Search

This paper analyses how 10 localities in the USA and England, recognised as leaders in clean energy and climate action, have used collaborative approaches to develop local climate change plans and energy conservation, efficiency, and renewable energy initiatives. It examines these planning and policy-making processes in the context of Margerum's [2008. A typology of collaboration efforts in environmental management.Environmental Management, 41 (4), 487–500] typology of “action”, “organizational”, and “policy-level” collaborations, as well as Gray's [1989.Collaborating: finding common ground for multiparty problems. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass] classification of collaboration in the “problem-setting”, “direction-setting”, and “implementation” phases. We conducted interviews with local elected officials, municipal staff, energy professionals, and citizen volunteers in each community, supplemented with an analysis of their adopted energy, climate change, and land-use plans. We find that despite the different government structures and political contexts between the two countries, there was a surprising amount of commonality in how the case study localities used collaborative planning to develop local climate plans and clean energy initiatives. These processes were most often initiated by local elected officials and/or high-level staff members, and then carried out in collaboration with local third-sector organisations and other community stakeholders. In the USA, collaboration was strongest at the policy level and in the direction-setting phase, with the distinguishing feature that citizen advisory boards or stakeholder working groups often took a more active role in shaping local plans and policies. The English localities had some of those same types of collaborations, but were more likely to also employ action collaboration, in the implementation phase, in which third-sector organisations coordinated with the locality to directly provide clean energy services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This special issue contributes to extant empirical scholarship assessing governmental capacity to meet significant policy challenges, in this case those related to climate change adaptation. The study includes detailed examination of five policy sectors-finance, infrastructure, energy, forestry, and transportation-in two countries, Canada and the United States-in order to determine what kinds of governance arrangements and analytical capacities exist in this area, how they are changing (if at all), and how they interrelate with the status and evolution of climate change outcomes in each sector. The articles provide a comprehensive sampling of policy network structure and behavior, organizational mandates and resources, and actual job duties and training of policy actors across these sectors at both the federal and subnational level of government. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Because of significant environmental changes underway in the Arctic region, institutional change for Northwest Passage management is receiving increased attention. Due to the potential environmental and security impacts of regularized ship transits through the Northwest Passage, a number of informed observers have discussed the need for considering alternative means of governing the waterway. This article assesses four approaches to governing the use of the Northwest Passage, including the current institutional arrangement. Following an overview of the environmental change underway in the Arctic region and its impacts on the Northwest Passage, the controversy surrounding the international legal status of the waterway and the possibility that it may in future become a commercial resource are discussed. Advantages and disadvantages of three alternative institutional models of resource governance recommended for application in the Northwest Passage case are presented, along with those surrounding the Arctic Cooperation Agreement, the current institution in use. The analysis suggests maintenance of the status quo institution appears to be the most likely outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Multilevel governance poses several challenges for the politics of climate change. On the one hand, the unequal distribution of power and interests can serve as a barrier to implementing coherent policy at a federal level. On the other, these features also enable policy leadership among sub-federal units. In the context of wide variation in climate policy at both national and sub-federal levels in Canada and in the United States, this paper utilizes an original data set to examine public attitudes and perceptions toward climate science and climate change policy in two federal systems. Drawing on national and provincial/state level data from telephone surveys administered in the United States and in Canada, the paper provides insight into where the public stands on the climate change issue in two of the most carbon-intensive federal systems in the world. The paper includes the first directly comparable public opinion data on how Canadians and Americans form their opinions regarding climate matters and provides insight into the preferences of these two populations regarding climate policies at both the national and sub-federal levels. Key findings are examined in the context of growing policy experiments at the sub-federal level in both countries and limited national level progress in the adoption of climate change legislation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article the author discusses the Indigenous Environmental Network (IEN) of North America and examines various environmental hazards faced by the indigenous peoples of Canada and the U.S. He comments on the impact that American consumption has on indigenous peoples and presents his belief that those living in indigenous territories are unnecessarily exposed to harmful environmental and radioactive toxins. Other topics include oil and natural gas consumption and depletion in Alaska, the impact of global climate change on the Arctic regions, and carbon trading policies.

In 2001, President George W. Bush confirmed that the US would not ratify the Kyoto Protocol. Despite the US' withdrawal, its neighbor Canada chose to ratify the Kyoto Protocol the following year. The divergence of these two highly integrated countries is surprising, since Canada and the US accepted comparable commitments in the 1997 Kyoto negotiations, and both could expect the costs of compliance to be significant given the greenhouse-gas intensive nature of their economies. The divergence cannot be explained by politicians' electoral incentives since Canadian and US politicians alike faced strong business opposition and a relatively inattentive public. A strong normative commitment to international cooperation to protect the global commons was necessary to overcome political opposition to ratification, but still not sufficient. In particular, while both Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chrétien and US President Bill Clinton supported ratification, only Chrétien had the institutional capacity to deliver on his values. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article reports that Canadian-U.S. environmental relations manifest a growing importance of transborder state and provincial cooperation and policy-making. Under the joint Climate Change Action Plan, adopted by the New England Governors and the Eastern Canadian Premiers in August 2001, participating provinces and states commit to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to 1990 levels by 2010 and 10 percent below 1990 levels by 2020. The provinces and states moreover pledge to ultimately decrease GHG emissions to levels that do not pose a threat to the climate, which according to an official estimate would require a 75-85 percent reduction from 2001 emission levels.