Structuring your paper Key point: Structure by CONCEPT, not by CASE Why? Because comparisons are easier across concepts Example: Research question: why did one country have a stronger policy at Paris than another? Want to compare France and Germany Scholars/literature show that policy explained by economic wealth and national institutions (plus ecological vulnerability and abatement costs) How do you structure the paper?

Two options: Madeup Example Bad option Good option Intro Literature explaining policy position Abatement costs/ ecovulnerability Economic wealth National institutions France Germany Conclusion Intro Literature explaining policy position Abatement costs/ ecovulnerability Economic wealth National institutions France compared to Germany Conclusion

What are the Possible Responses to Climate Change?

Gardiner’s view of options Source: Gardiner, S. Perfect Moral Storm. Oxford UP, 2011, p. 224.

Four basic response options Mitigation Reduce our generation of GHGs “Many impacts can be reduced, delayed or avoided by mitigation” (IPCC, 2007) Adaptation Change how we live when climate changes do occur “Unmitigated climate change would, in the long term, be likely to exceed the capacity of natural, managed and human systems to adapt” (IPCC, 2007) Geo-engineering Develop technologies to reduce incoming solar energy or “store” carbon we emit Grief Accept losses, changes we can’t avoid or adapt to

Some of the options

Carbon Taxes Tax carbon at fossil fuel source Need analysis to identify level of tax that will achieve desired carbon reduction Set tax, live with carbon outcome Politically challenging, if not impossible Easy to identify costs and cost incidence in advance Likely to be “regressive,” posing greater costs on poor

Cap and Trade Goals: a) achieve environmental goal, b) avoid command/control, c) create incentives for emission reductions at lowest cost, d) foster innovation Hard to identify costs and cost incidence in advance Process Identify facilities covered Set carbon goal, let costs be what they are Distribute tradable emission allowances Allow trading Monitor if submitted allowances equal actual emissions Impose penalties if emissions exceed allowances Isn’t this just “granting the right to pollute”?

Conservation Nudges Sending “Home Energy Reports” to utility “customers comparing their electricity use to that of their neighbors. … The average program reduces energy consumption by 2.0%. … Non-price interventions can substantially and cost effectively change consumer behavior: the effect is equivalent to an … electricity price increase of 11 to 20%... Effects are heterogeneous: households in the highest decile of pre-treatment consumption decrease usage by 6.3%, while consumption by the lowest decile decreases by only 0.3%.” (Alcott, 2011) https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0047272711000478

Framework to Compare Options Cap & Trade, Carbon Tax, or Nudge? CRITERIA OF COMPARISON Cap & Trade Carbon Tax Nudge Environmental Effectiveness Set goal, not price Set price, not goal Set neither Cost Effectiveness Government Cost vs. Corporate Cost High government, low corporate Low government, high corporate Both low Distributional Equity ?? Likely to be inequitable …. Other criteria?