International structure affects the foreign policy issues and the domestic politics; you have to do both sequentially and simultaneously. Prof. Robert Keohane (Princeton University) talks about international relations, cap-and trade and a “dual-leadership world” where Usa and China have to take the lead. But how can we get action from people and leaders in climate negotiations? “May be the Economy of Esteem could help us”, Prof. Keohane argues in this interview to Climate Science&Policy
It could be described as the ability to shape the preferences of others and attract them so that they want what you want. It is Soft Power and it is crucial in order to create a narrative of climate change which is widely accepted. But soft power alone isn’t enough: we need smart power, a combination of soft power and hard power. Prof. Joseph S. Nye (Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government) talks about the role of transnationl institutions, the new american course on climate policy and “How could we get everybody into the act and still get action”. “We are going to have to use a variety of international institutions and focus the European phrase, Variable Geometry” –
We have learned great deal at Copenhagen: whatever agreement we will come to, it has to be about the quality of economic growth and the way that it goes forward.
Prof. Thomas Heller (Stanfors University and Executive Director at Climate Policy Initiative) explains why, after the Cop15, we have now a better sense of what the problem is and where the solutions lie.
“It’s the same for all policy – Prof. Heller says – no matter how well it is designed, no matter how well it is intended, there are always questions about how it is implemented or how effective will it be”
Will the ambitious climate targets proposed at the G8 meeting in l’Aquila and discussed at COP15 in Copenhagen make the world more sustainable? In order to find an effective answer to this question, we should consider that a global climate policy may eventually lead to strong reductions of greenhouse gases, but it may also entail large costs and lower investments in education, wealth, or research and development. While the discussion on climate policy costs focus on GDP losses or monetary measures, authors introduce a new element in the discussion by combining economic, social, and environmental indicators onto a unique measure of sustainability, the FEEM Sustainability Index (FEEMSI), an innovative index which allows projecting sustainability indicators in the future. FEEMSI is able to summarize current and future sustainability performances for 40 countries up to the year 2020, and the effect of a stringent climate policy on sustainability is not straightforward
The Cop 15 is a bitter disappointment for European countries. While environment is one of the domains in which EU integration is deepest, European countries failed to build and support a common position that would have weighed on the outcome of the conference.
But the EU could try to make the Copenhagen Accord more ambitious and credible. How? Forgetting Kyoto – Stéphane Hallegatte suggests – recognizing that it is an important progress to have included the United States and China in a unique agreement and answering to four questions
The “climate deadlock” prevented to sign a real substitute for the Kyoto Protocol. But two important novelties nonetheless emerged from Copenhagen. First, an informal, although politically relevant, declaration of national emissions reduction targets for 2020. Secondly, the definition of the Copenhagen Green Climate Fund.
How much good are these news? Announced mitigation targets are far from being adequate to control climate change, however there are chances to put the world on the right trajectory to reduce global warming significantly. The analysis of two economists explains why
Cop15 came to its end without a legally-binding treaty and the public opinion is looking back at Copenhagen as the place where UN missed a big opportunity.
We can say that Cop15 was a complete failure; or we can look at Copenhagen as a step ahead toward the next climate treaty. In any case climate change is still there and it still is a big issue the world has to deal with. Answers by experts to one single question
At COP 15 in Copenhagen, China has put forward a proposal for cutting its carbon intensity by 40-45% from 2005 levels by 2020. The scheme has generated a variety of responses, which is unsurprising given the difficulty of assessing the intensity target. In particular, it gave the impression that China and the US may take the lead in the fight against climate change. By comparing figures from history and recent projections, this note is an attempt to shed some light on how ambitious is the Chinese climate proposal and, therefore, on China’s actual cooperative effort to control climate change
Three days before the end of COP15, Prof. Carraro chaired the side-event “Pathway towards low carbon society” where researchers from the international network for Low Carbon Society presented synthesis and results of their work. The network involves partners from all over the world. Participants joint the event here in Copenhagen from Europe (Mr. Lechtenbohmer and [...]
Being forced to stay overnight and solve a new stall in the process, eventually negotiators did not fail to close the LCA works. The major block came from the United States raising key divergences to be reflected in the final text of the draft core decision, especially concerning mitigation actions for developed and developing countries [...]
