PWH Undergraduate Essay Prize Preparing for the Worst: The Importance of Adaptive Climate Policy as Opposed to Mitigative

Over the past couple decades, global policymakers have focused increasingly on addressing the rising issue of climate change. The first of these global climate arrangements was the Kyoto Protocol in 1997, a voluntary agreement among over 150 countries. The goal of the protocol was to encourage countries to reduce emissions by five percent of their level in 1990 with frequent monitoring.[1]

Following the Kyoto Protocol, the Paris Agreement was created in 2015 to more comprehensively address climate change globally. Rather than centering on emissions, the Paris Accords focused on preventing a global warming increase of two degrees above pre-industrial levels, a benchmark where many scientists claim Earth will hit a point of no return.[2] This agreement was more flexible because each participating country could set their own goals and methods for reaching them.[3]

Both of these agreements were monumental in opening up conversation regarding global climate policy, although they each struggled to make a difference in carbon dioxide emissions. Based on data from the IPCC,[4] global emissions have continued to be on the rise, in spite of changing policy. In addition, both protocols have struggled due to their voluntary nature which allows for free riding. Countries with larger emissions can choose to simply not participate. For example, the United States has not ratified the Kyoto Protocol and recently backed out of the Paris Agreement despite being one of the greatest contributors to climate change. In regard to the Paris Agreement, there was also not enough monitoring to ensure countries completed their goals leading to a lack of accountability.[5]

Up until now, there has yet to be a binding international agreement on climate change, according to economist William Nordhaus.[6] Joining these climate agreements comes with economic costs. This causes countries to free ride and avoid these costs while gaining the benefits from other countries’ reductions. Nordhaus offers a solution to the free-riding problem: creating a climate “club” that penalizes members who are not involved. An example of penalization could be an economic advantage to those that are members of the club, thereby incentivizing non-members to join. While Nordhaus’s idea sounds feasible, it would be difficult to penalize non-members without also economically hurting members of this agreement as countries could lose trading partners. In addition, free riding is not the sole barrier in climate policy, therefore it wouldn’t fully address climate change.

Besides free riding, distributive politics is another obstacle to climate policy, according to Professors Michael Aklin and Matto Mildenberger.[7] Aklin and Mildenberger argue that much of national climate policy is based on the interests of internal political groups. Climate policies put certain occupational groups at a disadvantage such as those working for oil companies. Therefore, members of these groups will naturally be opposed to such policy and may form interest groups against these policies. Some examples of anti-climate activism groups include the Heritage Foundation, the American Enterprise Institute, and the Heartland Institute.[8] These groups use anti-sustainability propaganda and lobbying to interrupt productive climate policy creation within countries. This then impacts how countries act within a global arena. For example, in November of 2020, the United States, under Donald Trump’s presidency, exited the Paris Agreement due to strong Republican opposition to the agreement.[9] Aklin and Mildenberger propose that those interested in enacting climate policy must consider distributive politics to accurately prescribe a treatment for climate change. One possibility for addressing the issue of distributive politics is to promote climate activism groups within countries in order to neutralize anti-climate activism groups. For example, increasingly platforming groups such as Greenpeace USA, the Marine Conservation Institute, and educational groups such as the Alliance for Climate Education can help counteract the lobbying tactics and propaganda of the anti-climate activism groups.

Finally, the main perpetrators in this problem are not the ones experiencing the majority of its consequences. Larger industrial nations frequently have the highest emissions. China is responsible for 29.18% of global emissions and the United States is responsible for 14.02%.[10] At the same time, using the climate risk index as a measurement, countries such as Kiribati, the Philippines, India, and Madagascar are most at risk,[11] with Kiribati being threatened with submergence in the face of rising sea levels. Therefore, the problem-makers are not experiencing the consequences of their actions and have little incentive to change what they are doing.

Nordhaus’s solution properly addresses both the free riding and collective action problem but fails to address the issue of distributive policy and unconditional noncooperators within nations who can affect national climate policy and sidetrack country goals. At the same time, Aklin and Mildenberger emphasize the importance of the distributive policy problem, but any solutions would depend heavily on the neutralization of anti-climate change groups. Therefore, neither offer an effective solution proposed for global policy on how to mitigate the impacts of climate change before the consequences become irreversible.

Global policies that discuss how to reduce carbon emissions have been relatively ineffective to this point, and propaganda campaigns intended to encourage the individual to reduce their carbon footprint are directed at the wrong people as large corporations are responsible for nearly 71% of global emissions.[12] Therefore, it is more important to focus on adaptive global policy rather than mitigative.

Adaptive policies involve reducing “...our vulnerability to the harmful effects of climate change.”[13] Adaptation is often reactive instead of preemptive at both the national and community level. For example, communities in Sea Breeze, New Jersey have had to respond to the diminishing shore by creating bulkheads out of rocks and anything else they can find.[14] On a wider level, Indonesia has recently had to move its capital to Borneo due to the impacts of climate change and sea level rise in Jakarta.[15] Furthermore, the people of Kiribati have planted mangroves, built walls on the shore, and in the worst cases have emigrated from the islands in order to protect themselves from the rising sea levels.[16]

Most policies are reactionary, when instead, countries would be better served by anticipating the impacts of climate change and start emphasizing adaptation now. While it is difficult to sum up all possible ways to adjust to climate change, there are many broader policy areas that are currently being relatively ignored.

One area in need of improved policy is coastal adaptation and protection. Climate change will cause sea level rises that will flood the coasts. To prevent excessive damage from these flooding events, it’s important to do more research into methods that can prevent excessive flooding. Further research on salt marshes, mangroves, and seagrasses can particularly help the coasts, as these are natural buffers to storms and floods.[17] Particularly, policies should focus on funding groups to plant these marshes and seagrasses utilizing information from research groups. In addition, there should be more discussion related to finances and how to move people away from the shores efficiently if that becomes a necessity. This migration would be at an unforeseen level, and countries around the world would need to work together effectively to plan where refugees can head to. Countries would also need to pitch in money for the transportation and re-settlement costs of these refugees.

Another area of policy relates to infrastructure. Already, research has been conducted on how to “heat-proof” buses in order to operate in the hotter temperatures associated with climate change.[18] Other ways to adapt buildings to the hotter climate is by using green roofs and more city vegetation to combat urban heat traps that arise due to the way current urban infrastructure absorbs and holds onto heat. Global policy should incentivize having vegetation and green roofs, as well as “heat-proofed” transportation to better adapt countries to hotter average temperatures.

Lastly, as the world adapts to higher temperatures, we will have to cope with changes in crops and where they can be farmed. This could easily become a global issue as colder countries would be predominantly affected.[19] Working out agreements to ensure economies worldwide can thrive will help to avoid international conflicts and protect all countries.

There are, of course, limits to how much we will be able to adapt to climate change. Unfortunately, many climate change consequences are seemingly uncontrollable. For example, coral bleaching impacts oceans globally and destroys entire ecosystems filled with diverse fish species.[20] This issue is difficult to tackle as corals are very sensitive organisms that require the correct temperatures in order to maintain their symbiosis with algae and obtain oxygen. While there is not a clear answer as to how to address this problem, there is a lot of research being done on coral bleaching, and policies that emphasize financing these research groups can also help global adaptation to climate change.

There is no overarching solution to climate change, but there are things that can be done. The world is reaching a point of no return where humanity will be forced to adapt to the consequences of global climate change to survive. In addition, due to the free riding problem and distributive politics, it is more difficult to prioritize mitigation solutions. Energy should instead be put into adaptive solutions. Global policy needs to adjust its goal in relation to climate change from simply mitigating it at all costs, to instead planning how to adjust to it.

Endnotes

[1] “Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention”

[2] IPCC, “Special Report: Global Warming of 1.5 ºc”

[3] Council on Foreign Relations, “Global Climate Agreements: Successes and Failures”

[4] IPCC, “Special Report: Global Warming of 1.5 ºc”

[5] Council on Foreign Relations, “Global Climate Agreements: Successes and Failures”

[6] Nordhaus, “Climate Clubs: Overcoming Free-Riding in International Climate Policy,” 2015

[7] Aklin & Mildersberger, “Prisoners of the Wrong Dilemma: Why Distributive Conflict, Not Collective Action, Characterizes the Politics of Climate Change,” 2020

[8] NASA, “Global Climate Change Impact on Crops Expected within 10 Years, NASA Study Finds – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet,” 2021

[9] The Guardian, “The Republicans who Urged Trump to Pull Out of Paris Deal are Big Oil Darlings,” 2017

[10] Los Angeles Times, “Indonesia's Capital Is Sinking, Polluted and Now Moving to a New Location,” 2022

[11] Iberdrola, “¿Cuáles Son Los Países Más Amenazados y Vulnerables Por El Cambio Climático?” 2020

[12] The Guardian, “The Republicans Who Urged Trump to Pull out of Paris Deal Are Big Oil Darlings,” 2017

[13] NASA, “Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation,” 2021

[14] Lally, “Taken by the Tides,” 2021

[15] Los Angeles Times, “Indonesia's Capital Is Sinking, Polluted and Now Moving to a New Location,” 2022

[16] Corporativa, “Kiribati, El Primer País Que Engullirá El Cambio Climático Por La Subida Del Mar”

[17] Suarez, “5 Strategies That Achieve Climate Mitigation and Adaptation Simultaneously,” 2020

[18] Vollaro, “Bus for Urban Public Transport: Energy Performance Optimization,” 2014

[19] NASA, “Global Climate Change Impact on Crops Expected within 10 Years, NASA Study Finds – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet,” 2014

[20] U.S. Department of Commerce, “What Is Coral Bleaching?” 2010

References

Aklin, Michaël, and Matto Mildenberger. “Prisoners of the Wrong Dilemma: Why Distributive Conflict, Not Collective Action, Characterizes the Politics of Climate Change.” Global Environmental Politics, vol. 20, no. 4, 2020, pp. 4–27., https://doi.org/10.1162/glep_a_00578.

“Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation.” NASA, 23 Aug. 2021, https://climate.nasa.gov/solutions/adaptation-mitigation/.

Corporativa, Iberdrola. “Kiribati, El Primer País Que Engullirá El Cambio Climático Por La Subida Del Mar.”  https://www.iberdrola.com/sustainability/kiribati-climate-change#:~:text=Kiribati%2C%20the%20first%20country%20rising,a%20result%20of%20climate%20change&text=Global%20warming%20is%20causing%20glaciers,for%20islands%20and%20coastal%20regions.

“CO2 Emissions by Country.” Worldometer, https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-by-country/.

“Global Climate Agreements: Successes and Failures.” Council on Foreign Relations,  https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/paris-global-climate-change-agreements.

“Global Climate Change Impact on Crops Expected within 10 Years, NASA Study Finds – Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet.” NASA, 2 Dec. 2021, https://climate.nasa.gov/news/3124/global-climate-change-impact-on-crops-expected-within-10-years-nasa-study-finds/.

“Global Warming Skeptic Organizations (2013).” Union of Concerned Scientists, https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/global-warming-skeptic-organizations.

Iberdrola. “¿Cuáles Son Los Países Más Amenazados y Vulnerables Por El Cambio Climático?”, 3 Mar. 2020, https://www.iberdrola.com/sustainability/top-countries-most-affected-by-climate-change.

“Indonesia's Capital Is Sinking, Polluted and Now Moving to a New Location.” Los Angeles Times, 26 Jan. 2022, https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2022-01-26/indonesia-capital-jakarta-moving-borneo#:~:text=Jakarta%20is%20congested%2C%20polluted%2C%20prone,to%20the%20island%20of%20Borneo.

“Just 100 Companies Responsible for 71% of Global Emissions, Study Says.” The Guardian, 10 Jul. 2017, https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2017/jul/10/100-fossil-fuel-companies-investors-responsible-71-global-emissions-cdp-study-climate-change.

Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention, https://unfccc.int/resource/docs/convkp/kpeng.pdf.

Lally, Anne. “Taken by the Tides.” 34th Street Magazine, 2 Mar. 2021, https://www.34st.com/article/2021/03/climate-change-global-warming-sea-breeze-new-jersey.

Nordhaus, William. “Climate Clubs: Overcoming Free-Riding in International Climate Policy.” American Economic Review, vol. 105, no. 4, 2015, pp. 1339–1370., https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.15000001.

“Plastic Bag Ban: Programs and Initiatives.” City of Philadelphia, 23 Jun. 2021, https://www.phila.gov/programs/plastic-bag-ban/.

“The Republicans Who Urged Trump to Pull out of Paris Deal Are Big Oil Darlings.” The Guardian,  1 Jun. 2017, https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jun/01/republican-senators-paris-climate-deal-energy-donations.

“Special Report: Global Warming of 1.5 ºc.” IPCC, https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/.

Suarez, Isabella. “5 Strategies That Achieve Climate Mitigation and Adaptation Simultaneously.” World Resources Institute, 10 Feb. 2020, https://www.wri.org/insights/5-strategies-achieve-climate-mitigation-and-adaptation-simultaneously.

U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. “What Is Coral Bleaching?” 15 Mar. 2010, https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/coral_bleach.html#:~:text=When%20water%20is%20too%20warm,and%20are%20subject%20to%20mortality.

Vollaro, Roberto De Lieto, et al. “Bus for Urban Public Transport: Energy Performance Optimization.” Energy Procedia, Elsevier, 29 Jan. 2014, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1876610214000794.