Who should lead the climate change initiative?
(polls)
February 8, 2010
Poll – Who should lead the climate change initiative?
Posted by whoopingboy under Ideas, polls | Tags: Climate Change, initiative, polls |[8] Comments
[8] Comments
February 8, 2010
February 9, 2010 at 10:36 am
Each of the players need to lead the things they are capable of leading and for which they can have a positive effect. Each has an influence on a part of the picture. But every change in one area will affect (or disrupt!) a part of a system that is already functioning, for better or worse. Sometimes an idea that seems great for one is a big problem for the interests of others.
One reason for the slow progress on climate change is the extensive reasons why many players are better off for the foreseeable future with the status quo. (At least because of the uncertainty.)
One way to make new progress is to realize that that all the stakeholders will not have the same vision. A future that addresses concerns about climate change has to include all the players (or at least the powerful ones and the ones that powerful players care about).
To make progress, we can break down areas of stakeholder differences: Values, Goals, Process, Data.
We must be careful with this analysis because the stated agendas are often not the real agendas. For example, denial of the scientific evidence is a common strategy, which keeps the conversation bottled up at a low level that’s hard to break.
In his state of the union address, Obama attempted to move past this intractable disagreement on data by suggesting that common goals of economic development make the concerns about climate change irrelevant. Working toward sustainability is valuable for all because we use resources more efficiently. I’m not promoting this argument – just showcasing the use of the Values, Goals, Process, Data framework for finding common ground amongst stakeholders with different interests.
Maybe a scenario analysis would help. We could imagine some key uncertainties and write some scenarios for the future state and devise ways of getting there. The ways of getting there would include seeing what aspects of the status quo would have to break down, what resistances would arise, and what sources of power would have to emerge to overcome the resistances.
February 25, 2010 at 12:51 am
I agree with everything said above. However, I think ultimately, the mindset of the consumers have to drive the change in order for real change to take place. Unfortunately, most people are more reactive than they are proactive. Just look at the past 2 years. The only reason why the Green initiative has surged is becuase gas prices sky rocketted. After that people were in a frenzy to find alternative sources of fuel. So whose job is it to convince consumers that it’s truly in their best interests to address the climate change issue? I guess the answer for right now is that it’s all of us who believe in the climate change problem. But in the end it’s going to be driven by whoever has the most to gain from it right now whether that means financial gain or otherwise.
February 17, 2010 at 4:23 pm
listen to robert f. kennedy jr. talk about this stuff. he has all the answers.
February 24, 2010 at 9:06 am
I believe that the consumer must lead the initiative because that’s where the buying power comes from. Supply is usually driven by demand. If consumers are not willing to use their “economic voice” and buy green technologies then the market will continue to sustain dirty-but-cheaper technologies.
February 24, 2010 at 3:59 pm
Well maybe this change will need to come from a private company, as opposed to a goverment program or world-wide movement/awareness from countries or consumers.
Granted this assumes that a “private company” can come up with the next-gen green technology that will change the way consumers use power, but I think a “private company” is in a better position to encourage adoption by consumers as opposed to some government mandate (…since competeing forces will want their green power to be given the government mandate and in the end nothing will be done. So let the free market decide which green power is the best value for the consumer).
February 26, 2010 at 2:25 pm
Two words – Leonard Kang
February 26, 2010 at 4:34 pm
Agreed with Phong… private industry and commercial enterprises should take the lead.
Governments (not just US, but other governments as well) have already proven their inability to move quickly to fund and lead new technology developments due to standard issues of bureaucracy in large government organizations. It’s not to say government is inherently bad… it’s just that they cannot move fast enough to take the lead on things like this.
Technologies like the Prius, the Bloom Box, Tessla, SmartCar, etc. have all come about by private industries with little to no government intervention, and have made significant impacts in their respective market segments by altering consumer behavior, preferences and expectations in the products they use and consume, and the impact that these products have on the environment.
February 27, 2010 at 9:55 am
It will take an act of God, in the form of a crisis, to push government to create policy that sustains the environment. At this same time, enough consumers will have been convinced as well.
I don’t believe a ‘miracle’ technology exists that will save the world. Something to overcome the cheap, available, processable fossil fuels simply isn’t going to happen. People will not be willing to sacrifice their personal comfort and freedom unless there looms a greater loss of comfort and freedom.
Sorry to be fatalistic.