Date of Award

Spring 5-3-2024

Level of Access Assigned by Author

Open-Access Dissertation

Degree Name

Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

Department

Interdisciplinary Program

Advisor

Paul Andrew Mayewski

Second Committee Member

Sean Birkel

Third Committee Member

Mark Brewer

Additional Committee Members

Charles Norchi

Alan Gerber

Abstract

Preface As an interdisciplinary Ph.D. student at UMaine’s Climate Change Institute, I have an obligation to review a reasonably broad set of applicable climate-related topics, while conducting unique research and tackling specific research questions, problems, and providing substantive conclusions. As such, I have engaged a case study approach where questions specific to the science, policy, and politics of climate change are addressed. Those three case studies are described in more detail below. Background and Context As of July 2023, the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) validates and expands on thousands of peer-reviewed publications and author analysis which conclude that climate change is widespread, rapidly advancing, and intensifying and is primarily a consequence of human activity increasing greenhouse as concentrations. The IPCC warns there is a “rapidly closing window of opportunity to secure a livable and sustainable future for all” (IPCC, 2023, pg. 24). Estimates suggest 97% (NASA, 2023) of the scientific community agree that climate change is a real, existential threat to humanity. While continued research is needed to assess the impact of climate change the science is clear. In 2015, 196 countries signed the Paris Agreement, a global pact to reduce global warming and mitigate the effects of rapid climate change. These various countries then began offering comprehensive policy proposals designed to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement: to slow global warming to 1.5° Celsius. In 2020, as countries prepared for the global Conference of the Parties (COP26) climate summit, the majority strengthened their original policy proposals in recognition of an ever-shrinking window of opportunity to effectively mitigate global warming and rapid climate change. The new policy goal was to cut carbon emissions to reach net zero by 2050. Policy makers now agree that countries must cut carbon emissions in half by 2030 if we are to keep global warming to 1.5°C. In 2022, the United Nations (UN) published a report suggesting that the combined efforts of the now 193 parties signed on to Paris will result in a 10.6% increase in carbon dioxide emissions by 2030 (UNCC, 2022). An IPCC report released in 2023 (IPCC, 2023) strongly suggests efforts to reduce emissions and meet targets are falling short. Based upon a 2023 Yale “Climate Change In The American Mind” survey, the number of Americans who think global warming is currently occurring exceeds those who think it is not happening by a 5 to 1 margin (72% versus 15%) (Yale, 2023). Yet a recent Pew (Pew Research Center, 2024) study shows that “dealing with climate change” ranked 18th on a list of the policy priorities, down one spot from 2023. While President Biden’s $2 trillion-dollar Bipartisan Infrastructure/Inflation Reduction packages (H.R. 3684. 2021/H.R.5376. 2022) commit an estimated $375 billion to combat climate change, the bills included massive concessions to the fossil fuel industry including billions (CIEL, 2021) in annual subsidies, the opening of new leases for the extraction of gas and oil on public lands in New Mexico, Wyoming, Utah, Colorado, California, Montana, and North Dakota (BLM, 2023), and an easing of regulations on gas and oil pipeline projects like the Mountain Valley Pipeline in West Virginia, a pet project of US Senate holdout Joe Manchin. Many of these concessions were needed to pass the bill, which passed the US Senate by one vote. While thus far largely unsuccessful, the policies promoted in reports like the UN’s 2023 IPCC 6th Assessment on Climate Change reflect the need for immediate and dramatic action. What is missing, according to the 2022 IPCC report (Chapter 5) is the political will of the US public and politicians to prioritize climate change policy. Unfortunately, that will not happen until elected officials' self-preservation instinct (i.e., their desire to be re-elected) become as tied to climate change as it currently is to issues like the economy, health care, education, and immigration, among others. Until political survival hinges on one’s position on climate change, meaningful climate change policy will lag behind other, more politically expedient issues. Literature Review Each Case Study includes a literature review, including a summary of, comparisons between, and critiques of the most relevant scholarly sources. The literature review focuses on key concepts, theories, and research in order to supplement existing research in each of the three study areas herein. Contributions to Knowledge As an interdisciplinary Ph.D. student at UMaine’s Climate Change Institute, I have an obligation to cover a reasonably broad set of applicable climate related topics, while conducting research and tackling specific research questions, problems, and conclusions. As such, I have engaged a case study approach where questions specific to the science, policy and politics or climate change are addressed. That said, it has long been my contention that climate scientists and climate policy makers have done their jobs. Scientists have given us more than adequate scientific proof that climate change is real and advancing rapidly, while those policy makers focused on implementing policy designed to mitigate the impacts of carbon emissions have given us options that, if enacted and codified, would help positively address climate change and global warming. What is missing? Political will. To address this shortcoming, we must convince voters that climate change is at least as great if not a greater priority as important issues like health care, education, and the economy, resulting in the election of more pro-climate friendly candidates. To this end, this research is meant to find ways to effectively communicate climate messaging across partisan lines.

Comments

Link to Appendices: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1WAbvJgfiUj9Mc9skiBJjoz0DnTAaKXlV?usp=sharing

Additional Files
Appendix A.pdf (767 kB)
Download

Included in

Climate Commons

Share