Suchergebnisse

Will there be an international climate treaty to follow Kyoto when it expires in 2012, and if so what will it look like? Many climate justice and anti-capitalist spokespersons denounce the Kyoto Protocol as a "pretend solution" and reject international carbon trading altogether. This article argues that, on the contrary, an international cap and trade treaty is the only way to avert climate change fairly before it is too late, and that the Kyoto Protocol is a framework that progressives should defend and fix rather than condemn and nix. After explaining why many climate justice and anti-capitalist criticisms of carbon trading are without merit and fail to appreciate how international carbon trading can favor lesser developed countries (LDCs), five changes to make a post-Kyoto cap and trade treaty more effective and fair are proposed, and common arguments against carbon trading are rebutted.JEL codes: Q54, Q56, Q58. [Reprinted by permission of Sage Publications Inc., copyright holder.]

The science-society contract is broken. The climate is changing. Science demonstrates why this is occurring, that it is getting worse, the implications for human well-being and social-ecological systems, and substantiates action. Governments agree that the science is settled. The tragedy of climate change science is that at the same time as compelling evidence is gathered, fresh warnings issued, and novel methodologies developed, indicators of adverse global change rise year upon year. Meanwhile, global responses to Covid-19 have shown that even emergent scientific knowledge can bolster radical government action. We explore three options for the climate change science community. We find that two options are untenable and one is unpalatable. Given the urgency and criticality of climate change, we argue the time has come for scientists to agree to a moratorium on climate change research as a means to first expose, then renegotiate, the broken science-society contract.

AbstractEthiopia is experiencing an increasing frequency and intensity of slow‐onset and acute disasters caused by climate change, with significant health impacts. Understanding and addressing these impacts involves trade‐offs, which are central to effective priority setting in health and overarching efforts to meet the Sustainable Development Goals. Despite minimal historic greenhouse gas emissions, Ethiopia has been at the forefront of climate action since launching the Climate‐Resilient Green Economy (CRGE) in 2011, a low‐carbon development strategy. To learn from the Ethiopian approach, this paper examines to what extent health has been integrated into the CRGE. We found that the early years of the CRGE prioritized developing the financial basis of the green economy, while the health impacts of climate change have only been tentatively considered to date and remain detached from broader health strategies. Further analysis of climate adaptation measures, "health co‐benefits," and reducing specific vulnerabilities of the health sector could help improve health and build climate resilience.

"This volume showcases the diversity of the politics and practices of climate change governance across Southeast Asia. Through a series of country-level case studies and regional perspectives, the authors in this volume explore the complexities and contested nature of climate governance in what can be considered as one of the most dynamic and multi-faceted regions of the world. They reflect upon the tensions between authoritarian and democratic climate change governance, the multiple roles of civil society and non-state interventions, and the conflicts between state planning and market-driven climate change governance. Shedding light on climate change mitigation and adaptation efforts in Southeast Asia, this book presents the various formal and informal institutions of climate governance, their relevant actors, procedures, and policies. Empirical findings from a diverse set of environments are merged into cross-country comparisons that allows for elaboration on similar patterns whilst at the same time highlighting the distinct features of climate change governance in Southeast Asia. Drawing on case studies from all Southeast Asian countries, namely Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Timor-Leste and Viet Nam, this book will be of great interest to students, scholars, and practitioners dealing with climate change and environmental governance"--

This study presents an innovative approach to hand-coding parties' policy preferences in the relatively new, cross-sectoral field of climate change mitigation policy. It applies this approach to party manifestos in six countries, comparing the preferences of parties in Denmark, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy and the United Kingdom over the past two decades. It probes the data for evidence of validity through content validation and convergent/discriminant validation and engages with the debate on position-taking in environmental policy by developing a positional measure that incorporates 'pro' and 'anti' climate policy preferences. The analysis provides evidence for the validity of the new measures, shows that they are distinct from comparable measures of environmental policy preferences and argues that they are more comprehensive than existing climate policy measures. The new measures strengthen the basis for answering questions that are central to climate politics and to party politics. The approach developed here has important implications for the study of new, complex or cross-cutting policy issues and issues that include both valence and positional aspects.

This study presents an innovative approach to hand-coding parties' policy preferences in the relatively new, cross-sectoral field of climate change mitigation policy. It applies this approach to party manifestos in six countries, comparing the preferences of parties in Denmark, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy and the United Kingdom over the past two decades. It probes the data for evidence of validity through content validation and convergent/discriminant validation and engages with the debate on position-taking in environmental policy by developing a positional measure that incorporates 'pro' and 'anti' climate policy preferences. The analysis provides evidence for the validity of the new measures, shows that they are distinct from comparable measures of environmental policy preferences and argues that they are more comprehensive than existing climate policy measures. The new measures strengthen the basis for answering questions that are central to climate politics and to party politics. The approach developed here has important implications for the study of new, complex or cross-cutting policy issues and issues that include both valence and positional aspects.

Scientific consensus has emerged that emissions from economically important human activities worldwide are accelerating the impacts of climate change, with profound consequences for national economies and ecosystems. In recent years, official documents of many governments have acknowledged that environmental changes present security challenges. This paper highlights some of the challenges environmental security poses for traditional security concepts. It concludes that current institutions and policy paradigms are ill-equipped to manage these challenges and explores the potential for reframing the concept of "security" in ways that help decision-makers devise pluralistic and resilient societies.

Agriculture is vulnerable to climate change and a source of greenhouse gases (GHGs). Farmers face pressures to adjust agricultural systems to make them more resilient in the face of increasingly variable weather (adaptation) and reduce GHG production (mitigation). This research examines relationships between Iowa farmers' trust in environmental or agricultural interest groups as sources of climate information, climate change beliefs, perceived climate risks to agriculture, and support for adaptation and mitigation responses. Results indicate that beliefs varied with trust, and beliefs in turn had a significant direct effect on perceived risks from climate change. Support for adaptation varied with perceived risks, while attitudes toward GHG reduction (mitigation) were associated predominantly with variation in beliefs. Most farmers were supportive of adaptation responses, but few endorsed GHG reduction, suggesting that outreach should focus on interventions that have adaptive and mitigative properties (e.g., reduced tillage, improved fertilizer management).

Expectations play an important role in how people plan their lives and pursue their projects. People living in highly industrialized countries share a way of life that comes with high levels of emissions. Their expectations to be able to continue their projects imply their holding expectations to similarly high future levels of personal emissions. We argue that the frustration or undermining of these expectations would cause them significant harm. Further, the article investigates under what conditions people can be thought to hold legitimate expectations, in particular about permissible levels of future emissions. We distinguish differing theories of understanding these conditions, namely authority-based and justice-based theories, that each allows us to systematically distinguish between legitimate and illegitimate expectations. Furthermore, with respect to individuals' future permissible emissions we give several reasons for holding that such theories cannot identify a particular expectation to a specific level of personal emissions as the only legitimate one. Finally, we argue that the set of legitimate expectations that people hold with respect to a just and effective solution to climate change has normative significance in at least two ways: the differing but equally legitimate expectations ought to be taken into account when justifying what could count as such a solution and when determining the just way of arriving at and implementing such a solution.