1

Climate Change Politics and Policy

Prof. Todd M. La Porte

Associate Professor

Founders Hall 552

Office hours: Tuesday 1-3 pm, and by appt.

(202) 903-6464 (please no calls after 8 pm)

tlaporte *at* gmu.edu (preferred)

Fall Semester, 2016

GOV 319

EVPP xxx

Mondays, 4:30-7:10 pm

Room: TBA (possibly Robinson 246)

DRAFT Revised: 8/12/16

Climate change has been called the most significant public policy problem the world has ever faced.

Scientific work dating back to the late 19th century began to establish a link between human industrial

activity and increased global temperatures. However, it wasn’t until the 1980s that the issue of global

warming was raised convincingly by environmental activists and taken seriously by political leaders.

Since then, progress in illuminating the precise causes of climate and other global environmental changes

has accelerated. Important policies have been implemented, such as the Montreal Protocol to control

ozone-depleting chemicals, the Kyoto Protocol to control greenhouse gases.

The recent Paris agreement on climate change establishes for the first time a comprehensive, if

controversial, regime to limit global average temperature increases to no more than 2° Celsius; scientific

consensus that a better target is no greater than a 1.5° Celsius rise.

However, as climate scientists continue to uncover evidence of “dangerous anthropogenic climate

change,” climate politics is contentious, particularly in the United States. Resistance to aggressive climate

response in Congress is strong, the main action is in states, such as California, and cities and

communities, such as New York, Seattle, Chicago and even Arlington, Virginia.

Why is this so? What is it about climate change that produces such anxiety about what to do? Isn’t there a

moral case for action that should motivate everyone to act? What about the economic case, that it’s

cheaper to deal with the problems now than later? How are our politics responding to the multiple threats

associated with climate change? And what are the policies that might help us get a handle on it, once and

for all? Is technology the answer?

This course is designed to address the most important facets of climate politics and policy through an

advanced introduction to the issues of climate change science and policy. The course will be run as

a discussion seminar. Students will take a major role in reading and discussing the current literature.

The course also aims for a high level of practical policy training, along with a rigorous examination of the

climate science and policy literature.

The course deliverable is a group project on a selected climate policy issue, to be discussed in our first

class. The idea will be to prepare briefing materials for the next presidential administration, including

briefing papers and presentations. Some possible project topics include:

Energy system transition: Some countries, are shifting to a new energy paradigm by doubling down

on alternative energy sources, or in the case of Germany, even eliminating nuclear power: what

would such goals mean for the United States energy system?

Cutting carbon emissions: what issues would result from a goal to reduce, for example, agricultural

2

or transportation carbon emissions to half current levels by mid-century?

Pricing carbon: Economists generally agree that an accurate and widely accepted price for carbon

dioxide would help reduce carbon emissions and provide clear signals for technological innovation.

What might a U.S. pricing system look like, and how might it be implemented? Is a carbon tax a

viable candidate? What are the alternatives?

Adaptation on the front lines: how are, and how should, public officials in towns and cities doing to

prepare for climate challenges in the next 25 to 50 years, the lifetime of many public assets and

program time-horizons?

Low-carbon development: how can the developed world, especially the United States, help the

developing world achieve higher standards of living without the usual increases in carbon emissions?

What examples of successful strategies or cases do we have, and what are their strengths and

limitations?

Learning outcomes

Course learning objectives include:

Understand the principle climate science, politics and policy issues

Identify policy, political, and institutional issues that present barriers to effective policy

development, program design, and implementation

Understand the role of technologies in addressing climate concerns and their environmental,

economic and institutional ramifications

Understand basic professional policy analysis practices and techniques, and use them in a

simulation of a real-world policy setting

The course teaches students pertinent approaches to the study of climate science, climate policy-making

and climate politics, as a specific and important example of the interaction of science and policy. By the

end of the course, students will be well positioned to pursue further work on climate policy.

Requirements, Grades and Examinations

There are five main requirements for the course:

Blackboard posting and discussion 30%

Participation in class discussions 20%

Group project contribution 40%

Project presentation contribution 10%

Participation in class discussion is essential. You will be expected to review carefully in advance the

material assigned for each class and be prepared to discuss the important aspects of the readings in class

(see “Blackboard Posting and Reading Discussion” section below). My role in this process will be to get

the discussion started, assist the class with specific observations, pose questions, and help the class to

discover general principles running through the literature that are relevant to the issues we are taking up.

Texts

There is no required textbook for the course. All readings will be available through the Library or on

Blackboard.

3

Syllabus

Readings and Blackboard postings must be completed before each class session.

Week 1

Introduction: Read before first class session

Group A post Start Off Comments, Group B post Response Comments

We’ll set the stage for this course with a brief encounter with some provocative statements about the

problems the world faces: the challenge of climate change and the nexus of climate and energy. We’ll

also watch (before class) several recent popular media presentations that raise questions about climate

change and energy in easily accessible ways.

You may have already seen the 2007 film starring Al Gore, An Inconvenient Truth, which jumpstarted the

public conversation about climate change. If so, watch at the first episode of the 2014 documentary series,

Years of Living Dangerously, a Showtime production. We will revisit the subject of climate and risk

communications later, but these films are worth watching as we kick off the semester.

Be prepared to discuss the following:

1. McKibben argues societies need to keep in the ground a large quantity of already-discovered fossil

fuels if the planet is to avoid a climate catastrophe. In other writing he has argued that Earth has been

irrevocably changed by humankind, that our traditional reliance on economic growth is a source of

our environmental problems, and that we need new ways to think about the place of humans on it.

How does he support his reasoning? What are his conclusions? Does he make a persuasive case? Why

or why not?

2. How do the films and video for this week compare as climate risk communication vehicles? What

rhetorical or tactical approaches does each take? What social effects do the filmmakers hope will

occur because of their film?

McKibben, Bill, “Global warming’s terrifying new math,” Rolling Stone, July 19, 2012,

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/global-warmings-terrifying-new-math-20120719

An Inconvenient Truth. (2006). David Guggenheim, director, Lawrence Bender Productions, Participant

Media, (1:26:00).

Years of Living Dangerously. (2014). Simcha Jacobovici, director, The Years Project, Showtime, (59:11),

http://yearsoflivingdangerously.com/watch-years/

Week 2

What is climate? What is climate change? How does it happen? How do we know?

Group B post Start Off Comments, Group A post Response Comments

This week we will get some climate science basics under our belts. The U.S. Global Change Research

Program is the most authoritative U.S. synthesis climate science and human implications of climate

change. The science actually matters here, so even though it may seem overwhelming, immerse yourself

in the data and the scientific findings. The payoff will come over the course of the semester. Right now

we’re just taking the measure of the magnitude and complexity of the problem that is climate chane.

Urry, John, Climate Change and Society, (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2011), pp. 18-35.

Climate Reality Project, “Climate 101,” https://www.climaterealityproject.org/climate-101

4

U.S. Global Change Research Program, Climate Literacy: The Essential Principles of Climate Science,

(Washington, DC; U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2009, pp. 1-18,

https://downloads.globalchange.gov/Literacy/climate_literacy_highres_english.pdf

U.S. Global Change Research Program, National Climate Assessment, “Appendix 3: Climate Science

Supplement,” (Washington, DC; U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2014), pp. 735-789,

http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/system/files_force/downloads/high/NCA3_Full_Report_Append

ix_3_Climate_Science_Supplement_HighRes.pdf

Week 3

Human impacts on the environment and climate

Group A post Start Off Comments, Group B post Response Comments

This week we still dig deeper into the human dimensions of climate change, and consider the extent to

which human activity is, for better or worse, irreversibly changing the biology, chemistry, and habitability

of Earth. Are humans now overwhelming the forces of nature? What does that mean for policy and for

policymaking? What are the big choices that human societies are going to have to make?

Rockström, Johan, et al., “A safe operating space for humanity,” Nature, vol. 461, September 29, 2009,

http://steadystate.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/Rockstrom_Nature_Boundaries.pdf

Steffen, Will, Paul Crutzen and John McNeill, “The anthropocene: Are humans now overwhelming the

great forces of nature?” Ambio, vol. 36, no. 8, Dcember 2007, pp. 614-621, https://www.pik-

potsdam.de/news/public-events/archiv/alter-net/former-ss/2007/05-

09.2007/steffen/literature/ambi-36-08-06_614_621.pdf

U.S. Global Change Research Program, National Climate Assessment, “Overview,” (Washington, DC;

U.S. Global Change Research Program, 2014), pp. 1-68,

http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/system/files_force/downloads/high/NCA3_Overview_HighRes.

pdf. In addition, choose three regions to discuss in detail from remainder of the document, pp.

69-97.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2014). “Summary for Policymakers,” in Climate change

2014: the physical science basis, Fifth Assessment Report. WGI Technical Summary. Cambridge

University Press, Cambridge, UK,

http://www.climatechange2013.org/images/report/WG1AR5_SPM_FINAL.pdf

Week 4

Climate change, responsibility and ethics

Group B post Start Off Comments, Group A post Response Comments

Considerations of ethics and justice, as well as costs and economics, underlie a good deal of climate

politics. The two domains, ethics and economics are, in fact, inextricably linked. Pope Francis weighed in

on this debate last year with an important statement that was discussed around the world.

Ethical issues are about fairness: the developed countries produced nearly all the greenhouse gas

emissions as they industrialized, yet the burden of global warming falls mostly on poor countries that

have historically produced nearly no carbon pollution.

Moreover, any limitations on energy use to limit future global warming would fall most heavily on the

poor, who need more energy to improve their welfare.

So, what role should ethics play in shaping the politics and policy of energy and climate? How should the

hardship of mitigating and adapting to a climate-constrained world be allocated? What principles of

5

climate justice should we use rely on to guide individual and collective action? If ethical principles on

their own are difficult to agree on, does religion offer an answer to politics, as it often does in other areas?

Garvey outlines the major arguments arising from an ethical consideration of climate and energy.

Maniates raises questions about individual responsibility for addressing a global problem. NOW, the PBS

public affairs program by Bill Moyers, examines climate change from the perspective of Christian

religious leaders. We will take on the economic arguments about climate change later in the semester.

Garvey, James. (2008). “Responsibility,” ch. 3, “Doing Nothing,” ch. 4, “Doing Something,” ch. 5, in The

Ethics of Climate Change. Continuum, London, pp. 57-87, 88-112, 113-135.

Maniates, Michael F., “Individualization: plant a tree, ride a bike, save the world?” Global Environmental

Politics, vol. 1, no. 3, 2001, pp. 31-52.

NOW with Bill Moyers, “God and Global Warming,” Public Broadcasting Service, October 26, 2007,

http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/343/

Pope Francis. 2015. Laudato Si’: On Care for Our Common Home [Encyclical], selected quotations,

http://www.catholicclimatecovenant.org/LiteratureRetrieve.aspx?ID=137795. For full encyclical,

see: http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/encyclicals/documents/papa-

francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si.html.

Week 5

Climate change and the politics of denial

Group A post Start Off Comments, Group B post Response Comments

While scientists identified the mechanisms of climate change decades ago, public opinion and political

acceptance of the problem has waxed and waned. Some even deny that a problem even exists; more and

better information about climate effects seems not to help.

How can public attitudes be changed to support climate-friendly and energy-conserving policies? How

can individual behavior change be effected? Appeals to reason, ethics and religion may make some

difference intellectually or spiritually, but something more is needed to shift whole societies in a

particular direction.

We’ll begin our work this week by revisiting An Inconvenient Truth and Years of Living Dangerously.

This session explores a variety of communications research issues and strategies, including use of art and

literature, that may more effectively help shape climate and energy politics.

As noted for week 1, if you’ve seen An Inconvenient Truth, watch any two episodes of the 2014

Showtime series Years of Living Dangerously: a comparison of the two will be instructive on how

climate communications have evolved.

Hulme, M. (2009) “The things we fear,” ch. 6 and “The communication of risk,” ch. 7 in Why We

Disagree About Climate Change: Understanding Controversy, Inaction and Opportunity,

Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 178-210, 211-247.

Oreskes, Naomi and Erik M. Conway, Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the

Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming, (New York: Bloomsbury Press, 2010),

pp. 169-215, 240-265.

Dunlap, Riley E., and Aaron M. McCright. "Organized climate change denial." The Oxford handbook of

climate change and society (2011): 144-160.

Oreskes, Naomi, and Erik M. Conway. "Defeating the merchants of doubt." Nature 465, no. 7299 (2010):

686-687.

6

Last Week Tonight with John Oliver, season 1, episode 3, “Climate Change Debate,” (4:23),

http://www.hbo.com/last-week-tonight-with-john-oliver/episodes/01/03-may-11-

2014/video/climate-change-debate.html

Skeptical Science, http://www.skepticalscience.com/

Week 6

Climate politics: many colors of green

Group B post Start Off Comments, Group A post Response Comments

So if the case for doing something about climate change is clear, it still remains to ask: how do we go

about acting on it? Individual action is fine, as far as it goes, but for real change, societies have to change

the rules that govern how our economies work, and that reflect a new set of values about humans’

relationship to each other and to nature. This is the work of politics: solving collective action problems.

The reading this week covers some of the (many) discussion about what “green politics” might be, and

how we might structure our collective decision-making processes.

Carter, Neil, The Politics of the Environment: Ideas, Activism, Policy, 2nd ed., (Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, 2001, 2007), “The environment as a policy problem,” ch. 7, and “Sustainable

development and ecological modernisation,” ch. 8, pp. 173-206, 207-239.

Shellenberger, Michael and Nordhaus, Ted. (2004). The Death of Environmentalism: Global Warming

Politics in a Post-Environmental World. The Breakthrough Institute, Oakland, CA,

http://grist.org/article/doe-reprint/

Nijhuis, Michelle, “Is the “ecomodernist manifesto” the future of environmentalism?” The New Yorker,

June 2, 2105, http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/is-the-ecomodernist-manifesto-the-

future-of-environmentalism

Week 7

The energy-climate policy challenge: energy system transition

Group A post Start Off Comments, Group B post Response Comments

In this session we’ll dig deeper into the nature of the climate problem and into how it is linked to the

energy systems we depend on. Holdren is a physicist and served as science advisor to President Obama.

He has long been working on energy and environment issues, as a professor both at UC Berkeley and

Harvard. He observes, “energy is the most difficult part of the environment problem, and environment is

the most difficult part of the energy problem.” Energy is central to the functioning of societies. But until

the late 20th century, dealing with the consequences of energy exploitation was largely an afterthought.

Energy systems are human artifacts, constructed over decades by people and organizations. This session

will also look at energy systems, and introduce the idea of “energy wedges,” a proposal by Pacala and

Socolow to address the challenge of climate change by targeting “all of the above” energy strategies in a

systematic way.

And to bring the abstractions of climate and energy down to earth, we will all be measuring our own

energy use and climate impacts in an informal homework assignment. Be prepared to share your results

with the class.

7

Holdren, John P. (2008). Meeting the Climate Change Challenge. Eighth Annual John H. Chafee

Memorial Lecture on Science and the Environment. Washington, DC: National Council for

Science and the Environment, http://ncseonline.org/sites/default/files/Chafee08final.pdf

Deutsch, John M. (2011). The Crisis in Energy Policy. (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press), ch.

2, “Energy and Climate,” pp. 29-59.

German Energy Transition, “Energiewende,” Heinrich Böll Foundation, July 2015,

http://energytransition.de/. Full text available at: http://energytransition.de/wp-

content/themes/boell/pdf/en/German-Energy-Transition_en.pdf

Authoritative energy references

U.S. Energy Information Agency, “World Energy Demand and Economic Outlook,” International Energy

Outlook 2013, (Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Energy),

http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/ieo/world.cfm

BP Statistical Review of Energy, 2014, http://bp.com/statisticalreview

Week 8

Climate policies: the economics of climate change

Group B post Start Off Comments, Group A post Response Comments

Much of the case for action on climate change rests on economic costs. What will climate changes cost,

and over what time scale? What measures would be most cost effective in avoiding harm, and how

should they be financed? How should those most affected by climate change be compensated?

The path-breaking Stern Report provided the first comprehensive statement of climate costs and benefits;

this session will review that work and responses by critics of it, such as Nordhaus.

But a more fundamental aspect of the economics of climate change is the nature of market failures, and

how “normal” economics contributes to large-scale ecological harm through un-internalized economic

costs. The interconnected nature of human affairs has long been realized by ecologists, but contemporary

political economics often neglects climate externalities, to humanity’s common cost. Thiele argues that

“full cost accounting,” wherein all costs should be included in prices, would be acceptable to liberals and

conservatives, as it would reflect market principles much more fully than at present.

Speth, James Gustave, The Bridge at the Edge of the World: Capitalism, the Environment, and Crossing

From Crisis to Sustainability, (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2008), chs. 1-2, 5-6, pp. 17-

66, 107-146.

Thiele, Leslie Paul, Indra’s Net and the Midas Touch, (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2011), ch. 4,

“Economics,” pp. 131-168.

Stern, N. (ed.) (2006). “Economic modeling of climate change impacts,” ch. 6 in The economics of

climate change: the Stern review. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. See also the

Summary of conclusions and the Executive Summary,

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.hm-

treasury.gov.uk/stern_review_report.htm

Nordhaus, William D. (2006). “The ‘Stern Review’ on the Economics of Climate Change.” National

Bureau of Economic Research, NBER Working Paper No. W12741, December,

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=948654

8

Week 9

Climate policies: Mitigation, regulations, taxes, incentives

Group A post Start Off Comments, Group B post Response Comments

Economic instruments will likely play a key role in reducing carbon pollution and thereby mitigate, even

if they do not eliminate the threat of climate change. Carbon markets, carbon prices, carbon taxes are all

potentially powerful policy instruments to effect change – yet there is still little agreement on the

feasibility, design, implementation or consequences of such policies.

In addition, many observers see an important role for business in mitigating climate change, and advocate

for approaches that enlist businesses support, rather than alienating them. Some go so far as to worry that

the United States is losing the potentially lucrative, and inevitable, race to provide low- or no-carbon

technologies and services to an energy hungry planetary market.

Spaargaren, Gert, and Arthur P. J. Mol. “Carbon flows, carbon markets, and low-carbon lifestyles:

reflecting on the role of markets in climate governance.” Environmental Politics 22, no. 1 (2013):

174-193.

Frank, Charles, “Pricing carbon: a carbon tax or cap-and-trade?” Brookings, August 12, 2014,

http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/planetpolicy/posts/2014/08/12-pricing-carbon-frank

Kossoy, Alexandre et al.. 2015. State and trends of carbon pricing 2015. World Bank Group.

Washington, D.C., http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2015/09/25053834/state-trends-

carbon-pricing-2015, pp. 10-18.

Patchell, Jerry, and Roger Hayter. "How big business can save the climate." Foreign Affairs, vol. 92, no.

5, (2013), pp. 17-22.

New York Times, Room for Debate, “Why isn’t the U.S. a leader in green technology?”

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/09/20/why-isnt-the-us-a-leader-in-green-

technology

Week 10

Climate policies: Technology to the rescue? Opportunities and risks of low-carbon energy

strategies, and the “Stabilization Wedge Game”

Group B post Start Off Comments, Group A post Response Comments

This session addresses several types of technologies that receive policy attention for their potential to

reduce greenhouse gas emissions or otherwise help reduce the risk of dangerous climate change. Each

requires specific technical, operational and institutional requirements to be successful, and further

requires adequate public support.

While considerable research has been done on many of these technologies, much still remains to

demonstrate economic and political feasibility over the long term. We will discuss the opportunities and

risks of each of these, and will attempt to construct an analytic framework applicable to all that will help

to focus policy attention where it will be most effective.

In addition to the reading and class discussion, this week we will play a version of the “Stabilization

Wedge Game,” based on the work of Socolow and Pacala.

Socolow, Robert, Roberta Hotinski, Jeffery B. Greenblatt and Stephen Pacala. 2004. “Solving the Climate

Problem: Technologies available to curb CO2 emissions,” Environment, vol. 46, no. 10, pp. 8-19.

9

Kammen, Daniel, M. (2006). “The rise of renewable energy,” Scientific American, May, pp. 84-93.

Ochs, Alexander and Shakuntala Makhijani, Sustainable Energy Roadmaps: Guiding the Global Shift to

Domestic Renewables, Worldwatch Institute, no. 187, pp. 6-24,

http://www.worldwatch.org/system/files/EWP187_0.pdf

Moniz, Ernest. "Why we still need nuclear power: making clean energy safe and affordable." Foreign

Affairs, 90 (2011): 83.

R. Kunzig. (2008). “Geoengineering: how to cool earth--at a price” Scientific American, November, pp.

46-55.

Week 11

Adaptation to climate changes

Group A post Start Off Comments, Group B post Response Comments

With international efforts to limit greenhouse gas emissions seemingly ineffective, at least for now,

attention is growing on adaptation to climate changes. Many observers now feel that it is no longer a

question of if the climate is changing, but when, where and how much. In this view, efforts to avoid rapid

warming of the planet have failed, and thus the prudent approach is to manage the changes that are

inevitably coming.

This session will review briefly the main aspects of climate adaptation, from Fussel’s succinct conceptual

framework to Oxfam’s assessment of how climate changes will affect the poor and what to do about it,

and then from the perspective of international climate policy. Finally, we’ll turn to the issue of adaptation

is it concerns local government officials in the United States. The capacity to govern effectively turns out

to be one of the most important aspects of successful adaptation, rather than only physical barriers or

changes in livelihoods.

Füssel, H-M. (2007). “Adaptation planning for climate change: concepts, assessment approaches and key

lessons.” Sustainability Science 2, 265-275.

Oxfam International, “Adapting to climate change: What’s needed in poor countries, and who should

pay,” Oxfam Briefing Paper 104, May 29, 2007,

http://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/adapting%20to%20climate%20change.pdf

Khan, Mizan R., and J. Timmons Roberts. "Adaptation and international climate policy." Wiley

Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change 4.3 (2013): 171-189.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Local Government Climate Adaptation Training,”

https://www.epa.gov/communityhealth/local-government-climate-adaptation-training

Week 12

Climate change, energy and developing nations

Group B post Start Off Comments, Group A post Response Comments

Energy and climate change pose particularly acute dilemmas for developing counties, as has already been

suggested. Economic development implies increased use of energy; yet this would contribute to global

warming. This session explores the broad contours of the problem of development and climate change.

Adapting to a changing climate is inevitable. But how will it be done? Who will pay? How can rich

countries help poorer ones?

Resource wars are another aspect of climate and environmental change, as Homer-Dixon and the Center

for Naval analysis, among others have argued: these are just two of a growing number of international

security analyses about climate change. A compelling example is depicted in Abramson’s “Where the

Water Ends,” about climate-induced water scarcity in East Africa.

10

Hulme, M. (2009). “The challenges of development,” ch. 8 in Why we disagree about climate change:

understanding controversy, inaction and opportunity, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,

pp. 248-283.

Oxfam International, “Adapting to climate change: What’s needed in poor countries, and who should

pay,” Oxfam Briefing Paper 104, May 29, 2007,

http://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/adapting%20to%20climate%20change.pdf

Roberts, J. T. and Parks, B. C. (2007) “Introduction,” ch. 1 in A climate of injustice: global inequality,

North-South politics and climate policy, MIT Press, Cambridge MA, pp. 1-24.

Homer-Dixon, Thomas. (2007). “Terror in the Weather Forecast,” New York Times, April 24, p. A25,

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/24/opinion/24homer-dixon.html?_r=0

Center for Naval Analysis. (2014). National Security and the Accelerating Risks of Climate Change.

Washington, DC: CNA Corporation, https://www.cna.org/cna_files/pdf/MAB_5-8-14.pdf,

webcast, https://www.wilsoncenter.org/event/national-security-and-the-accelerating-risks-

climate-change

Abramson, Evan, “When the Water Ends,” MediaStorm and Yale Environment 360, October 26, 2010,

http://e360.yale.edu/feature/when_the_water_ends_africas_climate_conflicts/2331/#video

Week 13

Governance of climate change: International negotiations, national interests and state and

local responses

Group A post Start Off Comments, Group B post Response Comments

Since climate change is a global problem arising from unrestrained and uncoordinated national activities,

it makes sense that the only way to curb greenhouse gas emissions is to secure a strong if not binding

international agreement, particularly among the principal emitting countries. Despite the flurry of activity

at the United Nations, beginning in the early 1990s, and the promulgation of the Kyoto Protocol,

international efforts have stalled, and now appear to be largely dead.

This failure is due principally to recalcitrance by the United States, which after shaping much of the

climate change response refused to ratify Kyoto, because of concerns that developing countries were

unfairly escaping emissions limits, thereby stealing competitive economic advantage from the developed

countries.

“Conference of Party” meetings to plan for a post-Kyoto regime in Bali, Copenhagen, Durban, Rio,

Warsaw, among others, have produced some procedural accomplishments toward a global climate

regime. However, there are many outstanding issues that many think may not be resolved without

fundamental changes to the way international agreements are hammered out. In the United States, the

action has therefore shifted toward states and localities, which may signal a deeper and more complex

recasting of way governments pursue international agreements.

Gupta reviews the history of international climate change policy, and by periodizing it, shows how the

policy dynamics have so dramatically changed since global warming was shown to be occurring. Haas, a

noted scholar of international relations and the environment, suggests in his piece that the nature of global

environmental problems makes them difficult to address at the nation-state level, but that new multi-level

governance mechanisms are likely to be more successful, even if they are still hard to describe.

Betsill and Rabe dig deeper into the notions of governance, showing that while national governments may

be having difficulty orchestrating and negotiation policies at the international level, states and local

governments are having more success.

11

Finally, as a homework assignment, spend some time with C-LEARN, climate policy simulation

software, to see whether you have any better luck than international negotiators have had figuring out

how to keep the Earth from warming more than 2° C.

Gupta, J. (2010). “A history of international climate change policy.” WIREs Climate Change 1(5): 636-

653.

Haas, Peter M. (2004). “Addressing the global governance deficit.” Global Environmental Politics, 4(4),

1-15.

Betsill, Michelle and Rabe, Barry G. (2009). “Climate Change and Multilevel Governance: The Evolving

State and Local Roles,” ch. 8 in Toward Sustainable Communities, 2nd ed. Mazmanian and Kraft,

eds. The MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, pp. 201-225.

Homework assignment

Use C-LEARN climate simulation software to experiment with different scenarios for greenhouse gas

emission reductions, and deforestation and afforestation rates, http://www.climateinteractive.org/tools/c-

learn/simulation/

What rates are required to achieve CO2 levels below 550 ppm? Can CO2 levels be driven lower? If so,

how? If not, why not? What challenges for negotiators does this model point to?

If there is sufficient interest and number of participants, we will consider a full-scale climate negotiation

using Climate Interactive’s “World Climate” simulation: http://www.climateinteractive.org/tools/world-

climate/

Week 14

Behavior change: Climate change communication strategies and social movements

Group B post Start Off Comments, Group A post Response Comments

Communications strategies are key to changing public attitudes, and social and political movements are

key to changing laws and social structures. These two domains are especially pertinent in the case of

climate change. We’ll be closing out the semester with a look at key issues of communication and social

movement organization, and with a debate about what future approaches to climate might entail.

Maibach, et al. describe their work analyzing the audiences for climate messages; Maibach has already

begun to apply insights from this research in applied settings. Moser at al. are all prominent researchers

on climate communications, and provide a good overview of the field: when reading this piece, ask

yourself: “What works? What doesn’t?” The Cape Farewell project is an example of alternative ways of

communicating the urgency of responding to climate challenges: come to class with ideas of your own.

Can communications on its own solve climate politics problems? What else is needed?

As for our debate, we’ll divide into teams in class and debate the pros and cons of the divestment

movement, and entertain other ideas for social movement activism. To prepare, read the Jamison piece on

social movements, and skim the rest under the social movements topic. Also pay attention to the Fossil

Fuel Divestment Network, 350.org and Climate CoLab websites: they are key resources for climate

social movements.

Communications

Maibach, E. W., Roser-Renouf, C. and Leiserowitz, A., “Global warming’s six Americas.” Yale Project

on Climate Change and George Mason University, 2009 and recent updates,

http://climatecommunication.yale.edu/about/projects/global-warmings-six-americas/

12

Moser, Susanne C., Lisa Dilling, John S. Dryzek, Richard B. Norgaard, and David Schlosberg. 2011.

“Communicating Climate Change: Closing the Science-Action Gap.” In The Oxford Handbook of

Climate Change and Society, 161–174. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.

Vezirgiannidou, Sevasti-Eleni. “Climate and energy policy in the United States: the battle of ideas.”

Environmental Politics, vol. 22, no. 4 (2013), pp. 593-609.

Cape Farewell Project, http://www.capefarewell.com/. Browse the entire website.

Social Movements: A Debate

Jamison, Andrew. "Climate change knowledge and social movement theory." Wiley Interdisciplinary

Reviews: Climate Change 1, no. 6 (2010): 811-823.

Maxmin, Chloe, “The future of fossil-fuel divestment,” The Nation, May 18, 2016,

http://www.thenation.com/article/the-future-of-fossil-fuel-divestment/

Lenferna, Alex, “Why fossil fuel divestment is working,” Ethics and International Affairs, Carnegie

Council, October 14, 2014, http://www.ethicsandinternationalaffairs.org/2014/why-fossil-fuel-

divestment-is-working/

Gitlin, Todd, “The climate change movement is not wishful thinking anymore,” Mother Jones, October 6,

2014, http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/10/climate-change-movement-peoples-

march-wishful

Wisor, Scott, “Why climate change divestment will not work,” Ethics and International Affairs, Carnegie

Council, September 22, 2014, http://www.ethicsandinternationalaffairs.org/2014/why-climate-

change-divestment-will-not-work/

Fossil Fuel Divestment Student Network, http://www.studentsdivest.org/

350.org, http://350.org

Climate CoLab, http://climatecolab.org/

Week 15

Future of climate policy: how should climate be governed?

Group A post Start Off Comments, Group B post Response Comments

The future of climate policy is slowly coming into focus, even though it may still be difficult to see: the

agreement struck in Paris in December 2015 was hard-fought, and is broadly considered insufficient.

Often the prospects for making a meaningful dent in the problem seem hopeless, absent a climate

catastrophe of some kind. Nevertheless, there are some bases for optimism. This session will address

prospects for climate governance, as discussed in the following readings, but also building on the work

we’ve done throughout the semester.

Hulme, M. (2009). Why we disagree about climate change: understanding controversy, inaction and

opportunity, (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge), “The way we govern,” ch. 9, pp. 284-

321, and “Beyond climate change,” ch. 10, pp. 322-366.

“Maarten Hajer on Fix it! The Energetic Society as a New Perspective on Governance for a Clean

Economy,” PICNIC Festival 2011, https://vimeo.com/31424124

Urry, John, Climate Change and Society, (New York: Polity Press, 2011), pp. TBD.

Tollefson, Jeff, “Nations adopt historic global climate accord,” Nature, vol. 528, December 17, 2015,

315-16.