Download Climate Change Politics and Policy

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, 2014
PUBP 710
EVPP 741
Wednesdays, 7:20-10:00 pm
Room: TBA (470)
DRAFT Revised: 4/2/16
Climate change has been called the most significant public policy problem the world has ever
faced. Early scientific work to identify the problem was quickly taken up by policymakers, and important policies were implemented, such as the Montreal Protocol to control ozone-depleting chemicals.
But toward the end of the 20th century, as climate scientists continued to uncover evidence of the
possibility of “dangerous climate change,” climate politics became more contentious, particularly
in the United States, for a variety of economic, social, political and cultural reasons. Developing
countries diverge markedly in their concerns about mitigating greenhouse gas emissions, citing
economic and distributive justice rationales for resisting developed nation proposals. In this climate
(no pun intended), regions and cities are forging their own climate policies and programs in the absence of U.S. national leadership and strong international agreements.
At the same time, technological developments to address energy security as well as global warming
have multiplied. These include hydraulic fracturing or “fracking,” a renewed push for nuclear energy, experimentation with geo-engineering, and continued expansion of renewable energy such as
wind and solar power. Many of these technical developments accompany policy controversies of
their own. Even so, many argue that even greater efforts to develop technological solutions are
needed if humanity is to weather the coming climate changes.
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, with students taking a substantial role in assessing and discussing the literature. It 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 and energy policy issue, to be discussed in the first class. Some candidate project topics might be:





Looking at the U.S. energy system as a whole, how could policy be designed to transform it
from its current configuration to one that that has zero or almost-zero carbon emissions by
2055?
What are the implications of increasing nuclear power use to a level that would eliminate the
need for coal, by 2055?
How could policy be designed to reduce carbon emissions from agriculture to half current levels or more, by 2055?
How could policy be designed to cut energy use in buildings by one quarter, by 2055?
How might international climate negotiations structures or institutions be re-configured to
break the current stalemate?
1
Learning outcomes
The objectives of the course include learning to:




Understand the principle climate science, politics and policy issues
Understand the role of technologies in addressing climate concerns and their environmental, economic and institutional ramifications
Identify policy, political, and institutional issues that may present barriers to effective policy development, program design, and implementation
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 policymaking and climate politics, as a specific and important example of science and policy interaction.
By the end of the course, students will be well situated to pursue further work on climate policy.
Requirements, Grades and Examinations
There are five main requirements for the course:
Blackboard posting and discussion
Participation in class discussions
Group project contribution
Project presentation contribution
30%
20%
40%
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
The course is based on the following course texts, available at the Arlington Campus Bookstore.
However, I recommend looking first at used book websites, such as Alibris. Access them via
http://www.addall.com, which searches about 30 new and used books sites and lists results by
price.
Required books
Bryner, Gary and Robert Duffy, J. (2012). Integrating Climate, Energy, and Air Pollution Policies.
Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. ISBN-13: 978-0262517874
Garvey, James. (2008). The Ethics of Climate Change. Continuum, London. ISBN-13: 9780826497376
Hulme, M. (2009). Why We Disagree About Climate Change: Understanding Controversy, Inaction And Opportunity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. ISBN-13: 9780521727327
2
Essential resources
Below is a list of news and information resources essential to the professional climate policy community. Read them assiduously. In addition, the suite of daily news summaries from Energy and
Environment is excellent – and GMU gets this expensive service for free. And of course, a major
daily newspaper (e.g. Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, New York Times) is essential reading
for practitioners and students of policy. Other key resources that are widely used in the field are
also listed here.
GMU Library Environment InfoGuide -- http://infoguides.gmu.edu/environmentalpolicy -- this
should be your first stop.
Media
New York Times – http://www.nytimes.com -- click on “Times Topics” and then “Global Warming.”
Guardian (UK) -- the best European coverage of climate change and environment science and policy:
Politics and Science of Climate Change
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/scienceofclimatechange
--and-Environment: Climate Change
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/climate-change
Environment & Energy Daily -- http://www.eenews.net/eed/ -- indispensible daily summary of
most recent government and business news in these sectors;
ClimateWire -- http://www.eenews.net/cw/ -- similar publication from the same publisher.
For both E&E services, enter the following:
Account Type: “I’m not sure what type of account I have”
E-mail
“[@gmu.edu]” email address
Organization: “[George Mason University] [Division/Practice]”
Politico’s Energy and Environment page -- http://www.politico.com/energy/
Grist -- http://grist.org/topic/climate -- entertaining website on climate, energy, food and lifestyles
New York Times: DotEarth (Adrew Revkin’s blog) -- http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/ -- one of
the most influential environmental and climate blogs.
Climate Progress (Joe Romm’s blog) -- http://climateprogress.org/ -- another influential blog,
sometimes at odds with Revkin
Climate and environmental science
The Discovery of Global Warming -- www.aip.org/history/climate/ -- terrific introduction to climate change, and companion to book by Spencer Weart.
Understanding and Solving the Climate Change Problem -http://stephenschneider.stanford.edu/index.html -- outstanding web resource authored by
Stephen Schneider, updated by colleagues.
Real Climate -- www.realclimate.org -- a rich resource on climate science by climate scientists.
Climate Central -- http://www.climatecentral.org/ -- a journalist- and public-friendly science resource, particularly strong on charts and visual data.
Skeptical Science -- http://www.skepticalscience.com/ -- a climate science resource for opponents
of climate change skeptics.
Climate and energy policy
Center for Climate and Energy Solutions – http://www.c2es.org -- just what it says.
3
Pew Center on Global Climate Change – http://www.pewclimate.org -- good commentaries on climate policy.
Government and international agencies and authoritative statistics
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) – http://www.ipcc.ch
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change – http://www.unfccc.org -- reports
from individual nations.
BP Statistical Review of Energy, 2014, http://bp.com/statisticalreview
U.S. Energy Information Agency, International Energy Outlook 2013 –
http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/ieo/pdf/0484(2013).pdf – authoritative global energy statistics.
International Energy Agency – http://www.iea.org – also authoritative statistics on energy.
Group work
I strongly encourage you to join with students in your own study groups to discuss the material.
Student contact information will be exchanged at the first session to help you get these organized.
Blackboard and library databases
Book chapters and some other readings will be available through Blackboard.
Journal articles are available through the Library's databases (journals or newspapers: use Ejournal finder).
To login to Blackboard, go to http://mymasonportal.gmu.edu, and follow the login instructions.
Blackboard posting and reading discussions
As noted above, we will use the public Discussion Board function on Blackboard to jumpstart the
class discussions of the weekly readings. Comments and critiques online will give you time to consider what your classmates have to say about the readings, and help us focus on core issues more
quickly. Blackboard comments can also be useful as summaries and discussions of readings, useful
for preparing for the final exam.
There are two kinds of comments: Start-off Comments and Response Comments. The class will be
divided into two groups of roughly the same number of students. People whose last names begin
with letters A through J are in Group A, everyone else in is Group B.
Everyone in each group will post Start-off or Response Comments on alternate weeks, i.e, Group A
will post Start-off Comments on weeks 1, 3, 5, etc., and Group B will post Response Comments in
those weeks. Group B will post Start-off Comments on weeks 2, 4, 6, etc., and in those weeks,
Group A will post Response Comments.
Start-off Comments are to be posted to Blackboard no later than 6 pm, 48 hours before class.
Your contribution should be about 300-400 words, in which you:
1. Articulate any special insight or inspiration that week’s reading has given you, or any issues or problems you are having with it;
2. Raise and give initial thoughts on one or two questions the readings suggest that you would
like your classmates to reflect on and discuss in class
4
3. Begin to analyze and synthesize the readings, both within a session (i.e. discuss how readings relate to one another) and across the whole course (i.e. discuss how your view of the
general themes and issues of the course are shaped by the readings and class discussions).
Response Comments are to be posted by the group that has not posted Start-off Comments that
week. They must be posted no later than 6 pm, 24 hours before class, and should also be about
300-400 words. Response Comments respond to the Start-off Comments and begin (not end!) discussion on the topics raised.
Please do not post attachments of documents; cut and paste from documents into Blackboard directly, so we can all read discussion threads without leaving the Discussion Forum area.
Posting weekly is required. You will be assigned to a comment group on the first day of class.
Late comments. I take a dim view of late comments: you deprive your classmates of having the
benefit of your thoughts while you have the benefit of theirs. Accordingly, I cannot give full credit
for late comments. But if you do miss the deadline, post anyway: better late than never.
Getting your mind in shape: How to read in graduate school
This will be (I hope) a fascinating but (I know) demanding class. There is a larger than normal
reading load, as befits a 4-credit course. Video and audio program are also required from time to
time; they break up the routine of readings. The material itself is compelling: time flies when the
reading is good. Group work is strongly encouraged as a way to manage the workload, as well as
to connect with fellow classmates. If you have concerns about the time required to get all this done,
please let me know.
But there is a larger issue associated with the work this course demands: graduate school should
be thought of as a way of getting your mind in shape. It is more about learning how pose cut-tothe-core questions than it is about finding specific answers. It is more about learning to learn, a skill
that never loses its currency, and less about learning concrete but often time-limited information. It
is more about making an investment in critical thinking than it is about the consumption of entertaining stories or factoids.
Getting in shape intellectually takes a lot of work. Some activities help, others get in the way.
Things that help include:
Read hard copies of the best daily newspapers. Digital editions are great, but they risk allowing
you to over-tailor your exposure to the specific slants or issues news, which can contribute to intellectual myopia. There is nothing like flipping through actual pages of the New York Times, the Wall
Street Journal, or the Economist, glancing at stories you thought you’d never be interested in, and
finding something that grabs your attention.
Read books and long-form journalism, not just summaries or newsfeeds. Reading sustained
treatments of arguments, ideas or stories exercises the mind by exposing it to nuance, subtlety, and
complexity. Thinking critically depends on knowing more, and more deeply, than thin or hypertextlinked articles that give you little context or depth. Serious professionals don’t ignore lessdemanding media, but they limit its reach. Skim the book review pages of the Times or the Journal,
and make it a point to read the New Yorker or the Atlantic Monthly. Visit a good bookstore, sign up
for their newsletter and attend author events from time to time. Frequent the University or your
community library, and browse widely and borrow frequently.
5
Avoid substituting commercial television for serious journalism or academic writing. Commercial television is a wonderful medium in its place and time, but is a serious impediment to improved
understanding of public issues. It attracts and distracts viewers by raising anxiety levels by surrounding news and reporting about ideas with sensationalist techniques, compresses information
into extremely short sound and image bites, and tailors its coverage to the implicit, and sometimes
explicit, interests paying advertisers.
Sign up for electronic newsletters for publications in your field. Every profession or occupation
has a trade publication specializing in news and analysis pertinent to the field. Make it a point to
subscribe and at least skim the contents on a regular basis. Watch for conferences or reports on specific topics that interest you, and develop an understanding of what experts consider the pressing
issues of the day. This is the best route to becoming a leading participant yourself. The librarians
here at GMU can help you identify which publications to subscribe to, and in many cases can provide access for free.
Use libraries and other professional research assistance rather than relying too heavily on Internet search. The Internet has revolutionized access to information, but has not yet solved the problem of acquiring knowledge or, even more difficult, wisdom. Google searches are so convenient
that most of us indulge ourselves with snippets of instantly-discovered information, but put off doing real research using vetted, peer-reviewed or otherwise well-chosen sources that often reside in
library databases. The temptation to do a quick search online is like the challenge to public health
posed by junk food: the fat, salt, and sugar are so attractive and the marketing is so overwhelming
that it is difficult to resist. But a healthy intellectual “diet” should also seek out the fruits and vegetables of critical analytical thinking, and is necessary to give your mind a vigorous mental workout.
Make it a point to actually go into the library stacks to look for books. Because books are arranged by subject (not alphabetically), you can easily find a trove of materials based on a single call
number. This enables you to browse the collection much more efficiently than searching on line:
you can scan books while standing or sitting in the stacks themselves, and quickly get a sense of
what the subject is about, what treatment it’s been given by writers and scholars, and what is most
relevant to you.
Talk about what you are reading and thinking about with family, friends and classmates. Most of
what you will actually learn you will learn from people you interact with. Teachers can serve as
guides to what to learn, and can provide some feedback on how you are doing. But by and large it
is your classmates and friends that provide the best sounding board for what you think about what
you are reading. Explaining new ideas to others is a form of teaching and learning: by talking to
others, by teaching them, you are learning the material yourself. Doing so helps you see how new
information fits with what you already know, and helps you find gaps in your knowledge. Talking
about what you’re reading helps you to think more critically about it, and ultimately enables you to
master the material.
Writing help
Diana Hacker's A Pocket Manual of Style is the standard style manual in use in the School, and you
should become familiar with it. If you would like help with learning about how to compose your
arguments or write more clearly, please contact the University Writing Center,
http://writingcenter.gmu.edu, or see me.
6
Student journal: New Voices in Public Policy
I will nominate the very best papers in this course for publication in New Voices in Public Policy.
New Voices is a student- and faculty-reviewed journal that shares SPP's finest student work with the
rest of the world.
Disabilities
If you are a student with a disability and you need academic accommodations, please see me and
contact the Office of Disability Services (ODS) at 993-2474. All academic accommodations must
be arranged through the ODS.
Grading criteria
For purposes of this course, the grades of A or A- are reserved for sustained excellence and outstanding performance on all aspects of the course. The grades of B and B+ are used to denote mastery of the material and very good performance on all aspects of the course. The grade of B- denotes marginal quality work that is not quite up to graduate level standards. The grade of C denotes
work that may be adequate for undergraduate performance, but is not acceptable at the graduate
level. The grade of F denotes the failure to perform adequately.
I will occasionally return substandard work to students under the rubric of “revise and resubmit.”
Comments on written work are to be taken as general guides and feedback, not specific problems
that need fixing. It is not sufficient to simply correct errors I may have pointed out and consider
work dramatically improved.
To do well in this course, it is essential that you write well and use the literature we’ve read as a
foundation for your arguments. The guidelines below spell out the main evaluation criteria for writing, posting and participating in this class.
Writing assignments, class participation and Blackboard discussion grading criteria
A Writing is excellent in all respects. Arguments are clearly presented, logic is evident, appropriate detail is provided, literature is used throughout to make key points. Grammar, usage are
accurate, without errors, typos, etc. Formatting is clear, consistent, professional.
Student is actively engaged in and posts to Blackboard for every class, well in advance for all
members to read and react to. Voluntarily raises questions and thoughtfully contributes in
each class session. Posts frequently refer to readings and contributions of other students, both
from Blackboard postings and from class discussions. All readings are discussed thoughtfully,
and student makes a strong effort to synthesize material and explore its meaning and implications. Builds on other student comments, and is respectful of the views of others. Postings often raise questions about the material, both in the context of a particular session, but also more
thematically, across the course as a whole. Writing is clear, logical, and succinct.
7
A- Writing is very good. Arguments are clearly presented, logic is evident, appropriate detail is
provided, literature is used most of the time to make key points. Some grammar, usage inconsistencies, a few errors, typos, etc. Formatting is clear, consistent.
Student frequently participates in class, and posts for nearly every class, sufficiently in advance for most members to read and react to. Engages in class discussions without prompting.
Prepared most of the time, but not always. Posts refer to readings and contributions of other
students, both from Blackboard and class discussions. Most readings are discussed, and student makes a effort to synthesize material and explore its meaning and implications. Postings
raise questions about the material, both in the context of a particular session, but also thematically, across the course as a whole. Writing is clear, logical, and succinct. Performance is
good, but not consistently excellent.
B+ Writing is good. Arguments are mostly clearly presented, logic is sometimes not evident, occasional over-generalization is used, literature is used from time to time to make key points.
Some grammar, usage inconsistencies, a few errors, typos, etc. Formatting is pretty good, with
the occasional consistency.
Student attends class and participates in discussions sometimes, but performance is not consistent. Posts for most class sessions, and in time for readers to react. Posts often refer to readings and contributions from other students, but not as frequently as above. Postings refer often
to one or two readings rather than all or nearly all, but they provide insight into the material
discussed. Postings sometimes raise questions about the readings in the context of the class
discussion at hand. Writing is usually clear, logical and succinct, with only an occasional
overly long paragraph or run-on sentence.
B Writing is workmanlike, okay. Arguments are clearly presented most of the time, logic is is
mostly evident, with the occasional over-generalization. Literature is used sometimes to make
key points. Some grammar, usage inconsistencies, a few errors, typos, etc. Formatting is a bit
sloppy, inconsistent. Writing in this category is usually just good enough, but is not memorable, and often hard to critique in specific terms.
Student attends class and participates in discussions sometimes, but performance is not consistent. Student responds when asked, but does little beyond that. Posts for a majority of class
sessions, and usually in time for readers to react. Posts sometimes refer to readings and contributions from other students, but sometimes not. Postings mostly refer to a particular reading,
mostly as a summary or description, rather than an analysis. May get online discussion off
track. Questions are only occasionally raised about the readings. Writing is sometimes unclear
or exhibits questionable logic, and can be succinct, with only an occasional overly long paragraph or run-on sentence.
8
B- Writing is not quite up to graduate school standards. Arguments are sometimes muddy presented, logic is sometimes not evident, occasional over-generalization is used, literature is
used sparingly. Some grammar, usage inconsistencies, a few errors, typos, etc. Formatting is a
bit sloppy, inconsistent. Writing in this category is usually not quite good enough, and if it is
memorable, it is because it seems out of line from what we’ve come to expect. It is often hard
to critique in specific terms.
Student attends class, but is rather passive, and seldom volunteers to answer questions. Student reluctantly participates, and sometimes misses posting, sometimes not in time for readers
to react. Readings are generally not the focus of the postings as much as a discussion of some
of the ideas that the material raises. Personal commentary dominates the discussion. Writing is
sometimes hard to understand, due to flaws in logic, grammar or structure.
C Writing suffers from lack of precision, unclear logic, poor argumentation. Grammar and formatting are idiosyncratic and sloppy. Writing in this category needs considerable improvement.
Student does not attend all classes, and posts on an irregular basis, usually not in time for
readers to react. Comes to class unprepared to answer basic questions. Seldom volunteers for
anything, very passive. Perfunctory postings refer to some of the ideas that the material raises,
but readings are mentioned only in passing. Most of the postings are reactive only, and sometimes it is hard to tell if the student read any of the assigned readings or other postings at all.
Posts are brief, with little substance, and hard to understand. Usually seems to be present only
in body, but not in mind and spirit. Takes notes and hopes that he/she will not have to speak.
Grade equivalents are given below. These values will be used to calculate grades.
Received
grade
A
AB+
B
BC
F
Numeric
value
4.00
3.67
3.33
3.00
2.67
2.00
0
Calculated
grade from…
4.00
3.75
3.50
3.25
2.99
2.66
1.99
…to
3.76
3.51
3.26
3.00
2.67
2.00
0
Missed class sessions
Missing class is strongly discouraged, and I will not admit students who do not attend the first session,
even with notice. More than one absence may jeopardize your grade, if not your ability to keep up with
our rapid pace.
If for some reason you cannot attend a class, your participation grade can be maintained by providing
me a 750-word summary and analysis of the week's reading, with special attention to the critical questions they raise. This is to ensure that you have dug into the material, and will therefore have less risk falling behind the rest of the class.
9
Plagiarism
All work must be your own. In general, where the work of others is used, even in paraphrased form, it
must appropriately referenced. When in doubt, cite! Plagiarism is an Honor Code violation:
http://www.gmu.edu/facstaff/handbook/aD.html
The main things to keep in mind:





Know your sources and what they say.
Keep track of your sources when you copy and paste, and cite them accurately.
If you quote a key source, explain what the author says in your own words.
Avoid the temptation to simply change a few words or sentence order in a copied text. This is not
original writing, but instead is incorrect paraphrasing, which is a form of plagiarism.
If deadline pressure leads you to even consider passing off others’ work as your own, DON'T DO IT.
Contact me to discuss your situation. There are better ways to deal with stress than to risk expulsion.
If you have any questions about correct citation, paraphrasing and writing, let me know. The following
resources will also help:
GMU University Writing Center: Avoiding Plagiarism
http://writingcenter.gmu.edu/resources/plagiarism.html
Washington State University
http://www.wsulibs.wsu.edu/plagiarism/main.html
Indiana University: How to avoid plagiarism
http://www.indiana.edu/~wts/pamphlets/plagiarism.shtml
Purdue University: Avoiding Plagiarism (includes exercises)
http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/research/r_plagiar.html
Here follows the official SPGIA Policy on Plagiarism:
The profession of scholarship and the intellectual life of a university as well as the field of public policy
inquiry depend fundamentally on a foundation of trust. Thus any act of plagiarism strikes at the heart of
the meaning of the university and the purpose of SPGIA. It constitutes a serious breach of professional
ethics and it is unacceptable.
Plagiarism is the use of another’s words or ideas presented as one’s own. It includes, among other things,
the use of specific words, ideas, or frameworks that are the product of another’s work. Honesty and thoroughness in citing sources is essential to professional accountability and personal responsibility. Appropriate citation is necessary so that arguments, evidence, and claims can be critically examined.
Plagiarism is wrong because of the injustice it does to the person whose ideas are stolen. But it is also
wrong because it constitutes lying to one’s professional colleagues. From a prudential perspective, it is
shortsighted and self-defeating, and it can ruin a professional career.
The faculty of SPGIA takes plagiarism seriously and has adopted a zero tolerance policy. Any plagiarized
assignment will receive an automatic grade of “F.” This may lead to failure for the course, resulting in
10
dismissal from the University. This dismissal will be noted on the student’s transcript. For foreign students who are on a university-sponsored visa (eg. F-1, J-1 or J-2), dismissal also results in the revocation
of their visa.
To help enforce the SPGIA policy on plagiarism, all written work submitted in partial fulfillment of
course or degree requirements must be available in electronic form so that it can be compared with electronic databases, as well as submitted to commercial services to which the School subscribes. Faculty
may at any time submit student’s work without prior permission from the student. Individual instructors
may require that written work be submitted in electronic as well as printed form. The SPGIA policy on
plagiarism is supplementary to the George Mason University Honor Code; it is not intended to replace it
or substitute for it.
'Nuf said.
Course 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 authoritative yet provocative statements of the problems the world faces: the challenge of climate change and the nexus between 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 least two episodes 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.
As for our reading: Holdren is a physicist and the 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
in his piece, “energy is the most difficult part of the environment problem, and environment is the most
difficult part of the energy problem.” Energy is of course central to the functioning of societies; securing
access to it, exploiting it, distributing it and dealing with the consequences of its use are fundamental issues that all societies must face. But until the late 20th century, dealing with the consequences of energy
exploitation was largely an afterthought.
That is no longer the case, as Hamilton passionately argues. He captures the urgency many scientists, analysts and activists feel about the problem of global warming. He uses science to argue that humanity really has no choice but to alter the way it uses energy, in order to avoid catastrophic global warming, which
he says could easily render life unimaginably difficult.
Questions to guide your thinking and Blackboard postings:
1. Does Holdren’s statement, above, clarify or muddle the issue for us? What is implied for policy by
his construction of the problem?
2. Hamilton, a philosopher, says we cannot escape the science of climate change, and he implies in this
11
chapter (and makes explicit in the next) that humanity is in denial about the urgency and magnitude of
the problem. Why might this be so?
3. How do the two films and video for this week compare as climate risk communication vehicles?
What rhetorical or tactical approaches does each take, and with what effect? Do you find one more
persuasive or political efficacious that the other? What social effect do the filmmakers hope will occur because of their film?
Media
An Inconvenient Truth. (2006). David Guggenhein, director, Lawrence Bender Productions, Participant
Media.
Years of Living Dangerously. (2014). Simcha Jacobovici, director, The Years Project, Showtime.
Last Week Tonight with John Oliver, season 1, episode 3, “Climate Change Debate,” May 11, 2014,
(4:23), http://www.hbo.com/last-week-tonight-with-john-oliver/episodes/01/03-may-112014/video/climate-change-debate.html
Readings
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
Hamilton, Clive. (2010). “No Escaping the Science,” ch. 1 in Requiem for a Species: Why We Resist the
Truth About Climate Change. London: Earthscan, pp. 1-31.
Week 2
The energy-climate policy challenge
Group B post Start Off Comments, Group A 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. Deutsch as been a key player in science and policy debates about energy in
several administrations, both Republican and Democratic: his views on energy policy are informed by his
experience as a scientist, as a Department of Energy senior official and as the head of the Central Intelligence Agency in the Clinton Administration.
Bryner and Duffy’s piece introduces us to the idea of policy fragmentation in the linked domains of energy, climate and air pollution; he provides an essential framework to think about policy design as way to
address multiple goals. We will refer to their ideas throughout the semester.
Both the U.S National Climate Assessment and the IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report were released in
2014; both are authoritative and comprehensive studies of the science of climate change, it’s impacts and
the actual and possible societal and policy responses. Schneider provides an excellent overview in less
bureaucratic form.
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.
National Climate Assessment, 2014, http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/report. Browse the website, and
read the executive summary.
Deutsch, John M. (2011). The Crisis in Energy Policy. (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press), ch.
2, “Energy and Climate,” pp. 29-59.
12
Bryner, Gary and Robert Duffy, J., Integrating Climate, Energy, and Air Pollution Policies, (Cambridge,
MA: The MIT Press, 2012), ch. 1, “Introduction,” pp. 1-15.
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
Schneider, Stephen, Understanding and Solving the Climate Change Problem website, “Overview,”
http://stephenschneider.stanford.edu/Climate/Overview.html and “Climate Science,”
http://stephenschneider.stanford.edu/Climate/Climate_Science/Science.html
Week 3
Energy systems and political choices
Group A post Start Off Comments, Group B post Response Comments
Energy systems are human artifacts, constructed over decades by people and organizations. This session
will look at energy systems and strategies, including the classic pieces by Lovins on “hard” and “soft”
energy paths, wherein the notion that the composition of the energy infrastructure matters a great deal,
and that it is amenable to different choices more friendly to the environment.
We will also 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.
Smil, a noted energy systems historian and analyst, while sharing the concern for environmental threats
from energy, argues that it is nearly impossible to predict the energy future, that energy systems are remarkably durable, and that pronouncements of coming changes often fail to take scale and entrenched
interdependencies into account. These perspectives on energy systems provide an important foundation
for our subsequent work on climate policy and politics.
Finally, note that there are two important reference sources on energy production and consumption: BP’s
statistical review, U.S. Dept. of Energy/Energy Information Agency international outlook, and the BP
world statistical review; skim them both for their assessment of trends and prospects for energy production and consumption.
Goldemberg, J. (1996) Energy, Environment, and Development. (Earthscan: London, UK), 11 – 37.
Lovins, Amory. (1976) “Energy Strategy: The Road Not Taken,” Foreign Affairs, vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 65–
96.
Pacala, S. and Socolow, R. (2004). “Stabilization wedges: Solving the climate problem for the next 50
years.” Science, vol. 305, no. 5686, pp. 968-972.
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.
Grubler, Arnulf, and Cutler J. Cleveland. "Energy transitions." Encyclopedia of Earth (2008),
http://www.eoearth.org/view/article/152561/
Smil, Vaclav. "World history and energy." Encyclopaedia of Energy 6 (2004): 549,
http://vaclavsmil.com/wp-content/uploads/docs/smil-article-2004world-history-energy.pdf
Smil, Vaclav. "Global Energy: The Latest Infatuations In energy matters, what goes around, comes
around—but perhaps should go away." American Scientist, 99.3 (2011): 212-219,
http://www.americanscientist.org/issues/issue.aspx?id=12416&y=0&no=&content=true&page=1
&css=print
U.S. Energy Information Agency, “World Energy Demand and Economic Outlook,” chapter 1 in International Energy Outlook 2013, (Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Energy), pp. 9–21,
http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/ieo/pdf/0484(2013).pdf
13
BP Statistical Review of Energy, 2014, http://bp.com/statisticalreview
Week 4
Climate science in the policy process
Group B post Start Off Comments, Group A post Response Comments
Climate science may appear to be new and contentious, but in fact has a remarkably long and robust pedigree. This session will give us a first detailed look at the origins of climate science in history, and will
situate it in the context of science policy more generally. The novelty of climate science is in the worldwide impacts of climate change – greenhouse gases know no boundaries – thus making global warming
an unprecedented existential threat and the most important collective action problem nations have ever
faced. The economic and environmental stakes could not be higher – and thus the political challenges are
among the most acute in human history. Thus it behooves us to grapple with the interaction of climate
science and science policy to understand how climate and energy policy function, as a suite of scholars
show, including Schneider, a preeminent climate scientist-policy participant himself.
In addition, the session will also address briefly the disinformation controversies over climate science
(Oreskes and Conway, Pielke, and McCreight and Dunlap). While the preponderance of evidence indicates that the climate is warming generally, there are many outstanding issues on which experts continue
to research, and about which reasonable people disagree – as Hulme carefully shows.
Hulme, M. (2009). “The performance of science,” ch. 3 in Why we disagree about climate change: understanding controversy, inaction and opportunity, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp.
72-108.
Skolnikoff, Eugene B., “The role of science in policy,” Environment, vol. 41, no. 5, 1999, 9pp.
Andrews, Richard, “Risk-based decision making: policy, science, and politics,” in Norman J. Vig and
Michael E. Kraft, eds., Environmental Policy: New Directions for the Twenty-First Century, 6th
ed., (Washington, DC: CQ Press, 2006), pp. 215-238.
Schenkel, R. (2010). “The challenge of feeding scientific advice into policy-making,” Science, 330, 17491751.
Stirling, A. (2010). “Keep it complex,” Nature, 468, 1029-1031.
Schneider, Stephen and Michael D. Mastrandrea. (2010). “The politics of climate science,” ch. 1 in The
Politics of Climate Change: A Survey, Maxwell Boykoff, ed. Routledge/Europa: London, pp. 1125.
Schneider, Stephen, Understanding and Solving the Climate Change Problem website, “Policy,”
http://stephenschneider.stanford.edu/Climate/Climate_Policy/Policy.html
Climate change denial controversy
Oreskes, Naomi, (2004). “The scientific consensus on climate change: how do we know we’re not
wrong?” in Climate change: What It Means for Us, Our Children, and Our Grandchildren,
(Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2004), pp. 65-100.
Pielke, Roger A., Jr. “Consensus about climate change?” Letter to the editor by in response to N. Orestes,
and response by N. Orestes, 2005. Science, vol. 308, pp. 952-954.
McCright, Aaron M. and Riley E. Dunlap. (2000). “Challenging global warming as a social problem: an
analysis of the conservative movement’s counter-claims,” Social Problems, vol. 47, no. 4, pp.
499-522.
Oreskes, Naomi and Erik M. Conway, (2010). Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Obscured the
Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming. (New York: Bloomsbury Press), ch. 1,
pp. 10-35, ch. 6, pp.169-215.
14
Week 5
Economics of climate change
Group A post Start Off Comments, Group B 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 pathbreaking 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. Hamilton argues that
“growth fetishism,” a deviant aspect of neo-classical economics, is responsible for our current climate
woes, and that therefore we need to rethink our commitment to contemporary market economics to avoid
dangerous climate change. 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.
Finally, Newell and Paterson argue that we are now witnessing, and need to encourage, the emergence of
a new “climate capitalism,” “a form of capitalism … based on a fundamental and transformative shift
away from the use of fossil fuels [for] economic development in which de-carbonisation is defined as an
opportunity to reconcile capitalist accumulation with the requirements of climate change mitigation.”
This is an important claim we will investigate more fully.
Hulme, M. (2009). “The endowment of value,” ch. 4 in Why we disagree about climate change: understanding controversy, inaction and opportunity, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp.
109-141.
Hamilton, Clive. (2010). “Growth fetishism,” ch 2 in Requiem for a Species: Why We Resist the Truth
About Climate Change. Earthscan: London, pp. 32-65.
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.hmtreasury.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
Newell, Peter and Paterson, Matthew. (2010). “The Politics of the Carbon Economy,” ch. 5 in The Politics of Climate Change: A Survey, Maxwell Boykoff, ed. Routledge/Europa: London, pp. 77-95.
Week 6
Climate change, responsibility and ethics
Group B post Start Off Comments, Group A post Response Comments
15
Considerations of distributional ethics and justice underlie a good deal of climate politics, and follow
from, or even precede, economic considerations. The two domains are, in fact, inextricably linked. Ethical
issues are predominantly questions of equity: the developed countries produced nearly all of the greenhouse gas emissions in their drives to industrialize, yet the burden of global warming will fall mostly on
poor countries that have produced nearly no carbon pollution. Moreover, limitations on energy use to limit global warming would fall most heavily on the poor, who need energy to improve the welfare of their
people.
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 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?
Gardiner and Garvey each outline the major arguments arising from an ethical consideration of climate
and energy. Maniates and Muller, in their own ways, raise questions about individual responsibility for
addressing a global problem. Roberts and Parks frame climate ethics as one of climate justice in the context of North-South politics. Finally, NOW, the PBS public affairs program by Bill Moyers, examines
climate change from the perspective of Christian religious leaders.
Hulme, M. (2009). “The things we believe,” ch. 5 in Why we disagree about climate change: understanding controversy, inaction and opportunity, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK,
pp. 142-177.
Gardiner, S. (2010). “Ethics and climate change: an introduction.” WIREs Climate Change, 1(1), 54-66.
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.
Müller, Benito. (2007). “Food Miles or Poverty Eradication? The moral duty to eat African strawberries
at Christmas.” Oxford Energy and Environment Comment, pp. 1-6,
http://brusselsbriefings.files.wordpress.com/2008/02/muller-paper.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.
NOW, “God and Global Warming,” Public Broadcasting Service, October 26, 2007,
http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/343/
Week 7
Climate risk perception and communication
Group A post Start Off Comments, Group B post Response Comments
In market societies, risk communication is an essential element of public policy and behavior change;
public health authorities have grappled with this for decades. Denial that a problem even exists remains a
difficult problem, as we saw briefly in session 4. Raising awareness, often through appeals to fear, is a
standard technique. But how effective is it? How can public attitudes be changed to support climatefriendly 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,
which we first encountered at the beginning of the term. This session explores a variety of communications research issues and strategies, including use of art and literature, that may more effectively help
16
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.
Hamilton outlines how denial plays an important role in climate politics, while Dorries sketches the limitations of appeals to catastrophe and fear. Moser lays out a thorough account of where climate communications has been and what principles in her view underlie effective strategies.
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. Nesbit argues that, like other communications approaches, framing matters in public opinion formation, while Ereaut and Segnit use linguistic
analyses to assess public attitudes to climate communications campaigns in the United Kingdom. Finally,
the Cape Farewell project introduces the use of art to communicate the magnitude and urgency of climate
change in ways that may be effective where other techniques are not.
Media
An Inconvenient Truth. (2006). David Guggenhein, director, Lawrence Bender Productions, Participant
Media.
Years of Living Dangerously. (2014). Simcha Jacobovici, director, The Years Project, Showtime.
Cape Farewell Project, http://www.capefarewell.com/. Browse the entire website.
Public Opinion
Maibach, E. W., Roser-Renouf, C. and Leiserowitz, A. (2009). “Global warming’s six Americas: an audience segmentation analysis.” Yale Project on Climate Change and George Mason University,
http://environment.yale.edu/uploads/6Americas2009.pdf
Yale Program on Climate Communication, http://climatecommunication.yale.edu/
Polling Report, “Environment,” http://www.pollingreport.com/enviro.htm
Issues
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.
Hamilton, Clive. (2010). “Many Forms of Denial,” ch. 4 in Requiem for a Species: Why We Resist the
Truth About Climate Change. (London: Earthscan, pp. 95-133.
Dörries, M. (2010). “Climate catastrophes and fear,” WIREs Climate Change 1(6), 885-890.
Strategies
Moser, S. (2010). “Communicating climate change: history, challenges, processes and future directions.”
WIREs Climate Change 1(1), 31-53.
Nisbet, M.C. (2009). “Communicating climate change: why frames matter for public engagement.” Environment March/April, http://www.environmentmagazine.org/Archives/Back%20Issues/MarchApril%202009/Nisbet-full.html
Ereaut, G. and Segnit, N. (2006). “Warm words: how are we telling the climate story and can we tell it
better?” Institute for Public Policy Research, London,
http://www.ippr.org/assets/media/images/media/files/publication/2011/05/warm_words_1529.pdf
17
Week 8
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 session 6 has
already suggested. Economic development generally implies increased use of energy; yet this would contribute to global warming unless substantial mitigating and adaptive measures are taken. This session explores the broad contours of the problem of development and climate change.
The Southern perspective on climate negotiations is articulated Sanwal: developing countries insist that
the rich countries shoulder the lion’s share of the burden of reducing greenhouse gas emission, whereas
the Northern countries argue that costs should be allocated more evenly. One of the provisions of the
Kyoto Treaty is for the rich countries to provide compensating environmental payments and clean technology transfers to poorer countries: Bumpus and Cole and Persson and Azar ask whether such programs
are likely to work.
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.
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.
Sanwal, M. (2009). “Reflection on the climate negotiations: a southern perspective.” Climate Policy 9(3),
330-333.
Bumpus, A. G. and Cole, J. C. (2010). “How can the current CDM deliver sustainable development?”
WIREs Climate Change 1(4), 541-547.
Persson, U.M. and Azar, C. (2010). “Preserving the world's tropical forests - a price on carbon may not
do.” Environmental Science and Technology 44, 210-215.
Homer-Dixon, Thomas. (1999). “Violence,” ch. 7 in Environment, Scarcity, and Violence. Princeton University Press: Princeton, pp. 133-148 (skim pp. 149-176).
Center for Naval Analysis. (2007). National Security and the Threat of Climate Change. Washington,
DC: CNA Corporation. Report and video briefing available at:
http://www.cna.org/reports/climate
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 9
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 unfair-
18
ly 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.
We pick up again with Bryner and Duffy as they continue to explore the fragmented policy dynamics of
climate and energy, and turn directly to policy in the United States. 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.
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): 636653.
Haas, Peter M. (2004). “Addressing the global governance deficit.” Global Environmental Politics, 4(4),
1-15.
Bryner, Gary and Robert Duffy, J., Integrating Climate, Energy, and Air Pollution Policies, (Cambridge,
MA: The MIT Press, 2012), ch. 2, “Fragmentation, Policy Integration, and Policy Change,” pp.
16-39, ch. 3, “US Climate Policy,” pp. 41-69.
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/clearn/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/worldclimate/
Week 10
Decarbonization and technological innovation
Group B post Start Off Comments, Group A post Response Comments
19
Finding ways to consume less energy while maintaining or increasing economic well-being, particularly
for developing countries, appears to many to be the only way forward on climate change; advocates of
this strategy point to increasing population, rising middle classes in poorer nations, public resistance to
lifestyle changes that reducing consumption would entail as major challenges.
In light of these difficult options, advocates argue that improvements in energy efficiency, increased deployment of non-carbon energy sources such as nuclear and renewable energy such as wind and solar, and
even “emergency” planetary protection measures such as geo-engineering are all called for. We’ve already read Pacala and Sokolow’s suggestions about how to close the gap between where we’re headed
and where we need to go; in this and the next week, we’ll look at more detailed assessments of how to
achieve such goals.
First, we will address the dynamics of technological innovation in energy and “decarbonization” of the
economy, building on our earlier discussion of energy systems. Pielke lays out the case for decarbonization, while Deutsch provides an overview of the key non-carbon fuels with the greatest potential. Grubler,
Unruh and Berkhout each address how energy systems are best seen as large-scale, path-dependent technological regimes, not just techniques or equipment. Sanden and Azar suggest that incremental changes at
near-term time scales may help us achieve longer-term objectives, perhaps despite the perils associated
with “carbon lock-in.”
Pielke, Roger, Jr. (2010). “Decarbonization of the global economy,” and “Decarbonization policies
around the world,” chs. 3 and 4 in The Climate Fix: What Scientists and Politicians Won’t Tell
You About Climate Change. Basic Books: New York, pp. 61-79, 81-116.
Deutsch, John M. (2011). The Crisis in Energy Policy. (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press), ch.
4, “Biomass, Solar, and Nuclear Energy, with an Aside on Natural Gas,” pp. 79-109.
Unruh, Gregory C. "Understanding carbon lock-in." Energy policy 28.12 (2000): 817-830.
Unruh, Gregory C. "Escaping carbon lock-in." Energy policy 30.4 (2002): 317-325.
Berkhout, F. (2002). “Technological regimes, path dependency and the environment.” Global Environmental Change 12: 1-4.
Week 11
Technology to the rescue? Opportunities and risks of low-carbon energy strategies
Group A post Start Off Comments, Group B post Response Comments
This continuation 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.
Davis, Steven J., et al. "Rethinking wedges." Environmental Research Letters8.1 (2013): 011001.
20
Efficiency
Granade, Hannah Choi, et al., Unlocking Energy Efficiency in the U.S. Economy, McKinsey Global Energy and Materials, July 2009,
http://www.mckinsey.com/client_service/electric_power_and_natural_gas/latest_thinking/unlocki
ng_energy_efficiency_in_the_us_economy
Renewable energy
Lipp, Judith. (2007). “Lessons for Effective Renewable Electricity Policy from Denmark, Germany and
the United Kingdom” Energy Policy, vol. 35, no. 11, pp. 5481-5495,
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421507002091
Biofuels
Naylor, Rosamond L. et al. (2007). “The Ripple Effect: Biofuels, Food Security and the Environment.”
Environment, vol. 49 no. 9: pp. 30-43.
Nuclear power
Moniz, Ernest. "Why We Still Need Nuclear Power: Making Clean Energy Safe and Affordable." Foreign
Affairs, 90 (2011): 83.
Duffy, Robert. "Déjà vu all over again: climate change and the prospects for a nuclear power renaissance." Environmental Politics 20.5 (2011): 668-686.
Geoengineering
Victor, D. G., Morgan, M. G., Apt, J., Steinbruner, J., and Ricke, K. (2009). “The Geoengineering Option.” Foreign Affairs, March/April 2009, pp. 64-76.
R. Kunzig. (2008). “Geoengineering: How to Cool Earth--At a Price” Scientific American, November, pp.
46-55.
Week 12
Adaptation to climate changes
Group B post Start Off Comments, Group A post Response Comments
With international efforts to limit greenhouse gas emissions at a standstill, attention has recently shifted to
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,
followed by the most recent authoritative assessment of adaptation so far released, in as-yet-unoffical
draft form by the IPCC. 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.
Week 13
21
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.
Bryner, Gary and Robert Duffy, J., Integrating Climate, Energy, and Air Pollution Policies, (Cambridge,
MA: The MIT Press, 2012), ch. 7, “Integrating agriculture, energy and climate change policies,”
pp. 155-176, and ch. 8, “Climate change, policy integration, and ecological sustainability,” pp.
177-199.
Tollefson, Jeff, “Nations adopt historic global climate accord,” Nature, vol. 528, December 17, 2015,
315-16.
22