天易网

 找回密码
 注册
12
返回列表 发新帖
楼主: 郭国汀

全球气侯变化之政策原因

[复制链接]
 楼主| 发表于 11/10/2013 15:42:39 | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 郭国汀 于 11/10/2013 15:42 编辑

The security implications of climate change are obscure, almost invisible, to Canadians. This situation seems to be rooted in one or more of the following assumptions. First, the skeptics are right: climate science is imprecise and uncertain, and scientists cannot agree on the origins or consequences of a changing climate. Second, the people who are raising concerns about the possible security implications of climate change are scaremongers who lack credibility and tend to exaggerate risks and dangers. Third, climate change scenarios are not serious enough to translate into genuine security concerns for Canada. And fourth, Canada's security arrangements are adequate to handle whatever happens, and therefore it is okay to wait and see.[1]

[1] Margaret Purdy & Leanne Smythe,Why Canada must tackle the security dimensions of climate change , International journal Spring 2010 I p.411.

 楼主| 发表于 11/10/2013 15:43:56 | 显示全部楼层
An unprecedented consensus now exists among the world's leading climate scientists. They agree that the climate is changing in dramatic ways, that no region of the world is untouched, and that human activity is the principal contributor to increased concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane, and other greenhouse gases in the earth's atmosphere.[1]

[1] Margaret Purdy & Leanne Smythe,Why Canada must tackle the security dimensions of climate change , International journal Spring 2010 I  p.412

 楼主| 发表于 11/10/2013 15:46:18 | 显示全部楼层
The document for the scientific consensus on climate change is a 2007 report issued by the IPCC( Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), the newest one just published a few month ago in Oct 2013. The IPCC concluded that changes in the global climate system during the 21st century will exceed those observed during the previous 100 years, primarily as a result of fossil fuel consumption, agricultural expansion, and other human activities. Scientific academies and societies around the world, including the Royal Society of Canada, have endorsed these conclusions.[1] In its 1990 report, the IPCC reaffirmed that global warming is a serious threat. Average global temperatures are projected to rise between 1.10 C and 6.40C by the end of this century, contributing to the melting of glaciers, the thawing of permafrost, and more frequent heat waves. Precipitation patterns will change: increased precipitation is projected for high latitudes and increased desertification and more severe droughts are foreseen in lower latitudes. The sea level is expected to rise between 18 and 59 centimetres, increasing the risks of coastal flooding and erosion and accelerating the submergence of some islands. Extreme weather-more frequent and more intense weather-is likely to trigger storms, storm surges, and flash flooding.

[1] Margaret Purdy & Leanne Smythe,Why Canada must tackle the security dimensions of climate change , International journal Spring 2010 I p.412

 楼主| 发表于 11/10/2013 15:51:04 | 显示全部楼层
Canada, if it is to be true to its self-image of a force for good in this world, must play a leadership role, both in trying to facilitate US policy and on the global stage. Canada has the international "aptitude and experience" (149) which allow it to do far more than it has done to date to contribute to global climate change governance. We must first reverse our own failed policy and then, leading by example, make a positive contribution to the future of our world.[1]In 1988, the Government of Canada led by Prime Minister Brian Mulroney played a lead international role, working with two international agencies to host the Toronto Conference - the event which put climate change on the international policy agenda. In 2009, Canada was ignored or laughed off the stage in Copenhagen. It is a story of the unwillingness of the Chrétien, Martin, and Harper governments to face up to the provinces which are dependent upon oil revenues. His basic argument is that Canada has the material means, technological capacity, and popular support needed to begin taking effective action. The problem, he says, lies in three aspects of our political system. The first is the fact that under the Canadian constitution it is provinces, not the federal government, which own the natural resources - with the result, noted above, that efforts of individual Canadians and other governments are "overwhelmed by one export-oriented industry operating in one Canadian province." Secondly, he points to fragmentation of the party system, with five parties competing for votes, four of which now favour effective action, while the fifth has ruled since 2006. The third factor is economic integration with the US and consequent reluctance to adopt a climate-change policy which differs from that of Washington.[2]
On January 29, 2010, the Stephen Harper government announced that it had reduced its climate-change policy goal, in order to harmonize it with that of the US, from 20 per cent below 2006 levels, to be achieved by 2020, to 17 per cent below 2005 levels. The goals are meaningless in any case, since the Harper government is taking no active steps, beyond funding carbon sequestration research while waiting to see what the US does, to slow the annual increase in greenhouse gas emissions. Some Canadian provinces, most notably British Columbia, are putting in place potentially effective policy measures, but others are not. Alberta, for instance, has a policy goal which leaves ample room for expansion of its oil industry, which means growth in Alberta emissions will undercut any policy action taken by other provinces or the federal government.[3]

[1] Robert C. Paehlke, Some Like it Cold: The Politics of Climate Change in Canada, Labour 66file:///C:/Users/Thomas/AppData/Local/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_image001.gif (Fall 2010) p.259

[2] Robert C. Paehlke, Some Like it Cold: The Politics of Climate Change in Canada, Labour 66file:///C:/Users/Thomas/AppData/Local/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_image001.gif (Fall 2010) p.259

[3] Robert C. Paehlke, Some Like it Cold: The Politics of Climate Change in Canada, Labour 66file:///C:/Users/Thomas/AppData/Local/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_image001.gif (Fall 2010) p.258


 楼主| 发表于 11/10/2013 21:44:59 | 显示全部楼层
Municipalities inCanada have the potential to create sustainable communities through thecritical functions of land use planning, utility provision, transportationinfrastructure development, and waste management.[1]
“Policy capacity” or“policy analytical capacity” attempts to describe the link between policy developmentat the bureaucratic level and policy decisions taken by elected and appointedgovernment officials.[2] Policy capacity,by contrast, reflects the ability of civil servants to produce useful adviceand to effectively communicate that advice to government decision makers.  In thesimplest example of the heuristic policy cycle,politicians establish a policy goal, and then rely on their civilservants—permanent employees of the state who are largely unaffected byelections, lobbying, and public pressure—to investigate options for achieving the politicians' goals. These civil servants then forward the resultsof their work to the political executive to consider for policy implementation.
Climate policyactivists and experts have long argued that adopting emissions-reduction targets and implementing policies to try to meet thesetargets is the best approach. Isabel Galiana, Jeremy Leonard and ChristopherGreen argue that the policy focus onmeeting GHG emissions reduction targets over the past 15 years has been afailure, and that adopting a technology-led policy would be amore effective way for Canada to contribute to global climate changemitigation.[3]policymakers have put the emissions-reduction "chicken" before thetechnology-development "egg." If Canadian governments truly want to contribute to globalclimate change mitigation, they should adopt policies to bring about thenecessary technology breakthroughs, rather than setting GHG emissions reductiontargets they are unlikely to meet. They proposal would use carbon pricing in auniquely pragmatic and arguably politically acceptable manner - namely, by imposing a very low carbon tax or fee thatwould provide the needed long-term funding for energy technology R&D,testing and demonstration with minimal economic disruption.


[1]SarahBurch, Transforming barriers intoenablers of action on climate change Insights from three municipal case studiesin British Columbia Canada, Global Environmental Change Vol.20, Issue 2,May 2010 pp.288
[2] Newman.J, Perl.A, Wellstead.A, and McNutt.K(2011 )Policy capacity for climate changein Canada’s transportation sector.  

[3] Galiana, Isabel, Jeremy Leonard, andChristopher Green. 201 2. ATechnology-Led Climate Change Policy for Canada. IRPP Study 34. Montreal:Institute for Research on Public Policy


您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 注册

本版积分规则


站内文章仅为网友提供更多信息,不代表本网站同意其说法或描述,也不构成任何建议。本网站仅为网友提供交流平台,对网友自由上传的文字和图片等,本网站
不为其版权和内容等负责。站内部分内容转载自其它社区、论坛或各种媒体,有些原作者未知。如您认为站内的某些内容属侵权,请及时与我们联络并进行处理。
关于我们|隐私政策|免责条款|版权声明|网站导航|帮助中心
道至大 道天成

小黑屋|手机版|Archiver|联系我们|天易综合网 (Twitter@wolfaxcom)

GMT-5, 8/18/2018 13:35 , Processed in 0.240512 second(s), 10 queries , Gzip On.

Copyright 天易网 network. All Rights Reserved.

© 2009-2015 .

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表