Search results

Responses to COVID-19 provide insights into the climate crisis as well as new norms that may shape our global approach to greenhouse gas mitigation. This essay reflects on the dual crises with lessons learned and opportunities for Hawai'i.

AbstractThe long-term impacts of disasters are 'hidden' as it becomes increasingly difficult over time to attribute them to a singular event. We use a synthetic control methodology, formalized in Abadie, A.et al.(2010), Synthetic control methods for comparative case studies: estimating the effect of California's tobacco control program,Journal of the American Statistical Association105(490): 493–505, to estimate the long-term impacts of a 1992 hurricane on the Hawaiian island of Kauai. Hurricane Iniki, the strongest storm to hit Hawaii in many years, wrought an estimated US$ 7.4 billion (2008) in direct damages. Since the unaffected Hawaiian Islands provide a control group, the case of Iniki is uniquely suited to provide insight into the long-term impact of natural disasters. We show that Kauai's economy has yet to recover, 18 years after this event. We estimate the island's current population to be 12 per cent smaller than it would have been had the hurricane not occurred. Similarly, aggregate personal income and the number of private sector jobs are proportionally lower.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to present the University of Hawaii at Manoa's (UHM's) initiatives in achieving greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions on campus and at the state level.Design/methodology/approachUHM has taken a "lead by example" approach to climate change mitigation in terms of working to meet the American College & University Presidents Climate Commitment, becoming a founding member of The Climate Registry, and providing university leadership in crafting the policy to meet Hawaii's Climate Change Solutions Act of 2007.FindingsUniversities are uniquely poised to play a role in not only climate change research, education, and community outreach, but also in the regional and national policy‐making arena. In the absence of federal legislation, states are paving the way to create binding US GHG reduction commitments – making crafting innovative and appropriate policy all the more important and meaningful at the state and regional levels.Practical implicationsThe paper discusses the multi‐prong approach UHM is taking in addressing the threats of climate change: from on‐campus GHG measurements and reductions to helping guide overarching state policy.Originality/valueIslands are particularly vulnerable to the effects of climate change. UHM has taken a comprehensive approach to addressing climate change, from forming strategic partnerships with the electric utility, to developing campus and state GHG reduction strategies, to helping mobilize planning for impacts like sea‐level rise. This paper presents the efforts of UHM, including faculty, student and administration‐led projects, specifically illustrating the role of Universities in meeting GHG reduction commitments through a "lead by example" approach at both the university and state levels.

This data set documents the duration and value of U.S. state and local electric vehicle (EV) policies in effect from 2010 to 2015. Though the focus is on policies at the state-level, local government and electric utility policies are documented when they collectively cover a majority of the state׳s population or electricity customers. Data were collected first from the Alternative Fuel Database Center (AFDC), then supplemented with information taken from more than 300 government (state, city, and county) and utility websites. Nine separate EV-related policy instruments were identified, organized as capital financial incentives, operating financial incentives, preferred access incentives, and disincentives. Though most policy instruments act to support EV adoption, an increasing number of U.S. states are adopting an annual fee for EVs to support road maintenance costs. For vehicle purchase incentives, home charger subsidies, vehicle license tax or registration fees, and the annual EV fee, data was gathered on the money value of these policy instruments. For emissions inspection exemptions and high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane access, an annual money value for each policy instrument is estimated. The other policy instruments, time-of-use (TOU) rates for electricity, designated parking and free parking, are reported as binary variables. For further discussion of EV policy instruments as well as interpretation of their values, see Wee et al. [1]. EV policy instruments often differentiate between all-battery electric vehicles (BEVs) or plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs). Data is similarly organized with this distinction.