Climate Change Flashcards
1
Q
Books of use
A
- Klein (2015) This Changes Everything
- Bonneuil and Fressoz (2017) Shock Anthropocene
- Klein (2007) The Shock Doctrine
- Wallace-Wells (2019) The Uninhabitable Earth
- Carson (1962) Silent Spring
- Wilkinson and Pickett (2010) Spirit Level
- Dorling (2017) Equality Effect
- Kolbert (2015) Field notes form a catastrophe
- Robinson (2018) Climate Justice
- Lovelock (1979) Gaia
- Extinction Rebellion (2019)
- Oreskes and Conway (2010) Merchants of Doubt
- Juniper (2013) What has nature ever done for us
2
Q
Environmental History
[Timeline of Key events UNFCCC History - http://unfccc.int/timeline/]
A
- 1940s focus endangered species
- 50s/60s ecosystem preservation / national parks movement
- 60s/70s conservation and development
- 80s N/S, sustainable dev
- 80s emergence international agenda - 1988 US drought, Caribbean hurricanes, Hansen chief climate scientist at NASA statement to US senate, Toronto conference on the changing atmosphere, IPCC formed, Thatcher’s speech to Royal Society
- 90s climate change
- 1990 IPCC First Assessment Report - human emissions causing GHGs - leads to start UN General Assembly Negotiations on a Framework Convention
- 1992 154 countries sign UNFCCC - June Rio Earth Summit
- 1994 UNFCCC enters into force
- 1995 COP1 Berlin
- 1995 IPCC Second Assessment Report
- 1996 COP2 Geneva
- 1997 Kyoto Protocol (COP3) - first GHG emissions reduction treaty
- 2000 COP6 Hague collapse disagreements US/Europe use Kyoto mechanisms
- 2001 US withdraws Kyoto - COP7 sets stage Kyoto ratification - CDM, rules emissions trading
- 2004 COP10 Buenos Aires Programme of Work on Adaptation and Response Measures
- 2005 Kyoto becomes law after Russian ratification 55% - EU Emissions Trading Launches (EU ETS)
- 2006 COP12 Nairobi Work Programme on Adaptation + Nairobi Framework on Capacity-Building for the CDM - CDM opens
- 2007 IPCC 4th Assessment Report + COP13 Bali Action Plan - call for long-term goal for emissions reductions
- 2008 Joint Implementation Mechanism starts - countries earn emission reductions from promoting project elsewhere - COP14, Adaptation Fund
- COP15 2009 Copenhagen
- 2010 COP16 Cancun agreements - Green climate fund, technology mechanism, cancun adaptation framework (govs assist developing w CC)
- 2011 Durban COP17 adopt universal legal agreement on CC as soon as possible - agree new CC agreement by 2015, launch Momentum for Change
- 2012 COP18 Doha - launch second commitment period Kyoto
- 2013 IPCC 5th assessment report - COP 19 REDD
- 2014 UN secretary-general’s climate summit, 5th IPCC report - COP20 Lima
- 2015 COP21 Paris Agreement, SDGs
- 2017 One Planet Summit - low-carbon future
- 2018 IPCC 1.5 report, Katowice climate package
3
Q
1988 Toronto Conference
A
- Reduce emissions to 1988 levels by 2000 and further reduction 20% from 1988 levels by 2005
- first international conference on CC, 46 countries, first emissions reductions targets
4
Q
1997 Kyoto Protocol
- in Bulkeley and Newell (2015)
A
Over 150 countries sign Kyoto Protocol - 38 annex 1 industrialised countries reduce emissions 5.2% average below 1990 levels during 2008-2012
- USA reduce emissions 7%, Japan 6% and EU 8% - other industrialised countries small increases, others freeze emissions
- CDM and Joint Implementation
- first legally binding agreement
- US withdraw in 2001
5
Q
2009 COP15 Copenhagen
A
- Copenhagen Accord agreed by small group countries - industrialised nations committed provide developing nations with US$30bn of new, additional fast-track funding 2010-12 _ US$100bn per year by 2020 through Green Climate Fund
6
Q
Paris 2015
A
- Keep temps below 2 degrees, aim for 1.5
- limit GHG emissions to level can be managed in earth’s system
- scale up ambition targets/review every 5 years
- increased levels climate finance to developing countries
- 2016 US + China agreed ratify Paris Agreement - needs 55% global emissions before becomes globally binding
- signed by 195 countries
- Syria and Nicaragua only countries not to sign
- Ratified by 168 oct 2017
- NDCs or Nationally determined contributions are the heart of Paris Agreement – efforts by each country to reduce emissions and adapt to CC – each party or state has to prepare, communicate, maintain and update NDCs it intends to achieve.
- long term goal zero emissions
- ambitious - encouraged to do more, 5 year reviews
- more adaptation/mitigation international finance
- no agreement on loss and damage - regions experience loss/damage should reimbursed/assisted UNFCCC
- NAZCA - non-state actors sign - nearly 10,000 cities
7
Q
Jordan et al. (2018) Policentricity CC governance
A
- UNFCCC criticised being to slow produce results - 30 years governance emissions not peaked, not track 2 degrees
- international regime not accomplish climate governance alone not new
- bottom-up governance happening - state and non state actors - Ostrom (2010) positive poly centric governance had emerged and would increase - need for polycentric system diff governance diff scales - as opposed monocentric system single power
- where Ostrom optimistic many early 2000s saw widening climate governance as fragmentation - distraction international efforts (biermann et al 2009) - or else saw it as alternative not complementary to international regime like Ostrom
- conventional climate governance starts international regime, works down/out - Keohane and Victor (2011) see move regime complex
- Paris see move from set state emissions targets to states setting own - states not waiting for international regime to act anymore - regional govs, private sector
- features of poly centric systems = local action (each actor own actions, work out where fit among others), mutual adjustment (units interact, adjust around each other), experimentation (with approaches/solutions - multiple can be tested same time), trust and overarching rules (to link local initiatives)
8
Q
Bulkeley and Newell (2015) Intro/ History Governing CC
A
- growing scientific certainty, CC concern but slow international efforts
- orthodox approach = CC global problem so needs global solution - state cooperation to reduce emissions through international treaties
- other ways understand CC - global processes = diff geog responsibility on TNCs and rich consumers (Shell emits more than Saudi Arabia)
- CC framing global neglects other levels decision making
- issue focus on states in neoliberal, globalised world
- CC complex process, cuts through space and scale - need think beyond state
- US hegemon, WB, IMF- becomes more important than international institutions = uneven power system
- look at regimes through norms, values, knowledge shapes states/international institution - interests, IPCC - relationship science and climate policy complex and politicised
- Regime theory vs regime complex
- UNFCCC = secretariat, COP = meeting parties annually review progress commitments, decision making body climate negotiations, Subsidiary Bodies for Implementation, Scientific and Technological Advice and working groups specific issues, observer organisations
- COP blocks like OPEC, AOSIS (small island states) G77 (developing + China) - rise BRICs
- UNFCCC 1992 - then Kyoto, CDM, Joint Implementation, 2001 US left Kyoto over econ developing world not having reduce emissions
- 2007 Least Developed Countries Fund, Special Climate Change Fund, Adaptation Fund
- COP12 Nairobi focus SSA and CDM
- scientific knowledge greenhouse effect since 1800s but no attention politicians till 70s/80s
- N/S social justice/equity issues - common differentiated responsibility - uneven patterns responsibility and vulnerability
- markets and neoliberal governance - EU ETS
9
Q
Christoff (2010) Copenhagen
A
- 2009 COP15 Copenhagen meant establish goals after 2012 end Kyoto first commitment period, but Accord non-binding, China and US domestic influenced, UNFCCC weakness highlighted
- marked slow progress, walk-outs and disagreement
- final draft issue emphasis industrialised countries emissions reductions- supported G77 not Annex 1
- Copenhagen Accord written Brazil, india, China, South Africa
- china stalling progress - sent low ranking officials, missed meetings
- US secret meetings, accord announced media before accepted - accord denounced and blocked
- accord no specific targets, not consistent 2 degrees, Green Climate Fund
- tackling CC needs collective action but states focus domestic situation
- Country blocs stalemate
- issue US/China = 40% global emissions
- china dev pressures, manufacturing hub, wants to be superpower, increasing inequality, pol instability, CCP threats, ageing population, very dependent global markets
- US under Obama hoped climate leadership but not case - not have large majority in senate, so could not get support climate deals unless china/India reduct as competitors economically
10
Q
UNFCCC (1992)
A
Actual framework document
- focus on states/international bodies
- differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities - developed lead/fund
- present and future generations
- prevent ‘dangerous’ anthropogenic interference with the climate system
- parities to cooperate to promote a supportive, open international econ system = sustainable econ growth and dev in all parities, esp developing, so can address CC
- promote education and public awareness CC
- COP, body tech/scientific advice and financial mechanism established
11
Q
Climate Action Tracker (2020)
http://www.climateactiontracker.org
A
- how well countries doing towards 1.5 degree goal
- Morocco compatible, india 2 degree compatible, EU insufficient, China highly insufficient, USA critically insufficient
12
Q
Taylor and Watts (2019) 20 firms behind a third of all carbon emissions
A
- 20 fossil fuel companies = 35% energy-related CO2 and methane / 480bn tonnes CO2 since 1965
- Chevron, Exxon, BP and Shell = over 10%
- what matters is pol action and stamping down corporations - more impact than lifestyle change - fossil fuel companies aware env harm but funded campaigns spread doubt climate science - 1965 US President’s Science Advisory Committee warned fossil fuels were causing more CO2 = huge risks human-kind - same year head American petroleum institute wanted industry time running out deal with this. 1981 Exxon memo warned their CO2 emissions devastating impacts yet in 2000 exxon ad in NY Times play down connection them and CC. 2016 Exxon Chevron and BP donate over half a million dollars to Trump’s campaign.
- 12/20 companies state owned and 20% emissions - eg saudi Aramco (4.83%)
- failed pol system = population world suffer hands few people’s profits
- 90% emissions occurred at point of use - companies claim not responsible for consumers - many also claim part solution, renewables / low carbon alternatives - PetroChina claimed diff company from predecessor China National Petroleum so not responsible historic emissions
- CO2 + methane emissions from 90 biggest industrial carbon producers responsible almost half rise global temps and 1/3 sea level rise 1880-2010
- UN 2018 world has 12 years to avoid worst consequences and restrict to 1.5 degrees
13
Q
Werndl (2016)
A
Definition of climate should have 5 characteristics
- possible estimate climate from empirical data (and use empirical climates to estimate future conditions)
- defined climate should correctly classify climates that are uncontroversially different
- the definition should be independent of our knowledge
- the definition should be applicable to past, present, and future conditions
- should be mathematically well-defined
- Climate def 1 = distribution over time for constant external conditions
- Climate def 2 = distribution over time when the external conditions vary as in reality
- climate def 3 = distribution over time for regimes of varying external conditions - means of external conditions should at least be approximately constant
14
Q
Oreskes (2010)
A
- “If I have one message, that has been my message all along and it still is: this is not a scientific debate. It’s a political debate being made to look like a scientific debate. It is being camouflaged as science, being dressed up as a scientific debate.”
- Doubt is our product since it is the best means of competing with the “body of fact” that exists in the mind of the general public. It is also the means of establishing a controversy.
Memo from tobacco industry, 1969
15
Q
FLICC Framework CC examples
A
- Fake experts and Magnified Minority e.g. Global Warming Petition Project – 31000 ‘scientists’ signing a petition but only need an undergrad science degree to sign and that 31000 is only 0.3% of all americans with science degrees in last 37 yrs and only 0.1% of these are climate scientists. Number used is deliberately large to try and emphasise magnified minority, and also Fake Experts (99.9% of the signatories are not experts in climate science).
- Logical Fallacies
Red Herring – e.g. CO2 is a colourless, invisible gas so how can it have an influence Misrepresentation – misquotes, partial quotes, misattribution (e.g. the ‘Coming Ice Age’ in 1975 was from a Newsweek article not from scientific papers)
Jumping to Conclusions – e.g. heat island effect (this has been looked at and the same temperature trend comes from rural and urban stations)
False dichotomy – presenting only two choices when other choices are available. E.g. ice core evidence of CO2 and temperature lag (presented as one must always follow other but in fact positive feedback can means it can happen either way)
Impossible expectations – demands unrealistic standards of proof before action (e.g. tobacco industry kept raising standard of proof of link between cancer. Eg. The fact that models don’t produce perfect predictions can be used to argue against any model predictions (even when all models, independently developed and in different ways might agree on broad patterns and trends)
Cherry picking e.g. some glaciers are receding, a few temperature stations are going down, cold winters in UK. Should always be wary of findings in a regional/local context, or from a subset of data that show different results from the full dataset
Conspiracy theories – e.g. It’s a conspiracy – scientists are colluding to get research funding, or to get personally wealthy
16
Q
Real Example FLICC - Open Letter to the Geological Society (2018) - climate denial
A
- concerns: climate models fail model past climates accurately and overestimate future temp trends; current pause in warming; why 285ppm CO2 start industrial revolution is a desirable benchmark (coincides with victorian little lice age); co2 and temp higher than today during past 50mn years; natural warming 8 degrees and 100ppm co2 increase during holocene until 1800s
- “Such rational failures have to be of concern to the GSL [Geological Society of London] as they demonstrate that CO2 alone does not, nay cannot drive global warming, so how can it drive climate change? And if it does not, there is no reason for the uncritical acceptance of the UN/IPCC focus on penalising CO2 emissions?”
17
Q
WMO 1979 cited in Patterson 1996 (World Meteorological Association)
A
“…we can say with some confidence that the burning of fossil fuels, deforestation, and changes of land use have increased the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere by about 15% during the last century and it is at present increasingly by about 0.4% per year. It is likely that an increase will continue in the future. Carbon Dioxide plays a fundamental role in determining the temperature of the earth’s atmosphere, and it appears plausible that an increased amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere can contribute to a gradual warming of the lower atmosphere, especially at high latitudes. Patterns of change would be likely to affect the distribution of temperature, rainfall and other meteorological parameters, but the details of the changes are still poorly understood.”
18
Q
Paterson (1996)
A
it was clearly not the case that an epistemic consensus neatly produced international co-operation on the climate issue. Instead, it produced resources for policymakers from different countries … to advance the positions they preferred – it became another strategic argument at their disposal. Thus, oil producing countries were able to emphasise the uncertainties (even those within the limits of the scientific consensus).
19
Q
Macnaghten and Urry (1998)
A
“there is no singular nature as such, only natures. And such natures are historically, geographically and socially constituted. … once we acknowledge that ideas of nature both have been, and currently are, fundamentally intertwined with dominant ideas of society, we need to address what ideas of society and of its ordering become reproduced, legitimated, excluded, validated and so on, through appeals to nature or the natural.”
20
Q
Parker (2018) Climate Science
A
- investigates earth’s climate system - global, regional, local climates maintain/change - explain/predict workings climate system - modelling
- earth’s climate system complex - atmosphere, hydrosphere, cryosphere, lithosphere, biosphere - human activities part system, but often as external influences
- climate = average weather 30 years
- main issue external factors impacting internal regimes - CC complex
- Climate Data:
- station-based datasets (land based observation - temp, humidity) - might put together to look CC long-period
- Reanalyses - radiosondes = balloon instruments into atmosphere measure pressure, temp etc - launched sites world - satellite - 3D atmosphere/ocean observation/modelling
- paleoclimate reconstructions - proxies like oxygen isotopes in ice cores
- Climate Modelling:
- energy balance models (EBMs) earth’s surface energy budget
- earth system models of intermediate complexity (EMICs) - representations atmosphere, ocean, land, sea ice etc - simple representations
- more complex are coupled ocean-atmosphere general circulation models (GCMs) - 3 spatial dimensions simulate ocean/atmospheric motions
- Earth System Models (ESMs) latest GCMs - add atmospheric chemistry, ocean biochemistry
- Regional climate model (RCM) - smaller processes simulated
- models constructed coding, often built on from years back, work modularly eg. ocean one module - uncertainty what models of processes to include, what components make overall model realistic
- climate models used to learn about observations, seek explanations, make predictions
- models evaluated throughout development - degree similar climate system - compare a model to a past trend to see adequate / levels confidence data produces.
- Change only valid if impact internal variability is less 10% - less 1% chance temp increase is internal - IPCC conclusions stronger over time - 5th report probability over 95% half increase temp since 1950 due humans
- models projection - uncertainties = structural (form model equations take/solved), parameter, initial condition, probabilistic uncertainty estimates used in projections - not full certainty
- controversies:
- Tropospheric temp - models show rising GHGs = warming troposphere - satellite observations showed lack warming = deniers jump on
- Hockey strick - paleoclimate reconstructions = hockey stick graph - critiqued need more proxies than used
- climategate controversy - 2009 emails UEA climatic research unit made public
- Hiatus controversy - temp increase big 90s, less 90s-10s - claim GW stopped, climate models flawed predicted more warming - problem graphs shared public/policy average projections - variability
21
Q
Hulme (2009) Social meanings of climate
A
- often said need climatic stability for societal stability - climate good/bad = human judgement - climate is not weather, can’t use sense to see it like rain - climate is abstract, cannot be directly measured eg can measure temp certain place certain time but not average condition weather period years
- climate is physical and cultural (eg how think about sahara)
- physical climate based latitudinal zones sun - hot equator, cold north - greeks temperate, associated N/S danger. 30 year def WMO
- cultural climate - religion eg biblical flood, shape human lives eg Nile and Egypt - bound up national identity and climate extremes linked personal memory New Orleans - climate anxiety. fear extreme weather based God + Nature ideas - beyond control - Gaia idea modern version
- climate as ideology - greeks saw north cold, south too hot justify their hegemony - issues racism connected to climate and mastery of nature - climate to be conquered - wildness of nature, wilderness - Gaia Lovelock - public good
- climate historically linked collapse civilisations - fall roman empire
22
Q
Anderegg et al. (2010) expert credibility in CC
A
- climate scientist agreement anthropogenic CC but US public doubt anthropogenic cause / level scientific agreement - 98% consensus science
- small amount sceptics lot media attention and influence
- what constitutes expertise/credibility in scientific research - debates important CC issue decision-making
- skeptics hugely outnumbered scientists but media misunderstanding - nee media reflect weight expert credibility
23
Q
IPCC (2018) 1.5 degrees special report - summary for policy makers
A
- humans caused 1 degree, reach 1.5 2030-2052 current rate
- warming human emissions persist centuries long-term climate system damage
- climate models differences climate now, 1.5 and 2 degrees - increase temp, extremes, precipitation, drought
- 1.5 reduces sea level impact, and biodiversity impact
- coral reefs decline 70-90% 1.5 over 99% 2
- Pathway 1.5 degrees CO2 emissions need decline 45% 2010 levels by 2030, net zero 2050 - 2 degrees 25% 2030 and net zero 2070
24
Q
Waldman (2018)
A
- UN Climate report - claim 2020s last chance avert devastating impacts
- IPCC report - averting climate crisis requires reinvention global economy - by 2040 global food shortages, inundation coastal cities, refugee crisis
- scientists downplaying threat
- smaller carbon budget report states
25
Q
Jamieson et al (2019) why scientists downplay CC risks
A
- climate deniers accuse scientists exaggerating climate threat but they are if anything conservative
- scientific consensus around ages, but not convinced public danger - why public only just woken up
- new book look at acid rain, ozone depletion and sea level rise predictions antarctic ice sheet - found lot underestimation climate indicators/crisis
- scientists not see consensus goal, give realistic data - political leaders need know they aren’t exaggerating
- citizens must force leaders to act
26
Q
Loh and Gottlieb (2019) US and China need put aside rivalry and focus common enemy CC
A
- US concern China econ/pol threat, China sees US trying constrain it - CC security issue should come over CW tensions
- CC biggest security threat but neither concerned - US trying keep climate refugees out, promoting fossil fuels and undermining decarbonisation efforts
- china lead investor coal plants
- US largest historical contributor and per capita now - China largest GHG emitter by volume
27
Q
Jasanoff (2010)
A
- abstraction = method science achieves universality - wrenches phenomenon out specific contexts, makes parts meaningful independent of wholes - science creates entities like periodic table, biodiversity that reflect nobody’s unmediated observations on the world yet are accepted as real - foundation science’s cognitive authority
- science can’t mirror nature - offers representations - makes things impersonal, detached - issue CC
- science not only or primary medium people experience climate - social studies starting deconstruct science universal truths and power scientific knowledge
- author argues representations natural world attain power not through detachment from context but contrast between how things are and how they should be - epistemic claims env sciences most trusted when engage with practices confer normative authority - peer review, cultural practices politics and law - CC problematic because separates epistemic from normative - detaches global fact from local value - to know CC as science wishes is for societies to let go modes living with nature - CC displaces community as displaces human beings as species
- west science + politics long collaborated produce dominant understandings nature - behind public face env science is norm-building capacities nation-states setting baseline whose knowledge counts - diff states see diff things reliable guild policy
- scaling up local to global not necessarily loss meaning/care - planetary stewardship - think globally act locally - but idea earth single entity contingent particular histories - apollo missions photos earth rise
28
Q
IPCC AR5 Report (2013)
A
- Of the 545 [460 to 630] Pg C released to the atmosphere from fossil fuel and land-use emissions from 1750 to 2011, 240 [230 to 250] Pg C accumulated in the atmosphere, as estimated with very high accuracy from the observed increase of atmospheric CO2 concentration from 278 [275 to 281] ppm in 1750 to 390.5 ppm in 2011*. The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere grew by 4.0 [3.8 to 4.2] Pg C a–1 in the first decade of the 21st century.
- Observed atmospheric CO2 increases with latitude: driven by anthropogenic emissions which primarily occur in the industrialized countries north of the equator
- Independent line of evidence for the anthropogenic origin of the observed atmospheric CO2 increase comes from the observed consistent decrease in atmospheric O2 content and a decrease in the stable isotopic ratio of CO2 (13C/12C) in the atmosphere (Figure TS.5). {2.2.1, 6.1.3}
- “Ranges in square brackets indicate a 90% uncertainty interval unless otherwise stated. The 90% uncertainty interval is expected to have a 90% likelihood of covering the value that is being estimated. Uncertainty intervals are not necessarily symmetric about the corresponding best estimate. A best estimate of that value is also given where available”
- various points about carbon sequestration methods
29
Q
Ciais et al (2013) Carbon and other biogeochemical cycles in IPCC 2013
A
- Carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide 3 GHGs increased atmosphere since pre-industrial times, main cause CC - make up 80% total radiative forcing GHGs
- industrial era CO2 increased 40% 278ppm 1750 to 390ppm 2011 - CH4 increased 150% and N2O 20% - current levels all 3 exceed any level measured for 800,000 years
- high level confidence increase CO2 emissions from fossil fuel during and land use change - dominant cause increase
- fossil fuel industry contribution estimated 30% total CH4 emissions
- N2O emissions mostly from fertilisers, fossil fuels, biomass burning etc
- before human causes 7000 years prior 1750 atmospheric Co2 shows slow change ice core records - 260 to 280 ppm
- high confidence reductions permafrost due to warming = thawing frozen carbon
- Medium confidence CH4 emissions from wetlands increase higher CO2 + warmer climate.
- Likely N2O emissions from soils increase due to increased demand food + reliance agriculture nitrogen fertilisers
- Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) methods could in theory reduce CO2 atmosphere but methods limited. Also don’t know impact CDR on carbon / other biogeochemical cycles
30
Q
Lenton and Vaughan (2009) Radiative forcing potential diff climate geoengineering options
A
- climate geoengineering proposals seek rectify earth’s radiative imbalance - reducing absorption incoming solar radiation or removing CO2 atmosphere
- Geoengineering = large-scale engineering of environment to counteract changes atmospheric chemistry, mediate effects CO2
- surface temp earth net balance incoming solar shortwave radiation and outgoing long wave - geoengineering try reduce solar absorbed or increase long wave emitted - eg albedo reflection in atmosphere/surface - long wave options include sinks
- shortwave might be reflection by putting something in orbit
- long wave could be enhancing carbon sink, uptake Co2 plants increasing, storing carbon in biomass, geological storage etc - afforestation - air capture and storage
- compare options quantify radiative forcing - impact global mean energy balance
- geoengineering best seen complementing mitigation not alternative
- most shortwave options heavy risk
- air capture and storage greatest potential combined with afforestation, reforestation and bio-char production
31
Q
Young (1997)
A
International regimes are “social institutions that consist of agreed upon principles, norms, rules, decision making procedures, and programs that govern the interactions of actors in specific issue areas.”
32
Q
Nye and Keohane (1971)
A
“Students and practitioners of international politics have traditionally concentrated their attention on relationships between states. The state, regarded as an actor with purposes and power, is the basic unit of action; its main agents are the diplomat and the soldier… The environment of interstate politics, however, does not include only these powerful and well-known forces (state). A good deal of intersocietal intercourse, with significant political importance, takes place without government control.”
33
Q
Transnational - Kappen 1995
Governance - Risse 2004
TCCG Andonova et al 2009
Abbott (2012)
A
“regular interactions across national boundaries when at least one actor is a non-state agent or does not operate on behalf of a national government or an international organization.”
“relates to any form of creating or maintaining political order and providing common goods for a given political community on whatever level.”
therefore define transnational governance as occurring “when networks operating in the transnational sphere authoritatively steer constituents towards public goals.”
“Climate governance has become complex, fragmented, and decentralized, operating without central coordination.”
34
Q
Transnational climate governance examples
- uni
- REEEP (2020)
- Climate Group (2020)
A
- University Sector - large carbon footprints, sustainability, DU env strategy is not great, Edinburgh net-zero by 2040 - £64mn investment - Manchester lot initiatives - people and planet league
Energy: REEEP
(Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Partnership)
- hybrid agreement govs, authorities, interantional organisations, civil society, academics, NGOS, private sector/companies
- 400 partners including 45 govs - mission accelerate global market for sustainable energy
- 2002-2012 supported 154 clean energy projects 57 countries
- created by UK gov
- issues like energy access south
- low carbon pathways
Smart 2020: The Climate Group
- tech can provide value city sustainability - city innovation on CC
- 50 cities actively seeking solutions
- work with companies like Google, BT, Cisco make case smart action, advocate access energy info, city innovation
- tech to reduce emissions - improve efficiency cities transport, energy (Smart city)
- climate group hybrid network - companies w ICT and cities
35
Q
Bulkeley and Newell (2015) Transnational governance
A
- growing transnational actions CC
- emergence 90s - post post Kyoto - response deficit/ failures CC governance, others see CC issue as unique providing grounds cooperation beyond state level
- Kyoto flexible mechanisms involved new actors climate policy
- CC complex - sector issue too
- influence neoliberalism and globalisation
- transnational networks work through information-sharing, capacity building, funding, certification, requirements for membership
- Info sharing - Climate Group convene leaders, share evidence successful low carbon growth, practical solutions
- capacity building - REEEP invests clean energy markets help developing countries expand energy services/improve lives - green growth
- Regulation - Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative cap 91mn tons declines 2.5% year 2015-20 - regional budget emissions power sector
- regulation eg standards like emissions goals, certification schemes
- Types transnational governance
- Public actor networks - sub-units gov, regional/state authorities, local/city govs - eg climate alliance (european cities and indigenous peoples) 1,600 members 20 european countries aim reduce emissions 50% below 1990 levels by 2030 and protect rainforest indigenous partnerships
- 2005 US Mayors’ climate protection agreement (cities beat kyoto targets), 2008 EU covenant of Mayors (exceed EU policy goals)
- Cop13 Bali 2008 municipalities = 2nd largest delegation
- Hybid = actors public and private - PPPs (public-private partnerships) introduced 2002 Johannesburg summit SD - REEEP one largest formed UK gov 2002
- Private - non-state actors - businesses, think tanks - Climate Community and Biodiversity Alliance 2003 conservation international includes BP, Intel and NGOs like Rainforest Alliance - standard for land management projects
36
Q
Hale (2016)
Paris
A
- Paris 2015 climate summit shifts climate regime to embrace transitional climate action - shift from copenhagen binding targets to countries suggest own targets
- Paris commitments over 7000 cities, 5000 companies
- evolution climate regime copenhagen to paris needs exploring understand embrace transnational/bottom-up
- COP20 Peru 2014 Peruvian presidency saw importance climate mobilisation beyond UNFCCC - organised high level action day inviting mayors, CEOs make commitments
37
Q
Rogers et al (2015) Domestic politics shape transnational climate governance participation
A
- national context has a role in actors decisions participate in transnational governance
- eg New York Declaration on Forests - 30 multinational companies and many tropical countries 2014 to eliminate 8bn tonnes Co2
- some feel TCGs fill gap poor CC governance
- TCG effectiveness demands if include sizeable emitters
- TCG involvement varies countries and linked domestic variables
- TCGs grown since 80s/90s - few emerge Rio, most around Kyoto/ early 2000s
- impact political institutions - openness pol system linked ability actors engage transnational governance - agency and freedom - eg China entry FSC certification only possible with support China State Forestry Administration - degree decentralisation influential - US states for instance more autonomy issues like CC as decentralised
- domestic pol institutions give actors more agency = TCG participation higher - found strong correlation
- when govs have pro-climate policy goals, more actors in TCG
38
Q
Giddens (2009) Paradox
A
- we have no politics of climate change
- urgency and necessity of climate change issue but intangibility CC encourages lethargy, lack action - wait too long, too late meaningful action
- CC hard understand, actions not have immediate response = lack action
- not developed analysis pol innovations needed limit warming
39
Q
Bailey and Compston (2010)
A
“Trajectories of climate governance are shaped by struggle and negotiations between competing sets of interests operating within and across territorial scales. Despite the customary framing of climate change as a global problem requiring global solutions, climate governance can never be disentangled from these processes, just as international and national political strategies cannot simply be rolled out to the sub-national and local levels or between political jurisdictions.”
40
Q
Carbon Connection - Carbon Trade (2014)
A
- Two communities impacted global market carbon
- Scotland town Grangemouth polluted oil and chemical companies since 1940s
- Brazil local people’s water and land swallowed up destructive monoculture eucalyptus tree plantations - Sao Jose do Buriti Brazil
- south green areas clean up north’s mess
- oil companies scotland paying plant more eucalyptus in Brazil - supposedly soaks up CO2
- both communities exposed harms - video
41
Q
Case Study - the UK
A
- led way early international CC action
- 1989 Thatcher speech UN General Assembly “While the conventional political dangers—the threat of global annihilation, the fact of regional war—appear to be receding, we have all recently become aware of another insidious danger. It is as menacing in its way as those more accustomed perils with which international diplomacy has concerned itself for centuries. It is the prospect of irretrievable damage to the atmosphere, to the oceans, to earth itself. … It is mankind and his activities which are changing the environment of our planet in damaging and dangerous ways.”
- move away coal 90s
- cc levy - business high consumption pay in
- kyoto ratification
- UK ETS paved way EU ETS - piloted 2002-9
- led formation IPCC 1988
- privatisation electricity provision and dash for gas
- 1990 first target reduce CO2 to 1990 levels by 2005
- Rio 1992 UNFCCC agreement brokered UK
- 1994 National Climate Change Strategy
- New Labour gov pledges beyond UK Kyoto target reducing emissions 12.5% below 1990 levels 2008-12 - 20% reduction 2010
- 2000 New CC Programme
- encourage renewable and home energy efficiency 2000s
- UK met targets but not necessarily due to policy de-industrialisation, neoliberalism, outsourcing
- 2000 Royal Commission Env Pollution called transformation UK energy system - fossil fuels reduced 60% below 2000 levels by 2050 - led to 2003 Energy White Paper, Our Energy Future: Creating a Low Carbon Economy committed reducing use fossil fuels in energy system as called for
- 2008 CC Act - 2005 friends of the earth big ask campaign aim get cross party support cc bill - annual targets UK reduce emissions 3% - formation stop climate chaos campaign
- CC bill include gov target 80% reduction all UK emissions below 1990 levels by 2050
- Amendment act - achieve net zero carbon emissions by 2050
- Moratorium on fracking october 2019 (opportunity to repeal)
- not accounting commodity emissions
42
Q
Case Study - India
A
- 4th largest emitter
- developing - historically low emissions
- poverty 70% live less $2 day
- Global warming in an unequal world by agarwal and narain influenced India = not responsible cc - focus historical emissions - survival vs luxury emissions
- “On June 30, 2008, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh released India’s first National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC) outlining existing and future policies and programs addressing climate mitigation and adaptation. The plan identifies eight core “national missions” running through 2017.” “Emphasizing the overriding priority of maintaining high economic growth rates to raise living standards, the plan “identifies measures that promote our development objectives while also yielding co-benefits for addressing climate change effectively.” It says these national measures would be more successful with assistance from developed countries, and pledges that India’s per capita greenhouse gas emissions “will at no point exceed that of developed countries even as we pursue our development objectives.” - Centre for Climate and Energy Solutions June 2008
- “Though India is not part of the problem, it wants to be part of the solution. Our historical cumulative emission as of today is below 3%… The developed world must take moral responsibility for the state of the world today.”
Prakash Javadekar, India’s environment minister (2015) - “The desire to improve one’s lot has been the primary driving force behind human progress. While a few fortunate fellow beings have moved far ahead in this journey of progress, there are many in the world who have been left behind. Nations that are now striving to fulfil this ‘right to grow’ of their teeming millions cannot be made to feel guilty of their development agenda as they attempt to fulfil this legitimate aspiration.”
India’s NDC (2016) - India v diff responsibilities depending use total emissions, current emissions, per capita emissions
- huge HEP potential utilised
- INDC before paris pledges cut emissions intensity of economy - ratio carbon emissions per unit of GDP - cut 35% by 2030- also source 40% electricity renewable/low carbon 2030
- signed Paris
43
Q
Case Study - Morocco
A
- policies consistent 1.5 degrees
- NDC reduce emissions compared BAU 2030 17% or 42% if get climate finance
- energy - 53% electricity produced renewables, largest solar plant world
- member climate vulnerable forum
- 15-20% reduction precipitation since 1990 + severe droughts 2015
- climate finance to develop
- reliant agriculture
44
Q
Case Study - Australia
A
- 90s targets - 1988 levels by 2000 and reduce 20% emissions by 2005
- 1995 gov reversed position, 1997 bargained not reduce emissions, refused ratify Kyoto
- 2015 australia reduce emissions 26-28% of 2005 levels by 2030
- highest emitter per capita
- economy relies emission intensive industry and high carbon
- carbon wars film - 2011 election - cc high agenda - labour female MP branded liar over carbon tax = lost election
45
Q
Bulkeley and Newell (2015) Equity, Justice and Sustainable Development
A
- issues equity / justice climate governance
- responsibility - historic relations/ inequalities/ emissions - contributed least most susceptible worst impacts CC - Ugandan President called CC act aggression rich against poor- rich moral duty
- issue developing countries seen as sink developed emissions - carbon colonialism
- G77 demands more action developed yet contains China, India, Brazil
- differentiated responsibilities - reflect past, current, future GHG emission trends
- ecological debt south
- richest 20% world population = 60% current emissions
- issue where global supply networks responsibility emissions lie ie. production or consumption - eg china high emissions due to production for west - outsourcing
- global governance complicated by BRICs
- who should meet costs addressing CC - funds N to S
- how generate new funds - carbon taxes, need private investment - adaptation fund part funded sales emissions reductions cdm - issue CDM funding going to china, india not africa (2% projects)
- trade flows unregulated, not consider env factors - not governed public bodies
- who bears cost - poorer/marginalised communities - 1/3 population world susceptible water scarcity - electricity demand will x5 next 30 years
- cyclones Mozambique 1999 killed 700, 1mn displaced, reconstruction $700mn
- land given up sinks often poor - Norwegian company in Uganda leased lands sequestration project - 8000 people + 13 villages evicted - green land grabs
46
Q
Bulkeley (2001) Australia
A
- Australia domestic CC response - no-regrets guiding principle - idea addressing env problems can bring econ, social and env benefits - reconciliation env/econ objectives through cost/benefit analysis
- Kyoto Australia reluctant accept legally binding targets - crippling impacts economy and trade competitiveness
- advocate differentiated approach - each state same econ loss in pursuit emissions reductions - australia granted emission increase 2008-12
- Australia reliant emissions-intensive industries and has little political will act CC
- ecological modernisation discourse - recognises structural nature env problems but assumes existing institutions can internalise env care - re-embed econ sphere within env limits - idea need not be contradiction env protection and econ growth
- 1990 Australia Interim Planning Target from toronto - reduce emissions 1988 levels by 1990 + 20% 2005 - meet without impact eco/trade - 90-92 tried look into solving - Ecological sustainable development report 1991 and industry commission - both preferences market, focus cost
- effective policy so env benefits are free
- 1992 national greenhouse response strategy ineffective
- 1994 CC back agenda due failure - carbon tax met opposition = voluntary implementation by industry
- goal integrate econ/env goals but impossible - no-regrets just = BAU
47
Q
Mann (2020) Australia burning
A
- Great Barrier Reef warming-caused bleaching, ocean acidification
- Australia’s blue mountains threat cc
- smoke filled rainforest, sky brown haze - locals never seen anything like this - record heat, unprecedented drought, bushfires
- australia coal-based carbon emissions
- animals like koala burning and perishing huge numbers - australia on fire yet PM vacation in Hawaii - aligned coal interests
- australia dangerous CC already here - needs leadership - vote out fossil-fuelled politicians
48
Q
Alberro et al (2019) CC positive news
A
- HOPE?
- Costa Rica - ambitious plan decarbonise economy by 2050 - last year 98% electricity from renewable, economy still grew 3%
- March/April 2019 2 tropical cyclones hit SE Africa, killing 600 and 3mn emergency aid - but improvement forecasting disaster - first early warning - meant UK gov eg. worked aid agencies deliver supplies before hit
- Decleration of climate emergency - 1,200 local authorities declared climate emergency in 2019 - wave activism
- first time UK major leading party manifesto climate action at core
- XR, media coverage, school strikes - 75% Americans now accept humans have caused CC - empowered generation
49
Q
Hughes (2019) Amazon Fires
A
- August peak 30,901 more fires last year (3x)
- forest fires occur naturally but this due to farmers/loggers - amazon largest rainforest world, huge diversity and carbon store
- world neg reaction, condemns president Bolsonaro’s policies
- deforestation problem - 7,747km2 cleared 2019 up to october - likely even higher
- Paraguay also loosing hectares forests and wetlands
50
Q
McGrath (2019) COP25
A
- Longest UN climate talks on record Madrid end compromise deal - all countries to put new climate pledges on table by Glasgow conference
- need address gap happening and what needed to avoid danger
- huge pressure Glasgow - Johnson’s £28.8bn road-building plans not compatible eliminating CO2 emissions
- 2019 on course to be in top 3 warmest years
- 20 warmest years on record all happened past 22 years - currently on track 3-5 degree increase end century
51
Q
Carter and Jacobs (2014) CC British Labour gov 2006-10
A
- last labour Uk gov radical cc policy - 2008 CC act - before 2006 incremental approach CCEP, gradual shifts - C/E often traded off over policy objectives. 2006 stronger emissions targets, priority - see shift from CC Programme 2006 to UK Low Carbon Transition Plan 2009 - reduction 2-3mn tonnes CO2 per annum till 2010 compared 9mn tonnes till 2020
- Downs (1972) argues env issues go through cycles of attention, obscurity to enthusiasm public/media demanding gov action
- Kingdon - major policy hits occur 3 stress problems, politics and policies converge window opportunity for change (politics = pressure, national mood, policy = solutions available) - window for change
- Zaharidis (2003) coupling = consequential (problems emerge, pol pressure builds = policy solution) or doctrinal (window opens politics = find problem fits existing solution)
- Baumgartner and Jones argue policy makers only capable focusing few issues at a time, little attention issues low agenda - normal periods incrementalism policy - but window of opportunity can remove friction, chance radical change
- both models see radical change policy short - but 2006-2010 4 years
- 2006 12.5% reduction GHG emissions 2008-12 from 90s levels kyoto - 20% reduction by 2010 from 1990 levels labour target - £35mn CCs tech, homies efficiency standards
- 2009 34% reduction GHG emissions 2020 from 90 levels and 80% 2050 - 15% energy renewable by 2020, all new homes zero carbon by 2016
- 2005 attention CC - Blair highlights it at G8 summit, Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth, Stern Review
- 2008 friends earth, cross-party support, climate bill - problem, pressure, policy
- CC policy shift only env issue with the stern report - econ framing - CC cause 5-20% GDP per annum damage vs mitigation cost 1% - econ argument intensified post 2008 crash - 2009 gov low carbon industrial strategy £405mn support job creation/growth green sectors
- Eu external policy - 2007 ambitious climate targets for 2020 - requiring 34% reduction UK GHG emissions, 15% renewable energy target - venue shifts
- party competition - pressure labour gov climate policy - cameron vote blue, go green strategy 2006 - 3 major parties competing be green - 2 key issues - Labour’s plan build 3rd runway at Heathrow - also application build GB new coal power station kent first 3 decades
- individual politicians made CC part narrative identity - badge progressive politics
52
Q
Thaker and Leiserowitz (2014) India
A
- India under pressure sign legally binding emissions treaty - developed argue should based historic emissions
- India recognising co-benefits dev/cc objectives, flexible mitigation targets
- 50% pop depend climate sensitive sectors - 76% pop live less $2 a day - 3rd global emitter GHGs, tripling CO2 emissions fuel 1990-2011. Rising emissions = US refusal sign treaties
- India 17% world population per capita emission 1 ton vs US less 5% pop 17 tons
- Cop17 2011 durban india refused sign legal framework include dev and developing countries
- CC discourses emerge same time 80s india transitioning market economy - initial protecting domestic dev/sovereignty - claim env colonialism, luxury vs survival emissions - India part effort differentiated responsibility/historic emissions UNFCCC
- 40% indian pop not access energy
- opportunity india use renewables, not follow path North
- India aligned US? don’t want legal binding, want flexibility
- vulnerability used NGOs lobby gov
53
Q
Green Economy Quotes
- McAfee (2016)
- Owens (2010)
A
- “Green economy aims to use economic rationality and market mechanisms to mute the most ecologically damaging effects of globalized capitalism while reviving economic growth in the global North, fostering development in the South, and decoupling economic growth from environmental decline.”
- “Diffuse, longer-term trends associated with ecological modernisation, including the shift towards precautionary, proactive approaches in environmental policy and the growing belief that green technologies could help reconcile economic growth and ecological integrity were critical in opening up policy agenda.”
54
Q
Private Sector Governance Case Study - HSBC Climate Partnership - HSBC (2011)
A
- 2005 first carbon neutral bank (offsets, finance emissions reduction projects)
- based only operations - banks not have huge footprint - not based investments
- 2007 Climate partnership - building consensus CC real, important business, collective action needed
- climate champions 40,000 staff global tasforce drive change
- bearing witness to CC
- $100mn env NGOs - climate partnership - encourage low carbon investment
55
Q
Private Sector Governance Case Study - TESCO
A
- half emissions per square foot stores/ distribution centres by 2020 compared 2006
- reduce emissions distribution per case goods delivered 25% 2020 compared 2011
- reduce emissions of products in our supply chain 30% by 2020 compared 2008
- help customers ways halve carbon footrpint
- eg glass doors fridges better energy efficiency - now normalised
56
Q
Bulkeley and Newell (2015) Private CC Governance
A
- increasing role private sector CC governance - firms see opportunity
- corporations account large amount emissions - shell emits more saudi arabia
- long time businesses mobilised stall CC action - fossil fuel firms - Global Climate Coalition, Climate Council dominant voice 90s industry CC negotiations - violent lobbying against EU carbon tax proposed 1992 - challenge climate science + created NGOs convince public CC not real threat - Information Council for the Environment set up fuel, electricity and coal US companies - emphasised econ costs tackling CC - Australian Bureau of Agriculture and Resource Economics modelling exercises predict loss jobs - membership committee included Exxon, Mobil - impact australian gov - idea carbon leakage (N countries reduce emissions businesses just relocate polluting parts overseas - no point one country taking action, all need to) - another strategy to create statement at negotiations
- since Kyoto shift businesses seeing CC opportunity - first mover advantages
- consumer concern and CC corporate social responsibility - NGOs like UK Climate Group play role making business case CC action
- private climate governance been contested other actors - disputing claims, consumer boycotts, expose - eg fossil fuel divestment campaigns - 2015 22 cities, 2 countries, 20 religious organisations, 9 unis signed up
- issue private voluntary regulation = firms only act under pressure
