Topic of the paper:How does climate finance influence economic policies? How has climate finance help developing countries? (in terms of finance, resources, infrastructure).Includethoughts about carbo/greenhouse pricing.
Description:
Write an essay of about three pages to address this question.The body of the text should be about 750 words.
Sources
Use at least three peer-reviewed essays or a comparable source to answer the question.
For citations,
The format of reference should be “California’s cap-and-trade market will result in 40% greenhouse gas reductions from 1990 levels by 2030 (Smith, 2019).”
I uploaded 3 peer-review-journals but the expert is free to add one of his own.
Addressing Risk in Climate Finance Solutions Journal of International Affairs Editorial Board Addressing Risk in Climate Finance Solutions Author(s): Michael Eckhart Source: Journal of International Affairs , Vol. 70, No. 2, The End of International Cooperation? (Summer 2017), pp. 69-83 Published by: Journal of International Affairs Editorial Board Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/90012621 JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact
[email protected]. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at https://about.jstor.org/terms Journal of International Affairs Editorial Board is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of International Affairs This content downloaded from �������������128.228.0.62 on Thu, 03 Jun 2021 16:24:40 UTC�������������� All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/90012621 Journal of International Affairs, Summer 2017 Vol.70, No.2. © The Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York Addressing Risk in Climate Finance Solutions Michael Eckhart Michael Eckhart is a managing director at Citigroup and adjunct professor at Columbia SIPA. Despite the resurgence of nationalism and anti-globalization, the world will forge ahead in financing climate solutions. Three reasons for this stand out. First, the current political movement toward nationalism is in the realm of politics, not in technology, economics, or finance. Second, there is massive and global momentum in clean energy technologies and other climate solutions that is not going away. And third, the world has the capital resources to do the job and understands the next steps that need to be taken. This content downloaded from �������������128.228.0.62 on Thu, 03 Jun 2021 16:24:40 UTC�������������� All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms Journal of International Affairs 70 The world is lurching forward, in fits and starts, with solutions to global warming, climate change, and sustainability. The adoption of the Par- is Agreement in December 2015 appeared to establish a new and clear path. However, just a year later, it seemed that new challenges were arising from a resurgence of nationalism and anti-globalization, as reflected in the Brexit reso- lution in the United Kingdom and the election of Donald Trump as president of the United States on a platform of environmental rollback under the banner of America First. However, this article supports the view that we are not slipping backward and will forge ahead toward the financing of climate solutions for three reasons: 1. The current political movement toward nationalism is in the realm of politics, and not in the reality of technology, economics, industry, mar- kets, and finance—the factors that have overtaken pure politics as the drivers behind recent progress; 2. A massive and global momentum has built up over the past 70 years with clean energy technologies and other climate solutions that are not going away, supported by global policy commitments in over 150 countries that cannot be readily reversed; 3. The world has the capital resources to do the job and understands what next steps will need to be taken to create a pathway to success. The year 2015 might be seen in history as the culmination of 70 years of efforts since World War II to establish greater regionalization and globalization on many matters including but not limited to defense, trade, immigration, science, environment, and finance, and the formalization of greater cooperation among countries of the world in the form of agreements such as the Paris Agreement. The Paris Agreement The Paris Agreement is an agreement within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) dealing with greenhouse gas emissions through mitigation and adaptation, starting in the year 2020. Repre- sentatives of 195 countries negotiated the agreement in the run-up to, and at, the twenty-first Conference of the Parties (COP 21) of the UNFCCC in Paris and This content downloaded from �������������128.228.0.62 on Thu, 03 Jun 2021 16:24:40 UTC�������������� All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms Summer 2017 71 adopted the agreement by consensus on 12 December 2015. The agreement was opened for signature on 22 April 2016 (Earth Day) at a ceremony in New York City. As of April 2016, 194 UNFCCC member countries have signed the agreement, of which 143 have ratified. The agreement went into effect on 4 November 2016, just prior to the opening of COP 22 in Marrakech, Morocco. The agree- ment calls for nationally determined action plans, but also requires a report on progress every five years as part of a global cooperation agreement on reaching climate change goals. Brexit and Trans-Pacific Partnership Then, on the heels of this global success have come reversals of similar en- deavors, such as the Brexit resolution against UK membership in the European Union and the Trump administration’s withdrawal of U.S. participation in the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). The Brexit vote was reportedly about British citizens’ sense of lost sovereignty, and in particular a loss of control over immigration. The EU’s immigration pol- icy is a supranational set of rules that have come under fire due to the surge of refugees coming principally from war-torn areas of the Middle East and North Africa. Since 1999, the EU has been developing a common immigration policy for Eu- rope.1 EU countries have agreed that the union should have common immigra- tion and visa rules that will be valid across all 27 EU countries. These are set out in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union of 2009 and include common rules on entry and residence conditions for migrants, procedures for issuing long-term visas and residence permits, the rights of migrants living legal- ly in an EU country, measures tackling irregular immigration and unauthorized residence, and incentives and support for EU countries to promote the integra- tion of migrants. The Brexit resolution is said to have passed because of populist objection to these EU-imposed immigration rules that led to a swell of immigrants from Syr- This content downloaded from �������������128.228.0.62 on Thu, 03 Jun 2021 16:24:40 UTC�������������� All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms Eckhart 72 ia and other terrorist-prone, war-torn areas into the UK. The British were saying, in effect, “Britain First.” The TPP took more than ten years of talks to take shape. The agreement would have set new terms for trade and business investment among the United States and 11 other Pacific Rim nations—a far-flung group with an annual gross do- mestic product (GDP) of nearly $28 trillion that represents roughly 40 percent of global GDP and one-third of world trade.2 However, the Trump administration has withdrawn from the pact, citing America First. The politics of international cooperation seem to face the prospect of a 180-de- gree turn, and this rightfully raises the question of whether the Paris Agreement will be honored in full, in part, or dissolved. The thesis of this article is that the Paris Agreement will be honored in full and implemented for the following three reasons: 1. The technologies exist and are continuing to emerge to substantially reduce and eventually end the consumption of fossil fuels with the atten- dant carbon dioxide, methane, and other greenhouse gas emissions; 2. Policy mechanisms and market forces that are proven to work are al- ready in place in more than 150 countries to enable the shift;3 3. Sufficient capital resources are ready to be deployed if new risk-mitigat- ing mechanisms can be put in place. Technology The world is 70 years into a 100-year transition to a cleaner energy economy, to be reached by 2050. The ultimate outcome of a clean energy economy may be unknowable, but unstoppable progress is underway, and the achievement of a tipping point has already occurred in the form of the commercialization of clean energy and environmental technologies after decades of development. The modern environmental movement started with the passage of the first envi- ronmental legislation, the Federal Water Pollution Act, on 30 June 1948. (The author of this article was born 52 days later and, yes, the coincidence has been This content downloaded from �������������128.228.0.62 on Thu, 03 Jun 2021 16:24:an 1976 12:34:56 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms Addressing Risk in Climate Finance Solutions 73 noticed.)4 Then came a succession of environmental legislation, regulation, and programs to move society to a cleaner and eventually more sustainable existence. Perhaps an acceleration point came in 1973 and 1974, when the Arab oil embargo led to the intersection of energy and environmental considerations, leading to U.S. national programs that would address energy independence through alternative energy sources. Programs were initiated in: • Wind power • Hydro power • Solar energy and power • Geothermal energy and power • Biomass energy, power, fuels, and chemicals • Hydrogen energy • Energy storage • Energy efficiency and vehicle fuel standards • Electric vehicles • Advanced (cleaner) fossil fuels • Synthetic fuels • Advanced nuclear power • Other alternatives to the combustion of coal, oil, and natural gas At the same time, in 1971, the microprocessor was invented, beginning the infor- mation technology revolution leading to microcomputers, artificial intelligence, the Internet, the Internet of Things, and the ability to optimize our use of ener- gy. With digitalization, we have begun a massive revolution in our management of the electric grid and other energy systems. Policy Mechanisms in Support of Clean Energy The move to commercialization started in the late 1990s and early 2000s. As these cleaner technologies were implemented in the market, public policy shifted to “push” them into use and “pull” large-scale markets into taking form through a number of successive regulation developments. In 1978, the United States established non-utility power generation under the Public Utility Regulatory Pol- This content downloaded from �������������128.228.0.62 on Thu, 03 Jun 2021 16:24:40 UTC�������������� All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms Journal of International Affairs 74 icies Act (PURPA), creating the non-utility generation industry. Production tax credits were