Is Climate Change Changing Minds? Limited Effects of the Physical Environment on Climate Policy Opinion in the United States

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matt Motta
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
United States ◽  
Climate Policy ◽  
Physical Environment ◽  
The United States ◽  
Policy Opinion

scholarly journals The U.S. Withdrawal From the Paris Agreement: Challenges and Opportunities for China

2018 ◽  
Vol 04 (02) ◽  
pp. 281-300 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hongyuan Yu
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
United States ◽  
Climate Policy ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Clean Energy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Paris Agreement ◽  
Climate Governance ◽  
The U.S

President Trump’s decision to withdraw the United States from the Paris Agreement on Climate Change is both a major reversal of the Obama administration’s climate policy and a huge blow to global climate governance. The comprehensive regression of President Trump’s climate policy manifests mainly in three aspects: abolition of the clean energy plan, exit from the Paris Agreement, and a return to traditional energy policies, which reflect the cyclical and volatile nature of the U.S. climate policy. With its lasting negative impact, the China-U.S. cooperative leadership in global climate governance is stranded. In this light, China should strive for a bigger role in leading global efforts to address climate change and enhance cooperation through various mechanisms. Under the current U.S. policy environment, China can still strengthen cooperation with the United States in such fields as traditional energy, infrastructure investment, global energy market, and green finance.

Coaxing Climate Policy Leadership

2012 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 463-479 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steve Vanderheiden
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
United States ◽  
Climate Policy ◽  
Climate Change Mitigation ◽  
The United States ◽  
Policy Response ◽  
International Policy ◽  
Cooperative Scheme ◽  
Change Mitigation ◽  
The U.S

The United States and China have recently been called upon to exercise more leadership in developing an effective international policy response to climate change, but without giving attention to either the risks inherent in taking on such a role or the mechanism by which leading can mobilize others to act in response. Here, I understand leadership as action by a sufficiently powerful actor in a cooperative scheme that is capable of triggering reciprocal actions by followers on behalf of that scheme, and argue that such leadership can be coaxed by potential followers through pledges of reciprocal action that are made conditional upon prior action undertaken by a leader. In the context of the current international impasse over post-Kyoto climate change mitigation commitments, I identify means by which leadership by the U.S. or China might be induced by such conditional pledges, potentially allowing some obstacles to international collective action on climate change mitigation to be overcome.

scholarly journals Technocratic Structures of Climate Policy: Dead-end Debates, Neat Narratives and Manipulative Machiavellianism

2013 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 119
Author(s):  
Taylor A. Murray
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
United States ◽  
Climate Policy ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Public ◽  
Large Influence ◽  
Change Policy ◽  
Dead End

The contemporary models of climate change policy-making in the United States are particular to this decade. The increased role for experts and expert-led policymaking is unprecedented. However this power has been paradoxical. This paper argues that an excessive role for science in discussions of climate change has undermined the public’s role, and has thus undermined the efforts on behalf of policymakers to pass comprehensive climate change policy. Two main aspects of the excessive role for science in the formation of climate policy were found to be 1. the large influence of dissenting scientists on the debate, and 2. the alienation of the public from the discourse. Further, possible scenarios for policymaking, which better balance the roles of experts, the public, and policymakers, are discussed and frameworks for the future are outlined.

scholarly journals An Attack on the Separation of Powers? Strategic Climate Litigation in the Eyes of U.S. Judges

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (15) ◽  
pp. 8335
Author(s):  
Jasmina Nedevska
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Climate Change ◽  
United States ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
The United States ◽  
Checks And Balances ◽  
Climate Politics ◽  
The Social ◽  
Domestic Courts ◽  
Research Plan

Climate change litigation has emerged as a powerful tool as societies steer towards sustainable development. Although the litigation mainly takes place in domestic courts, the implications can be seen as global as specific climate rulings influence courts across national borders. However, while the phenomenon of judicialization is well-known in the social sciences, relatively few have studied issues of legitimacy that arise as climate politics move into courts. A comparatively large part of climate cases have appeared in the United States. This article presents a research plan for a study of judges’ opinions and dissents in the United States, regarding the justiciability of strategic climate cases. The purpose is to empirically study how judges navigate a perceived normative conflict—between the litigation and an overarching ideal of separation of powers—in a system marked by checks and balances.

Rethinking U.S. National Security after Covid19

2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Linda J. Bilmes
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
United States ◽  
National Security ◽  
The United States ◽  
Emerging Diseases ◽  
Defense Spending ◽  
Federal Spending ◽  
Us Economy ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Military

AbstractThe United States has traditionally defined national security in the context of military threats and addressed them through military spending. This article considers whether the United States will rethink this mindset following the disruption of the Covid19 pandemic, during which a non-military actor has inflicted widespread harm. The author argues that the US will not redefine national security explicitly due to the importance of the military in the US economy and the bipartisan trend toward growing the military budget since 2001. However, the pandemic has opened the floodgates with respect to federal spending. This shift will enable the next administration to allocate greater resources to non-military threats such as climate change and emerging diseases, even as it continues to increase defense spending to address traditionally defined military threats such as hypersonics and cyberterrorism.

Stress Testing to Assess Recovery from Extreme Events

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
M. John Plodinec
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
United States ◽  
Financial Institutions ◽  
Extreme Events ◽  
Stress Testing ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Other ◽  
New Approach ◽  
Rapid Spread ◽  
Potential Benefits

Abstract Over the last decade, communities have become increasingly aware of the risks they face. They are threatened by natural disasters, which may be exacerbated by climate change and the movement of land masses. Growing globalization has made a pandemic due to the rapid spread of highly infectious diseases ever more likely. Societal discord breeds its own threats, not the least of which is the spread of radical ideologies giving rise to terrorism. The accelerating rate of technological change has bred its own social and economic risks. This widening spectrum of risk poses a difficult question to every community – how resilient will the community be to the extreme events it faces. In this paper, we present a new approach to answering that question. It is based on the stress testing of financial institutions required by regulators in the United States and elsewhere. It generalizes stress testing by expanding the concept of “capital” beyond finance to include the other “capitals” (e.g., human, social) possessed by a community. Through use of this approach, communities can determine which investments of its capitals are most likely to improve its resilience. We provide an example of using the approach, and discuss its potential benefits.

Epic Cruelty: On Post-Pandemic Performance

2021 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 119-136
Author(s):  
Rick Mitchell
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
United States ◽  
African Americans ◽  
The United States ◽  
California State University ◽  
The State ◽  
State University ◽  
White Supremacist ◽  
Systemic Racism ◽  
Disaster Capitalism

As today’s catastrophic Covid-19 pandemic exacerbates ongoing crises, including systemic racism, rising ethno-nationalism, and fossil-fuelled climate change, the neoliberal world that we inhabit is becoming increasingly hostile, particularly for the most vulnerable. Even in the United States, as armed white-supremacist, pro-Trump forces face off against protesters seeking justice for African Americans, the hostility is increasingly palpable, and often frightening. Yet as millions of Black Lives Matter protesters demonstrated after the brutal police killing of George Floyd, the current, intersecting crises – worsened by Trump’s criminalization of anti-racism protesters and his dismissal of science – demand a serious, engaged, response from activists as well as artists. The title of this article is meant to evoke not only the state of the unusually cruel moment through which we are living, but also the very different approaches to performance of both Brecht and Artaud, whose ideas, along with those of others – including Benjamin, Butler, Latour, Mbembe, and Césaire – inform the radical, open-ended, post-pandemic theatre practice proposed in this essay. A critically acclaimed dramatist as well as Professor of English and Playwriting at California State University, Northridge, Mitchell’s published volumes of plays include Disaster Capitalism; or Money Can’t Buy You Love: Three Plays; Brecht in L.A.; and Ventriloquist: Two Plays and Ventriloquial Miscellany. He is the editor of Experimental O’Neill, and is currently at work on a series of post-pandemic plays.

scholarly journals Assessing Climate Change Impacts on Wildfire Risk in the United States

Forests ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 6 (12) ◽  
pp. 3197-3211 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hyunjin An ◽  
Jianbang Gan ◽  
Sung Cho
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
United States ◽  
Climate Change Impacts ◽  
The United States ◽  
Wildfire Risk
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document