Essay On Climate Change Governance

Dr James Hansen’s argumentative essay, “A Solution to the Climate Problem,” discusses his premise that it is imperative for humankind to deal with carbon dioxide emissions, which he believes needs to be phased out by the mid-21st century. He begins with the current paradigm in government efforts to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and claims that so far it has been a lot of talk and action in the other direction. Dr Hansen argues that while governments pay lip service to agreements such as the Kyoto Accord, they are going full steam ahead with projects that will result in increased carbon dioxide emissions, such as going forth with coal-fired power plants, coal-to-liquids, hydraulic fracturing, and tar sands oil extraction. Dr Hansen believes

The argument about man’s role in climate change and the role of government, the role of industry and the role of citizens is a significant challenge that crosses all levels of government, crosses all geopolitical boundaries and crosses all sectors of business. National governments across the globe are dealing with the issue in different ways, but one overarching aspect of control and mitigation can be seen in the oversight and regulation of the electric energy industry. One significant challenge facing each nation is the cost to lower carbon emissions and the question of who will pay the additional cost for compliance. Though the cost issue is significant, a much more difficult question is whether any decision on lowering emissions can make

In recent years , there is a colossal upsurge in the number of environmental concerns with climate change being a pivotal one. Although convergent efforts, be it an individual , company or a government, are made to ease this concern. I think government play a vital role in this regard.

It is becoming increasingly certain that climate change will have severe adverse effects on the environment in years to come. Addressing this issue poses a serious challenge for policy makers. How we choose to respond to the threat of global warming is not simply a political issue. It is also an economic issue and an ethical one. Responsible, effective climate change policy requires consideration of a number of complex factors, including weighing the costs of implementing climate change policies against the benefits of more environmentally sustainable practices. Furthermore, this analysis must take place amidst serious gaps in the existing research and technology concerning the developing climatic condition.

In a court case popularly titled “Dutch Treat” tried in 2015, a Dutch nongovernmental organization named “Urgenda” sued the Dutch government based on the tort of negligence. The group alleged that The Hague’s inadequate action on climate policy created serious environmental and human health risks, and sought a court order to compel the government to impose further emission reductions. The case is not settled and far from over as both sides are willing to take the case up to the Netherlands Supreme court. While there are differences in civil law and litigation here in the US and therefore the verdict met won’t have affect here at home, this case is revolutionary as it draws attention to climate change and shows that if things do not change soon, governments will be held responsible for their actions. This decision was a delight to climate change activists worldwide, as finally worldwide awareness is growing and inaction is unpopular. Action is the first step towards a promising solution, therefore it’s questionable whether or not action like this would’ve helped the situation presented in Shepard’s piece. Could acceptance and stagnancy be the cause of the worst flood the region has ever

James Inhofe, Barton’s ally, in synchrony, went even further to dispute their research or claims. According to Mann, Inhofe deliberately issued false claims or reports disputing their work or research. Inhofe went so far as to publish a book trying to dispel their research and the theories of global warming. In his book Inhofe tries to convenience readers that there is a conspiracy taking place amongst scientist like Mann behind and their global warming and climate

The climate change impacts of greenhouse gases threaten the economic development and environmental quality. These threats indicate that all nations regardless their economic growth should work collaboratively to reduce the emission to a certain level. Hare et al. (2011) argued that “climate change is a collective action problem” thus requires a global coordination from all countries. This indicates that actions from several countries would never be sufficient to address the climate change problem. If a global target to limit warming to 2°C or below is about to achieve (UNFCCC 2010, p.4) a broad range of participation is required (Hare et al., 2011). However, the increasing complexity of negotiation processes is inevitable. Each country will pursue its own interests during the

Global warming or climate change is an increase in the temperature of the earth’s atmosphere caused by intensified levels of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, resulting from the human activity of burning fossil fuels. The elevated levels of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases keep the planet warm enough to sustain life. However, an excessive amount of burning fossil fuels thickens the atmosphere and warms the climate, demonstrating the exploitation of a noble feature of the natural world. The Global Humanitarian Forum and Bjorn Lomborg argue if immediate action is necessary in dealing with climate change. Throughout this essay, the case of the Global Humanitarian Forum will be revealed as the suitable choice to tackle global

Countries’ past and future contributions to the accumulation of GHGs in the atmosphere are different, Comprehensive strategies in response to climate change that are consistent with sustainable development take into account the co-benefits, adverse side effects and risks that may arise from both adaptation and mitigation options. {3.1, 3.5, Box 3.4} The design of climate policy is influenced by how individuals and organizations perceive risks and uncertainties and take them into account. Methods of valuation from economic, social and ethical analysis are available to assist decision-making. These methods can take account of a wide range of possible impacts, including low-probability outcomes with large consequences. But they cannot identify a single best balance between mitigation, adaptation and residual climate impacts. {3.1} Climate change has the characteristics of a collective action problem at the global scale, because most GHGs accumulate over time and mix globally, and emissions by any agent (e.g., individual, community, company, country) affect other agents. Effective mitigation will not be achieved if individual agents advance their own interests independently. Cooperative responses, including international cooperation, are therefore required to effectively mitigate GHG emissions and address other climate change issues. The effectiveness of adaptation can be enhanced through complementary actions across levels, including international cooperation. The evidence suggests that outcomes seen as equitable can lead to more effective

It’s not secret that the human race is harming the planet. People cut down forests, release toxic gases into the air, and dump pollutants into the waterways. It’s a way of life and some of these activities are actually necessary to carry on civilized life. Nevertheless, there are ways to reduce harmful effects on the planet, and the human race is actually making progress in reducing emissions and replacing the trees that are constantly cut down. However, not all options are being pursued. Reasons for this go beyond the general skepticism of global warming and the like. There is both economic and political favorability in environmental negligence, and behind every one of these reasons, one simple truth

The most significant existing platform for climate change action is the UN, and UNFCCC in particular. The essay will now move on to the overall assessment of the evolution of the EU actorness in the climate change policy area during 1990-2000s, and, in the process, focus on the case study of the 2009 Copenhagen Climate Summit (also known as COP15). COP15 is a particularly interesting case to review when analysing the EU actorness in this area due to the fact that EU’s performance is mostly assessed as disappointing. Thus, it is an opportunity to take a closer look at the correlation of actorness and effectiveness, explore which actorness criteria caused these outcomes, as well as see if there were

Whilst entering the new millennium society and the earth as whole faces its biggest challenge to date, climate change. With this new challenge come new approaches, strategies to live sustainably, some will fail and some will work, but eventually we will defeat it. But if this is the case, why do we continue to tackle climate change using approaches which have proven to lead to dead ends, and not made effective changes, and which are restricting us and not allowing us to make the differences we have the potential to make. I wholeheartedly agree with the statement at the top. Climate change is a systemic problem which requires collective action(i.e from corporations and governments). Up to now, the most acknowledged models have placed the burden of responsibility on the individual, you. However in this essay I will be arguing that a shift in focus away from the individual, and on to the political infrastructures that our way of life is founded upon on is crucial if we are to achieve the rate of change required to save the earth from climate change. In the first section of this essay I will delve further into the “blindspots” and dead ends in which attempting to intervene against individual behaviour has brought us into. I will then develop this argument further by explaining the benefits of approaching this

For instance, when the United States imposed a ban on tuna imports from Mexico in 1991 due to their findings that Mexicans were using nets which often threatened dolphins, the GATT considered the ban as a violation (French, 2003:467). Despite the fact that the GATT and the WTO ostensibly supports the rights of countries to protect the environment, this case showed that the rule only applies to activities within their the borders (French, 2003:467). Considering that environmental problems transcend national borders and cannot be resolved by national governments individually, the GATT rule imposes a significant restriction on protection of the environment. Moreover, there is a clear inconsistency between climate change discourse and the WTO’s provisions. In 1992, The Rio Declaration on Environment and Development declared that “where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation” (French, 2003:470). On the other hand, the WTO’s provisions “require that health and safety laws be based on scientific principles and not be maintained with insufficient scientific evidence” (French, 2003:470). The EU law

On December 12 of 2015, 195 countries made history by committing to the first truly global international climate change agreement (Paris Agreement, 2015). This agreement took place in Paris and was adopted under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The outcome of the Paris Conference on Climate Change was described as “revolutionary” (Venezuela) “marvelous act” (China) and as “a tremendous collective achievement” (European Union) that introduced a “new era of global climate governance” (Egypt) while “restoring the global community’s faith of accomplishing things multilaterally” (USA) (Paris Agreement, 2015).

The structure of the Prisoner’s Dilemma (Kreps, Milgrom, Roberts & Wilson, 1982) and the solutions offered to it can be said to be more or less the way in which states have organised the creation and protection of collective goods. We pay tax to build a dam to protect us from the water, and get sanctioned if we do not. It also seems to be the manner in which (international) environmental governance was – and often still is – largely organised. Within the rationality of game theory, regarding the risk of climate change, one should simply extent the game to a plurality of persons that