Search results

The article addresses two interactions relevant to acid rain and global warming. First are interactions between sulfur and carbon emissions in producing important impacts, e.g., agricultural impacts in Asia. Second are behavioral interactions, i.e., rational responses to policies targeting one problem that make the other more difficult to solve. Initial calculations for the case of no new policies to limit sulfur or carbon emissions suggest that the cooling effect of sulfate aerosols would offset global warming from carbon dioxide, while carbon dioxide fertilization would more than offset crop losses due to acidification. The net result for the world as a whole in 2050 would be slight increases in agricultural production and GDP, and a slight decrease in prices - hardly a reason to limit carbon and sulfur. Two weaknesses of such global calculations are, first, that reasonable changes in assumptions about carbon dioxide fertilization plus the inclusion of agricultural impacts after 2050 could tip the balance slightly in the other direction, and, second, that they ignore regional differences and politics. The centrally planned countries of Asia are unlikely to tolerate the acidification they would suffer in the absence of new sulfur control policies. Indeed, China has already begun sulfur reductions. However, sulfur reductions without carbon reductions risk removing much of the potential sulfate aerosol shade that would otherwise tend to limit global warming and, perversely, entrenching the importance of coal. To explore the possibility of reducing both sulfur emissions and carbon emissions, the article concludes with an example focused not on one side or the other of the carbon-sulfur equation but on the technologies that are common to both.

The article addresses two interactions relevant to acid rain and global warming. First are interactions between sulfur and carbon emissions in producing important impacts, e.g., agricultural impacts in Asia. Second are behavioral interactions, i.e., rational responses to policies targeting one problem that make the other more difficult to solve. Initial calculations for the case of no new policies to limit sulfur or carbon emissions suggest that the cooling effect of sulfate aerosols would offset global warming from carbon dioxide, while carbon dioxide fertilization would more than offset crop losses due to acidification. The net result for the world as a whole in 2050 would be slight increases in agricultural production and GDP, and a slight decrease in prices - hardly a reason to limit carbon and sulfur. Two weaknesses of such global calculations are, first, that reasonable changes in assumptions about carbon dioxide fertilization plus the inclusion of agricultural impacts after 2050 could tip the balance slightly in the other direction, and, second, that they ignore regional differences and politics. The centrally planned countries of Asia are unlikely to tolerate the acidification they would suffer in the absence of new sulfur control policies. Indeed, China has already begun sulfur reductions. However, sulfur reductions without carbon reductions risk removing much of the potential sulfate aerosol shade that would otherwise tend to limit global warming and, perversely, entrenching the importance of coal. To explore the possibility of reducing both sulfur emissions and carbon emissions, the article concludes with an example focused not on one side or the other of the carbon-sulfur equation but on the technologies that are common to both.

The idea for the International Institute for Systems Analysis (IIASA) was first proposed by Lyndon Johnson in 1966 as one of several "bridge-building" initiatives between the United States and the Soviet bloc. The goal was to bring together researchers from different countries and disciplines to study problems common to advanced economies - pollution, healthcare delivery, traffic congestion, and the management of large enterprises in general. Formally non-governmental, IIASA was founded in 1972 by twelve National Member Organizations (NMOs), with political and financial support from their national governments. The purpose of this paper is to offer lessons from IIASA that might be useful to future efforts at scientific cooperation across political divides. To that end, only those aspects of IIASA's history that the author believes hold the most lessons for such efforts will be discussed. These include the origins of the idea in 1966, the negotiations leading to IIASA's formal founding in 1972, start-up issues in the 1970s, the withdrawal of White House support in 1982, and three key important developments in 1990 - renewed White House support, the end of the Cold War, and a new research agenda for the Institute. The paper provides an American perspective on IIASA's history, primarily because US source documents were more widely available than those from other countries. A complete and balanced history is still to be written.

The idea for the International Institute for Systems Analysis (IIASA) was first proposed by Lyndon Johnson in 1966 as one of several "bridge-building" initiatives between the United States and the Soviet bloc. The goal was to bring together researchers from different countries and disciplines to study problems common to advanced economies - pollution, healthcare delivery, traffic congestion, and the management of large enterprises in general. Formally non-governmental, IIASA was founded in 1972 by twelve National Member Organizations (NMOs), with political and financial support from their national governments. The purpose of this paper is to offer lessons from IIASA that might be useful to future efforts at scientific cooperation across political divides. To that end, only those aspects of IIASA's history that the author believes hold the most lessons for such efforts will be discussed. These include the origins of the idea in 1966, the negotiations leading to IIASA's formal founding in 1972, start-up issues in the 1970s, the withdrawal of White House support in 1982, and three key important developments in 1990 - renewed White House support, the end of the Cold War, and a new research agenda for the Institute. The paper provides an American perspective on IIASA's history, primarily because US source documents were more widely available than those from other countries. A complete and balanced history is still to be written.

AbstractNo Abstract

AbstractNo Abstract

PurposeThe constructs of relativism and absolutism have a significant role to play in the development of ethical theory; however, they are commonly simplified in their depictions and are philosophically more complex than we give them credit for. The purpose of this paper is to undertake an in‐depth examination of ethical relativity and ethical absolutism before concluding with a discussion of which research implications warrant further investigation.Design/methodology/approachA descriptive, historical, anthological approach has been taken.FindingsEthical relativism is regrettably subject to a proliferation of related terminology and, in many instances with different meanings ascribed to similar terms. In addition, ethical relativity appears to attract different research perspectives that are heavily dependent on their academic origins. A clear distinction needs to be made between ethical and situational relativity. It is suggested that relativism is present in the process of moral justification and that ethical relativism should be analyzed from three levels: the individual level, the role and group level, and the cultural levels. The over‐riding objection to ethical relativism rests on the consequences of accepting relativism, which undermines the existence and strength of global moral standards and the inherent positioning of ethical absolutism. Absolutism does not deny the existence of multiple moral practices evident around the world, but proposes that variations in ethical actions could still be rooted in common universal moral standards based on our requirements as human beings and the necessities of long‐term survival.Research limitations/implicationsThe ensuing discussions of relativism and absolutism open up a rich vein of research opportunities and suggest caution is required in regard to research methodologies. From a methodological perspective, care needs to be taken. For example, using hypothetical ethical dilemmas that are often unrelated to a specific industry or cultural setting has resulted in many researchers observing situational relativity rather than true ethical relativity.Originality/valueThis paper specifically examines whether there are differences in underlying and basic moral standards even though similarities in ethical behaviour have been determined, or whether differing ethical actions could, as the absolutists believe, originate from common universal standards despite apparent differences in perceptions and actions across cultures.

"A sympathetic, compassionate, and inspiring guide for parents, from the founders of one of the first Christian ministries for parents of LGBTQ children. Greg and Lynn McDonald had never interacted with members of the LGBTQ community until they discovered that their son was gay--and without resources or support, they had no idea how to handle this discovery. At first they tried to "fix" him, to no avail. But even in the earliest days of their journey, the McDonalds clung to two absolutes: they would love God, and they would love their son. This book follows the McDonald family's journey over the next twenty years, from a place of grief to a place of gratitude and acceptance that led the McDonalds' to start one of the first Christian ministries for parents of LGBTQ children. Based on their experience from counseling and coaching hundreds of struggling Christian parents, they offer tools for understanding your own emotional patterns and spiritual challenges. They also help you experience a deeper relationship with God while handling difficult or unexpected situations that are out of your control. You will discover tested principles, patterns, and spiritual lessons that can change the way we all see our families, and help Christians at large think though Christ-like ways to respond to the LGBTQ community. Written in an unvarnished, honest, reassuring, and relatable voice, this is a practical guide for parents and a roadmap to learning to love God, the people He created, and the church, even when they seem to be at odds"--