Search

The governance challenges embedded in climate change are daunting. Conventional logic holds that national and international action is necessary. While the United States is a major source of Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions – second only to China – national action on climate change has been lacking. However, hundreds of subnational US governments and thousands of industrial facilities are actively engaged in addressing climate change. Given the potential mismatch between the global nature of the problem and the policy reach of subnational governments, we evaluate the extent to which polycentric variation in subnational climate action is associated with changes in GHG emissions. We develop a unique data set that incudes facility‐level GHG emissions from major industrial sectors in the United States over 8 years and subnational climate governance action across all 50 states. This large‐N data set allows us to systematically test hypothesis from polycentric governance. This type of comparative analysis can help to better understand the conditions under which polycentric governance is associated with improved climate change outcomes, that is, declining GHG emissions. Our results suggest that even when controlling for past emissions, some elements of polycentric governance are associated with decreases in GHG emissions. Future research would benefit from augmenting the large N comparative analysis presented here with mixed methods research to more fully understand the dynamic processes shaping both climate policy and GHG emissions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study builds on the expanding literature on the interplay of corporate governance and corporate environment behaviour following the introduction of the carbon reporting directives of the UK Companies Act in 2013. We specifically focus on seeking clarity on the relationship between gender diversity, board independence, and board size with corporate environmental performance. The study examines these relationships under a mandatory nonfinancial reporting (NFR) requirement and tests the impact of regulatory shocks on board composition and channels affecting carbon emission. The findings confirm that board gender diversity and independence improve a firm's environmental performance. And while larger board sizes lead to larger environmental investments, the study finds that larger board sizes leads to poor environmental performance for the firm. The findings contribute to developments in countries, such as the United States, where there is an ongoing debate on the adoption of a mandatory NFR of carbon and the response of corporate boards. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rationale: Adverse health impacts from outdoor air pollution occur across the United States, but the magnitude of these impacts varies widely by geographic region. Ambient pollutant concentrations, emission sources, baseline health conditions, and population sizes and distributions are all important factors that need to be taken into account to quantify local health burdens. Objectives: To determine health impacts from ambient air pollution concentrations in the United States that exceed the levels recommended by the American Thoracic Society. Methods: Using a methodology that has been well established in previous "Health of the Air" reports, this study provides policyrelevant estimates for every monitored county and city in the United States for the adverse health impacts of outdoor pollution concentrations using U.S. Environmental Protection Agency design values for years 2018-2020. Additionally, for the first time, the report includes adverse birth outcomes as well as estimates of health impacts specifically attributable to wildland fires using an exposure dataset generated through CommunityMultiscale Air Quality simulations. Results: The adverse health burdens attributable to air pollution occur across the entire age spectrum, including adverse birth outcomes (10,660 preterm and/or low-weight births; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3,180-18,330), in addition to mortality impacts (21,300 avoidable deaths; 95% CI, 16,180-26,200), lung cancer incidence (3,000 new cases; 95% CI, 1,550-4,390), multiple types of cardiovascular and respiratorymorbidity (748,660 events; 95% CI, 326,050-1,057,080), and adversely impacted days (52.4million days; 95% CI, 7.9-92.4million days). Two different estimates of mortality impacts fromwildland fires were created based on assumptions regarding the underlying toxicity of particles fromwildland fires (low estimate of 4,080 deaths, 95% CI, 240-7,890;middle estimate of 28,000 deaths, 95% CI, 27,300-28,700). Conclusions: This year's report identified sizable health benefits that would be expected to occur across the United States with compliance with more health-protective air quality standards such as those recommended by the American Thoracic Society. This study also indicates that a large number of excess deaths are attributable to emissions from wildland fires; air quality management strategies outside what is required by the Clean Air Act will be needed to best address this important source of air pollution and its associated health risks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Alternatives assessment is a methodology used to identify, evaluate, and compare potential chemical and nonchemical solutions with a substance of concern. It is required in several chemicals management regulatory frameworks, with the objective of supporting the transition to safer chemistry and avoiding regrettable substitutions. Using expert input from symposium presentations and a discussion group hosted by the Association for the Advancement of Alternatives Assessment, four case examples of the use of alternatives assessment in regulatory frameworks were evaluated and compared: (1) the US Environmental Protection Agency Significant New Alternatives Policy (USEPA SNAP), (2) authorization provisions in the EU REACH (Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation, and Restriction of Chemicals) regulation, (3) the California (CA) Safer Consumer Products (SCP) Program, and (4) the Safer Products for Washington (WA) Program. Factors such as the purpose of the alternatives assessment, the timeline of actions, who completes the assessment, the role of stakeholder engagement, and the regulatory response options for each policy are outlined. Through these presentations and expert discussions, four lessons learned about the use of alternatives assessments in regulatory policy emerged: (1) the goal and purpose of the regulatory framework significantly affects its ability to result in safer substitution, (2) existing frameworks struggle with data access and insufficient stakeholder engagement, (3) some frameworks lack clear decision rules regarding what is a safer and feasible alternative, and (4) regulatory response options provide limited authority for enforcement and do not adequately address options where alternatives are unavailable or limited. Five recommendations address these lessons as well as how the application of alternatives assessment in regulatory settings could have greater impact in the future. This synthesis is not meant to be a comprehensive policy analysis, but rather an assessment based on the perspectives from experts in the field, which should be supplemented by formal policy analysis as policies are implemented over time. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2024;20:1035-1045. © 2023 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC)., (© 2023 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC).)

Historical evidence shows that environmental issues have been secondary to United States' agricultural policy since the first farm bill in 1933. The farm sector has undergone massive changes in technology and farming practices, but the environmental problems it causes have remained ancillary to productivist goals. Agri-environmental policy has continued to rely on subsidies and voluntary farmer participation, while combining environmental objectives with price and income support aims. The faith of agri-environmental programs is largely determined by what is desirable for safety net purposes, and in times of high crop and livestock prices and increased environmental pressures conservation is particularly underfunded. Additionally, monitoring and program assessment are poorly structured. This is particularly concerning today given the threats of climate change and agriculture's contribution to it. A major rethinking of these taxpayer-funded programs is necessary to improve their effectiveness. Programs should focus on environmental outcomes and monitoring and assessment should be strengthened., (© 2023. The Author(s) under exclusive licence to Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences.)