In a recent study, published in the environmental journal Nature Climate Change, NYU professor Jennifer Jacquet and a team of scientists found that people are not motivated to invest in a solution to climate change because it does not pose an immediate threat to their well-being.
Complacency surrounding climate change is particularly distressing given the depth of its potential effects. The Environmental Protection Agency lists several detrimental impacts, including shifts in agricultural crop yields, threats to energy supplies and hazards to human health. Although the EPA dissects these influences by region and sector, many state governments have not introduced legislation to confront the growing issue. For instance, only nine states have joined the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, a group that aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
The subject of climate change has received minimal attention by representatives in Congress, and the gridlock that proliferates both houses will likely continue to keep legislation from passing. With more than a handful of government officials unwilling to acknowledge the existence of an environmental problem, the possibility of federal action is slim to none.
Rather than focusing upon multilateral interstate agreements, the United States should concentrate efforts on state-based initiatives. California has been pioneering legislation against climate change. In 2006, the state passed comprehensive legislation in the Global Warming Solutions Act, pledging to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. As a state that constitutes approximately 1.4 percent of global carbon dioxide emissions, California’s legislation can foster a substantial, long-term effect. In recognition of the benefits of a state-based approach, last month the governors of California, Oregon, Washington and a representative from British Columbia signed an agreement to coordinate climate change policies.
Climate change initiatives on the local level can help push crucial environmental legislation through the doors of the federal government. For instance, RGGI is developing a cap and trade program for carbon dioxide emissions from power plants. Initiatives like RGGI can apply pressure on Congress to support bigger initiatives like the Kyoto Protocol, a UN treaty committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Perhaps more state-level programs will serve as a pipeline to incentivizing productive legislation on the federal level.
Climate change remains a present threat to future generations. Political self-interest in Washington, D.C. has plagued any chance for immediate reform. To effectively address global climate change today, the United States should embrace local policies.
A version of this article was published in the Wednesday, Oct. 30 print edition. Email the WSN Editorial Board at [email protected].
