Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Untitled
Untitled
TO CLIMATE POLICY
The Hartwell Approach to Climate Policy presents a powerful critique of mainstream climate
change policies and details a set of pragmatic alternatives based on the Hartwell Group’s
collective writings from 1988–2010. Drawing on a rich history of heterodox but increasingly
accepted views on climate change policy, this book brings together in a single volume a series
of key, related texts that define the “Hartwell critique” of conventional climate change policies
and the “Hartwell approach” to building more inclusive, pragmatic alternatives.
This book tells of the story of how and why conventional climate policy has failed and,
drawing from lessons learned, how it can be renovated. It does so by weaving together three
strands of analysis. First, it highlights why the mainstream approach, as embodied by the Kyoto
Protocol, has failed to produce real-world reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and delayed
real meaningful progress on climate change. Second, it explores the underlying political,
economic, and technological factors which form the boundary conditions for climate change
policy but which are often ignored by policy makers and advocates. Finally, it lays out a novel
approach to climate change guided centrally by the goal of uplifting human dignity
worldwide—and the recognition that this can only succeed if pursued pragmatically,
economically, and with democratic legitimacy.
With contributions from leading scholars in the field, this work presents a stinging critique
of current climate policy and a constructive primer for how to improve it.
Steve Rayner is James Martin Professor of Science and Civilization and Director of the
Institute for Science, Innovation and Society, University of Oxford, UK.
Mark Caine is Managing Editor of the Breakthrough Journal, The Breakthrough Institute,
Oakland, California, USA.
Science in Society Series
Series Editor: Steve Rayner
Institute for Science, Innovation and Society, University of Oxford
Editorial Board: Jason Blackstock, Bjorn Ola Linner, Susan Owens, Timothy O’Riordan,
Arthur Peterson, Nick Pidgeon, Daniel Sarewitz, Andy Sterling, Chris Tyler, Andrew Webster,
Steve Yearley
The Earthscan Science in Society Series aims to publish new high-quality research, teaching,
practical and policy-related books on topics that address the complex and vitally important
interface between science and society.
“It is difficult to argue that the world has done anything other than fail so far on climate
change, and fail pretty dismally.This timely and provocative book outlines some of the reasons
why—and suggests novel ways forward that might stand a higher chance of success.”
—Mark Lynas, environmentalist and journalist
“The Hartwell Approach to Climate Policy is a deeply reasoned, subtle, yet refreshingly
pragmatic collection of ideas that shows us how to build on our existing social and political
institutions to get beyond divisive politics and start moving, finally, toward a more sustainable
world.”
—Michael Crow, Arizona State University, USA
“This volume presents important perspectives on what needs to be done, and by whom, to
address climate change. Its authors speak from expertise developed in highly politicized global
and national environments, and what they say needs to be listened to and evaluated, and
weighed against long-standing mainstream approaches.”
—Mickey Glantz, University of Colorado, USA
“The Hartwell Approach to Climate Change cuts through the wrangling over climate science
with humanitarian common sense.”
—Ambassador Richard Benedick, President of the National
Council for Science and the Environment
THE HARTWELL APPROACH
TO CLIMATE POLICY
Typeset in Bembo
by Cenveo Publisher Services
CONTENTS
Acknowledgements x
SECTION 1
The road not taken 7
SECTION 2
An emerging critique 71
12 Disasters, death, and destruction: making sense of recent calamities (2006) 176
Roger Pielke Jr.
SECTION 3
The end of the pipe: an epistemological break 195
SECTION 4
From climate crisis to energy challenge 227
SECTION 5
The Hartwell Paper 245
SECTION 6
Beyond Hartwell 283
Afterword 304
Steve Rayner and Mark Caine
Index 307
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The editors express their gratitude to Alex Witze for editorial assistance and to all of the con-
tributors for their collegial support in assembling this collection. We also gratefully acknowl-
edge a grant from the Nathan Cummings Foundation to the Mackinder Programme for the
Study of Long-Wave Events, which partially supported Mark Caine’s work on this volume.
INTRODUCTION
Another book on climate change policy?
With the immense attention lavished on climate change today—in the media, in academic
circles, and elsewhere—why bother publishing yet another analysis of the nature of climate
change and its implications for effective policy action?
Every approach to public policy is underpinned by assumptions about the nature of the
world, of politics and public policies, and of the issues public policies are intended to address.
As climate change rose to prominence as a policy issue over the past several decades, certain
ways of understanding the nature of the problem—and of the role of public policy in addressing
it—soon came to dominate public discussions, which themselves reflect underlying world-
views and political philosophies. Alternative views based on different conceptions of climate
change and its implications for society, or of the nature of the world and the role of policy
and politics within it, remained marginal and achieved only limited airing.
The view of science, politics and policy that came to underpin climate policy action devel-
oped throughout the latter half of the twentieth century with the rise of the modern envi-
ronmental movement. Following successes fighting local air and water pollution in the US
and Europe through a focus on regulatory approaches to “end-of-the-pipe” pollution, advo-
cates for action on climate conceived of the issue as yet another pollution problem, albeit one
of a larger scale. Carbon dioxide emissions were a pollutant, the logic went, and like other
pollutants they could be controlled through point source regulation. Emissions targets could
be set for national “pipes”. Recent successes fighting ozone depletion and acid rain seemed to
confirm the strength of the approach.
This view of climate change is supported by several underlying beliefs: for example,
that climate change is at its core a market failure; that the global nature of climate change
demands a globally coordinated solution involving all nations; and, at least until recently, that
the central goal of policy should be to mitigate climate change through emissions reductions,
whereas a focus on adaptation would be conceding defeat and would lead to the failure of
mitigation. Taken together, these problem definitions and political preferences suggested a cli-
mate change solution path constructed around an encompassing international treaty stipulat-
ing carbon dioxide emissions targets, emissions reductions timetables, and market-based
approaches for achieving them.
2 Rayner and Caine
This view of the problem and the way it should be solved was incorporated into the archi-
tecture of a global climate policy regime through the United Nations Framework Convention
on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Negotiations leading to the UNFCCC began in 1990; the
agreement was opened for signature at the 1992 Rio Earth Summit and had its first Conference
of the Parties (COP) meeting in 1995, and in 1997 its member parties proposed the Kyoto
Protocol during the third COP meeting in Japan. The protocol sought to impose binding
carbon dioxide emissions targets on signatory countries from the developed world, princi-
pally European countries along with Australia, Japan, Russia, and the United States. Notably,
it omitted China, and all other so-called developing countries, reflecting the belief not only
that rich countries could better afford the costs of mitigating their greenhouse gas emissions,
but also that the developed world was responsible for most of the emissions to date.
The UNFCCC and Kyoto have locked the world into a framing of the climate change
challenge that was deeply misleading upon deeper inspection. This included the assumptions
that:
In the intervening years, individual countries and regions have crafted their own
approaches to climate change, structured either to meet Kyoto Protocol obligations or to
reduce carbon dioxide emissions on other terms. Given its status as the world’s largest
greenhouse gas emitter, the United States was notable in rejecting the treaty and proposing
alternative mitigation policies; while strong economic growth in China, India, and other
countries not subject to targets under the Kyoto Protocol has accelerated global emissions
growth. Even so, at the international level, the global process set in motion in 1992 remains
a dominant force in global climate change policy, consuming a substantial amount of the
money, effort, and political capital currently committed to addressing climate change glob-
ally, despite the lack of progress in either implementing a workable and effective global policy
regime or, more importantly, in actually making progress toward reducing global greenhouse
gas emissions, the regime’s raison d’être.
An emergent critique
While the UNFCCC was the centre of action of climate policy over the past several decades,
some analysts were expressing doubts about the likelihood of its success. Though most agreed
that climate change posed great risks and required concerted policy action, others found
themselves disagreeing with the ways in which the dominant process framed the problem of
climate change. And if the problem framing was itself fundamentally flawed, they asked,
could the solution paths that emerged from it yield the desired and expected outcomes?
Introduction 3
The authors whose work is presented in this volume were among the early voices offering
an alternative path forward on climate. Individually at first, starting in the late 1980s through
the mid-1990s, they voiced their concerns through academic writing, engagement with policy
makers, and public speaking on climate change policy, each bringing particular experiences
and expertise to bear on different aspects of the issue.
For instance, dominant policies would not work because they treated climate change as a
tame problem, Steve Rayner argued, despite abundant evidence of climate's “wickedness”
and the difficulty of addressing it through the sorts of policies that worked to combat tame
problems such as mercury and sulphur pollution. Gwyn Prins wrote that environmental
issues required thinking differently about coordinated international action due to character-
istics that set them apart from other global policy challenges. Economic losses from natural
disasters had not increased on a normalized basis, wrote Roger Pielke Jr., and efforts to
motivate climate change action by stoking fear of disasters would serve only to delegitimize
science in the public policy arena. Though science is invaluable in our effort to understand
and respond to the world around us, wrote Daniel Sarewitz, it cannot resolve the disputes that
characterize political discussions about climate change, which are fundamentally disputes over
values and vision rather than the epistemic quality of scientific knowledge.
The authors of the works in this volume soon recognized that the strands of research they
had been pursuing on their own were complementary and synergistic. Over the course of
20 years, they thus began a series of collaborations on papers, workshops, and policy advice
culminating in The Hartwell Paper (2010), a synthetic capstone weaving these strands together
into a statement of vision for the future of climate change policy.
As a statement about policy framing and direction, The Hartwell Paper was radical. It
proposed human dignity as the overarching aim of climate change policy, with attendant
emphases on energy access and climate change adaptation. It argued for a relentlessly prag-
matic approach to mitigation, focused on identifying and exploiting any and all overlaps
between what is materially necessary to reduce greenhouse emissions and what is politically
possible given political–economic constraints that, while not immutable, strongly bind and
define the available options for effective climate change policies. It argued for a renewed focus
on non-CO2 forcing agents, which had previously received minimal attention but which
subsequently have achieved greater prominence internationally.
Above all, The Hartwell Paper demanded a frontal reckoning with the “wickedness” of
climate change and thus an acceptance of the reality that, contrary to dominant narratives,
climate change is not a problem that can be “solved” but one to be coped with better or
worse as a condition of the modern world.
In addition to highlighting why the principal global policy approach has failed, this
volume brings together an alternative set of analyses that, over the decades, have developed
in parallel to, but in the shadow of, the mainstream global discussion. It details the rise of our
own strands of heterodox climate policy thinking, on topics ranging from carbon pricing to
adaptation and resilience, from the “wicked” nature of climate change to the structure of
international treaties and the frames and heuristics through which people understand and
engage with climate change.
This volume is not a comprehensive primer on climate change science or policy; nor does
it cover the full range of critiques of dominant approaches to global climate change strategy.
Rather, it brings together a body of work developed by multiple authors over nearly three
decades that adds up not only to a critique of dominant narratives on climate change policy
but also to a broadly coherent alternative perspective. As such, it provides a rich array of
scientific, political, and policy options for productively re-engaging with and addressing the
challenge of a changing climate. The constituent pieces are presented in chronological order
and without editing in order to present a historical and intellectual record of the evolution of
the Hartwell approach.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, this volume is offered as an aid to anyone concerned
about climate change but justifiably beleaguered by the collective global failure to address it
meaningfully. To such readers we offer a foundation of pragmatic ideas for framing the climate
change issue and responding to it through effective policy in the real world of competing
values and interests, complex social and technological arrangements, and expanding, yet
always-incomplete, scientific understanding.
Section list
Section 1, “The road not taken”, presents our earliest thinking on the nature of climate
change as a policy issue and implications arising. Beginning with Gerlach and Rayner’s 1988
Managing Global Climate Change: A View from the Social and Decision Sciences, this section
tracks the development of an alternative approach to thinking about and acting on climate
change that is rooted in an analysis of the social, political, economic, and technological facets
of the issue.
Section 2, “An emerging critique”, presents the early application of the conceptual
frameworks developed in Section 1 to the core tenets of mainstream climate change policy
discussions. Across nine pieces published between 2000 and 2007, an expanded set of authors
critiqued the targets-and-timetables approach that dominated global policy, the lack of atten-
tion towards adaptation within the most powerful policy forums, and the notion that climate
science itself could serve as an effective driver of climate change policy.
Section 3, “The end of the pipe”, details an epistemological breakpoint in the mid-2000s
at which long-held assumptions about the nature of climate change as a policy issue began to
unravel. Beginning in 2004 with Nordhaus and Shellenberger’s The Death of Environmentalism
and extending through the publication of Prins and Rayner’s Time to Ditch Kyoto in 2007, this
period saw the mainstream emergence of a critique of “pollution politics”, the notion that
climate change is a familiar type of environmental problem that can be addressed by reducing
pollution at its source. This period coincided with the apogee of public attention to climate
change, with the release of Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth in 2006 and the Fourth Assessment
Report (AR4) of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 2007.
Introduction 5
Section 4, “From climate crisis to energy challenge”, presents the activation and elucida-
tion of a long-held, but as yet neglected, strand of thinking emphasising the importance of
developing better technology to meet the climate change challenge. This perspective con-
fronts the widely held view that climate change is most effectively addressed by modifying
consumption habits and incentivizing technology adoption by making carbon-intensive
energy sources more expensive; for example, through high carbon taxes or stringent cap-
and-trade policies. The authors in this section draw on the critiques of this narrative in the
previous section and point out the obvious problem of addressing a problem of distant future
impacts through measures that increase peoples’ current cost of living. As an alternative approach,
they lay out a climate policy agenda that prioritises reducing the cost of new low-carbon
energy over increasing the cost of incumbent sources.
Section 5, “The Hartwell Paper”, presents the culmination and integration of the numer-
ous strands of climate change policy thinking developed through the preceding sections.
Collaboratively conceived and written in 2009–2010 by several of the authors presented in
this book, The Hartwell Paper served as a synthetic capstone of the diverse but thematically
unified work conducted by this group over the preceding two decades. Controversial at the
time of its publication, just after the failure of the 15th Conference of the Parties of the
UNFCCC in Copenhagen, the paper sparked a wide-ranging debate about the framing of
climate change as a policy issue and future approaches to managing this “wicked” problem.
Crucially, it established human dignity as the ultimate goal of climate change policy, demand-
ing an attendant emphasis on universal energy access, adaptation to extreme weather, and
mitigation of greenhouse emissions through oblique but efficacious policy approaches.
Section 6, “Beyond Hartwell”, presents recent writings updating and elaborating on the
framings and policy approaches put forth by The Hartwell Paper. The pieces within, authored
between 2010 and 2012, showcase the authors’ reflections on the future of climate policy and
the key challenges standing in the way of the pragmatic, human-dignity-oriented vision
spelled out in The Hartwell Paper.
This collection finishes with a brief Afterword. The editors are encouraged that there are
signs that the tide might finally be turning away from the one-big-treaty approach about which
authors working in what became the Hartwell mode expressed scepticism as long ago as 1988.
In 2007 articles such as “The wrong trousers” and the Nature commentary, “Time to ditch
Kyoto” still scandalized the environmental movement and the climate establishment by largely
reiterating the findings of Human Choice and Climate Change (Rayner and Malone 1998). Now
their arguments for “silver buckshot” rather than silver bullets and The Hartwell Paper’s call for a
discourse of opportunity around energy modernization in preference to a focus on centralized
emissions targets are beginning to gain a foothold in mainstream policy thinking, but it is still a
tenuous one and one that is viewed as only second best. There is increasing recognition of, and
interest in, the alternative governance approaches to dealing with climate change that are dis-
cussed in this volume; although the attachment to the idea of a comprehensive global deal
remains strong for some. Similarly, international processes are beginning to recognize the inev-
itability of adaptation and the central importance of collaboration on technology research,
development, demonstration, and deployment; although the bulk of the policy community has
yet to embrace climate change as a problem of technological change rather than one of environ-
mental control. Others are offering analyses of the failure of past policies, particularly cap-and-
trade policies, which are quite congruent with the Hartwell critique; although some at least
remain wedded to the idea of changing behaviour through a price mechanism (e.g. Helm 2012).
6 Rayner and Caine
But there are signs that a change of course towards a broadly Hartwellian perspective may be on
the horizon. A major challenge to this change in direction will be the personal and political
capital that activists and policy makers have sunk into the conventional policy architecture that
they must now abandon. The task for those who are convinced of the necessity for such a turn
is to ease their passage.This may mean that the trappings of the UNFCCC and Kyoto architec-
ture remain in place while the real policy heavy lifting is done through technological innovation
and policies that address the diverse immediate needs of citizens in different places while
improving our overall capacity to confront the challenges of climate and development.
References
Helm, D. (2012) The Carbon Crunch: How We’re Getting Climate Change Wrong and How to Fix it. London:
Yale University Press.
Rayner, S. and E.L. Malone (1998) Human Choice and Climate Change, Volume 4: What Have we Learned?
Columbus, OH: Battelle Press.
References