America's bottom-up climate change mitigation policy

Abstract

Many diverse actions can be taken to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Increasingly in the United States, policy-makers at subnational levels are setting emission targets and implementing plans for sector-specific GHG reductions. In this paper, local, state, and regional policy actions in the US are inventoried and analyzed as to their potential effect on national emissions. The realization of all existing subnational initiatives, as of September 2007, could stabilize US emissions at 2010 levels by the year 2020. The scale of these many decentralized mitigation actions, and their tendency to follow consistent steps, provide a counterpoint to oft-cited drawbacks of decentralized environmental policy. It also indicates that the US has been more committed to climate change mitigation than is generally acknowledged. r

Tackling Grand Challenges Pragmatically: Robust Action Revisited

“…For instance, as described above, there are now a wide number of jurisdictions that have experimented with market-based, tradable environmental allowances as a way of limiting environmental withdrawals or emissions and permitting trading of allocated allowances (Callon, 2009;Lutsey & Sperling, 2008;MacKenzie, 2009). At the same time, we now understand some limits of these programs, such as failing to protect any resources not explicitly covered by the trading rules.…”

A Sustainable Energy Scenario for the United States: Year 2050

“…The transition to a portfolio that encompasses an abundance of renewable energy resources is also consistent with other research on US energy system transition [37,38]. The scenario encompasses significant roles for both state and local governments, both of which are taking on increasing responsibilities for achieving sustainability and climate change goals [32,[39][40][41][42]. The scenario envisions great strides towards self-sufficiency in low-density human settlements, a goal which Sorrell [43] states is very important for achieving sustainability.…”

International benchmarking: policy responses to biodiversity and climate change in OECD countries

“…However, in terms of policy learning, such initiatives may stifle learning through experimentation and transferability. Policy implementation at local jurisdictional scales maybe associated with more learning through experimentation/pilot programmes (Dominique et al, 2013) or it could be the outcome of policy obstruction at the national level that is circumvented by state level action U " -up climate change mitigation and adaptation policies (Lutsey and Sperling, 2008). More research is needed to understand the implications of jurisdiction on policy learning.…”