Lecture 22 - Climate Change

What is the outline for this lecture?

Overview

• The history of climate policy

• Why has the world been so ineffective at addressing climate change?

  • Collective action dynamics

  • Distributional challenges

  • Leader time horizons

What are the political effects of climate change?

• Rising sea levels, hurricanes, warmer temperatures, droughts unexpected weather phenomena

  • Rate of warming in the past 15 years has been 40% higher than warming since the 1970s

• Developing nations, such as small isolated islands, are at greater risk

• Number of climate refugees increasing

• Issue with climate change is that it is occurring in may different ways and is not affecting people in the same manner, difficult to come up with a one-size-fits-all solution

What is the history of climate change?

• Industrial Revolution → rise of fossil fuel use, causing a massive spike in CO₂ emissions after 1850.

• 1970s–1980s: Scientists formally recognize global warming as a real, measurable problem.

1992 — UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)

• First global acknowledgment that climate change is a problem.

• No binding targets or enforcement mechanisms.

1997 — Kyoto Protocol

• First international agreement to limit carbon emissions.

• Took effect in 2005, ran until 2015.

2015 — Paris Agreement

• Replaced Kyoto.

• Countries set national commitments for emissions cuts (“NDCs”).

• Framework for ongoing global negotiations.

2021 — COP26

• Latest major update.

• Countries submitted new or revised national climate pledges.

• Current system guiding global climate mitigation.

What are the efforts to combat global warming: Kyoto protocol?

Main goal

• Reduce global emissions by 5% overall.

• Each nation received targets based on its historical emissions.

Cap-and-trade system

• Countries that emitted less than their target earned credits they could sell to others.

• Designed as a financial incentive to cut emissions.

Major problems

• U.S. never ratified the treaty (Congress opposed that it applied mainly to developed countries).

• China was not included under binding targets.

• Developing countries were largely omitted, even though they became major sources of emissions.

• Limited enforcement:

  • Penalties included tougher future targets or suspension from carbon markets.

  • Many states ignored penalties or simply left the agreement.

• Even the EU struggled to meet its targets.

• Ultimately, the 5% reduction goal was far too small to meaningfully address global warming.

Similar issues in the Paris Agreement

• Enforcement remains weak.

• Countries disagree on how to meet goals.

• Staying below 2°C of warming requires far more action than current commitments.

What is climate change like in American Politics?

• Trump administration: strongly pro–fossil fuel, openly hostile toward wind and other renewables.

• The U.S. has shown inconsistent commitment to climate agreements (e.g., repeatedly entering and exiting the Paris Agreement).

Issue salience in the U.S.:

• Americans tend to prioritize the economy, healthcare, and daily costs over climate.

• Many people say they care about climate change but don’t want higher energy prices, such as paying more at the gas pump.

Why so little progress (collective action problems)?

Climate change as a collective action problem

• Preventing global warming is a public good that requires private sacrifice.

• Countries (and individuals) benefit from others’ efforts but hesitate to act because costs are personal and benefits are global.

• Under Trump, Americans became more US-focused and less willing to think of themselves as global problem-solvers (a shift from the Obama era).

But collective action problems can be solved — success stories:

• Local pollution (China): China temporarily sacrificed economic growth to clean its air, improving livability.

• Acid rain: International cooperation steadily reduced sulfur emissions.

• Ozone layer: Global cuts to CFCs led to the ozone layer healing.

Why climate change is uniquely hard to fix

• High adjustment costs: Transitioning away from fossil fuels is expensive and disruptive.

• More complex science:

  • Hard to directly tie specific events to climate change.

  • Hard to convince people that a warmer planet is harmful.

  • Growing skepticism toward scientific claims.

• Equity problems:

  • Who should bear the costs?

  • If the U.S. invests heavily in climate action, China’s industry might gain a competitive edge.

• Public resistance:

  • People struggle to accept personal or national sacrifices to benefit the entire world, not just their own community.

Why so little progress (time horizons)?

• People naturally value the present more than the future.

  • Climate action requires paying costs now.

  • Benefits—reduced warming, fewer disasters—arrive later.

  • It’s hard to convince people to accept pain today for gains tomorrow.

• This creates a major problem for politicians:

  • Climate policies often involve short-term economic pain (higher energy prices, regulations).

  • Politicians worry that voters will punish them now, long before the future benefits arrive.

  • If they can’t get reelected, they can’t implement long-term climate plans.

Why so little progress (distributional effects)?

• Climate action is socially beneficial overall, but the costs and benefits are unevenly distributed.

• Groups that benefit from strong climate policy:

  • Young people (they will live through more warming).

  • Coastal communities (face sea-level rise and storms).

  • Anyone highly vulnerable to extreme heat, floods, or long-term environmental risk.

• Groups that are hurt by climate mitigation:

  • Workers and communities tied to the fossil fuel industry (coal, oil, gas).

  • People or sectors that depend on cheap fossil fuels (frequent flyers, heavy industry).

  • Regions like the Steel Belt → Rust Belt, where reducing fossil fuel use threatens local jobs and economic stability.

Bottom line:
Climate policies create winners and losers, which makes political consensus difficult even when the overall social benefit is clear.

What are some questions from the theory?

1. What does the climate “regime complex” do?

• We have lots of different climate groups and agreements, not one big system.

• This can either:

  • Help countries be flexible and try different solutions, or

  • Make it easy for powerful groups to block real action because no one is truly in charge.

2. Carbon tax vs. cap-and-trade

• Carbon tax: simple and effective, but people hate higher energy prices → hard to pass.

• Cap-and-trade: easier to sell politically, but messier and less reliable.

• Depending on which system we choose, different countries push back more (e.g., China under one system, India under another).

3. Who is the bigger obstacle—China or India?

• It depends:

  • China pollutes more but can act quickly if it chooses.

  • India resists limits because it’s still developing and needs cheap energy.

• The policy choice decides which country becomes the main “roadblock.”