political econ of climate change midterm

IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change)

Intergovernmental panel on climate change est in 1988 Under the UN. This is a body of leading climate scientists from the global north and global south responsible for examining scientific information related to climate change. This entity provides governments at all levels with a scientific basis used to develop climate policy. This body produces assessment reports every 5-8 years, the most recent being AR 6 which was published in 2023. According to their website, the IPCC was created to "provide policymakers with regular scientific assessments on climate change, its implications and potential futrue risks, as well as to put forward adaptation and mitigation options."

Uncertainty in the IPCC Report

Though assessment reports are loaded with scientific data, knowledge, and projections to inform on climate policy development, uncertainty lies in the fact that several phenomena associated with the impacts of climate change are difficult to estimate and predict. Climate science deals with several complexities, which make it hard to make objectively accurate projections, as consequences can be highly variable and non-linear. The IPCC addresses these gaps and uncertainties by establishing confidence levels (tiered from low to medium to high confidence) to communicate probability and exhibit how sure scientists are about particular information and projections. Sicne theres no 100% clarity, this leads to uncertainty within the field of policy implementation, which influences the orientation of social cost of carbon because estimations are made more difficult. Uncertainty surrounding impacts of future climate emissions leads to uncertainty regarding the SCC which thus poses a challenge to formalizing a carbon tax.

Link between global warming and extremes in temperature and precipitation

As global surface temperatures rise, extreme weather variabilities intensify, meaning that global warming is linked to stimulating extreme heat events, droughts, and precipitation. The IPCC AR6 confirms with high confidence that both temperature and precipitation extremes have increased due to human-induced climate change. According to AR6 of the IPCC, with every increment of global warming, regional changes in mean climate and extremes become more widespread and pronounced. These increases in weather extremes have been implicated in driving displacement, disrupting economies and services, as well as increasing mortality and morbidity rates.

The world's two energy problems

Roser categorizes global energy challenges into two primary components: the first being that those who have low carbon emissions lack access to energy, and the second being that those who have access to energy produce greenhouse gas emissions at unsustainably high rates. He observes that nations with a GDPpc below $25,000 generate lower emissions, elucidating that this is a result of energy poverty, as these countries lack access to modern energy and technology. The only countries that have emissions that are close to zero are those where the majority suffers from energy poverty, which is primarily those in SSA. Meanwhile, those countries surpassing a GDPpc average of $25,000, average per capita emissions exceed the global annual average of 4.8 tonnes of CO2 per capita. Thus, the wealthiest countries in the world produce the highest emissions due to their disproportionately higher energy consumption levels.

How climate change affected the January 2025 LA fires

Above-average precipitation in the winters of 2022, 2023, and 2024, led to increased vegetation growth, which provided more fuel for the already flammable environment. According to the World Weather Attribution, the region hadn't received any rain since May 2024, meaning grasses and brush were already dry and thus highly flammable. Intensified shifts between extreme dry and wet periods in LA have fueled its vulnerability to fire risk, especially as the Santa Ana winds contributed to the spread during this January 2025 period. The reading states that human-induced climate change is increasing wildfire frequency and severity in several global regions, as hot, dry, and windy environmental conditions increase risks associated with fire ignition and spread.

*Contribution of fossil fuels to total greenhouse gas emissions

According to lecture, approximately 85% of global energy derives from oil, gas, and coal alone—which are all fossil fuels. High rates of fossil fuel extraction have significantly increased the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. As fossil fuels are burned, especially via industrial processes, and thus released into the atmosphere, greenhouse gases are released, which contribute to global warming and drive climate change overall. The residence time of CO2 alone can extend longer than a century, meaning that the more CO2 is released, the more the planet warms as this atmosphere is continuously polluted by this greenhouse gas.

Energy transitions

According to lecture, there have been big gains in the U.S.'s transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy systems. Clean energy endured a record-breaking year in 2024, as the U.S. increased its clean energy capacity by 47% compared to 2023. The U.S. is also on track to add approximately 60 gigawatts of clean energy capacity in 2025. The falling cost of renewables has significantly contributed to facilitating green development and the clean energy transition; with some sectors enduring more growth than others due to external factors, largely political. In lecture, Dr. Ross even mentions how despite China consuming 50% of the world's coal, it stands as the global leader in renewable energy generation. Dr. Ross mentions also makes the point that past energy transitions were primarily centered on adding new fuels without reducing reliance on old ones; thus, future energy transitions must mean that fossil fuel usage/reliance must significantly decline, and we must prioritize moving towards net-zero emissions through replacing carbon-intensive sources.

Recent trends (e.g., last several decades) in per capita CO2 emissions in the US and China

Recent trends show that per capita CO2 emissions in the US have been declining while rising in China. According to lecture, China currently emits 2 times more than the US, however this wasn't always the case given that the US remains the world's top historical cumulative emitter of CO2, despite downward Tim Hayward discusses this concept of "polluter pays" as one of the ethical concerns regarding who is responsible for addressing climate change, which implicates China and the US. Moreover, this question of responsibility emerges when it comes to per capita emissions, as China obviously possesses a higher population compared to the US; hence, responsibility may be disproportionately assigned to China when factoring in per capita metrics. The question of per capita emissions also further complicates when factoring in China's lower consumption-based emissions relative to its higher production-based emissions, a point made by Dr. Ross in lecture.

Recent trends (e.g., last several decades) in cost of renewable energy, battery costs

According to lecture, the continually falling cost of renewables is a primary factor that's facilitating the renewable energy transition. For instance, between the 1991 to 2018 period, the cost of lithium-ion batteries decreased by roughly 97%. Furthermore, the International Energy Agency's (IEA) projections and forecasts have been shown to undermine global growth capacity of solar power; solar power growth is outpacing these projections, which signifies this virtuous cycle where renewable technologies are increasingly becoming cheaper. Greater deployment of renewable energy drives down their costs as they become competitive in new markets and subsequently increase demand.

Production-based versus consumption-based measures of national emissions

Production-based measures of national emissions accounts for the emissions associated with activities operating at the domestic scale. On the other hand, consumption-based emissions accounts for all the emissions associated with the production of a particular commodity or service consumed, regardless of production location. This means emissions associated with imported consumer goods and services is factored in measuring a nation's emissions. In lecture, Dr. Ross describes how this tension arises between both measures when it comes to Hayward's "polluter pays" approach for assigning responsibility. He explains how a country like Denmark, for example, who's often cited as a model for sustainable development, has higher consumption-based emissions relative to production-based. Meanwhile, China (who has received much of Denmark's offshored carbon-intensive manufacturing operations) has lower consumption-based emissions compared to production-based.

Impact of climate change on economic production around the world, and expected trends

Burke, Hsiang, and Miguel conducted a study on the global non-linear effect of temperature on economic production. This study explained how the economic impact of climate change is globally variable, largely depending on regional baseline average surface temperatures. They conclude that a 2º increase in warming will benefit cooler regions while disproportionately leaving warmer/hotter regions worse off, producing greater inequality overall. Climate change is thus more damaging to regions that are already warmer, which are largely constituted by impoverished nations (who are simultaneously hyperdependent on agriculture for economic development). Dr. Ross additionally mentions how climate change is linked to escalating conflict at both micro and macro levels, which obviously has its implications in economic productivity.

Tragedy of the commons, applied to climate change

The "tragedy of the commons" is this concept popularized by ecologist Garrett Hardin, describing how population growth is a key element fueling the degradation of our global common-pool resource: nature. Hardin's argument lies in the fact that population growth and unregulated access drives people to act in their own self-interest, which fuels environmental exploitation as they seek to maximize personal gain from this pool of finite resources, ultimately leading to collective suffering. Within the context of climate change, however, this hyperindividualistic notion indicated by Hardin's argument fails to acknowledge how carbon-polluting interests and entities are to largely blame for the contemporary climate crisis and resource exploitation. According to the Mildenberger article, roughly ⅔ of all CO2 ever emitted into the atmosphere can be traced back to 90 companies. Hence, responsibility for the climate crisis shouldn't be solely placed on individual impulses and breeding alone. In lecture, Ross also mentions how the tragedy of the commons is a useful framework for contextualizing the complicated politics surrounding climate change. No individual country has an incentive to curb their emissions and protect the global commons unless others r expected to as well, which furthers the tragedy of the commons as there's no sovereign entity present to prevent excessive burning of emissions; hence, nations act within their own interests and have more incentive to free-ride from the emissions reductions of other countries.

Social Cost of Carbon (SCC)

The social cost of carbon (SCC) represents the estimated monetary cost that society pays per additional ton of CO2 emitted into the atmosphere. This measure accounts for the damages produced by climate change over time, factoring in elements like disaster relief expenses and the economic and environmental costs of reduced agricultural yields. Economists use integrated assessment models to calculate SCC, which helps inform policymakers and governments mobilize climate action through internalizing the negative externality that is CO2 emissions. Dr. Ross discusses how the SCC is a contested concept in his article "The New Political Economy of Climate Change," as it's difficult to establish a discount rate that effectively translates these future costs into what they'd cost at present value. A higher discount rate means that future costs are valued less in present terms, leading to a lower SCC. A lower discount rate means future costs are valued more, leading to a higher SCC.

Discount Rates

Discount rates translate the future costs of climate change into present-day values. Higher discount rates typically produce lower SCC while lower discount rates tend to produce higher SCC. This rate symbolizes how much today's society values future damages relative to more present ones, making it an ethical concern rather than an empirical one. Discounting is based on the idea that harms (or benefits) occurring further in the future are valued less than those happening sooner. In climate economics, this means that damages expected decades from now are seen as less significant in today's terms, even if they may be larger in absolute terms. Hence, discount rates represent societal values and interests, making them a contested concept in environmental economics and climate policy. Dr. Ross also mentions how the uncertainty regarding tipping points and their potential impact on future damages further complicates the determination of "optimal" discount rates and these discount rates can help explain why there's a time inconsistency issue.

*Static versus dynamic costs of mitigating climate change

- Dynamic costs acknowledge how costs may change over time as elements like market dynamics and technological innovation allow scientists to produce cheaper models that can lead to changes in costs later down the line. These dynamic costs capture cost reductions over time, including co-benefits that may make climate mitigation appear less costly later down the line. Static costs reflect the immediate or near-term costs of reducing emissions using current technologies and systems. These assessments often assume no major innovation or behavioral change, which can lead to an overestimation of long-term mitigation costs. In the "New Political Economy of Climate Change" reading, Ross elaborates on the time inconsistency issue, which relates this duality between static and dynamic costs, where there is this conflict between present and future issues.

Global commons

The "global commons" refers to common-pool resources that are made readily accessible to all but aren't governed by any single authority, thereby requiring collective action in order to sustain them. A stable climate is conceptualized as part of the global commons, however, there exists no sovereign authority that compels actors to sustain this public good, which fuels this free-riding dilemma amongst those entities who refuse to limit their emissions. Regarding a stable climate and environmental integrity as a global commons means that these entities are subject to what Hardin refers to as the "tragedy of the commons." As individuals continue acting in their own self-interest to maximize their own gains through burning emissions, this depletes the integrity of the climate. The free-rider dilemma further presents this issue of nations and individuals benefiting from other entities lowering their emissions while they continue to degrade and exploit these global common-pool resources for their own gain.

Collective action problems

Collective action problems refer to instances in which individuals would benefit from cooperating to achieve a particular goal, but short-term gains and self-interested actions prevent this outcome from materializing. In the "New Political Economy of Climate Change," Ross describes climate policy as a collective action problem, as several actors refuse to place restrictions on their emissions for reasons of short-term gain and self-interest. For example, Americans are reluctant to pay higher energy prices that would result from implementing carbon pricing, which thus contributes to hindering collective global progress on climate mitigation. In lecture, costs concentrated, while benefits diffused... so people its gonna b costly for cost-bearing entities so they're incentivized to avoid coordination. collective action problem, more incentives to not coordinate since you can free-ride off the efforts made by others.

Distributional Conflict

Distributional conflicts refer to this situational imbalance and tension between actors who profit from the status quo emissions conditions and actors who gain from emissions-reduction policies. This approach largely seeks to examine whose interests are aligned with versus against particular climate policy. In "The New Political Economy of Climate Change," Dr. Ross discusses how labor unions and workers of carbon-emitting sectors function as actors who tend to support status quo emissions conditions, as the FF industry and carbon-dependent economies sustain their employment. The interests of these pro-status quo groups thus conflict with the interests of, say, the renewables industry or vulnerable populations in other countries. Furthermore, in lecture, Ross explains how popular views on climate change are increasingly conditioned by partisan divides, especially in Western nations.

Carbon lock-in

- Carbon lock-in refers to this situation where hyperdependency on carbon-intensive sectors and infrastructures hampers an all-encompassing transition to renewable energy. In lecture, Dr. Ross elucidates how past energy transitions have been successful in introducing new and cleaner technologies, however, contemporary energy transitions must be about actively fueling the obsolescence of fossil fuels and thus dismantling "carbon lock-in" instead of solely introducing cleaner/more sustainable systems. Carbon lock-in overall makes it harder for renewables and low-emission alternatives to effectively phase out fossil fuels and replace high-emission sectors. Gillighan and Stock reading

- Much of our economic system n infrastructure are oriented around the use of fossil fuels. Carbon lock-in exhibits this pursuit of building infrastructure around fossil fuels was something significantly pushed on by fossil fuel companies. Indoing so, this is emblematic that climate change n policy is a distributed conflcit ... conflict between interest groups

Kaya Identity

Total CO2 emissions levels are a product of 4 factors: population, GDPpc, the energy intensity of economic production (income), and the carbon intensity of energy used. This concept was developed by Yoichi Kaya. Broken down, these factors explain total emissions as being a product of the population rate, how wealthy a population is, how much energy is used for stimulating economic wealth, and how much CO2 is used in the production of that energy. Changes in any of these 4 parameters of the Kaya identity influence total CO2 emissions output, which thus additionally poses the critical question of "how do we decarbonize?" Several countries in the global north, including the US, Denmark, and France have been effective in mobilizing economic growth while decarbonizing, which can be largely attributed to these countries' efforts in decoupling

Difference between energy intensity (of income) and carbon intensity (of energy)

Energy intensity of income is a measure of how much energy is required to produce one unit of economic output, while carbon intensity of energy refers to the metric of how much CO2 is emitted per unit of energy used to support that economic output. Both parameters of energy intensity of income and carbon intensity of energy are enduring a decline in the US, all the while, economic productivity and population are increasing—a prime example of effective decoupling. The US demonstrates how energy intensity of income and carbon intensity of energy can be reduced to compensate for population and GDP growth. However, Dr. Ross mentions how although energy intensity and carbon intensity are declining globally, these metrics aren't declining at a quick enough rate to achieve net-zero emissions targets.

Climate tipping points

Climate tipping points refer to these critical thresholds in the Earth's more extensive climate and environmental systems. Once tipping points are exceeded, these changes can potentially generate irreversible damage to the environment. The uncertainties surrounding tipping points is what makes forecasting the social cost of carbon (SCC) and thus discount rates so difficult. A6 of the IPCC specifically documents the potential threats of exceeding climate tipping points, underscoring how breaching these thresholds can yield catastrophic effects, destabilizing ecosystems and thus endangering human livelihoods. Dr. Ross also mentions how tipping points are hard to predict as their effects may be non-linear, even despite knowledge of the dynamics of positive feedback cycles.

*Climate change and conflict: micro and macro effects

- Micro effect.. Idea that increase in temp tend to make indivs pursue more aggressive behavior . In lecture we discusses how studies have found that on hotter days, theres more road rage and profanity on social media. Macro , increases in scarcity, there r less resources, dramatic changes then spark conflicts. Syrian drought played infleuntial role in fueling civil war, changes in migration led to civil conflict in syria/. Forced displacement n refugee crises , reduces in agri spurring migration. Yields indirect consequences

*First, second, and third-order effects of climate change on conflict

As mentioned in lecture, the first order effect of climate change on conflict is that it poses direct damage to communities and infrastructures. The second effect is that climate change fuels refugee crises and displacement, fueling migration that largely transpires from rural to urban. The third-order effect is that migration fueled by crises and conflict can trigger political backlash in those destination countries and urban geographies receiving high influxes of migrants.

Climate and Migration

Climate change has been proven to fuel displacement and international migration crises. Approximately 1% of the global population lives in uninhabitable regions, and by 2070, this rate is projected to increase to 19%. With climate change disproportionately threatening less developed nations, these vulnerable populations are highly dependent on agriculture as a means of income. In lecture, Dr. Ross explains how the majority of migrants tend to be of a middle-income demographic and typically migrate locally to nearby urban areas or bordering countries. The 2011 Syrian drought, for example, fueled mass migration from rural parts of Syria to Damascus and even to Lebanon, Turkey, and EU member states. Moreover, cross-border migration has especially been shown to trigger political backlash, fueling populist anti-immigrant sentiments, especially among Western nations.

Individualization of responsibilities

The individualization of responsibility is an approach to answering who is responsible for climate change, shifting blame away from macro-scale institutions and processes and directing responsibility onto individual consumers instead. Dr. Ross mentions in lecture how top-emitting companies are fully complicit in fueling this notion, diverting attention away from their exploitative actions by framing the climate crisis as a product of individuals undervaluing the global commons and acting according to their self-interests. The individualization of responsibility notion is actively weaponized by top-emitting firms and industries to obfuscate their culpability in exacerbating the climate crisis. Meanwhile, Dr. Ross revealed a study to class which found that 100 companies are responsible for 71% of emissions since 1988.

Carbon emissions and negative externalities

Economists along with Dr. Ross in "The New Political Economy of Climate Change" refer to carbon/GHG emissions as negative externalities. The concept of a negative externality refers to a phenomenon manifested as an unintended side effect of an economic transaction. Conceptualizing carbon emissions as negative externalities means understanding their yielded consequences—climate change, adverse health impacts, pollution, etc—as manifested market failures. Dr. Ross elucidates how there is a near-consensus among economists claiming that the optimal solution to overcoming such negative externalities is to implement a carbon tax, which which assigns a monetary value to the unpriced social costs of emissions. This value, known as the social cost of carbon, seeks to internalize the external damages induced by carbon emissions, thus incentivizing cleaner investments, energy conservation, and switches from high to low carbon fuels to avoid carbon tax.

Co-benefits of climate change mitigation

In lecture, Dr. Ross explains how co-benefits represent positive externalities, which are positive outcomes produced in the course of some other action. For example, he highlights how investments in the renewable energy transition can generate new employment opportunities for domestic labor pools. Co-benefits are substantial as they effectively counteract those forces that hamper green development and clean energy transitions. Furthermore, Ian Parry's IMF article explains how carbon pricing in China and India can save hundreds of thousands of annual premature deaths caused by air pollution, thus delivering significant public health co-benefits. The co-benefits of climate migration demonstrate the fact that we can benefit in the present by effectively adopting interventions to reduce excessive carbon emissions.

Polluter pays, beneficiary pays, ability to pay

In his article examining climate change and ethics, Tim Hayward outlines 3 frameworks that shape the debate concerning who should bear responsibility for addressing climate change. The polluter pays principle claims that those entities who've caused the unsustainable atmospheric buildup of greenhouse gases should bear the costs of the climate crisis. The beneficiary pays principle assigns responsibility to those who've benefitted from excess emissions, thus distributing causal responsibility. Lastly, the "ability to pay" framework claims that those who bear the economic capacity to pay should be responsible for paying those costs associated with climate change, which would effectively rid the burdens on those countries disproportionately harmed by excess emissions.

The political power of fossil fuels

The fossil fuel industry bears so much global political infleunce due to its immense profitability. Dr. Ross in lecture mentions how the oil sector alone is a primary driver of the global market economy. Oil and gas alone are America's #1 exports, with several Gulf nation-states like Saudi Arabia even nationalizing oil production to generate revenue for the government to profitize off of. The latter is a prime example of how oil and the fossil fuel industry gains diplomatic infleunce as governments that're heavily reliant on these sectors end up backing them politically and thus further anchor their influence. Dr. Ross also explains how oil was also a primary factor in fueling urban sprawl in Los Angeles due to its cheap price.

The role of social movements

Social movements are a significant force that influences climate mitigation policy. There is power in numbers, and in lecture, Dr. Ross explains how the mobilization of the many throughout history has manifested significant changes, from women's suffrage to the Civil Rights movement. Hence, when beneficiaries of climate policy especially band together and volcalize their demands regarding divestment from fossil fuels and for an overall cleaner more sustainable future, these movements hold a signficinat degree of infleunce as they represent public interest. Dr. Ross does mention, however, that social meovemetns are hard to anticipate and predict.