalov ◽  
A. Kokorin
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Energy Savings ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
New Order ◽  
Paradigm Shifts ◽  
New Paradigm ◽  
Energy Efficiency Policy ◽  
Policy Paradigm ◽  
Change Policy

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.

How Modelling Tools Can Support Climate Change Policy: The Case of Costa Rica in the Energy Sector

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guido Godínez-Zamora ◽  
Luis Victor-Gallardo ◽  
Jam Angulo-Paniagua ◽  
Eunice Ramos ◽  
Mark Howells ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Costa Rica ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
Energy Sector ◽  
Change Policy

scholarly journals The Effects of US State-Level Energy and Environmental Policies on Clean Tech Innovation and Employment

2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ross Gittell ◽  
Josh Stillwagon
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
State Level ◽  
Environmental Policies ◽  
Environmental Benefits ◽  
Level Energy ◽  
Negative Effects ◽  
Employment Benefits ◽  
Technology Industry ◽  
Change Policy

<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>

scholarly journals Climate Change: Reversing the Past and Advancing the Future

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 115 ◽  
pp. 80-85
Author(s):  
Daniel Bodansky
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Paris Agreement ◽  
Montreal Protocol ◽  
Global Institutions ◽  
Change Policy ◽  
Global Action ◽  
Nationally Determined Contributions ◽  
Executive Action

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document