UBC Wiki - User contributions [en]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/Resources/Class Activity/Student Handout

2017-10-12T19:13:34Z

RichardPrice: /* Prior to the First Session */

== What to Expect ==
In this assignment, you will be working collaboratively with your peers to either expand on existing action plans or propose possible political strategies addressing the ethical challenges or opportunities associated with climate change. "Important: This is a public forum, anyone can view and/or edit your Wiki pages."

=== Prior to the First Session ===
* Review the ''Using the UBC Wik''i how to guide “[http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/wiki-guide/ how-to” videos and tutorials]
* Read and understand required readings:
# Chapter 10 from Global Ethics textbook,
# Background material of the [http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/global-climate-justice/ Global Climate Justice Case]
# Working action plans proposed by previous students at the bottom of the Global Climate Justice Case
* Decide on whether you would like to expand on existing action plans or to create your own proposal prior to Friday
* Bring a laptop or other suitable device to discussion sections on Friday so you can edit existing and/or add your proposal to the wiki (you will be able to share in groups if you don't have one yourself).

===Friday Tutorial (more details below)===
* You will either expand on previous action plans or create proposals to address ethical obstacles or opportunities to address global climate change; this will be written directly into the Wiki
*You are encouraged to edit the wiki after the class discussion

== Class Activity: How Should We Address Climate Change? ==
In groups of 3-4, either expand on one existing proposed action plan or write up one possible political strategy to address the ethical challenges or opportunities to address climate change. 

===Option 1: Expanding Existing Action Plans===
Write your response directly into [[Documentation:Open_Case_Studies/Political_Science/Template|the wiki]] by clicking on the link to the action plan that you want to expand upon at the bottom in the the last section under "Student Action Plans."

To contribute, make sure that you are logged into the wiki with your CWL, and click "edit".

===Option 2: Creating New Proposal===
Write your response directly into [[Documentation:Open_Case_Studies/Political_Science/Template|the wiki]] by clicking on one of the links to the action plan templates that are at the bottom in the the last section under "Student Action Plans."

Depending on who your group believes should be responsible for the most effective and ethical actions to address climate change, select an appropriate group and complete as much in the sections as you are able.

To contribute, make that you are logged into the wiki with your CWL, and click "edit". Do not worry about incomplete sections – rather, clearly mark areas with unanswered questions for others (or yourselves) to complete in the future.

If your proposed solution is based in a locality, specify which location. For example, if your group bases its actions in regional-level governments, specify which government you are talking about, e.g. the British Columbian Government. You may also choose a specific movement or advocacy group to focus your analysis.

===Probing Questions to Consider===
'''To get started on your proposals, you may find it helpful to consider some of the following questions:'''

# Which principles (in addressing global environmental ethical challenges, like climate change) are the most relevant and most important to you?
# What do you think is the most ethical approach to addressing climate change?
# Who is most responsible for addressing climate change? Citizens, corporations, governments, international organizations? Are there some groups who bear more responsibility than others? Why?
# At which level is political action most needed? Most effective? Individual, municipal, regional, national, international or global? Why?
# What kinds of actions are most effective? For example, climate change was highlighted during the recent Opening Ceremonies at the Olympic Games in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Are actions such as that useful and effective in mobilizing political action?
# Who stands to gain from your approach? Who stands to lose? How can you make it seem fair or at least acceptable to as many concerned as possible?
# How will your proposed actions be enforced and/or otherwise get sufficient buy-in? Who is responsible for ensuring compliance?
# What are the steps you need to take to carry about your proposed plan?
# What are your emotional reactions and/or responses to climate change? How might these emotions influence or impact your decisions and proposals?
# What challenges/barriers to your plan do you anticipate? How will you address these issues?

==Homework==
Before the next lecture class on Monday, please review the responses of other groups and be prepared to discuss the pros and cons of various proposals: which ones would you support as likely to gain the most traction?

This activity forms part of your participation grade in the course.

'''For the links to the action plans, see the bottom of the editable wiki version of the [[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Template|case study]] .'''

== Additional Resources ==
* Web version of the case study providing an overview of the issue on the UBC Open Case Studies project site: http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/global-climate-justice/

* Powerpoint presentation of brief overview of international environmental legislation, bodies (from Stockholm Conference to United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development 2012): http://rcen.ca/sites/default/files/uploads/earth_summit_presentation.pdf

* Government of Canada's Climate Change information page: http://www.climatechange.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=F2DB1FBE-1

* TEDtalk - Al Gore: The case for optimism on climate change (2016): http://www.ted.com/talks/al_gore_the_case_for_optimism_on_climate_change

* TEDtalk - Gordon Brown: Global ethic vs. national interest (2009): http://www.ted.com/talks/gordon_brown_on_global_ethic_vs_national_interest

[[Category:Open Case Studies]]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/Resources/Class Activity/Student Handout

2017-10-12T19:06:34Z

RichardPrice: /* Friday Tutorial (more details below) */

== What to Expect ==
In this assignment, you will be working collaboratively with your peers to either expand on existing action plans or propose possible political strategies addressing the ethical challenges or opportunities associated with climate change. "Important: This is a public forum, anyone can view and/or edit your Wiki pages."

=== Prior to the First Session ===
* Review wiki “[http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/wiki-guide/ how-to” videos and tutorials]
* Read and understand required readings:
# Chapter 10 from Global Ethics textbook,
# Background material of the [http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/global-climate-justice/ Global Climate Justice Case]
# Working action plans proposed by previous students at the bottom of the Global Climate Justice Case
* Decide on whether you would like to expand on existing action plans or to create your own proposal prior to Friday
* Bring a laptop or other suitable device to discussion sections on Friday so you can edit existing and/or add your proposal to the wiki (you will be able to share in groups if you don't have one yourself).

===Friday Tutorial (more details below)===
* You will either expand on previous action plans or create proposals to address ethical obstacles or opportunities to address global climate change; this will be written directly into the Wiki
*You are encouraged to edit the wiki after the class discussion

== Class Activity: How Should We Address Climate Change? ==
In groups of 3-4, either expand on one existing proposed action plan or write up one possible political strategy to address the ethical challenges or opportunities to address climate change. 

===Option 1: Expanding Existing Action Plans===
Write your response directly into [[Documentation:Open_Case_Studies/Political_Science/Template|the wiki]] by clicking on the link to the action plan that you want to expand upon at the bottom in the the last section under "Student Action Plans."

To contribute, make sure that you are logged into the wiki with your CWL, and click "edit".

===Option 2: Creating New Proposal===
Write your response directly into [[Documentation:Open_Case_Studies/Political_Science/Template|the wiki]] by clicking on one of the links to the action plan templates that are at the bottom in the the last section under "Student Action Plans."

Depending on who your group believes should be responsible for the most effective and ethical actions to address climate change, select an appropriate group and complete as much in the sections as you are able.

To contribute, make that you are logged into the wiki with your CWL, and click "edit". Do not worry about incomplete sections – rather, clearly mark areas with unanswered questions for others (or yourselves) to complete in the future.

If your proposed solution is based in a locality, specify which location. For example, if your group bases its actions in regional-level governments, specify which government you are talking about, e.g. the British Columbian Government. You may also choose a specific movement or advocacy group to focus your analysis.

===Probing Questions to Consider===
'''To get started on your proposals, you may find it helpful to consider some of the following questions:'''

# Which principles (in addressing global environmental ethical challenges, like climate change) are the most relevant and most important to you?
# What do you think is the most ethical approach to addressing climate change?
# Who is most responsible for addressing climate change? Citizens, corporations, governments, international organizations? Are there some groups who bear more responsibility than others? Why?
# At which level is political action most needed? Most effective? Individual, municipal, regional, national, international or global? Why?
# What kinds of actions are most effective? For example, climate change was highlighted during the recent Opening Ceremonies at the Olympic Games in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Are actions such as that useful and effective in mobilizing political action?
# Who stands to gain from your approach? Who stands to lose? How can you make it seem fair or at least acceptable to as many concerned as possible?
# How will your proposed actions be enforced and/or otherwise get sufficient buy-in? Who is responsible for ensuring compliance?
# What are the steps you need to take to carry about your proposed plan?
# What are your emotional reactions and/or responses to climate change? How might these emotions influence or impact your decisions and proposals?
# What challenges/barriers to your plan do you anticipate? How will you address these issues?

==Homework==
Before the next lecture class on Monday, please review the responses of other groups and be prepared to discuss the pros and cons of various proposals: which ones would you support as likely to gain the most traction?

This activity forms part of your participation grade in the course.

'''For the links to the action plans, see the bottom of the editable wiki version of the [[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Template|case study]] .'''

== Additional Resources ==
* Web version of the case study providing an overview of the issue on the UBC Open Case Studies project site: http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/global-climate-justice/

* Powerpoint presentation of brief overview of international environmental legislation, bodies (from Stockholm Conference to United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development 2012): http://rcen.ca/sites/default/files/uploads/earth_summit_presentation.pdf

* Government of Canada's Climate Change information page: http://www.climatechange.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=F2DB1FBE-1

* TEDtalk - Al Gore: The case for optimism on climate change (2016): http://www.ted.com/talks/al_gore_the_case_for_optimism_on_climate_change

* TEDtalk - Gordon Brown: Global ethic vs. national interest (2009): http://www.ted.com/talks/gordon_brown_on_global_ethic_vs_national_interest

[[Category:Open Case Studies]]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/Resources/Class Activity/Student Handout

2017-10-12T19:05:53Z

RichardPrice:

== What to Expect ==
In this assignment, you will be working collaboratively with your peers to either expand on existing action plans or propose possible political strategies addressing the ethical challenges or opportunities associated with climate change. "Important: This is a public forum, anyone can view and/or edit your Wiki pages."

=== Prior to the First Session ===
* Review wiki “[http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/wiki-guide/ how-to” videos and tutorials]
* Read and understand required readings:
# Chapter 10 from Global Ethics textbook,
# Background material of the [http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/global-climate-justice/ Global Climate Justice Case]
# Working action plans proposed by previous students at the bottom of the Global Climate Justice Case
* Decide on whether you would like to expand on existing action plans or to create your own proposal prior to Friday
* Bring a laptop or other suitable device to discussion sections on Friday so you can edit existing and/or add your proposal to the wiki (you will be able to share in groups if you don't have one yourself).

===Friday Tutorial (more details below)===
* You will either expand on previous action plans or create proposals to address ethical obstacles or opportunities to address global climate change; this will be written directly into the Wiki
* You are expected to read all class proposals as homework in preparation for Monday's lecture

== Class Activity: How Should We Address Climate Change? ==
In groups of 3-4, either expand on one existing proposed action plan or write up one possible political strategy to address the ethical challenges or opportunities to address climate change. 

===Option 1: Expanding Existing Action Plans===
Write your response directly into [[Documentation:Open_Case_Studies/Political_Science/Template|the wiki]] by clicking on the link to the action plan that you want to expand upon at the bottom in the the last section under "Student Action Plans."

To contribute, make sure that you are logged into the wiki with your CWL, and click "edit".

===Option 2: Creating New Proposal===
Write your response directly into [[Documentation:Open_Case_Studies/Political_Science/Template|the wiki]] by clicking on one of the links to the action plan templates that are at the bottom in the the last section under "Student Action Plans."

Depending on who your group believes should be responsible for the most effective and ethical actions to address climate change, select an appropriate group and complete as much in the sections as you are able.

To contribute, make that you are logged into the wiki with your CWL, and click "edit". Do not worry about incomplete sections – rather, clearly mark areas with unanswered questions for others (or yourselves) to complete in the future.

If your proposed solution is based in a locality, specify which location. For example, if your group bases its actions in regional-level governments, specify which government you are talking about, e.g. the British Columbian Government. You may also choose a specific movement or advocacy group to focus your analysis.

===Probing Questions to Consider===
'''To get started on your proposals, you may find it helpful to consider some of the following questions:'''

# Which principles (in addressing global environmental ethical challenges, like climate change) are the most relevant and most important to you?
# What do you think is the most ethical approach to addressing climate change?
# Who is most responsible for addressing climate change? Citizens, corporations, governments, international organizations? Are there some groups who bear more responsibility than others? Why?
# At which level is political action most needed? Most effective? Individual, municipal, regional, national, international or global? Why?
# What kinds of actions are most effective? For example, climate change was highlighted during the recent Opening Ceremonies at the Olympic Games in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Are actions such as that useful and effective in mobilizing political action?
# Who stands to gain from your approach? Who stands to lose? How can you make it seem fair or at least acceptable to as many concerned as possible?
# How will your proposed actions be enforced and/or otherwise get sufficient buy-in? Who is responsible for ensuring compliance?
# What are the steps you need to take to carry about your proposed plan?
# What are your emotional reactions and/or responses to climate change? How might these emotions influence or impact your decisions and proposals?
# What challenges/barriers to your plan do you anticipate? How will you address these issues?

==Homework==
Before the next lecture class on Monday, please review the responses of other groups and be prepared to discuss the pros and cons of various proposals: which ones would you support as likely to gain the most traction?

This activity forms part of your participation grade in the course.

'''For the links to the action plans, see the bottom of the editable wiki version of the [[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Template|case study]] .'''

== Additional Resources ==
* Web version of the case study providing an overview of the issue on the UBC Open Case Studies project site: http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/global-climate-justice/

* Powerpoint presentation of brief overview of international environmental legislation, bodies (from Stockholm Conference to United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development 2012): http://rcen.ca/sites/default/files/uploads/earth_summit_presentation.pdf

* Government of Canada's Climate Change information page: http://www.climatechange.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=F2DB1FBE-1

* TEDtalk - Al Gore: The case for optimism on climate change (2016): http://www.ted.com/talks/al_gore_the_case_for_optimism_on_climate_change

* TEDtalk - Gordon Brown: Global ethic vs. national interest (2009): http://www.ted.com/talks/gordon_brown_on_global_ethic_vs_national_interest

[[Category:Open Case Studies]]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/Resources/Class Activity/Guide

2016-10-21T04:34:20Z

RichardPrice: /* Marked assignment as Analytical Paper */

== POLI373: Environmental Ethics Class Activity - Information ==

== How should we address climate change? ==

After successfully completing this assignment, students should be able to

# Collaboratively add to and edit content using the UBC Wiki
# Contribute ideas to class discussions on the ethical aspects of climate change
# Discuss and appreciate the complexities around international negotiations and different levels of appropriate action from individual, local to global
# Collaborate with peers and their professor to develop proposals that could better address the ethical opportunities and obstacles for addressing climate change

=== Preparation ===

In order to complete the in-class activity, students must complete the following tasks:
* Review wiki “[http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/wiki-guide/ how-to” videos and tutorials] (see below also).

* Read and understand required readings: 1) Chapter 10 from Global Ethics textbook; & 2) background material on the Open Case Studies Climate Justice site: http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/global-climate-justice/

* Bring a laptop or other suitable device to discussion sections on Friday so you can edit and add your proposal to the wiki (you will be able to share in groups if you don't have one yourself).

=== Activity ===

This activity will take place over two classes, with the bulk of the activity occurring in tutorial on Friday, with a follow-up discussion in the following lecture.

==== Tutorial: Friday October 21 ====
* Groups of 4-5 students will create proposals to address ethical obstacles or opportunities to address global climate change
* Proposals will be written directly into the wiki
* Students will be made aware that anyone can view and/or edit their wiki pages
* Students need to read other proposals before following class on Monday

==== Lecture: Monday October 24 ====
* During lecture on the topic, professor will facilitate discussion on the action plans
** Links to action plans are available at the bottom of the Global Climate Justice case study: http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/global-climate-justice/
* What are the merits of each?
* Can the class come to a compromise of the best approaches to address ethical obstacles and opportunities to address climate change?
* Students are encouraged to edit the wiki after the class discussion

=== Future classes, suggestions for additional activities ===

==== Marked assignment as Analytical Paper ====
Students have the option to analyze and respond to criticisms of their proposal as an alternative to the usual format of the Analytical Paper which would be to engage in an analysis of the required readings on environmental ethics (Chapter 10 Global Ethics text & background information on the [http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/global-climate-justice/ Climate Justice site]). This topic paper should not be a simple presentation of the proposal, but be self-reflective of the process of collaboration in the creation of the proposal and others' response to it and analyze weaknesses and strengths of the proposal.

'''Note on Due Dates''': If you choose to the above option of an Analytical Paper based on the proposal, due to the nature of the assignment this paper can be handed in up to '''Friday, October 28'''. If you do a regular analytical paper - that is, analyze the required readings, then it is due the standard date of Friday October 21.

==== Future Classes ====
In a future iteration of this course, rather than have students create new proposals in the tutorial, students in groups can edit and update existing proposals as well. Every other step of the activity should remain the same.

=== Information for Students ===
Before tutorial on October 21, you should visit [http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/wiki-guide/ "How to Use the UBC Wiki"]

The instructions for the in-class activity are at the following link:
# [[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Resources/Class Activity/Student Handout|“How should we address climate change? - Class Activity”]]

[[Category:Open Case Studies]]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/Resources/Class Activity/Guide

2016-10-21T04:33:53Z

RichardPrice: /* Preparation */

== POLI373: Environmental Ethics Class Activity - Information ==

== How should we address climate change? ==

After successfully completing this assignment, students should be able to

# Collaboratively add to and edit content using the UBC Wiki
# Contribute ideas to class discussions on the ethical aspects of climate change
# Discuss and appreciate the complexities around international negotiations and different levels of appropriate action from individual, local to global
# Collaborate with peers and their professor to develop proposals that could better address the ethical opportunities and obstacles for addressing climate change

=== Preparation ===

In order to complete the in-class activity, students must complete the following tasks:
* Review wiki “[http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/wiki-guide/ how-to” videos and tutorials] (see below also).

* Read and understand required readings: 1) Chapter 10 from Global Ethics textbook; & 2) background material on the Open Case Studies Climate Justice site: http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/global-climate-justice/

* Bring a laptop or other suitable device to discussion sections on Friday so you can edit and add your proposal to the wiki (you will be able to share in groups if you don't have one yourself).

=== Activity ===

This activity will take place over two classes, with the bulk of the activity occurring in tutorial on Friday, with a follow-up discussion in the following lecture.

==== Tutorial: Friday October 21 ====
* Groups of 4-5 students will create proposals to address ethical obstacles or opportunities to address global climate change
* Proposals will be written directly into the wiki
* Students will be made aware that anyone can view and/or edit their wiki pages
* Students need to read other proposals before following class on Monday

==== Lecture: Monday October 24 ====
* During lecture on the topic, professor will facilitate discussion on the action plans
** Links to action plans are available at the bottom of the Global Climate Justice case study: http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/global-climate-justice/
* What are the merits of each?
* Can the class come to a compromise of the best approaches to address ethical obstacles and opportunities to address climate change?
* Students are encouraged to edit the wiki after the class discussion

=== Future classes, suggestions for additional activities ===

==== Marked assignment as Analytical Paper ====
Students have the option to analyze and respond to criticisms of their proposal as an alternative to the usual format of the Analytical Paper which would be to engage in an analysis of the required readings on environmental ethics (Chapter 7 Global Ethics text & background information on the [http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/global-climate-justice/ Climate Justice site]). This topic paper should not be a simple presentation of the proposal, but be self-reflective of the process of collaboration in the creation of the proposal and others' response to it and analyze weaknesses and strengths of the proposal.

'''Note on Due Dates''': If you choose to the above option of an Analytical Paper based on the proposal, due to the nature of the assignment this paper can be handed in up to '''Friday, October 28'''. If you do a regular analytical paper - that is, analyze the required readings, then it is due the standard date of Friday October 21.

==== Future Classes ====
In a future iteration of this course, rather than have students create new proposals in the tutorial, students in groups can edit and update existing proposals as well. Every other step of the activity should remain the same.

=== Information for Students ===
Before tutorial on October 21, you should visit [http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/wiki-guide/ "How to Use the UBC Wiki"]

The instructions for the in-class activity are at the following link:
# [[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Resources/Class Activity/Student Handout|“How should we address climate change? - Class Activity”]]

[[Category:Open Case Studies]]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Template

2016-10-14T20:12:02Z

RichardPrice: /* Political Philosophy */

=Global Climate Justice=

==Goal and Objectives==

To stimulate students to try to generate original ways to approach or frame the issue of global climate change that might provide a more productive path forward.

==Introduction==

===Framing the Problem===
What distribution of adjustment costs for climate change mitigation is fair, and should be acceptable to the most (important) countries?

Are there ways of framing the issue that could be more effective in galvanizing effective action?

Are problem-solving approaches to negotiating such environmental problems inadequate, such that more holistic ecological ethical approaches are needed? How feasible might be the adoption of such perspectives? Secondary case studies on the development of bans on killing of whales and use of animals for research might be able to show us the challenges and opportunities involved in how such changes may occur globally.

==Context and Status of Climate Change==

===Significance of the Issue===
* Human influence on the climate system is clear, and recent anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases are the highest in history. 
Industrialization and urbanization --> Anthropogenic GHGs emissions & Radiative forcing 

* Recent climate changes is projected to have widespread impacts on human and natural systems under various future emission scenarios. 
 

''Two perspectives:'' human's impact causing climate change & climate change's impact forcing human to adapt / make changes

'''Impacts (what is at stake?)'''

The most immediate effect of climate change is the increase of temperature, but the actual impacts of climate change stretch far beyond a “2 C° hotter summer”. 
The main impacts attributed to climate change include intensified extreme events: droughts, flooding, heat waves, cyclones & thunderstorms, and wildfires. As well as the following effects: 

1. Glacial melting & coastal erosion 

2. Water availability and distribution 

[[File:Arctic Glacial Melting and Future Projection.png|thumb|Arctic Glacial Melting and Future Projection]]

3. Disruption to ecosystem (abundance and activities) 

4. Impact on food production (a likely decrease in crop yield) 

5. Human health: pollution, spread of diseases 

{{#widget:YouTube|id=_EWOrZQ3L-c|height=315|width=420}}<ref > International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme, Retrieved on 05/19/2016 from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EWOrZQ3L-c&feature=youtu.be </ref> 
Source: International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme

* The first major conference on global climate change took place in Rio de Janeiro in 1982 and produced the Framework Convention on Climate Change. Subsequent rounds of negotiations have taken place in the form of preparatory meetings and subsequent conferences of states parties, including the 2009 Copenhagen Conference of the Parties to the Convention and the Paris Conference of 2015. 

While assessments of these negotiations vary somewhat, far and away the predominant view is that the results of these global negotiations to date fall far short of what is required to ensure the planet stays below the 2 degrees Celsius temperature rise above pre-industrial levels that had been widely accepted as the goal to avert the most disastrous impacts of climate change (note: that goal was revised to 1.5 degrees Celsius at Paris 2015; we have already hit 1 degree rise!). Contributors to this wiki are invited to post links to the most helpful concise summaries and assessments of the latest major international meetings and agreements, in this case the Paris meetings of December 2015.

==Major Events==

'''<big>1990: Kyoto Protocol</big> – more than 160 countries participated; target to reduce emission by 2012 '''

''*Side note: 55 developed countries participated; they constitute 55% of 1990’s emissions*'' 
 

'''Key control mechanisms'''
(=what international community has come up with in distributing sustainable duties) 

Primary--national measures

Additional:

* International Emission Trading 

* The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) 

''Defined in Article 12 of the Protocol, allows a country with an emission-reduction or emission-limitation commitment under the Kyoto Protocol (Annex B Party) to implement an emission-reduction project in developing countries. Such projects can earn saleable certified emission reduction (CER) credits, each equivalent to one tonne of CO2, which can be counted towards meeting Kyoto targets'' <ref name="kyoto"> UNFCCC, Kyoto Protocol Website. Retrieved on May 20th 2016 from: http://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol/mechanisms/clean_development_mechanism/items/2718.php </ref> 

3. Joint Implementation
''The mechanism known as “joint implementation,” defined in Article 6 of the Kyoto Protocol, allows a country with an emission reduction or limitation commitment under the Kyoto Protocol (Annex B Party) to earn emission reduction units (ERUs) from an emission-reduction or emission removal project in another Annex B Party, each equivalent to one tonne of CO2, which can be counted towards meeting its Kyoto target.
Joint implementation offers Parties a flexible and cost-efficient means of fulfilling a part of their Kyoto commitments, while the host Party benefits from foreign investment and technology transfer.''<ref name="kyoto"/>

'''<big>2012: Kyoto Protocol second commitment period -- Doha Amendment</big>'''
Essential Update: non-ratification of USA, and withdrawal of Canada 
Result: Amendment not yet in effect since 144 ratification is needed, but only has 65 so far.
<ref> UN Treaty Collection, 7 .c Doha Amendment to the Kyoto Protocol. Retrieved on May 20th, 2016 from: https://treaties.un.org/pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXVII-7-c&chapter=27&lang=en </ref> 
 

'''<big>2015: United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) at its 21st Session in Paris & Adoption of Paris Agreement</big>''' [http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/cp/climate/2015-paris-climate-talks/key-points-of-the-final-paris-climate-draft Key features] include: 1) National pledges of measures to curb emissions (not legally binding); 2) Goal to “reach global peaking of greenhouse gas emissions as soon as possible, recognizing that peaking will take longer for developing country parties, and to undertake rapid reductions thereafter;” 3) Review mechanism to take stock every five years; 4) Call to establish “a new collective quantified goal” of at least $100 billion a year in climate-related financing by 2020 to assist developing countries to transition to clean energy and deal climate change adaptation. 

'''<big>2016: UNFCCC 43rd Session</big>''' (Nairobi, Kenya, 11 – 13 April 2016), the IPCC Panel decided to accept the UNFCCC’s invitation to provide a special report in 2018 on the impacts of global warming of 1.5 ºC above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, and to prepare a Special Report on this topic '''in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development and efforts to eradicate poverty''' <ref> IPCC, Fifth Assessment. Retrieved on May 20th, 2016 from: http://www.ipcc.ch/report/sr15/ </ref>

==Recent Statistics on International Emissions==

[[File:Global anthropogenic CO2 emissions.png|x500px|:Global anthropogenic CO2 emissions]] 

[[File:Top 10 Countries - Gross Emission.png|x500px|Top 10 Countries - Gross Emission 2011]] 

[[File:Top 10 Countries - Per Capita Emission.png|x500px|Top 10 Countries - Per Capita Emission 2011]] 

[[File:2012 Emission Related Figures (Gross, Per Capita, Intensity & Benefit).png|x500px|2012 Emission Related Figures (Gross, Per Capita, Intensity & Benefit)]] 

==Climate Change Resources and References==
<references/>

==Additional Resources: Psychological Bias and Climate Change==
* [https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22329820-200-understand-faulty-thinking-to-tackle-climate-change/%20 Understand Faulty Thinking to Tackle Climate Change]. : by George Marshall - leading European experts in climate change communications.
* [http://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/dont-even-think-about-it-9781620401330/ Don't Even Think About It - Why Our Brains Are Wired to Ignore Climate Change]: George Marshall
* George Marshall's blog: http://climatedenial.org/
* Thinking Fast and Slow: Daniel Kahneman - Nobel Prize Winning economist looking at psychological principles in decision making: UBC Library [http://resolve.library.ubc.ca/cgi-bin/catsearch?bid=6983453 link]
* Video: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fle_FkILmEQ It's The End of the World and We Know It and I feel Fine]: Daniel Gilbert - Harvard Professor of Psychology talks about . TedX Academy

=====Comics to spice things up=====

http://cascadiaworkshops.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/climate-change-of-course.jpg 

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/501799583454791488/ 

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/386605949233228852/ 

==Political Science Perspectives==

<big>'''What Would A Political Scientist Do?'''</big>

===Collective Action Problem===
1) One approach to this issue is to think of it in terms of a collective action problem. The scale of the climate change problem is such that individual and voluntary actions by citizens and corporations are not adequate to satisfactorily address the issue. Government policy is required. But governments around the world have not been able to collectively agree on who should bear what responsibilities. Without such coordination, governments are reluctant to get too far ahead of other countries insofar as they worry about being taken advantage of by other countries if they implement policy changes like regulations that are perceived as carrying a negative economic impact, or spending on programs that incur costs not born by other countries. 
Moreover, some countries may think that their own individual contribution to climate change mitigation may not make that much of a difference, and thus be reticent to implement meaningful commitments. However, if many countries think this way, then too many will seek to avoid mitigation action, and too few will contribute. Some scholars in political science are skeptical that such collective action problems can be overcome by states, believing that states will protect their individual economic interests at the expense of the collective climate good. Others point to more successful efforts such as the '''Montreal Protocol''' dealing with ozone as demonstrating that sometimes states can create international institutions that coordinate their action, provide information and other benefits to produce shared commitments. 
At the latest round of global climate change negotiations in Paris in December of 2015, countries made individual (rather than collectively agreed upon) commitments of what they are prepared to do. For up to date information on these Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs), click [http://cait.wri.org/indc/ here]. So far the skeptics would seem right on this particular issue. Unless state economic interests happen to converge, or the most powerful states in the system use their influence to push through action (regarded as highly unlikely), there is not much room for optimism from this point of view, particularly since powerful corporations often have great influence on government positions, and many such corporations have tremendous investment in sustaining carbon-based economies. 

However, consider whether there is room here to explore how and why governments might act not just on short-term economic interests but on longer term interests and even other interests such as environmental ones? Some argue that the transition to a less carbon-intensive economies is technically and economically feasible.

 

===Individual Psychology and Ideology===

2) A second way of thinking about this issue focuses not on the international negotiating dynamics and state interests, but at the level of individual psychology and ideology. We know that humans have many biases when approaching complex social problems – to illustrate how they may operate importantly in this case, consider the following questions:

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Question'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
:: How important do you think it is that your government, along with other leading emitting countries, acts urgently to reduce greenhouse gas emissions?
A. Extremely

B. Very

C. Somewhat

D. Not very

E. unimportant

</div>
|}

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Question'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
:: ii) Over the past 12 months, have you:

A. Attended a rally or protest about climate change

B. Written to an elected official advocating climate action

C. Signed a petition advocating political action on climate change

D. Alternative involvements such as changing your lifestyle to more sustainable practices (riding a bicycle to work / school instead of taking a car, and so on).

E. None of the above

</div>
|}

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Also think about:'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
:: Do your own actions really match up to the level of concern you think climate change demands?

</div>
|}

Climate change is a kind of problem that is a bad match for some of our powerful [http://www.climateconviction.org/ psychological biases]. Namely, psychologists have found that:
* We tend to have trouble imagining a future drastically different from the present.
* We tend to block out complex problems that lack simple solutions.
* We tend to dislike delayed benefits and so are reluctant to sacrifice today for future gains
* We tend to find it harder to confront problems that creep up on us than emergencies that hit quickly.

Tom Toles has a great comic comparing humankinds' approach to climate change to the famous experiment that showed while frogs will jump out of a pot of hot water if they are dropped into it, they will sit in a pot of mild water until it gets so hot it boils - we can't post it here but google it and find it!

These biases may help explain why climate change appears to have not yet aroused sufficient citizen concern in enough countries to make it impossible for governments to continue to avoid making adequate commitments for climate change mitigation. On the other hand, there are other kinds of psychological triggers that perhaps could be tapped into to garner more support – for example, ''fear'' is often a very powerful, primal motivator. But framing climate change in fearful terms (perhaps like Al Gore's well-known film [https://www.algore.com/library/an-inconvenient-truth-dvd Inconvenient Truth] - see what reaction you have to this film) may lead to avoidance of the issue – are there empowering framings that might more successfully tap into some of our psychological tendencies? ' 

''Thanks to Professor [http://liu.arts.ubc.ca/profile/george-hoberg/ George Hoberg] of the Liu Institute from whose lectures some of this material is drawn.'' 

===Political Philosophy===
3) A final way of approaching this issue that will be considered here has been to think more like a political philosopher and identify what the most just or fair approach to this issue might be that all or most could agree to in terms of who has the '''responsibility''' to do what. These approaches focus on issues such as whose practices to date have caused global climate change, whose practices now are contributing to climate change, who has benefited from the industrialization processes that have produced climate change, and who has the ability to pay. So, should the industrialized countries whose activities have caused most of climate change - US, Canada, Europe, Japan - be the ones who bear the burdens of climate change mitigation? That is what China and India, for example, have argued. Or, should China now bear an equal or greater responsibility since it is now the single biggest emitter of climate change causing emissions? A key principle in such environmental negotiations including the 2015 Paris agreement has been the notion of accepting "common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities," which means that not all countries are in an equal position to address climate change. '''See what principle(s) you think you can come up with that might breakthrough the inability of the international community to produce a formulation that the key countries agree is fair and that would be more effective than current approaches.'''

A recent debate has been taking place on the desirability of focusing on issues of fairness and justice, or downplaying such concerns in favour of effectiveness. See the [http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/09/06/keohane-on-climate-what-price-equity-and-justice/ short article] by prominent International Relations scholar Robert Keohane.

Bring your ideas to discuss in brainstorming sessions in class: Are there other ways of approaching this issue that might be more productive, or avenues within the above approaches that might be useful? Previous generations have largely failed in this monumental challenge, it is up to your generation! The class activity pushes you to consider how to translate what you may think is a fair approach into practical ethics.

==Student Action Plans==
The following are links to action plans that are created by Political Science students. They are grouped according to who is most responsible for the proposed action to address climate change.

=== Advocacy Groups/Individual action ===
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Advocacy1|Group 1]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Advocacy2|Group 2]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Advocacy3|Group 3]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Advocacy4|Group 4]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Advocacy5|Group 5]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Advocacy6|Group 6]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Advocacy7|Group 7]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Advocacy8|Group 8]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Advocacy9|Group 9]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Advocacy10|Group 10]] 

===Industry/Technology/Corporations===
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Industry1|Group 1]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Industry2|Group 2]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Industry3|Group 3]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Industry4|Group 4]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Industry5|Group 5]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Industry6|Group 6]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Industry7|Group 7]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Industry8|Group 8]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Industry9|Group 9]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Industry10|Group 10]] 

=== Local / Municipal Governments ===
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Municipal1|Group 1]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Municipal2|Group 2]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Municipal3|Group 3]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Municipal4|Group 4]]
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Municipal5|Group 5]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Municipal6|Group 6]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Municipal7|Group 7]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Municipal8|Group 8]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Municipal9|Group 9]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Municipal10|Group 10]] 

=== Regional / Provincial / State Governments ===
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Regional1|Group 1]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Regional2|Group 2]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Regional3|Group 3]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Regional4|Group 4]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Regional5|Group 5]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Regional6|Group 6]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Regional7|Group 7]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Regional8|Group 8]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Regional9|Group 9]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Regional10|Group 10]] 

=== National Governments ===
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/National1|Group 1]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/National2|Group 2]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/National3|Group 3]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/National4|Group 4]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/National5|Group 5]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/National6|Group 6]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/National7|Group 7]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/National8|Group 8]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/National9|Group 9]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/National10|Group 10]] 

=== International Organizations / Agreements ===
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/International1|Group 1]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/International2|Group 2]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/International3|Group 3]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/International4|Group 4]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/International5|Group 5]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/International6|Group 6]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/International7|Group 7]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/International8|Group 8]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/International9|Group 9]] 
[[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/International10|Group 10]] 

[[Category: Open Case Studies]]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/Resources/Class Activity/Student Handout

2016-10-14T20:05:31Z

RichardPrice: /* How should we address climate change? - Class activity */

== How should we address climate change? - Class activity ==

In groups of 3-4, write up one possible political strategy to address the ethical challenges or opportunities to address climate change. Write your response directly into [[Documentation:Open_Case_Studies/Political_Science/Template|the wiki]] by clicking on one of the links to the templates for action plans that are at the bottom in the the last section under "Student Action Plans." Depending on who your group believes should be responsible for the most effective and ethical actions to address climate change, select an appropriate group and complete as much in the sections as you are able. To contribute, make that you are logged into the wiki with your CWL, and click "edit". Do not worry about incomplete sections – rather, clearly mark areas with unanswered questions for others (or yourselves) to complete in the future.

If your proposed solution is based in a locality, specify which location. For example, if your group bases its actions in regional-level governments, specify which government you are talking about, e.g. the British Columbian Government. You may also choose a specific movement or advocacy group to focus your analysis.

'''In your proposal, you may find it helpful to consider the following questions:'''

# Which principles (in addressing global environmental ethical challenges, like climate change) are the most relevant and most important to you?
# What do you think is the most ethical approach to addressing climate change?
# Who is most responsible for addressing climate change? Citizens, corporations, governments, international organizations? Are there some groups who bear more responsibility than others? Why?
# At which level is political action most needed? Most effective? Individual, municipal, regional, national, international or global? Why?
# What kinds of actions are most effective? For example, climate change was highlighted during the recent Opening Ceremonies at the Olympic Games in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Are actions such as that useful and effective in mobilizing political action?
# Who stands to gain from your approach? Who stands to lose? How can you make it seem fair or at least acceptable to as many concerned as possible?
# How will your proposed actions be enforced and/or otherwise get sufficient buy-in? Who is responsible for ensuring compliance?
# What are the steps you need to take to carry about your proposed plan?
# What challenges/barriers to your plan do you anticipate? How will you address these issues?

Before the next lecture class on Monday, please review the responses of other groups and be prepared to discuss the pros and cons of various proposals: which ones would you support as likely to gain the most traction?

This activity forms part of your participation grade in the course.

'''For the links to the action plans, see the bottom of the editable wiki version of the [[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Template|case study]] .'''

=== Additional Resources ===
* Web version of the case study providing an overview of the issue on the UBC Open Case Studies project site: http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/global-climate-justice/

* Powerpoint presentation of brief overview of international environmental legislation, bodies (from Stockholm Conference to United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development 2012): http://rcen.ca/sites/default/files/uploads/earth_summit_presentation.pdf

* Government of Canada's Climate Change information page: http://www.climatechange.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=F2DB1FBE-1

* TEDtalk - Al Gore: The case for optimism on climate change (2016): http://www.ted.com/talks/al_gore_the_case_for_optimism_on_climate_change

* TEDtalk - Gordon Brown: Global ethic vs. national interest (2009): http://www.ted.com/talks/gordon_brown_on_global_ethic_vs_national_interest

[[Category:Open Case Studies]]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/Resources/Class Activity/Student Handout

2016-10-14T20:04:46Z

RichardPrice: /* How should we address climate change? - Class activity */

== How should we address climate change? - Class activity ==

In groups of 3-4, write up one possible political strategy to address the ethical challenges or opportunities to address climate change. Write your response directly into [[Documentation:Open_Case_Studies/Political_Science/Template|the wiki]] by clicking on one of the links to templates for action plans that are at the bottom in the the last section under "Student Action Plans." Depending on who your group believes should be responsible for the most effective and ethical actions to address climate change, select an appropriate group and complete as much in the sections as you are able. To contribute, make that you are logged into the wiki with your CWL, and click "edit". Do not worry about incomplete sections – rather, clearly mark areas with unanswered questions for others (or yourselves) to complete in the future.

If your proposed solution is based in a locality, specify which location. For example, if your group bases its actions in regional-level governments, specify which government you are talking about, e.g. the British Columbian Government. You may also choose a specific movement or advocacy group to focus your analysis.

'''In your proposal, you may find it helpful to consider the following questions:'''

# Which principles (in addressing global environmental ethical challenges, like climate change) are the most relevant and most important to you?
# What do you think is the most ethical approach to addressing climate change?
# Who is most responsible for addressing climate change? Citizens, corporations, governments, international organizations? Are there some groups who bear more responsibility than others? Why?
# At which level is political action most needed? Most effective? Individual, municipal, regional, national, international or global? Why?
# What kinds of actions are most effective? For example, climate change was highlighted during the recent Opening Ceremonies at the Olympic Games in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Are actions such as that useful and effective in mobilizing political action?
# Who stands to gain from your approach? Who stands to lose? How can you make it seem fair or at least acceptable to as many concerned as possible?
# How will your proposed actions be enforced and/or otherwise get sufficient buy-in? Who is responsible for ensuring compliance?
# What are the steps you need to take to carry about your proposed plan?
# What challenges/barriers to your plan do you anticipate? How will you address these issues?

Before the next lecture class on Monday, please review the responses of other groups and be prepared to discuss the pros and cons of various proposals: which ones would you support as likely to gain the most traction?

This activity forms part of your participation grade in the course.

'''For the links to the action plans, see the bottom of the editable wiki version of the [[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Template|case study]] .'''

=== Additional Resources ===
* Web version of the case study providing an overview of the issue on the UBC Open Case Studies project site: http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/global-climate-justice/

* Powerpoint presentation of brief overview of international environmental legislation, bodies (from Stockholm Conference to United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development 2012): http://rcen.ca/sites/default/files/uploads/earth_summit_presentation.pdf

* Government of Canada's Climate Change information page: http://www.climatechange.gc.ca/default.asp?lang=En&n=F2DB1FBE-1

* TEDtalk - Al Gore: The case for optimism on climate change (2016): http://www.ted.com/talks/al_gore_the_case_for_optimism_on_climate_change

* TEDtalk - Gordon Brown: Global ethic vs. national interest (2009): http://www.ted.com/talks/gordon_brown_on_global_ethic_vs_national_interest

[[Category:Open Case Studies]]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/Resources/Class Activity/Guide

2016-10-14T19:57:08Z

RichardPrice: /* Marked assignment as Analytical Paper */

== POLI373: Environmental Ethics Class Activity - Information ==

== How should we address climate change? ==

After successfully completing this assignment, students should be able to

# Collaboratively add to and edit content using the UBC Wiki
# Contribute ideas to class discussions on the ethical aspects of climate change
# Discuss and appreciate the complexities around international negotiations and different levels of appropriate action from individual, local to global
# Collaborate with peers and their professor to develop proposals that could better address the ethical opportunities and obstacles for addressing climate change

=== Preparation ===

In order to complete the in-class activity, students must complete the following tasks:
* Review wiki “[http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/wiki-guide/ how-to” videos and tutorials] (see below also).

* Read and understand required readings: 1) Chapter 7 from Global Ethics textbook; & 2) background material on the Open Case Studies Climate Justice site: http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/global-climate-justice/

* Bring a laptop or other suitable device to discussion sections on Friday so you can edit and add your proposal to the wiki (you will be able to share in groups if you don't have one yourself).

=== Activity ===

This activity will take place over two classes, with the bulk of the activity occurring in tutorial on Friday, with a follow-up discussion in the following lecture.

==== Tutorial: Friday October 21 ====
* Groups of 4-5 students will create proposals to address ethical obstacles or opportunities to address global climate change
* Proposals will be written directly into the wiki
* Students will be made aware that anyone can view and/or edit their wiki pages
* Students need to read other proposals before following class on Monday

==== Lecture: Monday October 24 ====
* During lecture on the topic, professor will facilitate discussion on the action plans
** Links to action plans are available at the bottom of the Global Climate Justice case study: http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/global-climate-justice/
* What are the merits of each?
* Can the class come to a compromise of the best approaches to address ethical obstacles and opportunities to address climate change?
* Students are encouraged to edit the wiki after the class discussion

=== Future classes, suggestions for additional activities ===

==== Marked assignment as Analytical Paper ====
Students have the option to analyze and respond to criticisms of their proposal as an alternative to the usual format of the Analytical Paper which would be to engage in an analysis of the required readings on environmental ethics (Chapter 7 Global Ethics text & background information on the [http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/global-climate-justice/ Climate Justice site]). This topic paper should not be a simple presentation of the proposal, but be self-reflective of the process of collaboration in the creation of the proposal and others' response to it and analyze weaknesses and strengths of the proposal.

'''Note on Due Dates''': If you choose to the above option of an Analytical Paper based on the proposal, due to the nature of the assignment this paper can be handed in up to '''Friday, October 28'''. If you do a regular analytical paper - that is, analyze the required readings, then it is due the standard date of Friday October 21.

==== Future Classes ====
In a future iteration of this course, rather than have students create new proposals in the tutorial, students in groups can edit and update existing proposals as well. Every other step of the activity should remain the same.

=== Information for Students ===
Before tutorial on October 21, you should visit [http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/wiki-guide/ "How to Use the UBC Wiki"]

The instructions for the in-class activity are at the following link:
# [[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Resources/Class Activity/Student Handout|“How should we address climate change? - Class Activity”]]

[[Category:Open Case Studies]]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/Resources/Class Activity/Guide

2016-10-14T19:56:01Z

RichardPrice: /* Preparation */

== POLI373: Environmental Ethics Class Activity - Information ==

== How should we address climate change? ==

After successfully completing this assignment, students should be able to

# Collaboratively add to and edit content using the UBC Wiki
# Contribute ideas to class discussions on the ethical aspects of climate change
# Discuss and appreciate the complexities around international negotiations and different levels of appropriate action from individual, local to global
# Collaborate with peers and their professor to develop proposals that could better address the ethical opportunities and obstacles for addressing climate change

=== Preparation ===

In order to complete the in-class activity, students must complete the following tasks:
* Review wiki “[http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/wiki-guide/ how-to” videos and tutorials] (see below also).

* Read and understand required readings: 1) Chapter 7 from Global Ethics textbook; & 2) background material on the Open Case Studies Climate Justice site: http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/global-climate-justice/

* Bring a laptop or other suitable device to discussion sections on Friday so you can edit and add your proposal to the wiki (you will be able to share in groups if you don't have one yourself).

=== Activity ===

This activity will take place over two classes, with the bulk of the activity occurring in tutorial on Friday, with a follow-up discussion in the following lecture.

==== Tutorial: Friday October 21 ====
* Groups of 4-5 students will create proposals to address ethical obstacles or opportunities to address global climate change
* Proposals will be written directly into the wiki
* Students will be made aware that anyone can view and/or edit their wiki pages
* Students need to read other proposals before following class on Monday

==== Lecture: Monday October 24 ====
* During lecture on the topic, professor will facilitate discussion on the action plans
** Links to action plans are available at the bottom of the Global Climate Justice case study: http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/global-climate-justice/
* What are the merits of each?
* Can the class come to a compromise of the best approaches to address ethical obstacles and opportunities to address climate change?
* Students are encouraged to edit the wiki after the class discussion

=== Future classes, suggestions for additional activities ===

==== Marked assignment as Analytical Paper ====
Students have the option to analyze and respond to criticisms of their proposal as an alternative to the usual format of the Analytical Paper which would be to engage in an analysis of the required readings on environmental ethics (Chapter 7 Global Ethics text & background on wiki). This topic paper should not be a simple presentation of the proposal, but be self-reflective of the process of collaboration in the creation of the proposal and others' response to it and analyze weaknesses and strengths of the proposal.

'''Note on Due Dates''': If you choose to the above option of an Analytical Paper based on the proposal, due to the nature of the assignment this paper can be handed in up to '''Friday, October 28'''. If you do a regular analytical paper - that is, analyze the required readings, then it is due the standard date of Friday October 21.

==== Future Classes ====
In a future iteration of this course, rather than have students create new proposals in the tutorial, students in groups can edit and update existing proposals as well. Every other step of the activity should remain the same.

=== Information for Students ===
Before tutorial on October 21, you should visit [http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/wiki-guide/ "How to Use the UBC Wiki"]

The instructions for the in-class activity are at the following link:
# [[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Resources/Class Activity/Student Handout|“How should we address climate change? - Class Activity”]]

[[Category:Open Case Studies]]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/Resources/Class Activity/Guide

2016-10-14T19:55:11Z

RichardPrice: /* Preparation */

== POLI373: Environmental Ethics Class Activity - Information ==

== How should we address climate change? ==

After successfully completing this assignment, students should be able to

# Collaboratively add to and edit content using the UBC Wiki
# Contribute ideas to class discussions on the ethical aspects of climate change
# Discuss and appreciate the complexities around international negotiations and different levels of appropriate action from individual, local to global
# Collaborate with peers and their professor to develop proposals that could better address the ethical opportunities and obstacles for addressing climate change

=== Preparation ===

In order to complete the in-class activity, students must complete the following tasks:
* Review wiki “[http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/wiki-guide/ how-to” videos and tutorials] (see below also).

* Read and understand required readings: 1) Chapter 7 from Global Ethics textbook; & 2) background material on the Open Case Studies Climate Justice wiki: http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/global-climate-justice/

* Bring a laptop or other suitable device to discussion sections on Friday so you can edit and add your proposal to the wiki (you will be able to share in groups if you don't have one yourself).

=== Activity ===

This activity will take place over two classes, with the bulk of the activity occurring in tutorial on Friday, with a follow-up discussion in the following lecture.

==== Tutorial: Friday October 21 ====
* Groups of 4-5 students will create proposals to address ethical obstacles or opportunities to address global climate change
* Proposals will be written directly into the wiki
* Students will be made aware that anyone can view and/or edit their wiki pages
* Students need to read other proposals before following class on Monday

==== Lecture: Monday October 24 ====
* During lecture on the topic, professor will facilitate discussion on the action plans
** Links to action plans are available at the bottom of the Global Climate Justice case study: http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/global-climate-justice/
* What are the merits of each?
* Can the class come to a compromise of the best approaches to address ethical obstacles and opportunities to address climate change?
* Students are encouraged to edit the wiki after the class discussion

=== Future classes, suggestions for additional activities ===

==== Marked assignment as Analytical Paper ====
Students have the option to analyze and respond to criticisms of their proposal as an alternative to the usual format of the Analytical Paper which would be to engage in an analysis of the required readings on environmental ethics (Chapter 7 Global Ethics text & background on wiki). This topic paper should not be a simple presentation of the proposal, but be self-reflective of the process of collaboration in the creation of the proposal and others' response to it and analyze weaknesses and strengths of the proposal.

'''Note on Due Dates''': If you choose to the above option of an Analytical Paper based on the proposal, due to the nature of the assignment this paper can be handed in up to '''Friday, October 28'''. If you do a regular analytical paper - that is, analyze the required readings, then it is due the standard date of Friday October 21.

==== Future Classes ====
In a future iteration of this course, rather than have students create new proposals in the tutorial, students in groups can edit and update existing proposals as well. Every other step of the activity should remain the same.

=== Information for Students ===
Before tutorial on October 21, you should visit [http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/wiki-guide/ "How to Use the UBC Wiki"]

The instructions for the in-class activity are at the following link:
# [[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Resources/Class Activity/Student Handout|“How should we address climate change? - Class Activity”]]

[[Category:Open Case Studies]]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/Resources/Class Activity/Guide

2016-10-14T19:53:01Z

RichardPrice: /* Marked assignment as Analytical Paper */

== POLI373: Environmental Ethics Class Activity - Information ==

== How should we address climate change? ==

After successfully completing this assignment, students should be able to

# Collaboratively add to and edit content using the UBC Wiki
# Contribute ideas to class discussions on the ethical aspects of climate change
# Discuss and appreciate the complexities around international negotiations and different levels of appropriate action from individual, local to global
# Collaborate with peers and their professor to develop proposals that could better address the ethical opportunities and obstacles for addressing climate change

=== Preparation ===

In order to complete the in-class activity, students must complete the following tasks:
* Review wiki “how-to” videos and tutorials (see below).

* Read and understand required readings: 1) Chapter 7 from Global Ethics textbook; & 2) background material on the Open Case Studies Climate Justice wiki: http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/global-climate-justice/

* Bring a laptop or other suitable device to discussion sections on Friday so you can edit and add your proposal to the wiki (you will be able to share in groups if you don't have one yourself).

=== Activity ===

This activity will take place over two classes, with the bulk of the activity occurring in tutorial on Friday, with a follow-up discussion in the following lecture.

==== Tutorial: Friday October 21 ====
* Groups of 4-5 students will create proposals to address ethical obstacles or opportunities to address global climate change
* Proposals will be written directly into the wiki
* Students will be made aware that anyone can view and/or edit their wiki pages
* Students need to read other proposals before following class on Monday

==== Lecture: Monday October 24 ====
* During lecture on the topic, professor will facilitate discussion on the action plans
** Links to action plans are available at the bottom of the Global Climate Justice case study: http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/global-climate-justice/
* What are the merits of each?
* Can the class come to a compromise of the best approaches to address ethical obstacles and opportunities to address climate change?
* Students are encouraged to edit the wiki after the class discussion

=== Future classes, suggestions for additional activities ===

==== Marked assignment as Analytical Paper ====
Students have the option to analyze and respond to criticisms of their proposal as an alternative to the usual format of the Analytical Paper which would be to engage in an analysis of the required readings on environmental ethics (Chapter 7 Global Ethics text & background on wiki). This topic paper should not be a simple presentation of the proposal, but be self-reflective of the process of collaboration in the creation of the proposal and others' response to it and analyze weaknesses and strengths of the proposal.

'''Note on Due Dates''': If you choose to the above option of an Analytical Paper based on the proposal, due to the nature of the assignment this paper can be handed in up to '''Friday, October 28'''. If you do a regular analytical paper - that is, analyze the required readings, then it is due the standard date of Friday October 21.

==== Future Classes ====
In a future iteration of this course, rather than have students create new proposals in the tutorial, students in groups can edit and update existing proposals as well. Every other step of the activity should remain the same.

=== Information for Students ===
Before tutorial on October 21, you should visit [http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/wiki-guide/ "How to Use the UBC Wiki"]

The instructions for the in-class activity are at the following link:
# [[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Resources/Class Activity/Student Handout|“How should we address climate change? - Class Activity”]]

[[Category:Open Case Studies]]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/Resources/Class Activity/Guide

2016-10-14T19:52:28Z

RichardPrice: /* Marked assignment as Analytical Paper */

== POLI373: Environmental Ethics Class Activity - Information ==

== How should we address climate change? ==

After successfully completing this assignment, students should be able to

# Collaboratively add to and edit content using the UBC Wiki
# Contribute ideas to class discussions on the ethical aspects of climate change
# Discuss and appreciate the complexities around international negotiations and different levels of appropriate action from individual, local to global
# Collaborate with peers and their professor to develop proposals that could better address the ethical opportunities and obstacles for addressing climate change

=== Preparation ===

In order to complete the in-class activity, students must complete the following tasks:
* Review wiki “how-to” videos and tutorials (see below).

* Read and understand required readings: 1) Chapter 7 from Global Ethics textbook; & 2) background material on the Open Case Studies Climate Justice wiki: http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/global-climate-justice/

* Bring a laptop or other suitable device to discussion sections on Friday so you can edit and add your proposal to the wiki (you will be able to share in groups if you don't have one yourself).

=== Activity ===

This activity will take place over two classes, with the bulk of the activity occurring in tutorial on Friday, with a follow-up discussion in the following lecture.

==== Tutorial: Friday October 21 ====
* Groups of 4-5 students will create proposals to address ethical obstacles or opportunities to address global climate change
* Proposals will be written directly into the wiki
* Students will be made aware that anyone can view and/or edit their wiki pages
* Students need to read other proposals before following class on Monday

==== Lecture: Monday October 24 ====
* During lecture on the topic, professor will facilitate discussion on the action plans
** Links to action plans are available at the bottom of the Global Climate Justice case study: http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/global-climate-justice/
* What are the merits of each?
* Can the class come to a compromise of the best approaches to address ethical obstacles and opportunities to address climate change?
* Students are encouraged to edit the wiki after the class discussion

=== Future classes, suggestions for additional activities ===

==== Marked assignment as Analytical Paper ====
Students have the option to analyze and respond to criticisms of their proposal as an alternative to the usual format of the Analytical Paper which would be to engage in an analysis of the required readings on environmental ethics (Chapter 7 Global Ethics text & background on wiki). This topic paper should not be a simple presentation of the proposal, but be self-reflective of the process of collaboration in the creation of the proposal and others' response to it and analyze weaknesses and strengths of the proposal.

'''Note on Due Dates''': If you choose to the above option of an Analytical Paper based on the proposal, due to the nature of the assignment this paper can be handed in up to '''Friday, October 28'''. If you do a regular analytical paper - that is, analyze the required readings, then it is due the standard date of "Friday October 21".

==== Future Classes ====
In a future iteration of this course, rather than have students create new proposals in the tutorial, students in groups can edit and update existing proposals as well. Every other step of the activity should remain the same.

=== Information for Students ===
Before tutorial on October 21, you should visit [http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/wiki-guide/ "How to Use the UBC Wiki"]

The instructions for the in-class activity are at the following link:
# [[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Resources/Class Activity/Student Handout|“How should we address climate change? - Class Activity”]]

[[Category:Open Case Studies]]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/Resources/Class Activity/Guide

2016-10-14T19:45:57Z

RichardPrice: /* Tutorial: Friday October 21 */

== POLI373: Environmental Ethics Class Activity - Information ==

== How should we address climate change? ==

After successfully completing this assignment, students should be able to

# Collaboratively add to and edit content using the UBC Wiki
# Contribute ideas to class discussions on the ethical aspects of climate change
# Discuss and appreciate the complexities around international negotiations and different levels of appropriate action from individual, local to global
# Collaborate with peers and their professor to develop proposals that could better address the ethical opportunities and obstacles for addressing climate change

=== Preparation ===

In order to complete the in-class activity, students must complete the following tasks:
* Review wiki “how-to” videos and tutorials (see below).

* Read and understand required readings: 1) Chapter 7 from Global Ethics textbook; & 2) background material on the Open Case Studies Climate Justice wiki: http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/global-climate-justice/

* Bring a laptop or other suitable device to discussion sections on Friday so you can edit and add your proposal to the wiki (you will be able to share in groups if you don't have one yourself).

=== Activity ===

This activity will take place over two classes, with the bulk of the activity occurring in tutorial on Friday, with a follow-up discussion in the following lecture.

==== Tutorial: Friday October 21 ====
* Groups of 4-5 students will create proposals to address ethical obstacles or opportunities to address global climate change
* Proposals will be written directly into the wiki
* Students will be made aware that anyone can view and/or edit their wiki pages
* Students need to read other proposals before following class on Monday

==== Lecture: Monday October 24 ====
* During lecture on the topic, professor will facilitate discussion on the action plans
** Links to action plans are available at the bottom of the Global Climate Justice case study: http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/global-climate-justice/
* What are the merits of each?
* Can the class come to a compromise of the best approaches to address ethical obstacles and opportunities to address climate change?
* Students are encouraged to edit the wiki after the class discussion

=== Future classes, suggestions for additional activities ===

==== Marked assignment as Analytical Paper ====
Students may analyze and respond to their proposal as an alternative to a topic paper on environmental ethics. This topic paper should not be a simple presentation of the proposal, but be reflective and analytical of the process of collaboration in the creation of the proposal. As a critique, it should analyze weaknesses and strengths of their proposal.
If you choose to write your Analytical Paper on Environmental Ethics, due to the nature of the assignment this paper is due on '''Friday, October 28''' (rather than Friday October 21).

==== Future Classes ====
In a future iteration of this course, rather than have students create new proposals in the tutorial, students in groups can edit and update existing proposals as well. Every other step of the activity should remain the same.

=== Information for Students ===
Before tutorial on October 21, you should visit [http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/wiki-guide/ "How to Use the UBC Wiki"]

The instructions for the in-class activity are at the following link:
# [[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Resources/Class Activity/Student Handout|“How should we address climate change? - Class Activity”]]

[[Category:Open Case Studies]]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/Resources/Class Activity/Guide

2016-10-14T19:44:49Z

RichardPrice: /* Preparation */

== POLI373: Environmental Ethics Class Activity - Information ==

== How should we address climate change? ==

After successfully completing this assignment, students should be able to

# Collaboratively add to and edit content using the UBC Wiki
# Contribute ideas to class discussions on the ethical aspects of climate change
# Discuss and appreciate the complexities around international negotiations and different levels of appropriate action from individual, local to global
# Collaborate with peers and their professor to develop proposals that could better address the ethical opportunities and obstacles for addressing climate change

=== Preparation ===

In order to complete the in-class activity, students must complete the following tasks:
* Review wiki “how-to” videos and tutorials (see below).

* Read and understand required readings: 1) Chapter 7 from Global Ethics textbook; & 2) background material on the Open Case Studies Climate Justice wiki: http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/global-climate-justice/

* Bring a laptop or other suitable device to discussion sections on Friday so you can edit and add your proposal to the wiki (you will be able to share in groups if you don't have one yourself).

=== Activity ===

This activity will take place over two classes, with the bulk of the activity occurring in tutorial on Friday, with a follow-up discussion in the following lecture.

==== Tutorial: Friday October 21 ====
* Groups of 3-4 students will create proposals to address ethical obstacles or opportunities to address global climate change
* Proposals will be written directly into the wiki
* Students will be made aware that anyone can view and/or edit their wiki pages
* Students need to read other proposals before following class on Monday

==== Lecture: Monday October 24 ====
* During lecture on the topic, professor will facilitate discussion on the action plans
** Links to action plans are available at the bottom of the Global Climate Justice case study: http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/global-climate-justice/
* What are the merits of each?
* Can the class come to a compromise of the best approaches to address ethical obstacles and opportunities to address climate change?
* Students are encouraged to edit the wiki after the class discussion

=== Future classes, suggestions for additional activities ===

==== Marked assignment as Analytical Paper ====
Students may analyze and respond to their proposal as an alternative to a topic paper on environmental ethics. This topic paper should not be a simple presentation of the proposal, but be reflective and analytical of the process of collaboration in the creation of the proposal. As a critique, it should analyze weaknesses and strengths of their proposal.
If you choose to write your Analytical Paper on Environmental Ethics, due to the nature of the assignment this paper is due on '''Friday, October 28''' (rather than Friday October 21).

==== Future Classes ====
In a future iteration of this course, rather than have students create new proposals in the tutorial, students in groups can edit and update existing proposals as well. Every other step of the activity should remain the same.

=== Information for Students ===
Before tutorial on October 21, you should visit [http://cases.sites.olt.ubc.ca/wiki-guide/ "How to Use the UBC Wiki"]

The instructions for the in-class activity are at the following link:
# [[Documentation:Open Case Studies/Resources/Class Activity/Student Handout|“How should we address climate change? - Class Activity”]]

[[Category:Open Case Studies]]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Template

2016-10-06T17:02:37Z

RichardPrice: /* Political Philosophy */

=Global Climate Justice=

==Goal and Objectives==

To stimulate students to try to generate original ways to approach or frame the issue of global climate change that might provide a more productive path forward.

==Introduction==

===Framing the Problem===
What distribution of adjustment costs for climate change mitigation is fair, and should be acceptable to the most (important) countries?

Are there ways of framing the issue that could be more effective in galvanizing effective action?

Are problem-solving approaches to negotiating such environmental problems inadequate, such that more holistic ecological ethical approaches are needed? How feasible might be the adoption of such perspectives? Secondary case studies on the development of bans on killing of whales and use of animals for research might be able to show us the challenges and opportunities involved in how such changes may occur globally.

==Context and Status of Climate Change==

===Significance of the Issue===
* Human influence on the climate system is clear, and recent anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases are the highest in history. 
Industrialization and urbanization --> Anthropogenic GHGs emissions & Radiative forcing 

* Recent climate changes is projected to have widespread impacts on human and natural systems under various future emission scenarios. 
 

''Two perspectives:'' human's impact causing climate change & climate change's impact forcing human to adapt / make changes

'''Impacts (what is at stake?)'''

The most immediate effect of climate change is the increase of temperature, but the actual impacts of climate change stretch far beyond a “2 C° hotter summer”. 
The main impacts attributed to climate change include intensified extreme events: droughts, flooding, heat waves, cyclones & thunderstorms, and wildfires. As well as the following effects: 

1. Glacial melting & coastal erosion 

2. Water availability and distribution 

[[File:Arctic Glacial Melting and Future Projection.png|thumb|Arctic Glacial Melting and Future Projection]]

3. Disruption to ecosystem (abundance and activities) 

4. Impact on food production (a likely decrease in crop yield) 

5. Human health: pollution, spread of diseases 

{{#widget:YouTube|id=_EWOrZQ3L-c|height=315|width=420}}<ref > International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme, Retrieved on 05/19/2016 from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EWOrZQ3L-c&feature=youtu.be </ref>
Source: International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme

 

* The first major conference on global climate change took place in Rio de Janeiro in 1982 and produced the Framework Convention on Climate Change. Subsequent rounds of negotiations have taken place in the form of preparatory meetings and subsequent conferences of states parties, including the 2009 Copenhagen Conference of the Parties to the Convention and the Paris Conference of 2015. 

While assessments of these negotiations vary somewhat, far and away the predominant view is that the results of these global negotiations to date fall far short of what is required to ensure the planet stays below the 2 degrees Celsius temperature rise above pre-industrial levels that had been widely accepted as the goal to avert the most disastrous impacts of climate change (note: that goal was revised to 1.5 degrees Celsius at Paris 2015; we have already hit 1 degree rise!). Contributors to this wiki are invited to post links to the most helpful concise summaries and assessments of the latest major international meetings and agreements, in this case the Paris meetings of December 2015.

=== Major Events: ===

'''<big>1990: Kyoto Protocol</big> – more than 160 countries participated; target to reduce emission by 2012 '''

''*Side note: 55 developed countries participated; they constitute 55% of 1990’s emission*'' 
 

'''Key control mechanisms'''
(=what international community has come up with in distributing sustainable duties) 

Primary--national measures

Additional:

* International Emission Trading 

* The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) 

''Defined in Article 12 of the Protocol, allows a country with an emission-reduction or emission-limitation commitment under the Kyoto Protocol (Annex B Party) to implement an emission-reduction project in developing countries. Such projects can earn saleable certified emission reduction (CER) credits, each equivalent to one tonne of CO2, which can be counted towards meeting Kyoto targets'' <ref name="kyoto"> UNFCCC, Kyoto Protocol Website. Retrieved on May 20th 2016 from: http://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol/mechanisms/clean_development_mechanism/items/2718.php </ref> 

3. Joint Implementation
''The mechanism known as “joint implementation,” defined in Article 6 of the Kyoto Protocol, allows a country with an emission reduction or limitation commitment under the Kyoto Protocol (Annex B Party) to earn emission reduction units (ERUs) from an emission-reduction or emission removal project in another Annex B Party, each equivalent to one tonne of CO2, which can be counted towards meeting its Kyoto target.
Joint implementation offers Parties a flexible and cost-efficient means of fulfilling a part of their Kyoto commitments, while the host Party benefits from foreign investment and technology transfer.''<ref name="kyoto"/>

'''<big>2012: Kyoto Protocol second commitment period -- Doha Amendment</big>'''
Essential Update: non-ratification of USA, and withdrawal of Canada 
Result: Amendment not yet in effect since 144 ratification is needed, but only has 65 so far.
<ref> UN Treaty Collection, 7 .c Doha Amendment to the Kyoto Protocol. Retrieved on May 20th, 2016 from: https://treaties.un.org/pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXVII-7-c&chapter=27&lang=en </ref> 
 
'''<big>2015: United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) at its 21st Session in Paris & Adoption of Paris Agreement</big> '''
 [http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/cp/climate/2015-paris-climate-talks/key-points-of-the-final-paris-climate-draft Key features] include: 1) National pledges of measures to curb emissions (not legally binding); 2) Goal to “reach global peaking of greenhouse gas emissions as soon as possible, recognizing that peaking will take longer for developing country parties, and to undertake rapid reductions thereafter;” 3) Review mechanism to take stock every five years; 4) Call to establish “a new collective quantified goal” of at least $100 billion a year in climate-related financing by 2020 to assist developing countries to transition to clean energy and deal climate change adaptation. 

'''<big>2016: UNFCCC 43rd Session</big>''' (Nairobi, Kenya, 11 – 13 April 2016), the IPCC Panel decided to accept the UNFCCC’s invitation to provide a special report in 2018 on the impacts of global warming of 1.5 ºC above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, and to prepare a Special Report on this topic '''in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development and efforts to eradicate poverty''' <ref> IPCC, Fifth Assessment. Retrieved on May 20th, 2016 from: http://www.ipcc.ch/report/sr15/ </ref>

==Recent Statistics on International Emissions==

[[File:Global anthropogenic CO2 emissions.png|x500px|:Global anthropogenic CO2 emissions]] 

[[File:Top 10 Countries - Gross Emission.png|x500px|Top 10 Countries - Gross Emission 2011]] 

[[File:Top 10 Countries - Per Capita Emission.png|x500px|Top 10 Countries - Per Capita Emission 2011]] 

[[File:2012 Emission Related Figures (Gross, Per Capita, Intensity & Benefit).png|x500px|2012 Emission Related Figures (Gross, Per Capita, Intensity & Benefit)]] 

==Climate Change Resources and References==
<references/>

==Additional Resources: Psychological Bias and Climate Change==
* [https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22329820-200-understand-faulty-thinking-to-tackle-climate-change/%20 Understand Faulty Thinking to Tackle Climate Change]. : by George Marshall - leading European experts in climate change communications.
* [http://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/dont-even-think-about-it-9781620401330/ Don't Even Think About It - Why Our Brains Are Wired to Ignore Climate Change]: George Marshall
* George Marshall's blog: http://climatedenial.org/
* Thinking Fast and Slow: Daniel Kahneman - Nobel Prize Winning economist looking at psychological principles in decision making: UBC Library [http://resolve.library.ubc.ca/cgi-bin/catsearch?bid=6983453 link]
* Video: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fle_FkILmEQ It's The End of the World and We Know It and I feel Fine]: Daniel Gilbert - Harvard Professor of Psychology talks about . TedX Academy

=====Comics to spice things up=====

http://cascadiaworkshops.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/climate-change-of-course.jpg 

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/501799583454791488/ 

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/386605949233228852/ 

==Political Science Perspectives==

<big>'''What Would A Political Scientist Do?'''</big>

===Collective Action Problem===
1) One approach to this issue is to think of it in terms of a collective action problem. The scale of the climate change problem is such that individual and voluntary actions by citizens and corporations are not adequate to satisfactorily address the issue. Government policy is required. But governments around the world have not been able to collectively agree on who should bear what responsibilities. Without such coordination, governments are reluctant to get too far ahead of other countries insofar as they worry about being taken advantage of by other countries if they implement policy changes like regulations that are perceived as carrying a negative economic impact, or spending on programs that incur costs not born by other countries. 
Moreover, some countries may think that their own individual contribution to climate change mitigation may not make that much of a difference, and thus be reticent to implement meaningful commitments. However, if many countries think this way, then too many will seek to avoid mitigation action, and too few will contribute. Some scholars in political science are skeptical that such collective action problems can be overcome by states, believing that states will protect their individual economic interests at the expense of the collective climate good. Others point to more successful efforts such as the '''Montreal Protocol''' dealing with ozone as demonstrating that sometimes states can create international institutions that coordinate their action, provide information and other benefits to produce shared commitments. 
At the latest round of global climate change negotiations in Paris in December of 2015, countries made individual (rather than collectively agreed upon) commitments of what they are prepared to do. For up to date information on these Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs), click [http://cait.wri.org/indc/ here]. So far the skeptics would seem right on this particular issue. Unless state economic interests happen to converge, or the most powerful states in the system use their influence to push through action (regarded as highly unlikely), there is not much room for optimism from this point of view, particularly since powerful corporations often have great influence on government positions, and many such corporations have tremendous investment in sustaining carbon-based economies. 

However, consider whether there is room here to explore how and why governments might act not just on short-term economic interests but on longer term interests and even other interests such as environmental ones? Some argue that the transition to a less carbon-intensive economies is technically and economically feasible.

 

===Individual Psychology and Ideology===

2) A second way of thinking about this issue focuses not on the international negotiating dynamics and state interests, but at the level of individual psychology and ideology. We know that humans have many biases when approaching complex social problems – to illustrate how they may operate importantly in this case, consider the following questions:

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Question'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* How important do you think it is that your government, along with other leading emitting countries, acts urgently to reduce greenhouse gas emissions?

</div>
|}

A. Extremely 

B. Very 

C. Somewhat 

D. Not very 

E. unimportant

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Question'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* ii) Over the past 12 months, have you:

</div>
|}

A. Attended a rally or protest about climate change 

B. Written to an elected official advocating climate action 

C. Signed a petition advocating political action on climate change 

D. Alternative involvements such as changing your lifestyle to more sustainable practices (riding a bicycle to work / school instead of taking a car, and so on). 

E. None of the above 

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Also think about:'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* Do your own actions really match up to the level of concern you think climate change demands?

</div>
|}

Climate change is a kind of problem that is a bad match for some of our powerful [http://www.climateconviction.org/ psychological biases]. Namely, psychologists have found that
* We tend to have trouble imagining a future drastically different from the present.
* We tend to block out complex problems that lack simple solutions.
* We tend to dislike delayed benefits and so are reluctant to sacrifice today for future gains
* We tend to find it harder to confront problems that creep up on us than emergencies that hit quickly.

Tom Toles has a great comic comparing humankinds' approach to climate change to the famous experiment that showed while frogs will jump out of a pot of hot water if they are dropped into it, they will sit in a pot of mild water until it gets so hot it boils - we can't post it here but google it and find it!

These biases may help explain why climate change appears to have not yet aroused sufficient citizen concern in enough countries to make it impossible for governments to continue to avoid making adequate commitments for climate change mitigation. On the other hand, there are other kinds of psychological triggers that perhaps could be tapped into to garner more support – for example, ''fear'' is often a very powerful, primal motivator. But framing climate change in fearful terms (perhaps like Al Gore's well-known film [https://www.algore.com/library/an-inconvenient-truth-dvd Inconvenient Truth] - see what reaction you have to this film) may lead to avoidance of the issue – are there empowering framings that might more successfully tap into some of our psychological tendencies? ' 

===Political Philosophy===
3) A final way of approaching this issue that will be considered here has been to think more like a political philosopher and identify what the most just or fair approach to this issue might be that all or most could agree to in terms of who has the '''responsibility''' to do what. These approaches focus on issues such as whose practices to date have caused global climate change, whose practices now are contributing to climate change, who has benefited from the industrialization processes that have produced climate change, and who has the ability to pay. So, should the industrialized countries whose activities have caused most of climate change - US, Canada, Europe, Japan - be the ones who bear the burdens of climate change mitigation? That is what China and India, for example, have argued. Or, should China now bear an equal or greater responsibility since it is now the single biggest emitter of climate change causing emissions? A key principle in such environmental negotiations including the 2015 Paris agreement has been the notion of accepting "common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities," which means that not all countries are in an equal position to address climate change. '''See what principle(s) you think you can come up with that might breakthrough the inability of the international community to produce a formulation that the key countries agree is fair and that would be more effective than current approaches.'''

A recent debate has been taking place on the desirability of focusing on issues of fairness and justice, or downplaying such concerns in favour of effectiveness. See the [http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/09/06/keohane-on-climate-what-price-equity-and-justice/ short article] by prominent International Relations scholar Robert Keohane.

4) Student Activity: Consider and bring your ideas to discuss in brainstorming sessions: Are there other ways of approaching this issue that might be more productive, or avenues within the above approaches that might be useful? Previous generations have largely failed in this monumental challenge, it is up to your generation!

[[Category: Open Case Studies]]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Template

2016-10-06T16:58:36Z

RichardPrice: /* Context and Status of Climate Change */

=Global Climate Justice=

==Goal and Objectives==

To stimulate students to try to generate original ways to approach or frame the issue of global climate change that might provide a more productive path forward.

==Introduction==

===Framing the Problem===
What distribution of adjustment costs for climate change mitigation is fair, and should be acceptable to the most (important) countries?

Are there ways of framing the issue that could be more effective in galvanizing effective action?

Are problem-solving approaches to negotiating such environmental problems inadequate, such that more holistic ecological ethical approaches are needed? How feasible might be the adoption of such perspectives? Secondary case studies on the development of bans on killing of whales and use of animals for research might be able to show us the challenges and opportunities involved in how such changes may occur globally.

==Context and Status of Climate Change==

===Significance of the Issue===
* Human influence on the climate system is clear, and recent anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases are the highest in history. 
Industrialization and urbanization --> Anthropogenic GHGs emissions & Radiative forcing 

* Recent climate changes is projected to have widespread impacts on human and natural systems under various future emission scenarios. 
 

''Two perspectives:'' human's impact causing climate change & climate change's impact forcing human to adapt / make changes

'''Impacts (what is at stake?)'''

The most immediate effect of climate change is the increase of temperature, but the actual impacts of climate change stretch far beyond a “2 C° hotter summer”. 
The main impacts attributed to climate change include intensified extreme events: droughts, flooding, heat waves, cyclones & thunderstorms, and wildfires. As well as the following effects: 

1. Glacial melting & coastal erosion 

2. Water availability and distribution 

[[File:Arctic Glacial Melting and Future Projection.png|thumb|Arctic Glacial Melting and Future Projection]]

3. Disruption to ecosystem (abundance and activities) 

4. Impact on food production (a likely decrease in crop yield) 

5. Human health: pollution, spread of diseases 

{{#widget:YouTube|id=_EWOrZQ3L-c|height=315|width=420}}<ref > International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme, Retrieved on 05/19/2016 from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EWOrZQ3L-c&feature=youtu.be </ref>
Source: International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme

 

* The first major conference on global climate change took place in Rio de Janeiro in 1982 and produced the Framework Convention on Climate Change. Subsequent rounds of negotiations have taken place in the form of preparatory meetings and subsequent conferences of states parties, including the 2009 Copenhagen Conference of the Parties to the Convention and the Paris Conference of 2015. 

While assessments of these negotiations vary somewhat, far and away the predominant view is that the results of these global negotiations to date fall far short of what is required to ensure the planet stays below the 2 degrees Celsius temperature rise above pre-industrial levels that had been widely accepted as the goal to avert the most disastrous impacts of climate change (note: that goal was revised to 1.5 degrees Celsius at Paris 2015; we have already hit 1 degree rise!). Contributors to this wiki are invited to post links to the most helpful concise summaries and assessments of the latest major international meetings and agreements, in this case the Paris meetings of December 2015.

=== Major Events: ===

'''<big>1990: Kyoto Protocol</big> – more than 160 countries participated; target to reduce emission by 2012 '''

''*Side note: 55 developed countries participated; they constitute 55% of 1990’s emission*'' 
 

'''Key control mechanisms'''
(=what international community has come up with in distributing sustainable duties) 

Primary--national measures

Additional:

* International Emission Trading 

* The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) 

''Defined in Article 12 of the Protocol, allows a country with an emission-reduction or emission-limitation commitment under the Kyoto Protocol (Annex B Party) to implement an emission-reduction project in developing countries. Such projects can earn saleable certified emission reduction (CER) credits, each equivalent to one tonne of CO2, which can be counted towards meeting Kyoto targets'' <ref name="kyoto"> UNFCCC, Kyoto Protocol Website. Retrieved on May 20th 2016 from: http://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol/mechanisms/clean_development_mechanism/items/2718.php </ref> 

3. Joint Implementation
''The mechanism known as “joint implementation,” defined in Article 6 of the Kyoto Protocol, allows a country with an emission reduction or limitation commitment under the Kyoto Protocol (Annex B Party) to earn emission reduction units (ERUs) from an emission-reduction or emission removal project in another Annex B Party, each equivalent to one tonne of CO2, which can be counted towards meeting its Kyoto target.
Joint implementation offers Parties a flexible and cost-efficient means of fulfilling a part of their Kyoto commitments, while the host Party benefits from foreign investment and technology transfer.''<ref name="kyoto"/>

'''<big>2012: Kyoto Protocol second commitment period -- Doha Amendment</big>'''
Essential Update: non-ratification of USA, and withdrawal of Canada 
Result: Amendment not yet in effect since 144 ratification is needed, but only has 65 so far.
<ref> UN Treaty Collection, 7 .c Doha Amendment to the Kyoto Protocol. Retrieved on May 20th, 2016 from: https://treaties.un.org/pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXVII-7-c&chapter=27&lang=en </ref> 
 
'''<big>2015: United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) at its 21st Session in Paris & Adoption of Paris Agreement</big> '''
 [http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/cp/climate/2015-paris-climate-talks/key-points-of-the-final-paris-climate-draft Key features] include: 1) National pledges of measures to curb emissions (not legally binding); 2) Goal to “reach global peaking of greenhouse gas emissions as soon as possible, recognizing that peaking will take longer for developing country parties, and to undertake rapid reductions thereafter;” 3) Review mechanism to take stock every five years; 4) Call to establish “a new collective quantified goal” of at least $100 billion a year in climate-related financing by 2020 to assist developing countries to transition to clean energy and deal climate change adaptation. 

'''<big>2016: UNFCCC 43rd Session</big>''' (Nairobi, Kenya, 11 – 13 April 2016), the IPCC Panel decided to accept the UNFCCC’s invitation to provide a special report in 2018 on the impacts of global warming of 1.5 ºC above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, and to prepare a Special Report on this topic '''in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development and efforts to eradicate poverty''' <ref> IPCC, Fifth Assessment. Retrieved on May 20th, 2016 from: http://www.ipcc.ch/report/sr15/ </ref>

==Recent Statistics on International Emissions==

[[File:Global anthropogenic CO2 emissions.png|x500px|:Global anthropogenic CO2 emissions]] 

[[File:Top 10 Countries - Gross Emission.png|x500px|Top 10 Countries - Gross Emission 2011]] 

[[File:Top 10 Countries - Per Capita Emission.png|x500px|Top 10 Countries - Per Capita Emission 2011]] 

[[File:2012 Emission Related Figures (Gross, Per Capita, Intensity & Benefit).png|x500px|2012 Emission Related Figures (Gross, Per Capita, Intensity & Benefit)]] 

==Climate Change Resources and References==
<references/>

==Additional Resources: Psychological Bias and Climate Change==
* [https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22329820-200-understand-faulty-thinking-to-tackle-climate-change/%20 Understand Faulty Thinking to Tackle Climate Change]. : by George Marshall - leading European experts in climate change communications.
* [http://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/dont-even-think-about-it-9781620401330/ Don't Even Think About It - Why Our Brains Are Wired to Ignore Climate Change]: George Marshall
* George Marshall's blog: http://climatedenial.org/
* Thinking Fast and Slow: Daniel Kahneman - Nobel Prize Winning economist looking at psychological principles in decision making: UBC Library [http://resolve.library.ubc.ca/cgi-bin/catsearch?bid=6983453 link]
* Video: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fle_FkILmEQ It's The End of the World and We Know It and I feel Fine]: Daniel Gilbert - Harvard Professor of Psychology talks about . TedX Academy

=====Comics to spice things up=====

http://cascadiaworkshops.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/climate-change-of-course.jpg 

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/501799583454791488/ 

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/386605949233228852/ 

==Political Science Perspectives==

<big>'''What Would A Political Scientist Do?'''</big>

===Collective Action Problem===
1) One approach to this issue is to think of it in terms of a collective action problem. The scale of the climate change problem is such that individual and voluntary actions by citizens and corporations are not adequate to satisfactorily address the issue. Government policy is required. But governments around the world have not been able to collectively agree on who should bear what responsibilities. Without such coordination, governments are reluctant to get too far ahead of other countries insofar as they worry about being taken advantage of by other countries if they implement policy changes like regulations that are perceived as carrying a negative economic impact, or spending on programs that incur costs not born by other countries. 
Moreover, some countries may think that their own individual contribution to climate change mitigation may not make that much of a difference, and thus be reticent to implement meaningful commitments. However, if many countries think this way, then too many will seek to avoid mitigation action, and too few will contribute. Some scholars in political science are skeptical that such collective action problems can be overcome by states, believing that states will protect their individual economic interests at the expense of the collective climate good. Others point to more successful efforts such as the '''Montreal Protocol''' dealing with ozone as demonstrating that sometimes states can create international institutions that coordinate their action, provide information and other benefits to produce shared commitments. 
At the latest round of global climate change negotiations in Paris in December of 2015, countries made individual (rather than collectively agreed upon) commitments of what they are prepared to do. For up to date information on these Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs), click [http://cait.wri.org/indc/ here]. So far the skeptics would seem right on this particular issue. Unless state economic interests happen to converge, or the most powerful states in the system use their influence to push through action (regarded as highly unlikely), there is not much room for optimism from this point of view, particularly since powerful corporations often have great influence on government positions, and many such corporations have tremendous investment in sustaining carbon-based economies. 

However, consider whether there is room here to explore how and why governments might act not just on short-term economic interests but on longer term interests and even other interests such as environmental ones? Some argue that the transition to a less carbon-intensive economies is technically and economically feasible.

 

===Individual Psychology and Ideology===

2) A second way of thinking about this issue focuses not on the international negotiating dynamics and state interests, but at the level of individual psychology and ideology. We know that humans have many biases when approaching complex social problems – to illustrate how they may operate importantly in this case, consider the following questions:

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Question'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* How important do you think it is that your government, along with other leading emitting countries, acts urgently to reduce greenhouse gas emissions?

</div>
|}

A. Extremely 

B. Very 

C. Somewhat 

D. Not very 

E. unimportant

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Question'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* ii) Over the past 12 months, have you:

</div>
|}

A. Attended a rally or protest about climate change 

B. Written to an elected official advocating climate action 

C. Signed a petition advocating political action on climate change 

D. Alternative involvements such as changing your lifestyle to more sustainable practices (riding a bicycle to work / school instead of taking a car, and so on). 

E. None of the above 

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Also think about:'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* Do your own actions really match up to the level of concern you think climate change demands?

</div>
|}

Climate change is a kind of problem that is a bad match for some of our powerful [http://www.climateconviction.org/ psychological biases]. Namely, psychologists have found that
* We tend to have trouble imagining a future drastically different from the present.
* We tend to block out complex problems that lack simple solutions.
* We tend to dislike delayed benefits and so are reluctant to sacrifice today for future gains
* We tend to find it harder to confront problems that creep up on us than emergencies that hit quickly.

Tom Toles has a great comic comparing humankinds' approach to climate change to the famous experiment that showed while frogs will jump out of a pot of hot water if they are dropped into it, they will sit in a pot of mild water until it gets so hot it boils - we can't post it here but google it and find it!

These biases may help explain why climate change appears to have not yet aroused sufficient citizen concern in enough countries to make it impossible for governments to continue to avoid making adequate commitments for climate change mitigation. On the other hand, there are other kinds of psychological triggers that perhaps could be tapped into to garner more support – for example, ''fear'' is often a very powerful, primal motivator. But framing climate change in fearful terms (perhaps like Al Gore's well-known film [https://www.algore.com/library/an-inconvenient-truth-dvd Inconvenient Truth] - see what reaction you have to this film) may lead to avoidance of the issue – are there empowering framings that might more successfully tap into some of our psychological tendencies? ' 

===Political Philosophy===
3) A final way of approaching this issue that will be considered here has been to think more like a political philosopher and identify what the most just or fair approach to this issue might be that all or most could agree to in terms of who has the '''responsibility''' to do what. These approaches focus on issues such as whose practices to date have caused global climate change, whose practices now are contributing to climate change, who has benefited from the industrialization processes that have produced climate change, and who has the ability to pay. So, should the industrialized countries whose activities have caused most of climate change - US, Canada, Europe, Japan - be the ones who bear the burdens of climate change mitigation? That is what China and India, for example, have argued. Or, should China now bear an equal or greater responsibility since it is now the single biggest emitter of climate change causing emissions? See what principle you think you can come up with that might breakthrough the inability of the international community to produce a formulation that the key countries agree is fair.

A recent debate has been taking place on the desirability of focusing on issues of fairness and justice, or downplaying such concerns in favour of effectiveness. See the [http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/09/06/keohane-on-climate-what-price-equity-and-justice/ short article] by prominent International Relations scholar Robert Keohane.

4) Student Activity: Consider and bring your ideas to discuss in brainstorming sessions: Are there other ways of approaching this issue that might be more productive, or avenues within the above approaches that might be useful? Previous generations have largely failed in this monumental challenge, it is up to your generation!

[[Category: Open Case Studies]]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Template

2016-10-06T16:37:15Z

RichardPrice: /* Political Philosophy */

=Global Climate Justice=

==Goal and Objectives==

To stimulate students to try to generate original ways to approach or frame the issue of global climate change that might provide a more productive path forward.

==Introduction==

===Framing the Problem===
What distribution of adjustment costs for climate change mitigation is fair, and should be acceptable to the most (important) countries?

Are there ways of framing the issue that could be more effective in galvanizing effective action?

Are problem-solving approaches to negotiating such environmental problems inadequate, such that more holistic ecological ethical approaches are needed? How feasible might be the adoption of such perspectives? Secondary case studies on the development of bans on killing of whales and use of animals for research might be able to show us the challenges and opportunities involved in how such changes may occur globally.

==Context and Status of Climate Change==

===Significance of the Issue===
* Human influence on the climate system is clear, and recent anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases are the highest in history. 
Industrialization and urbanization --> Anthropogenic GHGs emissions & Radiative forcing 

* Recent climate changes is projected to have widespread impacts on human and natural systems under various future emission scenarios. 
 

''Two perspectives:'' human's impact causing climate change & climate change's impact forcing human to adapt / make changes

'''Impacts (what is at stake?)'''

The most immediate effect of climate change is the increase of temperature, but the actual impacts of climate change stretch far beyond a “2 C° hotter summer”. 
The main impacts attributed to climate change include intensified extreme events: droughts, flooding, heat waves, cyclones & thunderstorms, and wildfires. As well as the following effects: 

1. Glacial melting & coastal erosion 

2. Water availability and distribution 

[[File:Arctic Glacial Melting and Future Projection.png|thumb|Arctic Glacial Melting and Future Projection]]

3. Disruption to ecosystem (abundance and activities) 

4. Impact on food production (a likely decrease in crop yield) 

5. Human health: pollution, spread of diseases 

{{#widget:YouTube|id=_EWOrZQ3L-c|height=315|width=420}}<ref > International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme, Retrieved on 05/19/2016 from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EWOrZQ3L-c&feature=youtu.be </ref>
Source: International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme

 

* The first major conference on global climate change took place in Rio de Janeiro in 1982 and produced the Framework Convention on Climate Change. Subsequent rounds of negotiations have taken place in the form of preparatory meetings and subsequent conferences of states parties, including the 2009 Copenhagen Conference of the Parties to the Convention and the Paris Conference of 2015. 

While assessments of these negotiations vary somewhat, far and away the dominant view is that the results of these global negotiations to date have failed, in that they fall far short of what is required to ensure the planet stays below the 2 degrees Celsius temperature rise above pre-industrial levels that has been widely accepted as the goal to avert the most disastrous impacts of climate change.

=== Major Events: ===

'''<big>1990: Kyoto Protocol</big> – more than 160 countries participated; target to reduce emission by 2012 '''

''*Side note: 55 developed countries participated; they constitute 55% of 1990’s emission*'' 
 

'''Key control mechanisms'''
(=what international community has come up with in distributing sustainable duties) 

Primary--national measures

Additional:

* International Emission Trading 

* The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) 

''Defined in Article 12 of the Protocol, allows a country with an emission-reduction or emission-limitation commitment under the Kyoto Protocol (Annex B Party) to implement an emission-reduction project in developing countries. Such projects can earn saleable certified emission reduction (CER) credits, each equivalent to one tonne of CO2, which can be counted towards meeting Kyoto targets'' <ref name="kyoto"> UNFCCC, Kyoto Protocol Website. Retrieved on May 20th 2016 from: http://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol/mechanisms/clean_development_mechanism/items/2718.php </ref> 

3. Joint Implementation
''The mechanism known as “joint implementation,” defined in Article 6 of the Kyoto Protocol, allows a country with an emission reduction or limitation commitment under the Kyoto Protocol (Annex B Party) to earn emission reduction units (ERUs) from an emission-reduction or emission removal project in another Annex B Party, each equivalent to one tonne of CO2, which can be counted towards meeting its Kyoto target.
Joint implementation offers Parties a flexible and cost-efficient means of fulfilling a part of their Kyoto commitments, while the host Party benefits from foreign investment and technology transfer.''<ref name="kyoto"/>

'''<big>2012: Kyoto Protocol second commitment period -- Doha Amendment</big>'''
Essential Update: non-ratification of USA, and withdrawal of Canada 
Result: Amendment not yet in effect since 144 ratification is needed, but only has 65 so far.
<ref> UN Treaty Collection, 7 .c Doha Amendment to the Kyoto Protocol. Retrieved on May 20th, 2016 from: https://treaties.un.org/pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXVII-7-c&chapter=27&lang=en </ref> 
 
'''<big>2015: United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) at its 21st Session in Paris & Adoption of Paris Agreement</big> '''
 
'''<big>2016: UNFCCC 43rd Session</big>''' (Nairobi, Kenya, 11 – 13 April 2016), the IPCC Panel decided to accept the UNFCCC’s invitation to provide a special report in 2018 on the impacts of global warming of 1.5 ºC above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, and to prepare a Special Report on this topic '''in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development and efforts to eradicate poverty''' <ref> IPCC, Fifth Assessment. Retrieved on May 20th, 2016 from: http://www.ipcc.ch/report/sr15/ </ref>

==Recent Statistics on International Emissions==

[[File:Global anthropogenic CO2 emissions.png|x500px|:Global anthropogenic CO2 emissions]] 

[[File:Top 10 Countries - Gross Emission.png|x500px|Top 10 Countries - Gross Emission 2011]] 

[[File:Top 10 Countries - Per Capita Emission.png|x500px|Top 10 Countries - Per Capita Emission 2011]] 

[[File:2012 Emission Related Figures (Gross, Per Capita, Intensity & Benefit).png|x500px|2012 Emission Related Figures (Gross, Per Capita, Intensity & Benefit)]] 

==Climate Change Resources and References==
<references/>

==Additional Resources: Psychological Bias and Climate Change==
* [https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22329820-200-understand-faulty-thinking-to-tackle-climate-change/%20 Understand Faulty Thinking to Tackle Climate Change]. : by George Marshall - leading European experts in climate change communications.
* [http://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/dont-even-think-about-it-9781620401330/ Don't Even Think About It - Why Our Brains Are Wired to Ignore Climate Change]: George Marshall
* George Marshall's blog: http://climatedenial.org/
* Thinking Fast and Slow: Daniel Kahneman - Nobel Prize Winning economist looking at psychological principles in decision making: UBC Library [http://resolve.library.ubc.ca/cgi-bin/catsearch?bid=6983453 link]
* Video: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fle_FkILmEQ It's The End of the World and We Know It and I feel Fine]: Daniel Gilbert - Harvard Professor of Psychology talks about . TedX Academy

=====Comics to spice things up=====

http://cascadiaworkshops.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/climate-change-of-course.jpg 

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/501799583454791488/ 

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/386605949233228852/ 

==Political Science Perspectives==

<big>'''What Would A Political Scientist Do?'''</big>

===Collective Action Problem===
1) One approach to this issue is to think of it in terms of a collective action problem. The scale of the climate change problem is such that individual and voluntary actions by citizens and corporations are not adequate to satisfactorily address the issue. Government policy is required. But governments around the world have not been able to collectively agree on who should bear what responsibilities. Without such coordination, governments are reluctant to get too far ahead of other countries insofar as they worry about being taken advantage of by other countries if they implement policy changes like regulations that are perceived as carrying a negative economic impact, or spending on programs that incur costs not born by other countries. 
Moreover, some countries may think that their own individual contribution to climate change mitigation may not make that much of a difference, and thus be reticent to implement meaningful commitments. However, if many countries think this way, then too many will seek to avoid mitigation action, and too few will contribute. Some scholars in political science are skeptical that such collective action problems can be overcome by states, believing that states will protect their individual economic interests at the expense of the collective climate good. Others point to more successful efforts such as the '''Montreal Protocol''' dealing with ozone as demonstrating that sometimes states can create international institutions that coordinate their action, provide information and other benefits to produce shared commitments. 
At the latest round of global climate change negotiations in Paris in December of 2015, countries made individual (rather than collectively agreed upon) commitments of what they are prepared to do. For up to date information on these Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs), click [http://cait.wri.org/indc/ here]. So far the skeptics would seem right on this particular issue. Unless state economic interests happen to converge, or the most powerful states in the system use their influence to push through action (regarded as highly unlikely), there is not much room for optimism from this point of view, particularly since powerful corporations often have great influence on government positions, and many such corporations have tremendous investment in sustaining carbon-based economies. 

However, consider whether there is room here to explore how and why governments might act not just on short-term economic interests but on longer term interests and even other interests such as environmental ones? Some argue that the transition to a less carbon-intensive economies is technically and economically feasible.

 

===Individual Psychology and Ideology===

2) A second way of thinking about this issue focuses not on the international negotiating dynamics and state interests, but at the level of individual psychology and ideology. We know that humans have many biases when approaching complex social problems – to illustrate how they may operate importantly in this case, consider the following questions:

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Question'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* How important do you think it is that your government, along with other leading emitting countries, acts urgently to reduce greenhouse gas emissions?

</div>
|}

A. Extremely 

B. Very 

C. Somewhat 

D. Not very 

E. unimportant

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Question'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* ii) Over the past 12 months, have you:

</div>
|}

A. Attended a rally or protest about climate change 

B. Written to an elected official advocating climate action 

C. Signed a petition advocating political action on climate change 

D. Alternative involvements such as changing your lifestyle to more sustainable practices (riding a bicycle to work / school instead of taking a car, and so on). 

E. None of the above 

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Also think about:'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* Do your own actions really match up to the level of concern you think climate change demands?

</div>
|}

Climate change is a kind of problem that is a bad match for some of our powerful [http://www.climateconviction.org/ psychological biases]. Namely, psychologists have found that
* We tend to have trouble imagining a future drastically different from the present.
* We tend to block out complex problems that lack simple solutions.
* We tend to dislike delayed benefits and so are reluctant to sacrifice today for future gains
* We tend to find it harder to confront problems that creep up on us than emergencies that hit quickly.

Tom Toles has a great comic comparing humankinds' approach to climate change to the famous experiment that showed while frogs will jump out of a pot of hot water if they are dropped into it, they will sit in a pot of mild water until it gets so hot it boils - we can't post it here but google it and find it!

These biases may help explain why climate change appears to have not yet aroused sufficient citizen concern in enough countries to make it impossible for governments to continue to avoid making adequate commitments for climate change mitigation. On the other hand, there are other kinds of psychological triggers that perhaps could be tapped into to garner more support – for example, ''fear'' is often a very powerful, primal motivator. But framing climate change in fearful terms (perhaps like Al Gore's well-known film [https://www.algore.com/library/an-inconvenient-truth-dvd Inconvenient Truth] - see what reaction you have to this film) may lead to avoidance of the issue – are there empowering framings that might more successfully tap into some of our psychological tendencies? ' 

===Political Philosophy===
3) A final way of approaching this issue that will be considered here has been to think more like a political philosopher and identify what the most just or fair approach to this issue might be that all or most could agree to in terms of who has the '''responsibility''' to do what. These approaches focus on issues such as whose practices to date have caused global climate change, whose practices now are contributing to climate change, who has benefited from the industrialization processes that have produced climate change, and who has the ability to pay. So, should the industrialized countries whose activities have caused most of climate change - US, Canada, Europe, Japan - be the ones who bear the burdens of climate change mitigation? That is what China and India, for example, have argued. Or, should China now bear an equal or greater responsibility since it is now the single biggest emitter of climate change causing emissions? See what principle you think you can come up with that might breakthrough the inability of the international community to produce a formulation that the key countries agree is fair.

A recent debate has been taking place on the desirability of focusing on issues of fairness and justice, or downplaying such concerns in favour of effectiveness. See the [http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/09/06/keohane-on-climate-what-price-equity-and-justice/ short article] by prominent International Relations scholar Robert Keohane.

4) Student Activity: Consider and bring your ideas to discuss in brainstorming sessions: Are there other ways of approaching this issue that might be more productive, or avenues within the above approaches that might be useful? Previous generations have largely failed in this monumental challenge, it is up to your generation!

[[Category: Open Case Studies]]

Thread:Documentation talk:Open Case Studies/POLSCI/Resources/Resources (2)

2016-05-31T18:36:11Z

RichardPrice: New thread: Resources

Please insert the resources on psychology and climate change into a section at the bottom on resources - thanks.

Documentation talk:Open Case Studies/POLSCI/Resources

2016-05-31T18:36:09Z

RichardPrice: Talk page autocreated when first thread was posted

Thread:Documentation talk:Open Case Studies/POLSCI/Resources/Resources

2016-05-31T18:36:09Z

RichardPrice: New thread: Resources

Please insert the resources on psychology and climate change into a section at the bottom on resources - thanks.

Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Template

2016-05-31T18:34:17Z

RichardPrice:

<big>=Global Climate Justice=</big>

==Goal and Objectives==

To stimulate students to try to generate original ways to approach or frame the issue of global climate change that might provide a more productive path forward.

==Introduction==

===Framing the Problem===
What distribution of adjustment costs for climate change mitigation is fair, and should be acceptable to the most (important) countries?

Are there ways of framing the issue that could be more effective in galvanizing effective action?

Are problem-solving approaches to negotiating such environmental problems inadequate, such that more holistic ecological ethical approaches are needed? How feasible might be the adoption of such perspectives? Secondary case studies on the development of bans on killing of whales and use of animals for research might be able to show us the challenges and opportunities involved in how such changes may occur globally.

==Context and Status of Climate Change==

===Significance of the Issue===
* Human influence on the climate system is clear, and recent anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases are the highest in history. 
Industrialization and urbanization --> Anthropogenic GHGs emissions & Radiative forcing 

* Recent climate changes is projected to have widespread impacts on human and natural systems under various future emission scenarios. 
 

''Two perspectives:'' human's impact causing climate change & climate change's impact forcing human to adapt / make changes

'''Impacts (what is at stake?)'''

The most immediate effect of climate change is the increase of temperature, but the actual impacts of climate change stretch far beyond a “2 C° hotter summer”. 
The main impacts attributed to climate change include intensified extreme events: droughts, flooding, heat waves, cyclones & thunderstorms, and wildfires. As well as the following effects: 

1. Glacial melting & coastal erosion 

2. Water availability and distribution 

[[File:Arctic Glacial Melting and Future Projection.png|thumb|Arctic Glacial Melting and Future Projection]]

3. Disruption to ecosystem (abundance and activities) 

4. Impact on food production (a likely decrease in crop yield) 

5. Human health: pollution, spread of diseases 

{{#widget:YouTube|id=_EWOrZQ3L-c|height=315|width=420}}<ref > International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme, Retrieved on 05/19/2016 from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EWOrZQ3L-c&feature=youtu.be </ref>
Source: International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme

 

* The first major conference on global climate change took place in Rio de Janeiro in 1982 and produced the Framework Convention on Climate Change. Subsequent rounds of negotiations have taken place in the form of preparatory meetings and subsequent conferences of states parties, including the 2009 Copenhagen Conference of the Parties to the Convention and the Paris Conference of 2015. 
While assessments of these negotiations vary somewhat, far and away the dominant view is that the results of these global negotiations to date have failed, in that they fall far short of what is required to ensure the planet stays below the 2 degrees Celsius temperature rise above pre-industrial levels that has been widely accepted as the goal to avert the most disastrous impacts of climate change.

=== Major Events: ===

<big>1990: Kyoto Protocol</big> – more than 160 countries participated; target to reduce emission by 2012 

''*Side note: 55 developed countries participated; they constitute 55% of 1990’s emission*'' 
 

'''Key control mechanisms'''
(So you have idea of some of the ideas the international community has come up with) 

'''Primary--national measures''' 

Additional: 

1. International Emission Trading 

2. The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) 

''Defined in Article 12 of the Protocol, allows a country with an emission-reduction or emission-limitation commitment under the Kyoto Protocol (Annex B Party) to implement an emission-reduction project in developing countries. Such projects can earn saleable certified emission reduction (CER) credits, each equivalent to one tonne of CO2, which can be counted towards meeting Kyoto targets'' <ref name="kyoto"> UNFCCC, Kyoto Protocol Website. Retrieved on May 20th 2016 from: http://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol/mechanisms/clean_development_mechanism/items/2718.php </ref> 

3. Joint Implementation
''The mechanism known as “joint implementation,” defined in Article 6 of the Kyoto Protocol, allows a country with an emission reduction or limitation commitment under the Kyoto Protocol (Annex B Party) to earn emission reduction units (ERUs) from an emission-reduction or emission removal project in another Annex B Party, each equivalent to one tonne of CO2, which can be counted towards meeting its Kyoto target.
Joint implementation offers Parties a flexible and cost-efficient means of fulfilling a part of their Kyoto commitments, while the host Party benefits from foreign investment and technology transfer.''<ref name="kyoto"/>

<big>2012: Kyoto Protocol second commitment period -- Doha Amendment</big>
Essential Update: non-ratification of USA, and withdrawal of Canada 
Result: Amendment not yet in effect since 144 ratification is needed, but only has 65 so far.
<ref> UN Treaty Collection, 7 .c Doha Amendment to the Kyoto Protocol. Retrieved on May 20th, 2016 from: https://treaties.un.org/pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXVII-7-c&chapter=27&lang=en </ref> 
 
<big>2015: United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) at its 21st Session in Paris & Adoption of Paris Agreement</big> 
 
<big>2016: UNFCCC 43rd Session</big> (Nairobi, Kenya, 11 – 13 April 2016), the IPCC Panel decided to accept the UNFCCC’s invitation to provide a special report in 2018 on the impacts of global warming of 1.5 ºC above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, and to prepare a Special Report on this topic '''in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development and efforts to eradicate poverty''' <ref> IPCC, Fifth Assessment. Retrieved on May 20th, 2016 from: http://www.ipcc.ch/report/sr15/ </ref>

==Recent Statistics on International Emissions==

[[File:Global anthropogenic CO2 emissions.png|x500px|:Global anthropogenic CO2 emissions]] 

[[File:Top 10 Countries - Gross Emission.png|x500px|Top 10 Countries - Gross Emission 2011]] 

[[File:Top 10 Countries - Per Capita Emission.png|x500px|Top 10 Countries - Per Capita Emission 2011]] 

[[File:2012 Emission Related Figures (Gross, Per Capita, Intensity & Benefit).png|x500px|2012 Emission Related Figures (Gross, Per Capita, Intensity & Benefit)]] 

==Climate Change Resources and References==
<references/>

===== ~Comics to spice things up~ =====

http://cascadiaworkshops.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/climate-change-of-course.jpg 

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/501799583454791488/ 

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/386605949233228852/ 

==Political Science Perspectives==

<big>'''What Would A Political Scientist Do?'''</big>

===Collective Action Problem===
1) One approach to this issue is to think of it in terms of a collective action problem. The scale of the climate change problem is such that individual and voluntary actions by citizens and corporations are not adequate to satisfactorily address the issue. Government policy is required. But governments around the world have not been able to collectively agree on who should bear what responsibilities. Without such coordination, governments are reluctant to get too far ahead of other countries insofar as they worry about being taken advantage of by other countries if they implement policy changes like regulations that are perceived as carrying a negative economic impact, or spending on programs that incur costs not born by other countries. 
Moreover, some countries may think that their own individual contribution to climate change mitigation may not make that much of a difference, and thus be reticent to implement meaningful commitments. However, if many countries think this way, then too many will seek to avoid mitigation action, and too few will contribute. Some scholars in political science are skeptical that such collective action problems can be overcome by states, believing that states will protect their individual economic interests at the expense of the collective climate good. Others point to more successful efforts such as the '''Montreal Protocol''' dealing with ozone as demonstrating that sometimes states can create international institutions that coordinate their action, provide information and other benefits to produce shared commitments. 
At the latest round of global climate change negotiations in Paris in December of 2015, countries made individual (rather than collectively agreed upon) commitments of what they are prepared to do. For up to date information on these Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs), click [http://cait.wri.org/indc/ here]. So far the skeptics would seem right on this particular issue. Unless state economic interests happen to converge, or the most powerful states in the system use their influence to push through action (regarded as highly unlikely), there is not much room for optimism from this point of view, particularly since powerful corporations often have great influence on government positions, and many such corporations have tremendous investment in sustaining carbon-based economies. 

However, consider whether there is room here to explore how and why governments might act not just on short-term economic interests but on longer term interests and even other interests such as environmental ones? Some argue that the transition to a less carbon-intensive economies is technically and economically feasible.

 

===Individual Psychology and Ideology===

2) A second way of thinking about this issue focuses not on the international negotiating dynamics and state interests, but at the level of individual psychology and ideology. We know that humans have many biases when approaching complex social problems – to illustrate how they may operate importantly in this case, consider the following questions:

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Question'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* How important do you think it is that your government, along with other leading emitting countries, acts urgently to reduce greenhouse gas emissions?

</div>
|}

A. Extremely 

B. Very 

C. Somewhat 

D. Not very 

E. unimportant

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Question'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* ii) Over the past 12 months, have you:

</div>
|}

A. Attended a rally or protest about climate change 

B. Written to an elected official advocating climate action 

C. Signed a petition advocating political action on climate change 

D. Alternative involvements such as changing your lifestyle to more sustainable practices (riding a bicycle to work / school instead of taking a car, and so on). 

E. None of the above 

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Also think about:'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* Do your own actions really match up to the level of concern you think climate change demands?

</div>
|}

Climate change is a kind of problem that is a bad match for some of our powerful [http://www.climateconviction.org/ psychological biases]. Namely, psychologists have found that
* We tend to have trouble imagining a future drastically different from the present.
* We tend to block out complex problems that lack simple solutions.
* We tend to dislike delayed benefits and so are reluctant to sacrifice today for future gains
* We tend to find it harder to confront problems that creep up on us than emergencies that hit quickly.

Tom Toles has a great comic comparing humankinds' approach to climate change to the famous experiment that showed while frogs will jump out of a pot of hot water if they are dropped into it, they will sit in a pot of mild water until it gets so hot it boils - we can't post it here but google it and find it!

These biases may help explain why climate change appears to have not yet aroused sufficient citizen concern in enough countries to make it impossible for governments to continue to avoid making adequate commitments for climate change mitigation. On the other hand, there are other kinds of psychological triggers that perhaps could be tapped into to garner more support – for example, ''fear'' is often a very powerful, primal motivator. But framing climate change in fearful terms (perhaps like Al Gore's well-known film [https://www.algore.com/library/an-inconvenient-truth-dvd Inconvenient Truth] - see what reaction you have to this film) may lead to avoidance of the issue – are there empowering framings that might more successfully tap into some of our psychological tendencies? ' 

===Political Philosophy===
3) A final way of approaching this issue that will be considered here has been to think more like a political philosopher and identify what the most just or fair approach to this issue might be that all or most could agree to in terms of who has the '''responsibility''' to do what. These approaches focus on issues such as whose practices to date have caused global climate change, whose practices now are contributing to climate change, who has benefited from the industrialization processes that have produced climate change, and who has the ability to pay. So, should the industrialized countries whose activities have caused most of climate change - US, Canada, Europe, Japan - be the ones who bear the burdens of climate change mitigation? That is what China and India, for example, have argued. Or, should China now bear an equal or greater responsibility since it is now the single biggest emitter of climate change causing emissions? See what principle you think you can come up with that might breakthrough the inability of the international community to produce a formulation that the key countries agree is fair.

4) Student Activity: Consider and bring your ideas to discuss in brainstorming sessions: Are there other ways of approaching this issue that might be more productive, or avenues within the above approaches that might be useful? Previous generations have largely failed in this monumental challenge, it is up to your generation!

Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Template

2016-05-31T18:33:40Z

RichardPrice:

Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Template

2016-05-31T18:32:13Z

RichardPrice: /* Political Philosophy */

Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Template

2016-05-31T18:27:53Z

RichardPrice: /* Individual Ideology */

<big>=Global Climate Justice=</big>

==Goal and Objectives==

To stimulate students to try to generate original ways to approach or frame the issue of global climate change that might provide a more productive path forward.

==Introduction==

===Framing the Problem===
What distribution of adjustment costs for climate change mitigation is fair, and should be acceptable to the most (important) countries?

Are there ways of framing the issue that could be more effective in galvanizing effective action?

Are problem-solving approaches to negotiating such environmental problems inadequate, such that more holistic ecological ethical approaches are needed? How feasible might be the adoption of such perspectives? Secondary case studies on the development of bans on killing of whales and use of animals for research might be able to show us the challenges and opportunities involved in how such changes may occur globally.

==Context and Status of Climate Change==

===Significance of the Issue===
* Human influence on the climate system is clear, and recent anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases are the highest in history. 
Industrialization and urbanization --> Anthropogenic GHGs emissions & Radiative forcing 

* Recent climate changes is projected to have widespread impacts on human and natural systems under various future emission scenarios. 
 

''Two perspectives:'' human's impact causing climate change & climate change's impact forcing human to adapt / make changes

'''Impacts (what is at stake?)'''

The most immediate effect of climate change is the increase of temperature, but the actual impacts of climate change stretch far beyond a “2 C° hotter summer”. 
The main impacts attributed to climate change include intensified extreme events: droughts, flooding, heat waves, cyclones & thunderstorms, and wildfires. As well as the following effects: 

1. Glacial melting & coastal erosion 

2. Water availability and distribution 

[[File:Arctic Glacial Melting and Future Projection.png|thumb|Arctic Glacial Melting and Future Projection]]

3. Disruption to ecosystem (abundance and activities) 

4. Impact on food production (a likely decrease in crop yield) 

5. Human health: pollution, spread of diseases 

{{#widget:YouTube|id=_EWOrZQ3L-c|height=315|width=420}}<ref > International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme, Retrieved on 05/19/2016 from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EWOrZQ3L-c&feature=youtu.be </ref>
Source: International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme

 

* The first major conference on global climate change took place in Rio de Janeiro in 1982 and produced the Framework Convention on Climate Change. Subsequent rounds of negotiations have taken place in the form of preparatory meetings and subsequent conferences of states parties, including the 2009 Copenhagen Conference of the Parties to the Convention and the Paris Conference of 2015. 
While assessments of these negotiations vary somewhat, far and away the dominant view is that the results of these global negotiations to date have failed, in that they fall far short of what is required to ensure the planet stays below the 2 degrees Celsius temperature rise above pre-industrial levels that has been widely accepted as the goal to avert the most disastrous impacts of climate change.

=== Major Events: ===

<big>1990: Kyoto Protocol</big> – more than 160 countries participated; target to reduce emission by 2012 

''*Side note: 55 developed countries participated; they constitute 55% of 1990’s emission*'' 
 

'''Key control mechanisms'''
(So you have idea of some of the ideas the international community has come up with) 

'''Primary--national measures''' 

Additional: 

1. International Emission Trading 

2. The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) 

''Defined in Article 12 of the Protocol, allows a country with an emission-reduction or emission-limitation commitment under the Kyoto Protocol (Annex B Party) to implement an emission-reduction project in developing countries. Such projects can earn saleable certified emission reduction (CER) credits, each equivalent to one tonne of CO2, which can be counted towards meeting Kyoto targets'' <ref name="kyoto"> UNFCCC, Kyoto Protocol Website. Retrieved on May 20th 2016 from: http://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol/mechanisms/clean_development_mechanism/items/2718.php </ref> 

3. Joint Implementation
''The mechanism known as “joint implementation,” defined in Article 6 of the Kyoto Protocol, allows a country with an emission reduction or limitation commitment under the Kyoto Protocol (Annex B Party) to earn emission reduction units (ERUs) from an emission-reduction or emission removal project in another Annex B Party, each equivalent to one tonne of CO2, which can be counted towards meeting its Kyoto target.
Joint implementation offers Parties a flexible and cost-efficient means of fulfilling a part of their Kyoto commitments, while the host Party benefits from foreign investment and technology transfer.''<ref name="kyoto"/>

<big>2012: Kyoto Protocol second commitment period -- Doha Amendment</big>
Essential Update: non-ratification of USA, and withdrawal of Canada 
Result: Amendment not yet in effect since 144 ratification is needed, but only has 65 so far.
<ref> UN Treaty Collection, 7 .c Doha Amendment to the Kyoto Protocol. Retrieved on May 20th, 2016 from: https://treaties.un.org/pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXVII-7-c&chapter=27&lang=en </ref> 
 
<big>2015: United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) at its 21st Session in Paris & Adoption of Paris Agreement</big> 
 
<big>2016: UNFCCC 43rd Session</big> (Nairobi, Kenya, 11 – 13 April 2016), the IPCC Panel decided to accept the UNFCCC’s invitation to provide a special report in 2018 on the impacts of global warming of 1.5 ºC above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, and to prepare a Special Report on this topic '''in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development and efforts to eradicate poverty''' <ref> IPCC, Fifth Assessment. Retrieved on May 20th, 2016 from: http://www.ipcc.ch/report/sr15/ </ref>

==Recent Statistics on International Emissions==

[[File:Global anthropogenic CO2 emissions.png|x500px|:Global anthropogenic CO2 emissions]] 

[[File:Top 10 Countries - Gross Emission.png|x500px|Top 10 Countries - Gross Emission 2011]] 

[[File:Top 10 Countries - Per Capita Emission.png|x500px|Top 10 Countries - Per Capita Emission 2011]] 

[[File:2012 Emission Related Figures (Gross, Per Capita, Intensity & Benefit).png|x500px|2012 Emission Related Figures (Gross, Per Capita, Intensity & Benefit)]] 

==Climate Change Resources and References==
<references/>

===== ~Comics to spice things up~ =====

http://cascadiaworkshops.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/climate-change-of-course.jpg 

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/501799583454791488/ 

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/386605949233228852/ 

==Political Science Perspectives==

<big>'''What Would A Political Scientist Do?'''</big>

===Collective Action Problem===
1) One approach to this issue is to think of it in terms of a collective action problem. The scale of the climate change problem is such that individual and voluntary actions by citizens and corporations are not adequate to satisfactorily address the issue. Government policy is required. But governments around the world have not been able to collectively agree on who should bear what responsibilities. Without such coordination, governments are reluctant to get too far ahead of other countries insofar as they worry about being taken advantage of by other countries if they implement policy changes like regulations that are perceived as carrying a negative economic impact, or spending on programs that incur costs not born by other countries. 
Moreover, some countries may think that their own individual contribution to climate change mitigation may not make that much of a difference, and thus be reticent to implement meaningful commitments. However, if many countries think this way, then too many will seek to avoid mitigation action, and too few will contribute. Some scholars in political science are skeptical that such collective action problems can be overcome by states, believing that states will protect their individual economic interests at the expense of the collective climate good. Others point to more successful efforts such as the '''Montreal Protocol''' dealing with ozone as demonstrating that sometimes states can create international institutions that coordinate their action, provide information and other benefits to produce shared commitments. 
At the latest round of global climate change negotiations in Paris in December of 2015, countries made individual (rather than collectively agreed upon) commitments of what they are prepared to do. For up to date information on these Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs), click [http://cait.wri.org/indc/ here]. So far the skeptics would seem right on this particular issue. Unless state economic interests happen to converge, or the most powerful states in the system use their influence to push through action (regarded as highly unlikely), there is not much room for optimism from this point of view, particularly since powerful corporations often have great influence on government positions, and many such corporations have tremendous investment in sustaining carbon-based economies. 

However, consider whether there is room here to explore how and why governments might act not just on short-term economic interests but on longer term interests and even other interests such as environmental ones? Some argue that the transition to a less carbon-intensive economies is technically and economically feasible.

 

===Individual Psychology and Ideology===

2) A second way of thinking about this issue focuses not on the international negotiating dynamics and state interests, but at the level of individual psychology and ideology. We know that humans have many biases when approaching complex social problems – to illustrate how they may operate importantly in this case, consider the following questions:

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Question'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* How important do you think it is that your government, along with other leading emitting countries, acts urgently to reduce greenhouse gas emissions?

</div>
|}

A. Extremely 

B. Very 

C. Somewhat 

D. Not very 

E. unimportant

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Question'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* ii) Over the past 12 months, have you:

</div>
|}

A. Attended a rally or protest about climate change 

B. Written to an elected official advocating climate action 

C. Signed a petition advocating political action on climate change 

D. Alternative involvements such as changing your lifestyle to more sustainable practices (riding a bicycle to work / school instead of taking a car, and so on). 

E. None of the above 

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Also think about:'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* Do your own actions really match up to the level of concern you think climate change demands?

</div>
|}

Climate change is a kind of problem that is a bad match for some of our powerful [http://www.climateconviction.org/ psychological biases]. Namely, psychologists have found that
* We tend to have trouble imagining a future drastically different from the present.
* We tend to block out complex problems that lack simple solutions.
* We tend to dislike delayed benefits and so are reluctant to sacrifice today for future gains
* We tend to find it harder to confront problems that creep up on us than emergencies that hit quickly.

Tom Toles has a great comic comparing humankinds' approach to climate change to the famous experiment that showed while frogs will jump out of a pot of hot water if they are dropped into it, they will sit in a pot of mild water until it gets so hot it boils - we can't post it here but google it and find it!

These biases may help explain why climate change appears to have not yet aroused sufficient citizen concern in enough countries to make it impossible for governments to continue to avoid making adequate commitments for climate change mitigation. On the other hand, there are other kinds of psychological triggers that perhaps could be tapped into to garner more support – for example, ''fear'' is often a very powerful, primal motivator. But framing climate change in fearful terms (perhaps like Al Gore's well-known film [https://www.algore.com/library/an-inconvenient-truth-dvd Inconvenient Truth] - see what reaction you have to this film) may lead to avoidance of the issue – are there empowering framings that might more successfully tap into some of our psychological tendencies? ' 

===Political Philosophy===
3) A final way of approaching this issue that will be considered here has been to think more like a political philosopher and identify what the most just or fair approach to this issue might be that all or most could agree to in terms of who has the '''responsibility''' to do what. These approaches focus on issues such as whose practices to date have caused global climate change, whose practices now are contributing to climate change, who has benefited from the industrialization processes that have produced climate change, and who has the ability to pay etc.

4) Student Activity: Consider and bring your ideas to discuss in brainstorming sessions: Are there other ways of approaching this issue that might be more productive, or avenues within the above approaches that might be useful?

===Teaching Resources===
*How might you incorporate this case study into your course, discussions and assignments?

==What would an XX Do?==
*Respond to these questions: How would an XX, approach responding to the problem outlined in this case study, and what are some responses they might offer?
*What elements of the case would they be most likely to focus on and why?
*What kinds of questions would they ask?
*What kinds of disciplinary approaches or methodology might they use?
*In answering these questions, draw from existing literature from this discipline where possible, considering especially how similar problems have been approached.

===Teaching Resources===
* How might an instructor in XX incorporate this case study into their course readings, discussions, and assignments?

[[Category: Open Case Studies]]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Template

2016-05-31T18:17:16Z

RichardPrice: /* Collective Action Problem */

<big>=Global Climate Justice=</big>

==Goal and Objectives==

To stimulate students to try to generate original ways to approach or frame the issue of global climate change that might provide a more productive path forward.

==Introduction==

===Framing the Problem===
What distribution of adjustment costs for climate change mitigation is fair, and should be acceptable to the most (important) countries?

Are there ways of framing the issue that could be more effective in galvanizing effective action?

Are problem-solving approaches to negotiating such environmental problems inadequate, such that more holistic ecological ethical approaches are needed? How feasible might be the adoption of such perspectives? Secondary case studies on the development of bans on killing of whales and use of animals for research might be able to show us the challenges and opportunities involved in how such changes may occur globally.

==Context and Status of Climate Change==

===Significance of the Issue===
* Human influence on the climate system is clear, and recent anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases are the highest in history. 
Industrialization and urbanization --> Anthropogenic GHGs emissions & Radiative forcing 

* Recent climate changes is projected to have widespread impacts on human and natural systems under various future emission scenarios. 
 

''Two perspectives:'' human's impact causing climate change & climate change's impact forcing human to adapt / make changes

'''Impacts (what is at stake?)'''

The most immediate effect of climate change is the increase of temperature, but the actual impacts of climate change stretch far beyond a “2 C° hotter summer”. 
The main impacts attributed to climate change include intensified extreme events: droughts, flooding, heat waves, cyclones & thunderstorms, and wildfires. As well as the following effects: 

1. Glacial melting & coastal erosion 

2. Water availability and distribution 

[[File:Arctic Glacial Melting and Future Projection.png|thumb|Arctic Glacial Melting and Future Projection]]

3. Disruption to ecosystem (abundance and activities) 

4. Impact on food production (a likely decrease in crop yield) 

5. Human health: pollution, spread of diseases 

{{#widget:YouTube|id=_EWOrZQ3L-c|height=315|width=420}}<ref > International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme, Retrieved on 05/19/2016 from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EWOrZQ3L-c&feature=youtu.be </ref>
Source: International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme

 

* The first major conference on global climate change took place in Rio de Janeiro in 1982 and produced the Framework Convention on Climate Change. Subsequent rounds of negotiations have taken place in the form of preparatory meetings and subsequent conferences of states parties, including the 2009 Copenhagen Conference of the Parties to the Convention and the Paris Conference of 2015. 
While assessments of these negotiations vary somewhat, far and away the dominant view is that the results of these global negotiations to date have failed, in that they fall far short of what is required to ensure the planet stays below the 2 degrees Celsius temperature rise above pre-industrial levels that has been widely accepted as the goal to avert the most disastrous impacts of climate change.

=== Major Events: ===

<big>1990: Kyoto Protocol</big> – more than 160 countries participated; target to reduce emission by 2012 

''*Side note: 55 developed countries participated; they constitute 55% of 1990’s emission*'' 
 

'''Key control mechanisms'''
(So you have idea of some of the ideas the international community has come up with) 

'''Primary--national measures''' 

Additional: 

1. International Emission Trading 

2. The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) 

''Defined in Article 12 of the Protocol, allows a country with an emission-reduction or emission-limitation commitment under the Kyoto Protocol (Annex B Party) to implement an emission-reduction project in developing countries. Such projects can earn saleable certified emission reduction (CER) credits, each equivalent to one tonne of CO2, which can be counted towards meeting Kyoto targets'' <ref name="kyoto"> UNFCCC, Kyoto Protocol Website. Retrieved on May 20th 2016 from: http://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol/mechanisms/clean_development_mechanism/items/2718.php </ref> 

3. Joint Implementation
''The mechanism known as “joint implementation,” defined in Article 6 of the Kyoto Protocol, allows a country with an emission reduction or limitation commitment under the Kyoto Protocol (Annex B Party) to earn emission reduction units (ERUs) from an emission-reduction or emission removal project in another Annex B Party, each equivalent to one tonne of CO2, which can be counted towards meeting its Kyoto target.
Joint implementation offers Parties a flexible and cost-efficient means of fulfilling a part of their Kyoto commitments, while the host Party benefits from foreign investment and technology transfer.''<ref name="kyoto"/>

<big>2012: Kyoto Protocol second commitment period -- Doha Amendment</big>
Essential Update: non-ratification of USA, and withdrawal of Canada 
Result: Amendment not yet in effect since 144 ratification is needed, but only has 65 so far.
<ref> UN Treaty Collection, 7 .c Doha Amendment to the Kyoto Protocol. Retrieved on May 20th, 2016 from: https://treaties.un.org/pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXVII-7-c&chapter=27&lang=en </ref> 
 
<big>2015: United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) at its 21st Session in Paris & Adoption of Paris Agreement</big> 
 
<big>2016: UNFCCC 43rd Session</big> (Nairobi, Kenya, 11 – 13 April 2016), the IPCC Panel decided to accept the UNFCCC’s invitation to provide a special report in 2018 on the impacts of global warming of 1.5 ºC above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, and to prepare a Special Report on this topic '''in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development and efforts to eradicate poverty''' <ref> IPCC, Fifth Assessment. Retrieved on May 20th, 2016 from: http://www.ipcc.ch/report/sr15/ </ref>

==Recent Statistics on International Emissions==

[[File:Global anthropogenic CO2 emissions.png|x500px|:Global anthropogenic CO2 emissions]] 

[[File:Top 10 Countries - Gross Emission.png|x500px|Top 10 Countries - Gross Emission 2011]] 

[[File:Top 10 Countries - Per Capita Emission.png|x500px|Top 10 Countries - Per Capita Emission 2011]] 

[[File:2012 Emission Related Figures (Gross, Per Capita, Intensity & Benefit).png|x500px|2012 Emission Related Figures (Gross, Per Capita, Intensity & Benefit)]] 

==Climate Change Resources and References==
<references/>

===== ~Comics to spice things up~ =====

http://cascadiaworkshops.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/climate-change-of-course.jpg 

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/501799583454791488/ 

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/386605949233228852/ 

==Political Science Perspectives==

<big>'''What Would A Political Scientist Do?'''</big>

===Collective Action Problem===
1) One approach to this issue is to think of it in terms of a collective action problem. The scale of the climate change problem is such that individual and voluntary actions by citizens and corporations are not adequate to satisfactorily address the issue. Government policy is required. But governments around the world have not been able to collectively agree on who should bear what responsibilities. Without such coordination, governments are reluctant to get too far ahead of other countries insofar as they worry about being taken advantage of by other countries if they implement policy changes like regulations that are perceived as carrying a negative economic impact, or spending on programs that incur costs not born by other countries. 
Moreover, some countries may think that their own individual contribution to climate change mitigation may not make that much of a difference, and thus be reticent to implement meaningful commitments. However, if many countries think this way, then too many will seek to avoid mitigation action, and too few will contribute. Some scholars in political science are skeptical that such collective action problems can be overcome by states, believing that states will protect their individual economic interests at the expense of the collective climate good. Others point to more successful efforts such as the '''Montreal Protocol''' dealing with ozone as demonstrating that sometimes states can create international institutions that coordinate their action, provide information and other benefits to produce shared commitments. 
At the latest round of global climate change negotiations in Paris in December of 2015, countries made individual (rather than collectively agreed upon) commitments of what they are prepared to do. For up to date information on these Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs), click [http://cait.wri.org/indc/ here]. So far the skeptics would seem right on this particular issue. Unless state economic interests happen to converge, or the most powerful states in the system use their influence to push through action (regarded as highly unlikely), there is not much room for optimism from this point of view, particularly since powerful corporations often have great influence on government positions, and many such corporations have tremendous investment in sustaining carbon-based economies. 

However, consider whether there is room here to explore how and why governments might act not just on short-term economic interests but on longer term interests and even other interests such as environmental ones? Some argue that the transition to a less carbon-intensive economies is technically and economically feasible.

 

===Individual Ideology===

2) A second way of thinking about this issue focuses not on the international negotiating dynamics and state interests, but at the level of individual psychology. We know that humans have many biases when approaching complex social problems – to illustrate how they may operate importantly in this case, consider the following questions:

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Question'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* How important do you think it is that your government, along with other leading emitting countries, acts urgently to reduce greenhouse gas emissions?

</div>
|}

A. Extremely 

B. Very 

C. Somewhat 

D. Not very 

E. unimportant

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Question'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* ii) Over the past 12 months, have you:

</div>
|}

A. Attended a rally or protest about climate change 

B. Written to an elected official advocating climate action 

C. Signed a petition advocating political action on climate change 

D. Alternative involvements such as changing your lifestyle to more sustainable practices (riding a bicycle to work / school instead of taking a car, and so on). 

E. None of the above 

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Also think about:'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* Do your own actions really match up to the level of concern you think climate change demands?

</div>
|}

Climate change is a kind of problem that is a bad match for some of our powerful psychological biases. Namely, psychologists have found that
* We tend to have trouble imagining a future drastically different from the present.
* We tend to block out complex problems that lack simple solutions.
* We tend to dislike delayed benefits and so are reluctant to sacrifice today for future gains
* We tend to find it harder to confront problems that creep up on us than emergencies that hit quickly.

[insert Tom Toles comic here]

These biases may help explain why climate change appears to have not yet aroused sufficient citizen concern in enough countries to make it impossible for governments to continue to avoid making adequate commitments for climate change mitigation. On the other hand, there are other kinds of psychological triggers that perhaps could be tapped into to garner more support – for example, ''fear'' is often a very powerful, primal motivator. But framing climate change in fearful terms may lead to avoidance of the issue – are there empowering framings that might more successfully tap into some of our psychological tendencies? ''(Connections to psychological links / resources would be useful here!)'' 

===Political Philosophy===
3) A final way of approaching this issue that will be considered here has been to think more like a political philosopher and identify what the most just or fair approach to this issue might be that all or most could agree to in terms of who has the '''responsibility''' to do what. These approaches focus on issues such as whose practices to date have caused global climate change, whose practices now are contributing to climate change, who has benefited from the industrialization processes that have produced climate change, and who has the ability to pay etc.

4) Student Activity: Consider and bring your ideas to discuss in brainstorming sessions: Are there other ways of approaching this issue that might be more productive, or avenues within the above approaches that might be useful?

===Teaching Resources===
*How might you incorporate this case study into your course, discussions and assignments?

==What would an XX Do?==
*Respond to these questions: How would an XX, approach responding to the problem outlined in this case study, and what are some responses they might offer?
*What elements of the case would they be most likely to focus on and why?
*What kinds of questions would they ask?
*What kinds of disciplinary approaches or methodology might they use?
*In answering these questions, draw from existing literature from this discipline where possible, considering especially how similar problems have been approached.

===Teaching Resources===
* How might an instructor in XX incorporate this case study into their course readings, discussions, and assignments?

[[Category: Open Case Studies]]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Template

2016-05-31T18:11:05Z

RichardPrice: /* Major Events: */

<big>=Global Climate Justice=</big>

==Goal and Objectives==

To stimulate students to try to generate original ways to approach or frame the issue of global climate change that might provide a more productive path forward.

==Introduction==

===Framing the Problem===
What distribution of adjustment costs for climate change mitigation is fair, and should be acceptable to the most (important) countries?

Are there ways of framing the issue that could be more effective in galvanizing effective action?

Are problem-solving approaches to negotiating such environmental problems inadequate, such that more holistic ecological ethical approaches are needed? How feasible might be the adoption of such perspectives? Secondary case studies on the development of bans on killing of whales and use of animals for research might be able to show us the challenges and opportunities involved in how such changes may occur globally.

==Context and Status of Climate Change==

===Significance of the Issue===
* Human influence on the climate system is clear, and recent anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases are the highest in history. 
Industrialization and urbanization --> Anthropogenic GHGs emissions & Radiative forcing 

* Recent climate changes is projected to have widespread impacts on human and natural systems under various future emission scenarios. 
 

''Two perspectives:'' human's impact causing climate change & climate change's impact forcing human to adapt / make changes

'''Impacts (what is at stake?)'''

The most immediate effect of climate change is the increase of temperature, but the actual impacts of climate change stretch far beyond a “2 C° hotter summer”. 
The main impacts attributed to climate change include intensified extreme events: droughts, flooding, heat waves, cyclones & thunderstorms, and wildfires. As well as the following effects: 

1. Glacial melting & coastal erosion 

2. Water availability and distribution 

[[File:Arctic Glacial Melting and Future Projection.png|thumb|Arctic Glacial Melting and Future Projection]]

3. Disruption to ecosystem (abundance and activities) 

4. Impact on food production (a likely decrease in crop yield) 

5. Human health: pollution, spread of diseases 

{{#widget:YouTube|id=_EWOrZQ3L-c|height=315|width=420}}<ref > International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme, Retrieved on 05/19/2016 from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EWOrZQ3L-c&feature=youtu.be </ref>
Source: International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme

 

* The first major conference on global climate change took place in Rio de Janeiro in 1982 and produced the Framework Convention on Climate Change. Subsequent rounds of negotiations have taken place in the form of preparatory meetings and subsequent conferences of states parties, including the 2009 Copenhagen Conference of the Parties to the Convention and the Paris Conference of 2015. 
While assessments of these negotiations vary somewhat, far and away the dominant view is that the results of these global negotiations to date have failed, in that they fall far short of what is required to ensure the planet stays below the 2 degrees Celsius temperature rise above pre-industrial levels that has been widely accepted as the goal to avert the most disastrous impacts of climate change.

=== Major Events: ===

<big>1990: Kyoto Protocol</big> – more than 160 countries participated; target to reduce emission by 2012 

''*Side note: 55 developed countries participated; they constitute 55% of 1990’s emission*'' 
 

'''Key control mechanisms'''
(So you have idea of some of the ideas the international community has come up with) 

'''Primary--national measures''' 

Additional: 

1. International Emission Trading 

2. The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) 

''Defined in Article 12 of the Protocol, allows a country with an emission-reduction or emission-limitation commitment under the Kyoto Protocol (Annex B Party) to implement an emission-reduction project in developing countries. Such projects can earn saleable certified emission reduction (CER) credits, each equivalent to one tonne of CO2, which can be counted towards meeting Kyoto targets'' <ref name="kyoto"> UNFCCC, Kyoto Protocol Website. Retrieved on May 20th 2016 from: http://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol/mechanisms/clean_development_mechanism/items/2718.php </ref> 

3. Joint Implementation
''The mechanism known as “joint implementation,” defined in Article 6 of the Kyoto Protocol, allows a country with an emission reduction or limitation commitment under the Kyoto Protocol (Annex B Party) to earn emission reduction units (ERUs) from an emission-reduction or emission removal project in another Annex B Party, each equivalent to one tonne of CO2, which can be counted towards meeting its Kyoto target.
Joint implementation offers Parties a flexible and cost-efficient means of fulfilling a part of their Kyoto commitments, while the host Party benefits from foreign investment and technology transfer.''<ref name="kyoto"/>

<big>2012: Kyoto Protocol second commitment period -- Doha Amendment</big>
Essential Update: non-ratification of USA, and withdrawal of Canada 
Result: Amendment not yet in effect since 144 ratification is needed, but only has 65 so far.
<ref> UN Treaty Collection, 7 .c Doha Amendment to the Kyoto Protocol. Retrieved on May 20th, 2016 from: https://treaties.un.org/pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXVII-7-c&chapter=27&lang=en </ref> 
 
<big>2015: United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) at its 21st Session in Paris & Adoption of Paris Agreement</big> 
 
<big>2016: UNFCCC 43rd Session</big> (Nairobi, Kenya, 11 – 13 April 2016), the IPCC Panel decided to accept the UNFCCC’s invitation to provide a special report in 2018 on the impacts of global warming of 1.5 ºC above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, and to prepare a Special Report on this topic '''in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development and efforts to eradicate poverty''' <ref> IPCC, Fifth Assessment. Retrieved on May 20th, 2016 from: http://www.ipcc.ch/report/sr15/ </ref>

==Recent Statistics on International Emissions==

[[File:Global anthropogenic CO2 emissions.png|x500px|:Global anthropogenic CO2 emissions]] 

[[File:Top 10 Countries - Gross Emission.png|x500px|Top 10 Countries - Gross Emission 2011]] 

[[File:Top 10 Countries - Per Capita Emission.png|x500px|Top 10 Countries - Per Capita Emission 2011]] 

[[File:2012 Emission Related Figures (Gross, Per Capita, Intensity & Benefit).png|x500px|2012 Emission Related Figures (Gross, Per Capita, Intensity & Benefit)]] 

==Climate Change Resources and References==
<references/>

===== ~Comics to spice things up~ =====

http://cascadiaworkshops.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/climate-change-of-course.jpg 

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/501799583454791488/ 

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/386605949233228852/ 

==Political Science Perspectives==

<big>'''What Would A Political Scientist Do?'''</big>

===Collective Action Problem===
1) One approach to this issue is to think of it in terms of a collective action problem. The scale of the climate change problem is such that individual and voluntary actions by citizens and corporations are not adequate to satisfactorily address the issue. Government policy is required. But governments around the world have not been able to collectively agree on who should bear what responsibilities. Without such coordination, governments are reluctant to get too far ahead of other countries insofar as they worry about being taken advantage of by other countries if they implement policy changes like regulations that are perceived as carrying a negative economic impact, or spending on programs that incur costs not born by other countries. 
Moreover, some countries may think that their own individual contribution to climate change mitigation may not make that much of a difference, and thus be reticent to implement meaningful commitments. However, if many countries think this way, then too many will seek to avoid mitigation action, and too few will contribute. Some scholars in political science are skeptical that such collective action problems can be overcome by states, believing that states will protect their individual economic interests at the expense of the collective climate good. Others point to more successful efforts such as the '''Montreal Protocol''' dealing with ozone as demonstrating that sometimes states can create international institutions that coordinate their action, provide information and other benefits to produce shared commitments. 
At the latest round of global climate change negotiations in Paris in December of 2015, countries made individual (rather than collectively agreed upon) commitments of what they are prepared to do (a bit more on results of Paris here, and/or useful links) – so far the skeptics would seem right on this particular issue. Unless state economic interests happen to converge, or the most powerful states in the system use their influence to push through action (regarded as highly unlikely), there is not much room for optimism from this point of view, particularly since powerful corporations often have great influence on government positions, and many such corporations have tremendous investment in sustaining carbon-based economies. 

However, consider whether there is room here to explore how and why governments might act not just on short-term economic interests but on longer term interests and even other interests such as environmental ones? Some argue that the transition to a less carbon-intensive economies is technically and economically feasible.

 

===Individual Ideology===

2) A second way of thinking about this issue focuses not on the international negotiating dynamics and state interests, but at the level of individual psychology. We know that humans have many biases when approaching complex social problems – to illustrate how they may operate importantly in this case, consider the following questions:

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Question'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* How important do you think it is that your government, along with other leading emitting countries, acts urgently to reduce greenhouse gas emissions?

</div>
|}

A. Extremely 

B. Very 

C. Somewhat 

D. Not very 

E. unimportant

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Question'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* ii) Over the past 12 months, have you:

</div>
|}

A. Attended a rally or protest about climate change 

B. Written to an elected official advocating climate action 

C. Signed a petition advocating political action on climate change 

D. Alternative involvements such as changing your lifestyle to more sustainable practices (riding a bicycle to work / school instead of taking a car, and so on). 

E. None of the above 

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Also think about:'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* Do your own actions really match up to the level of concern you think climate change demands?

</div>
|}

Climate change is a kind of problem that is a bad match for some of our powerful psychological biases. Namely, psychologists have found that
* We tend to have trouble imagining a future drastically different from the present.
* We tend to block out complex problems that lack simple solutions.
* We tend to dislike delayed benefits and so are reluctant to sacrifice today for future gains
* We tend to find it harder to confront problems that creep up on us than emergencies that hit quickly.

[insert Tom Toles comic here]

These biases may help explain why climate change appears to have not yet aroused sufficient citizen concern in enough countries to make it impossible for governments to continue to avoid making adequate commitments for climate change mitigation. On the other hand, there are other kinds of psychological triggers that perhaps could be tapped into to garner more support – for example, ''fear'' is often a very powerful, primal motivator. But framing climate change in fearful terms may lead to avoidance of the issue – are there empowering framings that might more successfully tap into some of our psychological tendencies? ''(Connections to psychological links / resources would be useful here!)'' 

===Political Philosophy===
3) A final way of approaching this issue that will be considered here has been to think more like a political philosopher and identify what the most just or fair approach to this issue might be that all or most could agree to in terms of who has the '''responsibility''' to do what. These approaches focus on issues such as whose practices to date have caused global climate change, whose practices now are contributing to climate change, who has benefited from the industrialization processes that have produced climate change, and who has the ability to pay etc.

4) Student Activity: Consider and bring your ideas to discuss in brainstorming sessions: Are there other ways of approaching this issue that might be more productive, or avenues within the above approaches that might be useful?

===Teaching Resources===
*How might you incorporate this case study into your course, discussions and assignments?

==What would an XX Do?==
*Respond to these questions: How would an XX, approach responding to the problem outlined in this case study, and what are some responses they might offer?
*What elements of the case would they be most likely to focus on and why?
*What kinds of questions would they ask?
*What kinds of disciplinary approaches or methodology might they use?
*In answering these questions, draw from existing literature from this discipline where possible, considering especially how similar problems have been approached.

===Teaching Resources===
* How might an instructor in XX incorporate this case study into their course readings, discussions, and assignments?

[[Category: Open Case Studies]]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Template

2016-05-19T23:15:17Z

RichardPrice:

=Global Climate Justice=

==Goal and Objectives==

To stimulate students to try to generate original ways to approach or frame the issue of global climate change that might provide a more productive path forward.

==Introduction==

===Framing the Problem===
What distribution of adjustment costs for climate change mitigation is fair, and should be acceptable to the most (important) countries?

Are there ways of framing the issue that could be more effective in galvanizing effective action?

Are problem-solving approaches to negotiating such environmental problems inadequate, such that more holistic ecological ethical approaches are needed? How feasible might be the adoption of such perspectives? Secondary case studies on the development of bans on killing of whales and use of animals for research might be able to show us the challenges and opportunities involved in how such changes may occur globally.

===Historical Context===

The first major conference on global climate change took place in Rio de Janeiro in 1982 and produced the Framework Convention on Climate Change. Subsequent rounds of negotiations have taken place in the form of preparatory meetings and subsequent conferences of states parties, including the 2009 Copenhagen Conference of the Parties to the Convention and the Paris Conference of 2015. While assessments of these negotiations vary somewhat, far and away the dominant view is that the results of these global negotiations to date have failed, in that they fall far short of what is required to ensure the planet stays below the 2 degrees Celsius temperature rise above pre-industrial levels that has been widely accepted as the goal to avert the most disastrous impacts of climate change.

 
Implications (what is at stake?)

The most immediate effect of climate change is the increase of temperature, but the actual impacts of climate change stretch far beyond a “2 C° hotter summer”.
The main impacts attributed to climate change include intensified extreme events: droughts, flooding, heat waves, cyclones & thunderstorms, and wildfires. All this in turn has the following effects
1. Glacial melting & coastal erosion
2. Water availability and distribution
3. Disruption to ecosystem (abundance and activities)
4. Impact on food production
5. Human health: pollution, spread of disease.

==Climate Change Status Resources and References==
could put background references and links here on climate change; for justice approaches, could have another reference section below

to be added: links and videos and references

==Political Science Perspectives==

==What Would A Political Scientist Do?==

(could add 2nd level headings to distinguish the approaches)

1) One approach to this issue is to think of it in terms of a collective action problem. The scale of the climate change problem is such that individual and voluntary actions by citizens and corporations are not adequate to satisfactorily address the issue. Government policy is required. But governments around the world have not been able to collectively agree on who should bear what responsibilities. Without such coordination, governments are reluctant to get too far ahead of other countries insofar as they worry about being taken advantage of by other countries if they implement policy changes like regulations that are perceived as carrying a negative economic impact, or spending on programs that incur costs not born by other countries. Moreover, some countries may think that their own individual contribution to climate change mitigation may not make that much of a difference, and thus be reticent to implement meaningful commitments. However, if many countries think this way, then too many will seek to avoid mitigation action, and too few will contribute. Some scholars in political science are skeptical that such collective action problems can be overcome by states, believing that states will protect their individual economic interests at the expense of the collective climate good. Others point to more successful efforts such as the Montreal Protocol dealing with ozone as demonstrating that sometimes states can create international institutions that coordinate their action, provide information and other benefits to produce shared commitments. At the latest round of global climate change negotiations in Paris in December of 2015, countries made individual (rather than collectively agreed upon) commitments of what they are prepared to do (a bit more on results of Paris here, and/or useful links) – so far the skeptics would seem right on this particular issue. Unless state economic interests happen to converge, or the most powerful states in the system use their influence to push through action (regarded as highly unlikely), there is not much room for optimism from this point of view, particularly since powerful corporations often have great influence on government positions, and many such corporations have tremendous investment in sustaining carbon-based economies.

However, consider whether there is room here to explore how and why governments might act not just on short-term economic interests but on longer term interests and even other interests such as environmental ones? Some argue that the transition to a less carbon-intensive economies is technically and economically feasible. (help from economists and others here!).

 
2) A second way of thinking about this issue focuses not on the international negotiating dynamics and state interests, but at the level of individual psychology. We know that humans have many biases when approaching complex social problems – to illustrate how they may operate importantly in this case, consider the following questions:

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Question'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* How important do you think it is that your government, along with other leading emitting countries, acts urgently to reduce greenhouse gas emissions?

</div>
|}

A. Extremely 

B. Very 

C. Somewhat 

D. Not very 

E. unimportant

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Question'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* ii) Over the past 12 months, have you:

</div>
|}

A. Attended a rally or protest about climate change 

B. Written to an elected official advocating climate action 

C. Signed a petition advocating political action on climate change 

D. Alternative involvements such as changing your lifestyle to more sustainable practices (riding a bicycle to work / school instead of taking a car, and so on). 

E. None of the above 

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Also think about:'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* Do your own actions really match up to the level of concern you think climate change demands?

</div>
|}

Climate change is a kind of problem that is a bad match for some of our powerful psychological biases. Namely, psychologists have found that
* We tend to have trouble imagining a future drastically different from the present.
* We tend to block out complex problems that lack simple solutions.
* We tend to dislike delayed benefits and so are reluctant to sacrifice today for future gains
* We tend to find it harder to confront problems that creep up on us than emergencies that hit quickly.

[insert Tom Toles comic here]

These biases may help explain why climate change appears to have not yet aroused sufficient citizen concern in enough countries to make it impossible for governments to continue to avoid making adequate commitments for climate change mitigation. On the other hand, there are other kinds of psychological triggers that perhaps could be tapped into to garner more support – for example, fear is often a very powerful, primal motivator. But framing climate change in fearful terms may lead to avoidance of the issue – are there empowering framings that might more successfully tap into some of our psychological tendencies? Connections to psychological links / resources would be useful here!

3) A final way of approaching this issue that will be considered here has been to think more like a political philosopher and identify what the most just or fair approach to this issue might be that all or most could agree to in terms of who has the responsibility to do what. These approaches focus on issues such as whose practices to date have caused global climate change, whose practices now are contributing to climate change, who has benefited from the industrialization processes that have produced climate change, and who has the ability to pay.

4) Student Activity: Consider and bring your ideas to discuss in brainstorming sessions: Are there other ways of approaching this issue that might be more productive, or avenues within the above approaches that might be useful?

===Teaching Resources===
* How might an instructor in political science incorporate this case study into their course readings, discussions, and assignments?

==What would an XX Do?==
*Respond to these questions: How would an XX, approach responding to the problem outlined in this case study, and what are some responses they might offer?
*What elements of the case would they be most likely to focus on and why?
*What kinds of questions would they ask?
*What kinds of disciplinary approaches or methodology might they use?
*In answering these questions, draw from existing literature from this discipline where possible, considering especially how similar problems have been approached.

===Teaching Resources===
* How might an instructor in XX incorporate this case study into their course readings, discussions, and assignments?

[[Category: Open Case Studies]]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Template

2016-05-19T23:13:11Z

RichardPrice:

=Global Climate Justice=

==Goal and Objectives==

To stimulate students to try to generate original ways to approach or frame the issue of global climate change that might provide a more productive path forward.

==Introduction==

===Framing the Problem===
What distribution of adjustment costs for climate change mitigation is fair, and should be acceptable to the most (important) countries?

Are there ways of framing the issue that could be more effective in galvanizing effective action?

Are problem-solving approaches to negotiating such environmental problems inadequate, such that more holistic ecological ethical approaches are needed? How feasible might be the adoption of such perspectives? Secondary case studies on the development of bans on killing of whales and use of animals for research might be able to show us the challenges and opportunities involved in how such changes may occur globally.

===Historical Context===
The most immediate effect of climate change is the increase of temperature, but the actual impacts of climate change stretch far beyond a “2 C° hotter summer”.
The main impacts attributed to climate change include intensified extreme events: droughts, flooding, heat waves, cyclones & thunderstorms, and wildfires. All this in turn has the following effects
1. Glacial melting & coastal erosion
2. Water availability and distribution
3. Disruption to ecosystem (abundance and activities)
4. Impact on food production
5. Human health: pollution, spread of disease.

 
Implications (what is at stake?)

The first major conference on global climate change took place in Rio de Janeiro in 1982 and produced the Framework Convention on Climate Change. Subsequent rounds of negotiations have taken place in the form of preparatory meetings and subsequent conferences of states parties, including the 2009 Copenhagen Conference of the Parties to the Convention and the Paris Conference of 2015. While assessments of these negotiations vary somewhat, far and away the dominant view is that the results of these global negotiations to date have failed, in that they fall far short of what is required to ensure the planet stays below the 2 degrees Celsius temperature rise above pre-industrial levels that has been widely accepted as the goal to avert the most disastrous impacts of climate change.

==Climate Change Status Resources and References==
could put background references and links here on climate change; for justice approaches, could have another reference section below

to be added: links and videos and references

==Political Science Perspectives==

==What Would A Political Scientist Do?==

(could add 2nd level headings to distinguish the approaches)

1) One approach to this issue is to think of it in terms of a collective action problem. The scale of the climate change problem is such that individual and voluntary actions by citizens and corporations are not adequate to satisfactorily address the issue. Government policy is required. But governments around the world have not been able to collectively agree on who should bear what responsibilities. Without such coordination, governments are reluctant to get too far ahead of other countries insofar as they worry about being taken advantage of by other countries if they implement policy changes like regulations that are perceived as carrying a negative economic impact, or spending on programs that incur costs not born by other countries. Moreover, some countries may think that their own individual contribution to climate change mitigation may not make that much of a difference, and thus be reticent to implement meaningful commitments. However, if many countries think this way, then too many will seek to avoid mitigation action, and too few will contribute. Some scholars in political science are skeptical that such collective action problems can be overcome by states, believing that states will protect their individual economic interests at the expense of the collective climate good. Others point to more successful efforts such as the Montreal Protocol dealing with ozone as demonstrating that sometimes states can create international institutions that coordinate their action, provide information and other benefits to produce shared commitments. At the latest round of global climate change negotiations in Paris in December of 2015, countries made individual (rather than collectively agreed upon) commitments of what they are prepared to do (a bit more on results of Paris here, and/or useful links) – so far the skeptics would seem right on this particular issue. Unless state economic interests happen to converge, or the most powerful states in the system use their influence to push through action (regarded as highly unlikely), there is not much room for optimism from this point of view, particularly since powerful corporations often have great influence on government positions, and many such corporations have tremendous investment in sustaining carbon-based economies.

However, consider whether there is room here to explore how and why governments might act not just on short-term economic interests but on longer term interests and even other interests such as environmental ones? Some argue that the transition to a less carbon-intensive economies is technically and economically feasible. (help from economists and others here!).

 
2) A second way of thinking about this issue focuses not on the international negotiating dynamics and state interests, but at the level of individual psychology. We know that humans have many biases when approaching complex social problems – to illustrate how they may operate importantly in this case, consider the following questions:

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Question'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* How important do you think it is that your government, along with other leading emitting countries, acts urgently to reduce greenhouse gas emissions?

</div>
|}

A. Extremely 

B. Very 

C. Somewhat 

D. Not very 

E. unimportant

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Question'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* ii) Over the past 12 months, have you:

</div>
|}

A. Attended a rally or protest about climate change 

B. Written to an elected official advocating climate action 

C. Signed a petition advocating political action on climate change 

D. Alternative involvements such as changing your lifestyle to more sustainable practices (riding a bicycle to work / school instead of taking a car, and so on). 

E. None of the above 

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Also think about:'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* Do your own actions really match up to the level of concern you think climate change demands?

</div>
|}

Climate change is a kind of problem that is a bad match for some of our powerful psychological biases. Namely, psychologists have found that
* We tend to have trouble imagining a future drastically different from the present.
* We tend to block out complex problems that lack simple solutions.
* We tend to dislike delayed benefits and so are reluctant to sacrifice today for future gains
* We tend to find it harder to confront problems that creep up on us than emergencies that hit quickly.

[insert Tom Toles comic here]

These biases may help explain why climate change appears to have not yet aroused sufficient citizen concern in enough countries to make it impossible for governments to continue to avoid making adequate commitments for climate change mitigation. On the other hand, there are other kinds of psychological triggers that perhaps could be tapped into to garner more support – for example, fear is often a very powerful, primal motivator. But framing climate change in fearful terms may lead to avoidance of the issue – are there empowering framings that might more successfully tap into some of our psychological tendencies? Connections to psychological links / resources would be useful here!

3) A final way of approaching this issue that will be considered here has been to think more like a political philosopher and identify what the most just or fair approach to this issue might be that all or most could agree to in terms of who has the responsibility to do what. These approaches focus on issues such as whose practices to date have caused global climate change, whose practices now are contributing to climate change, who has benefited from the industrialization processes that have produced climate change, and who has the ability to pay.

4) Student Activity: Consider and bring your ideas to discuss in brainstorming sessions: Are there other ways of approaching this issue that might be more productive, or avenues within the above approaches that might be useful?

===Teaching Resources===
* How might an instructor in political science incorporate this case study into their course readings, discussions, and assignments?

==What would an XX Do?==
*Respond to these questions: How would an XX, approach responding to the problem outlined in this case study, and what are some responses they might offer?
*What elements of the case would they be most likely to focus on and why?
*What kinds of questions would they ask?
*What kinds of disciplinary approaches or methodology might they use?
*In answering these questions, draw from existing literature from this discipline where possible, considering especially how similar problems have been approached.

===Teaching Resources===
* How might an instructor in XX incorporate this case study into their course readings, discussions, and assignments?

[[Category: Open Case Studies]]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Template

2016-05-19T23:11:20Z

RichardPrice:

=Global Climate Justice=

==Goal and Objectives==
To stimulate students to try to generate original ways to approach or frame the issue of global climate change that might provide a more productive path forward.

==Introduction==

===Framing the Problem===
What distribution of adjustment costs for climate change mitigation is fair, and should be acceptable to the most (important) countries?

Are there ways of framing the issue that could be more effective in galvanizing effective action?

Are problem-solving approaches to negotiating such environmental problems inadequate, such that more holistic ecological ethical approaches are needed? How feasible might be the adoption of such perspectives? Secondary case studies on the development of bans on killing of whales and use of animals for research might be able to show us the challenges and opportunities involved in how such changes may occur globally.

===Historical Context===
The most immediate effect of climate change is the increase of temperature, but the actual impacts of climate change stretch far beyond a “2 C° hotter summer”.
The main impacts attributed to climate change include intensified extreme events: droughts, flooding, heat waves, cyclones & thunderstorms, and wildfires. All this in turn has the following effects
1. Glacial melting & coastal erosion
2. Water availability and distribution
3. Disruption to ecosystem (abundance and activities)
4. Impact on food production
5. Human health: pollution, spread of disease.

 
Implications (what is at stake?)

The first major conference on global climate change took place in Rio de Janeiro in 1982 and produced the Framework Convention on Climate Change. Subsequent rounds of negotiations have taken place in the form of preparatory meetings and subsequent conferences of states parties, including the 2009 Copenhagen Conference of the Parties to the Convention and the Paris Conference of 2015. While assessments of these negotiations vary somewhat, far and away the dominant view is that the results of these global negotiations to date have failed, in that they fall far short of what is required to ensure the planet stays below the 2 degrees Celsius temperature rise above pre-industrial levels that has been widely accepted as the goal to avert the most disastrous impacts of climate change.

==Climate Change Status Resources and References==
could put background references and links here on climate change; for justice approaches, could have another reference section below

to be added: links and videos and references

==Political Science Perspectives==

==What Would A Political Scientist Do?==

(could add 2nd level headings to distinguish the approaches)

1) One approach to this issue is to think of it in terms of a collective action problem. The scale of the climate change problem is such that individual and voluntary actions by citizens and corporations are not adequate to satisfactorily address the issue. Government policy is required. But governments around the world have not been able to collectively agree on who should bear what responsibilities. Without such coordination, governments are reluctant to get too far ahead of other countries insofar as they worry about being taken advantage of by other countries if they implement policy changes like regulations that are perceived as carrying a negative economic impact, or spending on programs that incur costs not born by other countries. Moreover, some countries may think that their own individual contribution to climate change mitigation may not make that much of a difference, and thus be reticent to implement meaningful commitments. However, if many countries think this way, then too many will seek to avoid mitigation action, and too few will contribute. Some scholars in political science are skeptical that such collective action problems can be overcome by states, believing that states will protect their individual economic interests at the expense of the collective climate good. Others point to more successful efforts such as the Montreal Protocol dealing with ozone as demonstrating that sometimes states can create international institutions that coordinate their action, provide information and other benefits to produce shared commitments. At the latest round of global climate change negotiations in Paris in December of 2015, countries made individual (rather than collectively agreed upon) commitments of what they are prepared to do (a bit more on results of Paris here, and/or useful links) – so far the skeptics would seem right on this particular issue. Unless state economic interests happen to converge, or the most powerful states in the system use their influence to push through action (regarded as highly unlikely), there is not much room for optimism from this point of view, particularly since powerful corporations often have great influence on government positions, and many such corporations have tremendous investment in sustaining carbon-based economies.

However, consider whether there is room here to explore how and why governments might act not just on short-term economic interests but on longer term interests and even other interests such as environmental ones? Some argue that the transition to a less carbon-intensive economies is technically and economically feasible. (help from economists and others here!).

 
2) A second way of thinking about this issue focuses not on the international negotiating dynamics and state interests, but at the level of individual psychology. We know that humans have many biases when approaching complex social problems – to illustrate how they may operate importantly in this case, consider the following questions:

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Question'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* How important do you think it is that your government, along with other leading emitting countries, acts urgently to reduce greenhouse gas emissions?

</div>
|}

A. Extremely 

B. Very 

C. Somewhat 

D. Not very 

E. unimportant

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Question'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* ii) Over the past 12 months, have you:

</div>
|}

A. Attended a rally or protest about climate change 

B. Written to an elected official advocating climate action 

C. Signed a petition advocating political action on climate change 

D. Alternative involvements such as changing your lifestyle to more sustainable practices (riding a bicycle to work / school instead of taking a car, and so on). 

E. None of the above 

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Also think about:'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* Do your own actions really match up to the level of concern you think climate change demands?

</div>
|}

Climate change is a kind of problem that is a bad match for some of our powerful psychological biases. Namely, psychologists have found that
* We tend to have trouble imagining a future drastically different from the present.
* We tend to block out complex problems that lack simple solutions.
* We tend to dislike delayed benefits and so are reluctant to sacrifice today for future gains
* We tend to find it harder to confront problems that creep up on us than emergencies that hit quickly.

[insert Tom Toles comic here]

These biases may help explain why climate change appears to have not yet aroused sufficient citizen concern in enough countries to make it impossible for governments to continue to avoid making adequate commitments for climate change mitigation. On the other hand, there are other kinds of psychological triggers that perhaps could be tapped into to garner more support – for example, fear is often a very powerful, primal motivator. But framing climate change in fearful terms may lead to avoidance of the issue – are there empowering framings that might more successfully tap into some of our psychological tendencies? Connections to psychological links / resources would be useful here!

3) A final way of approaching this issue that will be considered here has been to think more like a political philosopher and identify what the most just or fair approach to this issue might be that all or most could agree to in terms of who has the responsibility to do what. These approaches focus on issues such as whose practices to date have caused global climate change, whose practices now are contributing to climate change, who has benefited from the industrialization processes that have produced climate change, and who has the ability to pay.

4) Student Activity: Consider and bring your ideas to discuss in brainstorming sessions: Are there other ways of approaching this issue that might be more productive, or avenues within the above approaches that might be useful?

===Teaching Resources===
* How might an instructor in political science incorporate this case study into their course readings, discussions, and assignments?

==What would an XX Do?==
*Respond to these questions: How would an XX, approach responding to the problem outlined in this case study, and what are some responses they might offer?
*What elements of the case would they be most likely to focus on and why?
*What kinds of questions would they ask?
*What kinds of disciplinary approaches or methodology might they use?
*In answering these questions, draw from existing literature from this discipline where possible, considering especially how similar problems have been approached.

===Teaching Resources===
* How might an instructor in XX incorporate this case study into their course readings, discussions, and assignments?

[[Category: Open Case Studies]]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Template

2016-05-19T22:57:51Z

RichardPrice: /* Historical Context */

=Global Climate Justice=

==Goal and Objectives==
To stimulate students to try to generate original ways to approach or frame the issue of global climate change that might provide a more productive path forward.

==Introduction==

===Framing the Problem===
What distribution of adjustment costs for climate change mitigation is fair, and should be acceptable to the most (important) countries?

Are there ways of framing the issue that could be more effective in galvanizing effective action?

Are problem-solving approaches to negotiating such environmental problems inadequate, such that more holistic ecological ethical approaches are needed? How feasible might be the adoption of such perspectives? Secondary case studies on the development of bans on killing of whales and use of animals for research might be able to show us the challenges and opportunities involved in how such changes may occur globally.

===Historical Context===
The most immediate effect of climate change is the increase of temperature, but the actual impacts of climate change stretch far beyond a “2 C° hotter summer”.
The main impacts attributed to climate change include the following:

1. Glacial melting & coastal erosion
2. Affecting water availability and distributions
3. Disruption to ecosystem (abundance and activities)
4. Negative impact outweighs positive impacts on food production
5. Human health
And most importantly: intensified extreme events. This including: droughts, flooding, heat waves, cyclones & thunderstorms, and wildfires
 
Implications (what is at stake?)

The first major conference on global climate change took place in Rio de Janeiro in 1982 and produced the Framework Convention on Climate Change. Subsequent rounds of negotiations have taken place in the form of preparatory meetings and subsequent conferences of states parties, including the 2009 Copenhagen Conference of the Parties to the Convention and the Paris Conference of 2015. While assessments of these negotiations vary somewhat, far and away the dominant view is that the results of these global negotiations to date have failed, in that they fall far short of what is required to ensure the planet stays below the 2 degrees Celsius temperature rise above pre-industrial levels that has been widely accepted as the goal to avert the most disastrous impacts of climate change.

==Climate Change Status Resources and References==
could put background references and links here on climate change; for justice approaches, could have another reference section below

to be added: links and videos and references

==Political Science Perspectives==

==What Would A Political Scientist Do?==

(could add 2nd level headings to distinguish the approaches)

1) One approach to this issue is to think of it in terms of a collective action problem. The scale of the climate change problem is such that individual and voluntary actions by citizens and corporations are not adequate to satisfactorily address the issue. Government policy is required. But governments around the world have not been able to collectively agree on who should bear what responsibilities. Without such coordination, governments are reluctant to get too far ahead of other countries insofar as they worry about being taken advantage of by other countries if they implement policy changes like regulations that are perceived as carrying a negative economic impact, or spending on programs that incur costs not born by other countries. Moreover, some countries may think that their own individual contribution to climate change mitigation may not make that much of a difference, and thus be reticent to implement meaningful commitments. However, if many countries think this way, then too many will seek to avoid mitigation action, and too few will contribute. Some scholars in political science are skeptical that such collective action problems can be overcome by states, believing that states will protect their individual economic interests at the expense of the collective climate good. Others point to more successful efforts such as the Montreal Protocol dealing with ozone as demonstrating that sometimes states can create international institutions that coordinate their action, provide information and other benefits to produce shared commitments. At the latest round of global climate change negotiations in Paris in December of 2015, countries made individual (rather than collectively agreed upon) commitments of what they are prepared to do (a bit more on results of Paris here, and/or useful links) – so far the skeptics would seem right on this particular issue. Unless state economic interests happen to converge, or the most powerful states in the system use their influence to push through action (regarded as highly unlikely), there is not much room for optimism from this point of view, particularly since powerful corporations often have great influence on government positions, and many such corporations have tremendous investment in sustaining carbon-based economies.

However, consider whether there is room here to explore how and why governments might act not just on short-term economic interests but on longer term interests and even other interests such as environmental ones? Some argue that the transition to a less carbon-intensive economies is technically and economically feasible. (help from economists and others here!).

 
2) A second way of thinking about this issue focuses not on the international negotiating dynamics and state interests, but at the level of individual psychology. We know that humans have many biases when approaching complex social problems – to illustrate how they may operate importantly in this case, consider the following questions:

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Question'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* How important do you think it is that your government, along with other leading emitting countries, acts urgently to reduce greenhouse gas emissions?

</div>
|}

A. Extremely 

B. Very 

C. Somewhat 

D. Not very 

E. unimportant

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Question'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* ii) Over the past 12 months, have you:

</div>
|}

A. Attended a rally or protest about climate change 

B. Written to an elected official advocating climate action 

C. Signed a petition advocating political action on climate change 

D. Alternative involvements such as changing your lifestyle to more sustainable practices (riding a bicycle to work / school instead of taking a car, and so on). 

E. None of the above 

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Also think about:'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* Do your own actions really match up to the level of concern you think climate change demands?

</div>
|}

Climate change is a kind of problem that is a bad match for some of our powerful psychological biases. Namely, psychologists have found that
* We tend to have trouble imagining a future drastically different from the present.
* We tend to block out complex problems that lack simple solutions.
* We tend to dislike delayed benefits and so are reluctant to sacrifice today for future gains
* We tend to find it harder to confront problems that creep up on us than emergencies that hit quickly.

[insert Tom Toles comic here]

These biases may help explain why climate change appears to have not yet aroused sufficient citizen concern in enough countries to make it impossible for governments to continue to avoid making adequate commitments for climate change mitigation. On the other hand, there are other kinds of psychological triggers that perhaps could be tapped into to garner more support – for example, fear is often a very powerful, primal motivator. But framing climate change in fearful terms may lead to avoidance of the issue – are there empowering framings that might more successfully tap into some of our psychological tendencies? Connections to psychological links / resources would be useful here!

3) A final way of approaching this issue that will be considered here has been to think more like a political philosopher and identify what the most just or fair approach to this issue might be that all or most could agree to in terms of who has the responsibility to do what. These approaches focus on issues such as whose practices to date have caused global climate change, whose practices now are contributing to climate change, who has benefited from the industrialization processes that have produced climate change, and who has the ability to pay.

4) Student Activity: Consider and bring your ideas to discuss in brainstorming sessions: Are there other ways of approaching this issue that might be more productive, or avenues within the above approaches that might be useful?

===Teaching Resources===
* How might an instructor in political science incorporate this case study into their course readings, discussions, and assignments?

==What would an XX Do?==
*Respond to these questions: How would an XX, approach responding to the problem outlined in this case study, and what are some responses they might offer?
*What elements of the case would they be most likely to focus on and why?
*What kinds of questions would they ask?
*What kinds of disciplinary approaches or methodology might they use?
*In answering these questions, draw from existing literature from this discipline where possible, considering especially how similar problems have been approached.

===Teaching Resources===
* How might an instructor in XX incorporate this case study into their course readings, discussions, and assignments?

[[Category: Open Case Studies]]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Template

2016-05-19T22:50:26Z

RichardPrice:

=Global Climate Justice=

==Goal and Objectives==
To stimulate students to try to generate original ways to approach or frame the issue of global climate change that might provide a more productive path forward.

==Introduction==

===Framing the Problem===
What distribution of adjustment costs for climate change mitigation is fair, and should be acceptable to the most (important) countries?

Are there ways of framing the issue that could be more effective in galvanizing effective action?

Are problem-solving approaches to negotiating such environmental problems inadequate, such that more holistic ecological ethical approaches are needed? How feasible might be the adoption of such perspectives? Secondary case studies on the development of bans on killing of whales and use of animals for research might be able to show us the challenges and opportunities involved in how such changes may occur globally.

===Historical Context===
to be expanded: significance, chronicle, impact of cc, figures etc 
Implications (what is at stake?)

The first major conference on global climate change took place in Rio de Janeiro in 1982 and produced the Framework Convention on Climate Change. Subsequent rounds of negotiations have taken place in the form of preparatory meetings and subsequent conferences of states parties, including the 2009 Copenhagen Conference of the Parties to the Convention and the Paris Conference of 2015. While assessments of these negotiations vary somewhat, far and away the dominant view is that the results of these global negotiations to date have failed, in that they fall far short of what is required to ensure the planet stays below the 2 degrees Celsius temperature rise above pre-industrial levels that has been widely accepted as the goal to avert the most disastrous impacts of climate change.

==Climate Change Status Resources and References==
could put background references and links here on climate change; for justice approaches, could have another reference section below

to be added: links and videos and references

==Political Science Perspectives==

==What Would A Political Scientist Do?==

(could add 2nd level headings to distinguish the approaches)

1) One approach to this issue is to think of it in terms of a collective action problem. The scale of the climate change problem is such that individual and voluntary actions by citizens and corporations are not adequate to satisfactorily address the issue. Government policy is required. But governments around the world have not been able to collectively agree on who should bear what responsibilities. Without such coordination, governments are reluctant to get too far ahead of other countries insofar as they worry about being taken advantage of by other countries if they implement policy changes like regulations that are perceived as carrying a negative economic impact, or spending on programs that incur costs not born by other countries. Moreover, some countries may think that their own individual contribution to climate change mitigation may not make that much of a difference, and thus be reticent to implement meaningful commitments. However, if many countries think this way, then too many will seek to avoid mitigation action, and too few will contribute. Some scholars in political science are skeptical that such collective action problems can be overcome by states, believing that states will protect their individual economic interests at the expense of the collective climate good. Others point to more successful efforts such as the Montreal Protocol dealing with ozone as demonstrating that sometimes states can create international institutions that coordinate their action, provide information and other benefits to produce shared commitments. At the latest round of global climate change negotiations in Paris in December of 2015, countries made individual (rather than collectively agreed upon) commitments of what they are prepared to do (a bit more on results of Paris here, and/or useful links) – so far the skeptics would seem right on this particular issue. Unless state economic interests happen to converge, or the most powerful states in the system use their influence to push through action (regarded as highly unlikely), there is not much room for optimism from this point of view, particularly since powerful corporations often have great influence on government positions, and many such corporations have tremendous investment in sustaining carbon-based economies.

However, consider whether there is room here to explore how and why governments might act not just on short-term economic interests but on longer term interests and even other interests such as environmental ones? Some argue that the transition to a less carbon-intensive economies is technically and economically feasible. (help from economists and others here!).

 
2) A second way of thinking about this issue focuses not on the international negotiating dynamics and state interests, but at the level of individual psychology. We know that humans have many biases when approaching complex social problems – to illustrate how they may operate importantly in this case, consider the following questions:

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Question'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* How important do you think it is that your government, along with other leading emitting countries, acts urgently to reduce greenhouse gas emissions?

</div>
|}

A. Extremely 

B. Very 

C. Somewhat 

D. Not very 

E. unimportant

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Question'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* ii) Over the past 12 months, have you:

</div>
|}

A. Attended a rally or protest about climate change 

B. Written to an elected official advocating climate action 

C. Signed a petition advocating political action on climate change 

D. Alternative involvements such as changing your lifestyle to more sustainable practices (riding a bicycle to work / school instead of taking a car, and so on). 

E. None of the above 

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Also think about:'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* Do your own actions really match up to the level of concern you think climate change demands?

</div>
|}

Climate change is a kind of problem that is a bad match for some of our powerful psychological biases. Namely, psychologists have found that
* We tend to have trouble imagining a future drastically different from the present.
* We tend to block out complex problems that lack simple solutions.
* We tend to dislike delayed benefits and so are reluctant to sacrifice today for future gains
* We tend to find it harder to confront problems that creep up on us than emergencies that hit quickly.

[insert Tom Toles comic here]

These biases may help explain why climate change appears to have not yet aroused sufficient citizen concern in enough countries to make it impossible for governments to continue to avoid making adequate commitments for climate change mitigation. On the other hand, there are other kinds of psychological triggers that perhaps could be tapped into to garner more support – for example, fear is often a very powerful, primal motivator. But framing climate change in fearful terms may lead to avoidance of the issue – are there empowering framings that might more successfully tap into some of our psychological tendencies? Connections to psychological links / resources would be useful here!

3) A final way of approaching this issue that will be considered here has been to think more like a political philosopher and identify what the most just or fair approach to this issue might be that all or most could agree to in terms of who has the responsibility to do what. These approaches focus on issues such as whose practices to date have caused global climate change, whose practices now are contributing to climate change, who has benefited from the industrialization processes that have produced climate change, and who has the ability to pay.

4) Student Activity: Consider and bring your ideas to discuss in brainstorming sessions: Are there other ways of approaching this issue that might be more productive, or avenues within the above approaches that might be useful?

===Teaching Resources===
* How might an instructor in political science incorporate this case study into their course readings, discussions, and assignments?

==What would an XX Do?==
*Respond to these questions: How would an XX, approach responding to the problem outlined in this case study, and what are some responses they might offer?
*What elements of the case would they be most likely to focus on and why?
*What kinds of questions would they ask?
*What kinds of disciplinary approaches or methodology might they use?
*In answering these questions, draw from existing literature from this discipline where possible, considering especially how similar problems have been approached.

===Teaching Resources===
* How might an instructor in XX incorporate this case study into their course readings, discussions, and assignments?

[[Category: Open Case Studies]]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/Political Science/Template

2016-05-19T22:36:47Z

RichardPrice:

=Global Climate Justice=

==Goal and Objectives==
To stimulate students to try to generate original ways to approach or frame the issue of global climate change that might provide a more productive path forward.

==Introduction==

===Framing the Problem===
What distribution of adjustment costs for climate change mitigation is fair, and should be acceptable to the most (important) countries?

Are there ways of framing the issue that could be more effective in galvanizing effective action?

Are problem-solving approaches to negotiating such environmental problems inadequate, such that more holistic ecological ethical approaches are needed? How feasible might be the adoption of such perspectives? Secondary case studies on the development of bans on killing of whales and use of animals for research might be able to show us the challenges and opportunities involved in how such changes may occur globally.

===Historical Context===
to be expanded: significance, chronicle, impact of cc, figures etc 
Implications (what is at stake?)

The first major conference on global climate change took place in Rio de Janeiro in 1982 and produced the Framework Convention on Climate Change. Subsequent rounds of negotiations have taken place in the form of preparatory meetings and subsequent conferences of states parties, including the 2009 Copenhagen Conference of the Parties to the Convention and the Paris Conference of 2015. While assessments of these negotiations vary somewhat, far and away the dominant view is that the results of these global negotiations to date have failed, in that they fall far short of what is required to ensure the planet stays below the 2 degrees Celsius temperature rise above pre-industrial levels that has been widely accepted as the goal to avert the most disastrous impacts of climate change.

==Climate Change Status Resources and References==
could put background references and links here on climate change; for justice approaches, could have another reference section below

to be added: links and videos and references

==Political Science Perspectives==

==What Would A Political Scientist Do?==

(could add 2nd level headings to distinguish the approaches)

1) One approach to this issue is to think of it in terms of a collective action problem. The scale of the climate change problem is such that individual and voluntary actions by citizens and corporations are not adequate to satisfactorily address the issue. Government policy is required. But governments around the world have not been able to collectively agree on who should bear what responsibilities. Without such coordination, governments are reluctant to get too far ahead of other countries insofar as they worry about being taken advantage of by other countries if they implement policy changes like regulations that are perceived as carrying a negative economic impact, or spending on programs that incur costs not born by other countries. Moreover, some countries may think that their own individual contribution to climate change mitigation may not make that much of a difference, and thus be reticent to implement meaningful commitments. However, if many countries think this way, then too many will seek to avoid mitigation action, and too few will contribute. Some scholars in political science are skeptical that such collective action problems can be overcome by states, believing that states will protect their individual economic interests at the expense of the collective climate good. Others point to more successful efforts such as the Montreal Protocol dealing with ozone as demonstrating that sometimes states can create international institutions that coordinate their action, provide information and other benefits to produce shared commitments. At the latest round of global climate change negotiations in Paris in December of 2015, countries made individual (rather than collectively agreed upon) commitments of what they are prepared to do (a bit more on results of Paris here, and/or useful links) – so far the skeptics would seem right on this particular issue. Unless state economic interests happen to converge, or the most powerful states in the system use their influence to push through action (regarded as highly unlikely), there is not much room for optimism from this point of view, particularly since powerful corporations often have great influence on government positions, and many such corporations have tremendous investment in sustaining carbon-based economies.

However, consider whether there is room here to explore how and why governments might act not just on short-term economic interests but on longer term interests and even other interests such as environmental ones? Some argue that the transition to a less carbon-intensive economies is technically and economically feasible. (help from economists and others here!).

 
2) A second way of thinking about this issue focuses not on the international negotiating dynamics and state interests, but at the level of individual psychology. We know that humans have many biases when approaching complex social problems – to illustrate how they may operate importantly in this case, consider the following questions:

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Question'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* How important do you think it is that your government, along with other leading emitting countries, acts urgently to reduce greenhouse gas emissions?

</div>
|}

A. Extremely 

B. Very 

C. Somewhat 

D. Not very 

E. unimportant

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Question'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* ii) Over the past 12 months, have you:

</div>
|}

A. Attended a rally or protest about climate change 

B. Written to an elected official advocating climate action 

C. Signed a petition advocating political action on climate change 

D. Alternative involvements such as changing your lifestyle to more sustainable practices (riding a bicycle to work / school instead of taking a car, and so on). 

E. None of the above 

{| class="ambox ambox-content"
| class="mbox-image" | [[Image:Edit-copy purple.svg|40px]]
| class="mbox-text" | <div>

'''Also think about:'''
[[File:Question mark icon creative commons.svg|50px|frameless|left]]
::* Do your own actions really match up to the level of concern you think climate change demands?

</div>
|}

Climate change is a kind of problem that is a bad match for some of our powerful psychological biases. Namely, psychologists have found that
* We tend to have trouble imagining a future drastically different from the present.
* We tend to block out complex problems that lack simple solutions.
* We tend to dislike delayed benefits and so are reluctant to sacrifice today for future gains
* We tend to find it harder to confront problems that creep up on us than emergencies that hit quickly.

[insert Tom Toles comic here]

These biases may help explain why climate change appears to have not yet aroused sufficient citizen concern in enough countries to make it impossible for governments to continue to avoid making adequate commitments for climate change mitigation. On the other hand, there are other kinds of psychological triggers that perhaps could be tapped into to garner more support – for example, fear is often a very powerful, primal motivator. But framing climate change in fearful terms may lead to avoidance of the issue – are there empowering framings that might more successfully tap into some of our psychological tendencies? Connections to psychological links / resources would be useful here!

3) A final way of approaching this issue that will be considered here has been to think more like a political philosopher and identify what the most just or fair approach to this issue might be that all or most could agree to in terms of who has the responsibility to do what. These approaches focus on issues such as whose practices to date have caused global climate change, whose practices now are contributing to climate change, who has benefited from the industrialization processes that have produced climate change, and who has the ability to pay.

4) Student Activity: Consider and bring your ideas to discuss in brainstorming sessions: Are there other ways of approaching this issue that might be more productive, or avenues within the above approaches that might be useful?

===Teaching Resources===
* How might an instructor in political science incorporate this case study into their course readings, discussions, and assignments?

==What would an XX Do?==
*Respond to these questions: How would an XX, approach responding to the problem outlined in this case study, and what are some responses they might offer?
*What elements of the case would they be most likely to focus on and why?
*What kinds of questions would they ask?
*What kinds of disciplinary approaches or methodology might they use?
*In answering these questions, draw from existing literature from this discipline where possible, considering especially how similar problems have been approached.

===Teaching Resources===
* How might an instructor in XX incorporate this case study into their course readings, discussions, and assignments?

[[Category: Open Case Studies]]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/Topics

2016-05-17T16:48:25Z

RichardPrice: /* Library Resources */

==Case Study Writers==
Please add your proposed case study topic below and indicate whether you will write solo or are seeking a collaborator.

Please also add a request for materials from the Library - if you have something specific you would like to be available to you during the Case Study Sprint.

===Topics===
* Example topic - Name (seeking a collaborator)
* Climate Justice: what distribution of costs for climate change mitigation should be regarded as fair by the most (important) countries ? (Would be most helpful to work with someone who has expertise in causes of climate change)*
* Are problem-solving approaches to environmental problems inadequate, such that more holistic ecological ethical approaches are needed? How feasible are such changes? Case studies on the development of bans on killing of whales and use of animals for research can show us how some such changes have occurred globally. (Again, if there is someone such as in the sciences with expertise on these issues that woudl be enormously helpful).

==Library Resources==

If you require any print resources from [http://www.library.ubc.ca/ UBC Library], please list them below. These resources will be brought to the sprint for you use.

===Library Resources===
* Author, Title, Link (if you have one)
* Henry Shue, Climate Justice: Vulnerability and Protection (Oxford University Press, 2014). (listed as only held by UBCO library!: can we get a copy?)
*Peter Singer, Animal Liberation (most recent edition).

==Pages to keep track of resources==
Remember that there are individual pages for each discipline, where you can keep track of resources you might use during the writing of the case study. See here: http://wiki.ubc.ca/Documentation:Open_Case_Studies/Prep_Workshop#Developing_a_Shared_Resource_using_Wiki

[[Category: Open Case Studies]]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/Topics

2016-05-17T16:32:51Z

RichardPrice: /* Library Resources */

==Case Study Writers==
Please add your proposed case study topic below and indicate whether you will write solo or are seeking a collaborator.

Please also add a request for materials from the Library - if you have something specific you would like to be available to you during the Case Study Sprint.

===Topics===
* Example topic - Name (seeking a collaborator)
* Climate Justice: what distribution of costs for climate change mitigation should be regarded as fair by the most (important) countries ? (Would be most helpful to work with someone who has expertise in causes of climate change)*
* Are problem-solving approaches to environmental problems inadequate, such that more holistic ecological ethical approaches are needed? How feasible are such changes? Case studies on the development of bans on killing of whales and use of animals for research can show us how some such changes have occurred globally. (Again, if there is someone such as in the sciences with expertise on these issues that woudl be enormously helpful).

==Library Resources==

If you require any print resources from [http://www.library.ubc.ca/ UBC Library], please list them below. These resources will be brought to the sprint for you use.

===Library Resources===
* Author, Title, Link (if you have one)
* Henry Shue, Climate Justice: Vulnerability and Protection (Oxford University Press, 2014). (listed as only held by UBCO library!: can we get a copy?)
*

==Pages to keep track of resources==
Remember that there are individual pages for each discipline, where you can keep track of resources you might use during the writing of the case study. See here: http://wiki.ubc.ca/Documentation:Open_Case_Studies/Prep_Workshop#Developing_a_Shared_Resource_using_Wiki

[[Category: Open Case Studies]]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/POLI/Resources

2016-05-17T16:30:06Z

RichardPrice: /* Species Protection */

==Ethics in World Politics Topics==

===Climate Justice===

====Articles====

Henry Shue, "[http://ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/login?url=http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9930.1993.tb00093.x/epdf Subsistence Emissions and Luxury Emissions]," Law and Policy 15:1 (January 1993).

====Webpages====

[http://supportclimatejustice.org/henry-shue/ Climate Justice Dialogue]

====Images====
[[File:Smog-hit-Chinese-cities--009.jpg|thumb|Smog Chinese cities]]

===Species Protection===

====Articles====
Protection of Chimpanzees. The US banned experimentation on chimpanzees in 2015.
<ref>Charissa Echevez, "US Government Finally Banning Chimp Research," [http://www.sciencetimes.com/articles/7769/20151123/government-finally-banning-chimp-research.htm Science Times], November 23, 2015, accessed April 19, 2015</ref>

Ban on Whaling: Regulating vs. banning whaling.
<ref> Ian Hurd, "Almost Saving Whales: The Ambiguity of Success at the International Whaling Commission," Ethics and International Affairs [http://www.ethicsandinternationalaffairs.org/2012/almost-saving-whales-the-ambiguity-of-success-at-the-international-whaling-commission-full-text/], March 29, 2012, accessed May 17, 2016</ref>

References
<references/>

Documentation:Open Case Studies/Topics

2016-05-17T16:21:11Z

RichardPrice: /* Topics */

==Case Study Writers==
Please add your proposed case study topic below and indicate whether you will write solo or are seeking a collaborator.

Please also add a request for materials from the Library - if you have something specific you would like to be available to you during the Case Study Sprint.

===Topics===
* Example topic - Name (seeking a collaborator)
* Climate Justice: what distribution of costs for climate change mitigation should be regarded as fair by the most (important) countries ? (Would be most helpful to work with someone who has expertise in causes of climate change)*
* Are problem-solving approaches to environmental problems inadequate, such that more holistic ecological ethical approaches are needed? How feasible are such changes? Case studies on the development of bans on killing of whales and use of animals for research can show us how some such changes have occurred globally. (Again, if there is someone such as in the sciences with expertise on these issues that woudl be enormously helpful).

==Library Resources==

If you require any print resources from [http://www.library.ubc.ca/ UBC Library], please list them below. These resources will be brought to the sprint for you use.

===Library Resources===
* Author, Title, Link (if you have one)
*
*

==Pages to keep track of resources==
Remember that there are individual pages for each discipline, where you can keep track of resources you might use during the writing of the case study. See here: http://wiki.ubc.ca/Documentation:Open_Case_Studies/Prep_Workshop#Developing_a_Shared_Resource_using_Wiki

[[Category: Open Case Studies]]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/Sprint/Author Guide

2016-05-17T16:07:38Z

RichardPrice: /* Questions, suggestions, comments on how to use the case studies */

=Case Study Details=

==What do we mean by "case study?"==

These ideas came from the brainstorm activity we engaged in during the workshop in April.

The case study:

*Encourages students to think critically about an issue
*Includes elements of reflection: How do students internalize?
*Contains value uncertainty
*Deals with complex problems/wicked problems with many stakeholders and values
*Abstractable (local-global)
*Deals with specific problems that are addressed
*Focuses on a particular scenario
*Highlights controversy/Uncertainty
*Includes specific examples of where a problem is addressed
*Includes discussion of What works? What does not work?
*Clear enough to be understood across different disciplines and areas

===Questions, suggestions, comments on this shared definition===
''Participants edit this section to add their thoughts here''

==Who is the audience?==

There are multiple audiences for these case studies:
* Students in the courses you teach
* Students in courses in other disciplines
* Students and instructors not involved in this project, both inside and outside of UBC, who might use the resource in their own teaching and learning (those outside UBC can't edit it, but they can still use it or copy/paste into something else and change it there)
* The general public, who might learn a lot from these resources

==Proposed format==

Given that we anticipate a broad audience for the case studies, it's important that they be written using layperson language. Discipline specific terminology may be brought in at the level of the "perspectives" piece - where there is opportunity to identify how various disciplines would approach the problem (for example, some may bring expertise in different tools/frameworks for problem analysis or public consultation, etc.).

===Template===
'''Cases'''
* Introduction
* Framing the Problem: describe a (hypothetical or actual) problem or dilemma related to sustainability or environmental ethics, describe why it is a problem and why it is difficult to solve
* Historical Context: how the problem developed, similar or related historical problems
* Implications:
** Political: describe governmental jurisdiction over this issue and dilemmas for lawmakers, current laws/precedents related to the problem
** Economic: describe economic issues related to the problem
** Social: describe social groups this problem impacts and who needs to be taken into account in its solution
* Moving Forward: describe suggestions for solving the problem, pros and cons of these
* References
'''Disciplinary Perspectives'''
* What would a philosopher do?: How might someone from philosophy approach solving this problem? Which issues would they take into account when analyzing the problem? What does literature from this discipline say about problems like this?
* What would a geographer do?
* Etc.
'''Teaching Resources'''
* Philosophy: How might an instructor in philosophy incorporate this case study into their course readings, discussions, and assignments?
* Geography
* Etc.

===Questions, suggestions, comments on this proposed format===
''Participants edit this section to add their thoughts here''

==How might the case studies be used in teaching?==
The case studies we develop may be used in any learning environment where students are grappling with themes related to sustainability or environmental ethics. The objectives may be refined to support the learning goals of a particular course.

As a starting place, we propose that instructors use the case studies developed within this project by requiring students to answer a series of open-ended questions, contributing to an analysis of the issue presented and a proposed solution or way forward. Some suggested lines of questioning include:

* What is the issue?
* What is the goal of the analysis?
* What is the context in which this issue is arising?
* What key facts should be considered?
* Whose voices are we hearing and whose are absent?
* What alternatives are available to the decision-maker(s)?
* What would you recommend — and why?

Case studies offer a way for students to "actively engage in figuring out the principles by abstracting from the examples" (Boston University - [http://www.bu.edu/ctl/teaching-resources/using-case-studies-to-teach/ Using Case Studies to Teach]) . This process develops their skills for:

* Problem solving
* Using analytical tools, quantitative and/or qualitative, depending on the case
* Decision making in complex situations
* Coping with ambiguities

===Questions, suggestions, comments on how to use the case studies===
''Participants edit this section to add their thoughts here'

Also useful could be active learning exercises such as simulations, debates, small group discussions, and so on that would be appropriate for the topic

==Document to record case study topics==

Please go to this page to write down the topic or topics you're thinking you might use for your case study: http://wiki.ubc.ca/Documentation:Open_Case_Studies/Topics

We can see what others are doing and see if there are overlaps, see if others have ideas we might use, etc.

==Sprint Process==

===Our goals===
* Create a single case for each of the disciplines focused on a theme in sustainability or environmental ethics.
* Collaboratively develop a perspective section for each of the case studies: "How would a philosopher, polical scientist,georgrapher, etc. approach the problem?"
* Suggest teaching resources, such as relevant questions that will help students approach the topic from various disciplinary perspectives.

===Day 1: May 19th: 9:30am-4:30pm===

====Setting the stage====
*Mapping out the two-days (group activity)
*Revisiting and finalizing structure and approaches to case studies
*Discussion (Approaches to using case-studies in the classroom)
*Clarification of roles

====Initial Drafting/Writing====
*Drafting case studies

====12:00-1:00pm LUNCH--Provided====

====Case studies check in====
*Case study group feedback: check-ins
*Incorporating revisions

====Process check in and Wrap-up====

===Day 2: May 20th : 9:30am - 4:30pm===

====Day 1 Debrief====
*Reflecting on Day 1 Process
*Feedback and day 2 plan

====Revising case-studies====
*Case study revisions

===Case studies check in===

====Case Studies Perspectives====
*Activity: Individual case studies are shared between individuals. Colleagues add onto their colleagues' case study, considering “How would a political scientist (etc.) approach this? What about a philosopher...?" 3 rotations to build on the case studies.

====Case studies check in====
* review
* student feedback

====Final Debrief====
* end of session

[[Category: Open Case Studies]]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/Sprint/Author Guide

2016-05-17T16:07:11Z

RichardPrice: /* Questions, suggestions, comments on how to use the case studies */

=Case Study Details=

==What do we mean by "case study?"==

These ideas came from the brainstorm activity we engaged in during the workshop in April.

The case study:

*Encourages students to think critically about an issue
*Includes elements of reflection: How do students internalize?
*Contains value uncertainty
*Deals with complex problems/wicked problems with many stakeholders and values
*Abstractable (local-global)
*Deals with specific problems that are addressed
*Focuses on a particular scenario
*Highlights controversy/Uncertainty
*Includes specific examples of where a problem is addressed
*Includes discussion of What works? What does not work?
*Clear enough to be understood across different disciplines and areas

===Questions, suggestions, comments on this shared definition===
''Participants edit this section to add their thoughts here''

==Who is the audience?==

There are multiple audiences for these case studies:
* Students in the courses you teach
* Students in courses in other disciplines
* Students and instructors not involved in this project, both inside and outside of UBC, who might use the resource in their own teaching and learning (those outside UBC can't edit it, but they can still use it or copy/paste into something else and change it there)
* The general public, who might learn a lot from these resources

==Proposed format==

Given that we anticipate a broad audience for the case studies, it's important that they be written using layperson language. Discipline specific terminology may be brought in at the level of the "perspectives" piece - where there is opportunity to identify how various disciplines would approach the problem (for example, some may bring expertise in different tools/frameworks for problem analysis or public consultation, etc.).

===Template===
'''Cases'''
* Introduction
* Framing the Problem: describe a (hypothetical or actual) problem or dilemma related to sustainability or environmental ethics, describe why it is a problem and why it is difficult to solve
* Historical Context: how the problem developed, similar or related historical problems
* Implications:
** Political: describe governmental jurisdiction over this issue and dilemmas for lawmakers, current laws/precedents related to the problem
** Economic: describe economic issues related to the problem
** Social: describe social groups this problem impacts and who needs to be taken into account in its solution
* Moving Forward: describe suggestions for solving the problem, pros and cons of these
* References
'''Disciplinary Perspectives'''
* What would a philosopher do?: How might someone from philosophy approach solving this problem? Which issues would they take into account when analyzing the problem? What does literature from this discipline say about problems like this?
* What would a geographer do?
* Etc.
'''Teaching Resources'''
* Philosophy: How might an instructor in philosophy incorporate this case study into their course readings, discussions, and assignments?
* Geography
* Etc.

===Questions, suggestions, comments on this proposed format===
''Participants edit this section to add their thoughts here''

==How might the case studies be used in teaching?==
The case studies we develop may be used in any learning environment where students are grappling with themes related to sustainability or environmental ethics. The objectives may be refined to support the learning goals of a particular course.

As a starting place, we propose that instructors use the case studies developed within this project by requiring students to answer a series of open-ended questions, contributing to an analysis of the issue presented and a proposed solution or way forward. Some suggested lines of questioning include:

* What is the issue?
* What is the goal of the analysis?
* What is the context in which this issue is arising?
* What key facts should be considered?
* Whose voices are we hearing and whose are absent?
* What alternatives are available to the decision-maker(s)?
* What would you recommend — and why?

Case studies offer a way for students to "actively engage in figuring out the principles by abstracting from the examples" (Boston University - [http://www.bu.edu/ctl/teaching-resources/using-case-studies-to-teach/ Using Case Studies to Teach]) . This process develops their skills for:

* Problem solving
* Using analytical tools, quantitative and/or qualitative, depending on the case
* Decision making in complex situations
* Coping with ambiguities

===Questions, suggestions, comments on how to use the case studies===
''Participants edit this section to add their thoughts here'

'===Also useful could be active learning exercises such as simulations, debates, small group discussions, and so on that would be appropriate for the topic===

==Document to record case study topics==

Please go to this page to write down the topic or topics you're thinking you might use for your case study: http://wiki.ubc.ca/Documentation:Open_Case_Studies/Topics

We can see what others are doing and see if there are overlaps, see if others have ideas we might use, etc.

==Sprint Process==

===Our goals===
* Create a single case for each of the disciplines focused on a theme in sustainability or environmental ethics.
* Collaboratively develop a perspective section for each of the case studies: "How would a philosopher, polical scientist,georgrapher, etc. approach the problem?"
* Suggest teaching resources, such as relevant questions that will help students approach the topic from various disciplinary perspectives.

===Day 1: May 19th: 9:30am-4:30pm===

====Setting the stage====
*Mapping out the two-days (group activity)
*Revisiting and finalizing structure and approaches to case studies
*Discussion (Approaches to using case-studies in the classroom)
*Clarification of roles

====Initial Drafting/Writing====
*Drafting case studies

====12:00-1:00pm LUNCH--Provided====

====Case studies check in====
*Case study group feedback: check-ins
*Incorporating revisions

====Process check in and Wrap-up====

===Day 2: May 20th : 9:30am - 4:30pm===

====Day 1 Debrief====
*Reflecting on Day 1 Process
*Feedback and day 2 plan

====Revising case-studies====
*Case study revisions

===Case studies check in===

====Case Studies Perspectives====
*Activity: Individual case studies are shared between individuals. Colleagues add onto their colleagues' case study, considering “How would a political scientist (etc.) approach this? What about a philosopher...?" 3 rotations to build on the case studies.

====Case studies check in====
* review
* student feedback

====Final Debrief====
* end of session

[[Category: Open Case Studies]]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/Sprint/Author Guide

2016-05-17T16:06:21Z

RichardPrice: /* Also useful could be active learning exercises such as simulations, debates, small group discussions, and so on that would be appropriate for the topic */

=Case Study Details=

==What do we mean by "case study?"==

These ideas came from the brainstorm activity we engaged in during the workshop in April.

The case study:

*Encourages students to think critically about an issue
*Includes elements of reflection: How do students internalize?
*Contains value uncertainty
*Deals with complex problems/wicked problems with many stakeholders and values
*Abstractable (local-global)
*Deals with specific problems that are addressed
*Focuses on a particular scenario
*Highlights controversy/Uncertainty
*Includes specific examples of where a problem is addressed
*Includes discussion of What works? What does not work?
*Clear enough to be understood across different disciplines and areas

===Questions, suggestions, comments on this shared definition===
''Participants edit this section to add their thoughts here''

==Who is the audience?==

There are multiple audiences for these case studies:
* Students in the courses you teach
* Students in courses in other disciplines
* Students and instructors not involved in this project, both inside and outside of UBC, who might use the resource in their own teaching and learning (those outside UBC can't edit it, but they can still use it or copy/paste into something else and change it there)
* The general public, who might learn a lot from these resources

==Proposed format==

Given that we anticipate a broad audience for the case studies, it's important that they be written using layperson language. Discipline specific terminology may be brought in at the level of the "perspectives" piece - where there is opportunity to identify how various disciplines would approach the problem (for example, some may bring expertise in different tools/frameworks for problem analysis or public consultation, etc.).

===Template===
'''Cases'''
* Introduction
* Framing the Problem: describe a (hypothetical or actual) problem or dilemma related to sustainability or environmental ethics, describe why it is a problem and why it is difficult to solve
* Historical Context: how the problem developed, similar or related historical problems
* Implications:
** Political: describe governmental jurisdiction over this issue and dilemmas for lawmakers, current laws/precedents related to the problem
** Economic: describe economic issues related to the problem
** Social: describe social groups this problem impacts and who needs to be taken into account in its solution
* Moving Forward: describe suggestions for solving the problem, pros and cons of these
* References
'''Disciplinary Perspectives'''
* What would a philosopher do?: How might someone from philosophy approach solving this problem? Which issues would they take into account when analyzing the problem? What does literature from this discipline say about problems like this?
* What would a geographer do?
* Etc.
'''Teaching Resources'''
* Philosophy: How might an instructor in philosophy incorporate this case study into their course readings, discussions, and assignments?
* Geography
* Etc.

===Questions, suggestions, comments on this proposed format===
''Participants edit this section to add their thoughts here''

==How might the case studies be used in teaching?==
The case studies we develop may be used in any learning environment where students are grappling with themes related to sustainability or environmental ethics. The objectives may be refined to support the learning goals of a particular course.

As a starting place, we propose that instructors use the case studies developed within this project by requiring students to answer a series of open-ended questions, contributing to an analysis of the issue presented and a proposed solution or way forward. Some suggested lines of questioning include:

* What is the issue?
* What is the goal of the analysis?
* What is the context in which this issue is arising?
* What key facts should be considered?
* Whose voices are we hearing and whose are absent?
* What alternatives are available to the decision-maker(s)?
* What would you recommend — and why?

Case studies offer a way for students to "actively engage in figuring out the principles by abstracting from the examples" (Boston University - [http://www.bu.edu/ctl/teaching-resources/using-case-studies-to-teach/ Using Case Studies to Teach]) . This process develops their skills for:

* Problem solving
* Using analytical tools, quantitative and/or qualitative, depending on the case
* Decision making in complex situations
* Coping with ambiguities

===Questions, suggestions, comments on how to use the case studies===
''Participants edit this section to add their thoughts here''

==Document to record case study topics==

Please go to this page to write down the topic or topics you're thinking you might use for your case study: http://wiki.ubc.ca/Documentation:Open_Case_Studies/Topics

We can see what others are doing and see if there are overlaps, see if others have ideas we might use, etc.

==Sprint Process==

===Our goals===
* Create a single case for each of the disciplines focused on a theme in sustainability or environmental ethics.
* Collaboratively develop a perspective section for each of the case studies: "How would a philosopher, polical scientist,georgrapher, etc. approach the problem?"
* Suggest teaching resources, such as relevant questions that will help students approach the topic from various disciplinary perspectives.

===Day 1: May 19th: 9:30am-4:30pm===

====Setting the stage====
*Mapping out the two-days (group activity)
*Revisiting and finalizing structure and approaches to case studies
*Discussion (Approaches to using case-studies in the classroom)
*Clarification of roles

====Initial Drafting/Writing====
*Drafting case studies

====12:00-1:00pm LUNCH--Provided====

====Case studies check in====
*Case study group feedback: check-ins
*Incorporating revisions

====Process check in and Wrap-up====

===Day 2: May 20th : 9:30am - 4:30pm===

====Day 1 Debrief====
*Reflecting on Day 1 Process
*Feedback and day 2 plan

====Revising case-studies====
*Case study revisions

===Case studies check in===

====Case Studies Perspectives====
*Activity: Individual case studies are shared between individuals. Colleagues add onto their colleagues' case study, considering “How would a political scientist (etc.) approach this? What about a philosopher...?" 3 rotations to build on the case studies.

====Case studies check in====
* review
* student feedback

====Final Debrief====
* end of session

[[Category: Open Case Studies]]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/Sprint/Author Guide

2016-05-17T16:04:51Z

RichardPrice: /* Questions, suggestions, comments on this proposed format */

=Case Study Details=

==What do we mean by "case study?"==

These ideas came from the brainstorm activity we engaged in during the workshop in April.

The case study:

*Encourages students to think critically about an issue
*Includes elements of reflection: How do students internalize?
*Contains value uncertainty
*Deals with complex problems/wicked problems with many stakeholders and values
*Abstractable (local-global)
*Deals with specific problems that are addressed
*Focuses on a particular scenario
*Highlights controversy/Uncertainty
*Includes specific examples of where a problem is addressed
*Includes discussion of What works? What does not work?
*Clear enough to be understood across different disciplines and areas

===Questions, suggestions, comments on this shared definition===
''Participants edit this section to add their thoughts here''

==Who is the audience?==

There are multiple audiences for these case studies:
* Students in the courses you teach
* Students in courses in other disciplines
* Students and instructors not involved in this project, both inside and outside of UBC, who might use the resource in their own teaching and learning (those outside UBC can't edit it, but they can still use it or copy/paste into something else and change it there)
* The general public, who might learn a lot from these resources

==Proposed format==

Given that we anticipate a broad audience for the case studies, it's important that they be written using layperson language. Discipline specific terminology may be brought in at the level of the "perspectives" piece - where there is opportunity to identify how various disciplines would approach the problem (for example, some may bring expertise in different tools/frameworks for problem analysis or public consultation, etc.).

===Template===
'''Cases'''
* Introduction
* Framing the Problem: describe a (hypothetical or actual) problem or dilemma related to sustainability or environmental ethics, describe why it is a problem and why it is difficult to solve
* Historical Context: how the problem developed, similar or related historical problems
* Implications:
** Political: describe governmental jurisdiction over this issue and dilemmas for lawmakers, current laws/precedents related to the problem
** Economic: describe economic issues related to the problem
** Social: describe social groups this problem impacts and who needs to be taken into account in its solution
* Moving Forward: describe suggestions for solving the problem, pros and cons of these
* References
'''Disciplinary Perspectives'''
* What would a philosopher do?: How might someone from philosophy approach solving this problem? Which issues would they take into account when analyzing the problem? What does literature from this discipline say about problems like this?
* What would a geographer do?
* Etc.
'''Teaching Resources'''
* Philosophy: How might an instructor in philosophy incorporate this case study into their course readings, discussions, and assignments?
* Geography
* Etc.

===Questions, suggestions, comments on this proposed format===
''Participants edit this section to add their thoughts here''

===Also useful could be active learning exercises such as simulations, debates, small group discussions, and so on that would be appropriate for the topic===

==How might the case studies be used in teaching?==
The case studies we develop may be used in any learning environment where students are grappling with themes related to sustainability or environmental ethics. The objectives may be refined to support the learning goals of a particular course.

As a starting place, we propose that instructors use the case studies developed within this project by requiring students to answer a series of open-ended questions, contributing to an analysis of the issue presented and a proposed solution or way forward. Some suggested lines of questioning include:

* What is the issue?
* What is the goal of the analysis?
* What is the context in which this issue is arising?
* What key facts should be considered?
* Whose voices are we hearing and whose are absent?
* What alternatives are available to the decision-maker(s)?
* What would you recommend — and why?

Case studies offer a way for students to "actively engage in figuring out the principles by abstracting from the examples" (Boston University - [http://www.bu.edu/ctl/teaching-resources/using-case-studies-to-teach/ Using Case Studies to Teach]) . This process develops their skills for:

* Problem solving
* Using analytical tools, quantitative and/or qualitative, depending on the case
* Decision making in complex situations
* Coping with ambiguities

===Questions, suggestions, comments on how to use the case studies===
''Participants edit this section to add their thoughts here''

==Document to record case study topics==

Please go to this page to write down the topic or topics you're thinking you might use for your case study: http://wiki.ubc.ca/Documentation:Open_Case_Studies/Topics

We can see what others are doing and see if there are overlaps, see if others have ideas we might use, etc.

==Sprint Process==

===Our goals===
* Create a single case for each of the disciplines focused on a theme in sustainability or environmental ethics.
* Collaboratively develop a perspective section for each of the case studies: "How would a philosopher, polical scientist,georgrapher, etc. approach the problem?"
* Suggest teaching resources, such as relevant questions that will help students approach the topic from various disciplinary perspectives.

===Day 1: May 19th: 9:30am-4:30pm===

====Setting the stage====
*Mapping out the two-days (group activity)
*Revisiting and finalizing structure and approaches to case studies
*Discussion (Approaches to using case-studies in the classroom)
*Clarification of roles

====Initial Drafting/Writing====
*Drafting case studies

====12:00-1:00pm LUNCH--Provided====

====Case studies check in====
*Case study group feedback: check-ins
*Incorporating revisions

====Process check in and Wrap-up====

===Day 2: May 20th : 9:30am - 4:30pm===

====Day 1 Debrief====
*Reflecting on Day 1 Process
*Feedback and day 2 plan

====Revising case-studies====
*Case study revisions

===Case studies check in===

====Case Studies Perspectives====
*Activity: Individual case studies are shared between individuals. Colleagues add onto their colleagues' case study, considering “How would a political scientist (etc.) approach this? What about a philosopher...?" 3 rotations to build on the case studies.

====Case studies check in====
* review
* student feedback

====Final Debrief====
* end of session

[[Category: Open Case Studies]]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/POLI/Resources

2016-04-19T21:58:19Z

RichardPrice:

Documentation:Open Case Studies/POLI/Resources

2016-04-19T21:57:16Z

RichardPrice:

Documentation:Open Case Studies/POLI/Resources

2016-04-19T21:56:00Z

RichardPrice:

Documentation:Open Case Studies/POLI/Resources

2016-04-19T21:15:21Z

RichardPrice: /* Topics */

=Ethics in World Politics Topics=

==Climate Justice==

===Articles===

Henry Shue, "[http://ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/login?url=http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9930.1993.tb00093.x/epdf Subsistence Emissions and Luxury Emissions]," Law and Policy 15:1 (January 1993).

===Webpages===

[http://supportclimatejustice.org/henry-shue/ Climate Justice Dialogue]

===Images===
[[File:Smog-hit-Chinese-cities--009.jpg|thumb|Smog Chinese cities]]

===Get Started===
* search the web for discipline specific case study resources
* add any resources you find to this page (links, images, video)
* use the [[Documentation:Open_Case_Studies/Prep_Workshop|Help Links]] for formatting guidance
::* level 3 formatted subheadings (as in Get Started) are advised to keep the final aggregated resource readable.

[[Category: Open Case Studies]]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/POLI/Resources

2016-04-19T21:10:38Z

RichardPrice: /* Articles */

=Topics=

==Climate Justice==

===Articles===

Henry Shue, "[http://ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/login?url=http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9930.1993.tb00093.x/epdf Subsistence Emissions and Luxury Emissions]," Law and Policy 15:1 (January 1993).

===Webpages===

[http://supportclimatejustice.org/henry-shue/ Climate Justice Dialogue]

===Images===
[[File:Smog-hit-Chinese-cities--009.jpg|thumb|Smog Chinese cities]]

===Get Started===
* search the web for discipline specific case study resources
* add any resources you find to this page (links, images, video)
* use the [[Documentation:Open_Case_Studies/Prep_Workshop|Help Links]] for formatting guidance
::* level 3 formatted subheadings (as in Get Started) are advised to keep the final aggregated resource readable.

[[Category: Open Case Studies]]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/POLI/Resources

2016-04-19T21:07:54Z

RichardPrice: /* Articles */

=Topics=

==Climate Justice==

===Articles===

Henry Shue, "[http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9930.1993.tb00093.x/epdf Subsistence Emissions and Luxury Emissions,]" Law and Policy 15:1 (January 1993).

===Webpages===

[http://supportclimatejustice.org/henry-shue/ Climate Justice Dialogue]

===Images===
[[File:Smog-hit-Chinese-cities--009.jpg|thumb|Smog Chinese cities]]

===Get Started===
* search the web for discipline specific case study resources
* add any resources you find to this page (links, images, video)
* use the [[Documentation:Open_Case_Studies/Prep_Workshop|Help Links]] for formatting guidance
::* level 3 formatted subheadings (as in Get Started) are advised to keep the final aggregated resource readable.

[[Category: Open Case Studies]]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/POLI/Resources

2016-04-19T21:03:34Z

RichardPrice: /* Climate Justice */

=Topics=

==Climate Justice==

===Articles===

===Webpages===

[http://supportclimatejustice.org/henry-shue/ Climate Justice Dialogue]

===Images===
[[File:Smog-hit-Chinese-cities--009.jpg|thumb|Smog Chinese cities]]

===Get Started===
* search the web for discipline specific case study resources
* add any resources you find to this page (links, images, video)
* use the [[Documentation:Open_Case_Studies/Prep_Workshop|Help Links]] for formatting guidance
::* level 3 formatted subheadings (as in Get Started) are advised to keep the final aggregated resource readable.

[[Category: Open Case Studies]]

File:Smog-hit-Chinese-cities--009.jpg

2016-04-19T21:02:30Z

RichardPrice: User created page with UploadWizard

=={{int:filedesc}}==
{{Information
|description={{en|1=Smog Chinese cities}}
|date=2016-04-19 14:01:28
|source=http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/mar/12/china-smog-pollution-beijing
|author=AP
|permission=
|other_versions=
}}

=={{int:license-header}}==
{{subst:uwl}}

[[Category:Uploaded with UploadWizard]]

Documentation:Open Case Studies/POLI/Resources

2016-04-19T20:57:09Z

RichardPrice: /* POLI Resources */

=Topics=

==Climate Justice==

===Articles===

===Webpages===

[http://supportclimatejustice.org/henry-shue/ Climate Justice Dialogue]

===Get Started===
* search the web for discipline specific case study resources
* add any resources you find to this page (links, images, video)
* use the [[Documentation:Open_Case_Studies/Prep_Workshop|Help Links]] for formatting guidance
::* level 3 formatted subheadings (as in Get Started) are advised to keep the final aggregated resource readable.

[[Category: Open Case Studies]]