Climate change
Authors
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

As fallout from accelerating climate change and the economic meltdown reveals, today's gravest threats are transnational, demanding unprecedented cooperation among competing nations to find lasting solutions. The policies and strategies developed for the balance-of-power rivalries of the 20th century no longer apply in this one, according to the authors of Power & Responsibility, a book launched March 17 at Stanford.

"Transnational threats create security interdependence between the most powerful states and the weaker states," author Stephen J. Stedman said during the panel discussion hosted by the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies. "The United States can't defend itself against any threat without sustained international cooperation from others."

Stedman, a faculty member at Stanford's Center for International Security and Cooperation (CISAC), Bruce Jones of New York University and Carlos Pascual from the Brookings Institution, said their book seeks to promote the concept of "responsible sovereignty" to rebuild international order and strengthen international institutions such as the United Nations. In other words, the authors argue, their notion of sovereignty demands responsibility from states in addition to according privilege. Furthermore, nations should be held responsible for the harmful international effects of their domestic policies-whether it's producing massive amounts of carbon dioxide or failing to secure national borders and financial institutions, thus enabling terrorist groups to attack targets thousands of miles away.

The book's publication follows a policy oriented Plan for Action booklet released last November on the heels of the U.S. presidential election. Timed to coincide with the start of the Obama administration, the 360-page book, published by Brookings Institution Press, highlights seven issues that demand transnational solutions: nuclear proliferation, climate change, bio-security, civil violence and regional conflicts, terrorism and economic security. According to Stedman, the book was received positively during recent launches in Europe, Asia and Washington, D.C. and, earlier this month, the authors presented their findings to senior White House officials.

While U.S. power is in decline, Jones said, it is the only nation with the military, diplomatic, economic and political power needed to take a global lead in tackling transnational threats. The world's rising powers-China, India and Brazil-recognize that the alternative to U.S. leadership is "entropy and chaos," he said, and that every state stands to benefit more from the former as long as it is geared to structured cooperation.

"This is not a love fest of great powers," Jones continued. "There are real interests here and there [would] be tough and sustained negotiations." But the alternatives-maintaining the status quo where global decisions are made by the outmoded G-7 group of industrialized nations, or establishing a "league of democracies" that would exclude critical players such as China-are simply unworkable. "We recognize that our model is tough but we think it's the most likely to have impact on the threats that face us," Jones said.

Hero Image
MGI
All News button
1
-

Charles Perrow is an emeritus professor of sociology at Yale University and a visiting professor at CISAC in the winter and spring terms. Among his award-winning research is Organizing America: Wealth, Power, and the Origins of American Capitalism (Princeton, 2002), and Normal Accidents: Living with High Risk Technologies (Princeton, 1999). His 2008 articles include "Complexity, Catastrophe, and Modularity," Sociological Inquiry 78:2, May 2008 162-73; "Conservative Radicalism," Organization 15:2 2008 271-77; "Disasters Evermore? Reducing our Vulnerabilities to Natural, Industrial, and Terrorist Disasters," Social Research 75:3 Fall, 2008. His recent membership on a National Academy of Science panel on the possibilities of certifying software led to his current work on cyber security. He is also researching organizational forms in economic globalization. He received his BA, MA, and PhD from the University of California, Berkeley, all in sociology.

Stephen H. Schneider is the Melvin and Joan Lane Professor for Interdisciplinary Environmental Studies, Professor of Biological Sciences, Professor by Courtesy of Civil and Environmental Engineering, and Co-Director and Senior Fellow at the Center for Environmental Science and Policy in the Woods Institute for the Environment at Stanford University. Dr. Schneider received his Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering and Plasma Physics from Columbia University in 1971. In 1975, he founded the interdisciplinary journal, Climatic Change, and continues to serve as its Editor. Dr. Schneider was honored in 1992 with a MacArthur Fellowship for his ability to integrate and interpret the results of global climate research through public lectures, seminars, classroom teaching, environmental assessment committees, media appearances, Congressional testimonies, and research collaboration with colleagues. He has consulted with federal agencies and/or White House staff in the Nixon, Carter, Reagan, George H. W. Bush, and Clinton administrations. Dr. Schneider was elected to membership in the U.S. National Academy of Sciences in 2002 and received both the National Conservation Achievement Award from the National Wildlife Federation and the Edward T. Law Roe Award of the Society of Conservation Biology in 2003. He has been a Coordinating Lead Author in Working Group II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) under the auspices of the World Meteorological Organization and the United Nations Environment Program from 1997 to the present. His recent work has centered on the importance of risk management in climate-policy decision making, given the uncertainties in future projections of global climate change, and he continues to serve as a noted advisor to decision makers and stakeholders in industry, government, and nonprofit sectors regarding possible climate-related events. He is also engaged in improving public understanding of science and environment through extensive media communication and public outreach.

If you would like to be added to the email announcement list, please visit https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/socialscienceseminar

Reuben W. Hills Conference Room

Charles Perrow Professor (Emeritus) of Sociology, Yale University; Visiting Professor, CISAC Speaker
Stephen H. Schneider Melvin and Joan Lane Professor for Interdisciplinary Environmental Studies; Professor of Biological Sciences; Co-Director and Senior Fellow at the Center for Environmental Science and Policy in the Woods Institute for the Environment, Stanford Commentator
Seminars
-

Abstract
An accurate estimate of the ultimate production of oil, gas, and coal would be helpful for the ongoing policy discussion on alternatives to fossil fuels and climate change. By ultimate production, we mean total production, past and future. It takes a long time to develop energy infrastructure, and this means it matters whether we have burned 20% of our oil, gas, and coal, or 40%. In modeling climate change, the carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels is the most important factor. The time frame for the climate response is much longer than the time frame for burning fossil fuels, and this means that the total amount burned is more important than the burn rate. Oil, gas, and coal ultimates are traditionally estimated by government geological surveys from measurements of oil and gas reservoirs and coal seams, together with an allowance for future discoveries of oil and gas. We will see that where these estimates can be tested, they tend to be too high, and that more accurate estimates can be made by curve fits to the production history.

Bio
Professor Rutledge is the Tomiyasu Professor of Electrical Engineering at Caltech, and a former Chair of the Division of Engineering and Applied Science there.  He is the author of the textbook Electronics of Radio, published by Cambridge University Press, and the popular microwave computer-aided-design software package Puff.  He is a Fellow of the IEEE, a winner of the IEEE Microwave Prize, and a winner of the Teaching Award of the Associated Students at Caltech.  He served as the editor for the Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques, and is a founder of the Wavestream Corporation, a manufacturer of high-power transmitters for satellite uplinks.

This talk is part of the PESD Energy Working Group series.

Richard and Rhoda Goldman Conference Room

Dave Rutledge Professor of Electrical Engineering Speaker Caltech
Seminars
Authors
David G. Victor
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Foreign Affairs features David Victor this week for a Q&A on timely issues relating to climate change. Questions from the audience focus on geoengineering, the subject of an article, "The Geoengineering Option", in this month's issue (March/April 2009) authored by Victor and several co-authors.

» Foreign Affairs Q&A with David Victor

Hero Image
earth mirrors
All News button
1
Authors
David G. Victor
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

David Victor and co-authors, M. Granger Morgan, Jay Apt, John Steinbruner, and Katherine Ricke have written a provocative piece, The Geoengineering Option, in Foreign Affairs that is helping to catalyze a debate over the best policy course for this mitigation strategy.

As climate change accelerates, policymakers may have to consider geoengineering as an emergency strategy to cool the planet. Engineering the climate strikes most as a bad idea, but the article argues that the earth's rapidly warming trend necessitates a serious look at geoengineering.

The world's slow progress in cutting carbon emissions and the looming danger that the climate could take a sudden turn for the worse, require policymakers to take a closer look at emergency strategies for curbing the effects of global warming.~ from The Geoengineering Option

Below is a schema of geoengineering options to help mitigate for the earth's warming climate.

 

Additional coverage:

» When Will Geoengineering Tip? in Science Progress
» Geoengineering: Time to Get Serious? in Huffington Post

Hero Image
Hurricane Emily and moon NASA
All News button
1
Authors
Varun Rai
David G. Victor
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

India has been famous for arguing that it (and the rest of the developing world) should incur no expense in controlling emissions that cause climate change. The West caused the problem and it should clean it up. That argument is increasingly untenable-both in the fundamental arithmetic of climate change, which is a problem that is impossible to solve without developing country participation, and in the political reality that important western partners will increasingly demand more of India and other developing countries. India's own public is also demanding more.

The Indian government has outlined a broad plan for what could be done, but the plan still lacks a strategy to inform which efforts offer the most leverage on warming emissions and which are most credible because they align with India's own interests. This paper offers a framework for that strategy. It suggests that a large number of options to control warming gases are in India's own self-interest, and with three case studies it suggests that leverage on emissions could amount to several hundred million tonnes of CO2 annually over the next decade and an even larger quantity by 2030. (For comparison, the Kyoto Protocol has caused worldwide emission reductions of, at most, a couple hundred million tonnes of CO2 per year.) We suggest in addition to identifying self-interest, which is the key concept in the burgeoning literature on "co-benefits" of climate change policy, that it is also important to examine where India and outsiders (e.g., technology providers and donors) have leverage.

One reason that strategies offered to date have remained abstract and difficult to implement is that they are not rooted in a clear understanding of where the Government of India is able to deliver on its promises (and where Indian firms have access to the needed technology and practices). Many ideas are interesting in theory but do not align with the administrative and technological capabilities of the Indian context. As the rest of the world contemplates how to engage with India on the task of controlling emissions it must craft deals that reflect India's interests, capabilities and leverage on emissions. These deals will not be simple to craft, but there are many precedents for such arrangements in other areas of international cooperation, such as in accession agreements to the WTO.

All News button
1
Subscribe to Climate change