Search

Begin New Search Topic Climate Change Political Geography North America Content Type Working Paper Publication Year within 5 Years

1. The State of EU-US Digital and Energy Cooperation

Author:
Federica Marconi, Wolfgang Münchau, and Irene Paviotti
Publication Date:
02-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Istituto Affari Internazionali
Abstract:
In a time of rapid technological advancements and changing energy paradigms, the European Union and the United States are trying to coordinate their efforts to navigate the complexities of an ever-evolving landscape. Transatlantic dialogues and cooperative endeavours are key mechanisms for mitigating tensions and fostering a common assessment of the opportunities and risks arising from these advancements. Critical in this regard are the problems of governance emanating from technological development and its consequences in the digital sphere as well as the delicate balance between security, competitiveness and environmental targets in the energy dimension.
Topic:
Climate Change, International Cooperation, Political Economy, Governance, European Union, Transatlantic Relations, Digital Policy, and Energy
Political Geography:
Europe, North America, and United States of America

2. The Economy in its Labyrinth: A Structuralist View of the Mexican Economy in the 21st Century

Author:
Liz Monroy Gomez Franco
Publication Date:
01-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Political Economy Research Institute (PERI), University of Massachusetts Amherst
Abstract:
In this paper, I analyze the performance of the Mexican economy during the two decades of the 21st century. I focus on the aggregate and sectoral dynamics of the economy to understand the underlying dynamics behind the aggregate performance of the economy. With these results in mind, I analyze the changes and continuities in the conduction of macroeconomic and labor market policy with the arrival of a new administration in 2018. The goal of analyzing both elements is to provide an integrated view of the situation in which the Mexican economy will face three structural challenges: the medium and long-run effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, the integration of artificial intelligence into the production process, and climate change.
Topic:
Climate Change, Political Economy, History, Macroeconomics, Artificial Intelligence, COVID-19, and Labor Market
Political Geography:
North America and Mexico

3. A Primer on the 2022 National Security Strategy

Author:
Peter Juul and Heba Malik
Publication Date:
10-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for American Progress - CAP
Abstract:
The 2022 National Security Strategy introduces new ideas on navigating strategic competition with China and Russia, investing at home, and a renewed focus on the fight against climate change.
Topic:
Security, Climate Change, National Security, Rivalry, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:
Russia, China, Europe, Asia, North America, and United States of America

4. How the Inflation Reduction Act Will Drive Global Climate Action

Author:
Frances Colon, Cassidy Childs, and Anne Christianson
Publication Date:
08-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for American Progress - CAP
Abstract:
The Inflation Reduction Act puts the United States on track to meeting its Paris Agreement commitment and to reclaiming the mantle of global climate leadership.
Topic:
Climate Change, Energy Policy, Environment, International Cooperation, and Inflation
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

5. Greening the US Sovereign Bond Guarantee Program: A Proposal to Boost Climate-Directed Sovereign Finance in Developing Countries

Author:
Scott Morris, Rowan Rockafellow, and Alan Cameron
Publication Date:
02-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
Sovereign bond guarantees (SBGs) are an effective but underutilized instrument available to the US government in support of developing country partners. By protecting bond purchasers in the event of a foreign issuer country’s default, SBGs substantially reduce borrowing costs for developing country governments. In this CGD policy paper, we estimate the costs and benefits of historical US sovereign bond guarantees in order to model the use of SBGs for climate finance purposes. We demonstrate that the US government-provided SBG has the effect of conferring the US government’s cost of borrowing on the partner government. On that basis, it represents substantial savings for these countries. Based on this analysis, we propose a $20 billion “Green” SBG program aimed at financing climate change mitigation efforts in 28 emerging market economies. We estimate that the US government could support $20 billion in bond issuances through a subsidy outlay of $2 billion, resulting in a 22 percent reduction in borrowing cost of the target countries, which represents $4 billion in budgetary saving for their governments. We propose that the subsidy appropriations in support of the guarantees be retained and recycled within the Green SBG program, which would substantially improve the financial leverage of the program over time. We also suggest that the program could be used for climate adaptation purposes by targeting a different group of developing countries
Topic:
Climate Change, Development, Finance, Sustainability, and Green Transition
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

6. Mexico’s “Catch-22”: The Implications of Being a Trade and Climate Partner of the United States and the European Union

Author:
Simone Lucatello
Publication Date:
01-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS)
Abstract:
Under the current global environmental governance and trade regimes, several initiatives, such as the new United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement, the European Union’s European Green Deal, and regional free trade agreements the European Union has implemented with strategic partners like Mexico, are prompting a vibrant discussion on how trade agreements can be used as a potential mechanism to create enforceable cross-border commitments to tackle climate change. However, to cut greenhouse gas emissions within a few decades, a decisive departure from current trends in emission and trade policies is required by all countries, both developed and developing. As a result, politicians, scholars and experts around the world have looked to trade agreements as a possible tool for reaching global climate commitments, either related to or independent from the Paris Agreement. But how well do these agreements suit this purpose? Carbon-intensive products worldwide increased when tariff reductions were implemented, resulting in destructive practices for many countries, particularly those in the Global South. For countries such as Mexico, the nexus between trade and climate change is not easy to address: the country is trapped between its ambitions to play a role in global trade platforms as an industrial manufacturer and agricultural exporter and its desire to be recognized as a global actor in climate change policy and actions within the global community. Despite recent changes in climate and environmental politics under the administration of President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (2018–2024), Mexico is a middle-income country with a long-standing tradition as climate champion and environmental leader in the Global South and needs to make clear where it stands under the new global environmental and ecological transition scenario imposed by the climate crisis and trade-related issues. The “entanglement” of global trade treaties and commitments under the current climate crisis, represents a major shift for Mexico. Caught between the new US–Mexico-Canada Agreement, the EU–Mexico Trade Agreement and the possible impacts of the European Green Deal, Mexico needs to define its role in trade and environmental terms alongside giant partners such as the United States and the European Union, while defending its role as a regional power. If the European Green Deal takes off as an international driver for deepening climate and sustainable development goals with European Union strategic partners, it remains to be seen how Mexico will respond to the challenge. In this paper we address the possible implications for Mexico under each of these instruments. We look at the interplay between them, explore the linkages and possible conflictual pathways, and “disentangle” the schemes in which trade and climate change are interconnected. Mexico may be trapped in a “catch-22” situation. Environmental provisions embedded in trade treaties provide critical benefits to the country, but this often comes at the expense of “unacceptable” environmental enforcement measures that can put at risk national development plans, especially at a time when the environment and climate change issues are not at the top of the current administration’s political agenda.
Topic:
Climate Change, Governance, European Union, Partnerships, Trade, and Green Deal
Political Geography:
North America, Mexico, and United States of America

7. To Bring Emissions-Slashing Technologies to Market, the United States Needs Targeted Demand-Pull Innovation Policies

Author:
Varun Sivaram, Matt Bowen, Noah Kaufman, and Doug Rand
Publication Date:
01-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center on Global Energy Policy (CGEP), Columbia University
Abstract:
President-elect Joe Biden has called climate change one of the four most important crises facing the country and pledged ambitious climate action.[1] At the heart of his strategy to slash US and global emissions is a focus on developing new and improved technologies to make clean energy transitions more affordable. During the campaign, Biden pledged a “historic investment in clean energy innovation.”[2] Indeed, boosting funding for energy research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) is widely popular among both Republicans and Democrats and represents a rare legislative opportunity for advancing climate policy under a razor-thin Democratic majority in Congress.[3] In December 2020, Congress passed the most sweeping energy legislation in a decade, attached to the $900 billion COVID-19 stimulus package, and authorized boosting clean energy RD&D funding.[4] Yet such investments alone may not be sufficient to successfully commercialize critical clean energy technologies. Today’s energy industry presents daunting barriers that impede the swift adoption of newer, cleaner technologies. As a result, the private sector underinvests in scaling up promising technologies and building out clean energy infrastructure.[5] Therefore, in addition to funding energy RD&D (“technology-push” policies), government policies should bolster market demand for clean energy to encourage private investors and firms to scale up and commercialize new technologies (“demand-pull” policies). Still, there are steep political obstacles in the way of many ambitious demand-pull policies. For example, President-elect Biden has called for economywide measures such as a clean electricity standard and $400 billion of public procurement of clean products such as electric vehicles.[6] These policies would create large markets for mass deployment of clean energy and speed a clean energy transition. But enacting them requires substantial new regulations and appropriations from Congress, a challenging feat even given the new Democratic control of both chambers of Congress. Fortunately, there is a set of targeted demand-pull measures that the Biden administration can immediately use—with existing statutory authority and without requiring massive new appropriations—to create early markets for promising clean energy technologies. These measures, which we call “demand-pull innovation policies,” fill a niche between RD&D investments that create new technology options and policies that support the large-scale deployment of clean energy. Demand-pull innovation policies focus narrowly on creating and shaping early markets for emerging technologies. For example, targeted government procurement, prize competitions, or milestone payments can provide early markets for clean energy technologies that have been developed with the aid of public RD&D funding. The government can also coordinate private procurement or otherwise catalyze private market adoption through certification and standard-setting processes. Such demand-pull innovation policies have extremely high leverage and have transformed limited public investment into flourishing private commercial markets across the space, medical, and energy fields.[7] Coherently pursuing demand-pull innovation policies will require coordination across the federal government. To this end, the incoming Biden administration should consider creating a new government office, the Energy Technology Markets Office (ETMO), to spearhead the scale-up and commercialization of promising clean energy technologies. The ETMO could be housed within the Department of Energy (DOE) to take advantage of the DOE’s deep expertise in energy technologies and markets. Indeed, in the recently passed Energy Act of 2020 (Division Z of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021), Congress directed the DOE to build its capabilities to pursue demand-pull innovation policies.[8] In the same legislation, Congress also authorized the DOE’s Office of Technology Transitions, which could alternatively lead the demand-pull innovation agenda. Regardless of whether the administration creates a new office or augments an existing one, in order to maximize their potential impact, demand-pull innovation policies should not be the domain of only the DOE. Rather, the DOE should collaborate with a range of federal agencies—many of which, such as the Department of Defense, have sizable resources to invest in emerging technology procurement—to enact policies and pursue public-private partnerships to build market demand for the innovations critical to decarbonization. In concert with new RD&D investments in clean energy innovation, demand-pull innovation policies could be a powerful tool to speed the adoption of new technologies and cultivate advanced energy industries that can manufacture and export US innovations.
Topic:
Climate Change, Energy Policy, Environment, Science and Technology, Green Technology, and Carbon Emissions
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

8. The EU-US Trade and technology Council: Mapping the Challenges and Opportunities for Transatlantic Cooperation on Trade, Climate, and Digital

Author:
Guillaume Van der Loo, Thijs Vandenbussche, and Andreas Aktoudianakis
Publication Date:
09-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
EGMONT - The Royal Institute for International Relations
Abstract:
The EU-US Summit on 15 June 2021 marked the beginning of a renewed transatlantic partner- ship and set an ambitious joint agenda for EU-US cooperation post-COVID-19. The new Biden administration offers the EU the opportunity to re-establish transatlantic relations, which reached their lowest point since World War II under the turbulent Trump administration, and to address the bilateral disputes and tensions that have emerged, partly as a result of Trump’s ‘America First’ policies. One of the key deliverables of the Summit was the establishment of the EU-US Trade and Technology Council (TTC). The TTC aims to deepen EU-US relations on trade and investment and to avoid new technical barriers to trade by cooperating on key poli- cies such as technology, digital policy issues and supply chains. Despite the optimism in Brussels and Washington about renewing and strengthening transat- lantic cooperation, there are several challenges for EU-US cooperation. In the areas of trade, digital and climate in particular several differing views or outstanding disputes (most of them inherited by the Trump administration) will need to be addressed by the new TTC (the first meeting is scheduled on 29-30 September 2021) or other joint bodies. Only then will the EU and the US be able to deliver on the new ambitious transatlantic agenda. This paper will there- fore discuss the key challenges and opportunities for EU-US cooperation in the three inter- related areas of trade, digital and climate. For each of these areas, the outcome of the June 2021 EU-US Summit will be discussed and the challenges and opportunities for delivering on the renewed transatlantic agenda will be analysed. Moreover, this paper will present several policy recommendations, for the TTC or on EU-US cooperation in general, on how to advance the transatlantic partnership.
Topic:
Climate Change, Diplomacy, International Cooperation, International Trade and Finance, Science and Technology, European Union, Digitalization, and Summit
Political Geography:
Europe, North America, and United States of America

9. The Organizational Roots of Market Design Failure: Structural Abstraction, the Limits of Hierarchy, and the California Energy Crisis of 2000/01.

Author:
Georg Rilinger
Publication Date:
12-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies
Abstract:
Economic sociologists have rarely studied organizational reasons why market design pro- cesses fail. Drawing on the organizational literature on mistakes and accidents, the paper identifies such reasons for a fatal design decision during the creation of California’s first electricity markets. Designers proposed weak oversight structures even though their mod- els called for active and permanent regulatory control. Sellers like Enron could therefore manipulate the market without fear of detection, prolonging the western energy crisis. A process of “structural abstraction” explains this mistake. Designers were split into three groups that worked in different divisions and relied on local frames to understand the over- sight requirements. Each group missed information the others were aware of and arrived at the conclusion that minimal oversight would suffice. Higher levels of the hierarchy should have discovered and resolved these discrepancies. However, these levels considered the is- sue at a higher level of abstraction. Such structural abstraction made room for ambiguities that obscured the local disagreements.
Topic:
Climate Change, Economics, Energy Policy, Electricity, and Energy Crisis
Political Geography:
California, North America, and United States of America

10. Indigenous Reserve Lands in Canada Face High Flood Risk

Author:
Jason Thistlethwaite, Andrea Minano, Daniel Henstra, and Daniel Scott
Publication Date:
04-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre for International Governance Innovation
Abstract:
Nearly every year, Indigenous peoples in First Nations communities face property damage, disrupted livelihoods and the severe social and psychological burdens associated with evacuation due to flooding. Perhaps the most striking example is the recurrent flooding that afflicts the Kashechewan First Nation in Northern Ontario, whose residents have been forced to evacuate their homes every spring for 17 years. Although it’s known that Indigenous communities face a greater flood risk and experience more flood emergencies than the general Canadian population, the scope and magnitude of the current threat, and how it might evolve under climate change, has been little studied. This policy brief reports on research at the University of Waterloo that is assessing, quantifying and mapping the flood risk to Indigenous peoples living on reserve lands and includes policy recommendations to help with better understanding and reducing that risk.
Topic:
Climate Change, Natural Disasters, Indigenous, and Flood
Political Geography:
Canada and North America