1. The Politics of Climate Change

2. Climate change What prevents the international community from responding effectively to climate change? 4/16/2008Hans Peter Schmitz

3. Climate change –policy options Is global warming taking place?  Yes Is human activity contributing to climate change?  Yes Should we spent resources on mitigating climate change or on coping with it?  For mitigation: only ‘real’ solution is a total turnaround  For adaptation: less expensive/takes advantage of economic and technological progress 4/16/2008Hans Peter Schmitz

4. Unresolved questions? What is undisputed: Human activity has increased the level of atmospheric carbon dioxide (C0 2 ) concentration. What is disputed:  How important is human activity for climate change?  How should we deal with it (combating or coping)?  Who should pay for climate change measures? 4/16/2008Hans Peter Schmitz

6. Skeptics Is CO 2 really the main culprit for climate change?  Is there a linear relationship between increasing C0 2 levels and warming? How does the trapping capacity change with rising levels?  What happened in the Earth’s past when C0 2 levels were high (due to volcanic activities, etc.)?  What else affects climate change? Examples: Sun cycles, cosmic radiation, sea currents… 4/16/2008Hans Peter Schmitz

7. Global response 1950s: First scientific evidence for human role in increasing greenhouse gases (GHGs). 1985-87: UN Climate Change conferences. 1988: Canada demands a 20 per cent reduction of C0 2 emissions below 1988 levels by 2005. 4/16/2008Hans Peter Schmitz

8. Scientific evidence 1988: Creation of the Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change (IPCC, membership: more than 2,000 scientists).IPCC 1992: Adoption of the Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC).  Voluntary commitment by developed nations (Annex I) to return to 1990 emission levels by 2000. 1994: UNFCC comes into force.UNFCC comes into force 4/16/2008Hans Peter Schmitz

9. Kyoto Protocol Mandates an average of 5% reduction by 2012 below 1990 levels.  Decrease: 8% European Union; 7% US; 6% Canada/Japan; 0% Russia/New Zealand; No agreement on non-Annex-I countries. Implementation:  lower emissions,  enhance “sinks” (carbon sequestration; grow forests),  emissions trading with other Annex I states; 4/16/2008Hans Peter Schmitz

10. Bush Administration 2005: Kyoto comes into force after Russia signs on in late 2004 (55% of the Annex I countries needed). Federal government/Bush administration  Kyoto protocol harmful to US economic interests.  disputes scientific evidence for climate change.  Wants all countries to reduce GHGs. 4/16/2008Hans Peter Schmitz

11. Private sector and local levels Local levels and private sector  State and city initiatives to decrease ‘carbon footprint’ NGOs and MNCs: Private Sector Initiatives  Insurance companies (Swiss Re) 4/16/2008Hans Peter Schmitz

12. Explaining failure Why has Kyoto failed?  US power and domestic interests Powerful domestic business lobby/consumer resistance  Collective action problem Failure of Kyoto to include developing nations Incentives for free-riding  Science Link between rising carbon dioxide and temperature levels? Is mitigation or adaptation the appropriate response?  Technology Alternatives to fossil fuels are not readily available 4/16/2008Hans Peter Schmitz

13. Theories of IR Neo-Realism: self-interested resource exploitation  The issue is not yet a national security problem. Countries should pursue their autonomous strategies. Neo-liberal Institutionalism: collective action problem  The issue is a typical collective action problem requiring coordination among states.  Domestic business interests (in the US) prevail over environmental activists. Idealism/Constructivism: global governance  The environment is a global challenge to the nation state. Climate requires the creation of a world government. 4/16/2008Hans Peter Schmitz

14. Nuclear energy? Is nuclear energy the solution? Realism: YES  The major long-term concern is dependency (on oil). Institutionalism: YES  Peaceful use of nuclear energy will contribute to economic growth and inter-state cooperation. Idealism/Identity: YES/NO  Yes: Climate change requires immediate response.  No: Nuclear energy is unsafe and environmentally destructive (no safe disposal policy for waste). 4/16/2008Hans Peter Schmitz