1
Q
Relativism
A
- no absolute right or wrong, but we can say acts are morally acceptable as long as they conform to my society’s approved practices
moral standards often differ across cultures
leads to conventionalism (right to do whatever immediate social environment dictates)
Issues:
- however, moral views can differ in society (subcultures, individual dissent)
under relativism, everything can be justified as long as its justified in the time period you talk about (e.g. slavery obviously wrong, but if you were to argue about it in the 1700s, it could be viewed differently)
2
Q
Consequentialism
A
acts are good if they have good consequences –>morality of action depends solely on the consequences it brings about, right thing to do brings about the best state of affairs when all things considered
Issues:
- what are the good outcomes we care about, and do we all agree –> it can differ depending on who you ask
Whose well-being do we want to maximize
3
Q
A
4
Q
Egoism
A
(type of consequentialism)
- acts are good if they benefit me
2 types: ethical egoism & psychological egoism
5
Q
ethical egoism (objectivism)
A
- moral agents should do what is in their self interest
Smith: when we each pursue our own self interest, we are collectively better off –> when we try to help others it is unsatisfactory bc 1) we invasively impose our own preferences 2) charity is degrading and debilitating (e.g. giving money to homeless encourages their begging behavior and doesn’t help them in the long run)
Ayn Rand: the true source of value is in the individual (supreme value of each individual life) –> their inspiration, work, etc. so asking them to sacrifice for society is limiting their own ability (destroying the highest value)
6
Q
psychological egoism
A
- self-interest is in fact what motivates people –> humans (may) be selfish by nature
no such thing as a selfless act –> everything you do brings you benefit (e.g. donating makes you feel better)
7
Q
Argument against egoism
A
- There is scientific evidence that the evolutionary success of humans is largely due to cooperation and altruism (inconsistent with psychological egoism)
Insurance/sympathy –> bad luck is an important determinant in well-being, do we really want to be cold-hearted and not care about the unfortunate
in PD situations, both parties are worse off than if they collaborate
8
Q
Utilitarianism
A
- acts are good if they can be expected to raise the sum of all human welfare (increase sum of all happiness)
issues:
- involuntary sacrifices –> the sacrificed have no rights
- justified torture –> can be ethical if outcomes are beneficial even if act is disturbing
- equal treatment of innocent and guilty, family and strangers –> utilitarianism says to always sacrifice less to save more no matter who
- breaking promises, lying for greater good depending on the circumstances is okay
- monetizes everything, even life itself –> quantify the effects of each decision
9
Q
4 golden rules
A
1: golden rule = do unto others as you would have others do unto you
2: Kant’s 1st rule, the Categorical Imperative = act according to principles that are universalizable (generally agreed)
3: Kant’s 2nd rule, the Practical Imperative = do not treat people purely as a means (don’t use people for your own benefit)
4: Ethics of care = act according to duties of care
10
Q
Issues with the Golden Rule
A
- differences in preferences –> what should a meatlover serve to his vegetarian dinner guest?
- acts where there is no “other” who would do the acts to you (e.g. suicide, gluttony, realization of one’s talents)
- lenient law enforcer –> golden rule of whether cop arrests a robber or not, cop doesn’t want to be arrested so they let the robber go
11
Q
How to apply the categorical imperative (rule #2)
A
- Start by stating the action you are considering: e.g. “borrowing some money that I don’t intend to pay”
- devise a general guiding principle that would underlie the decision: “When I need the money I will borrow it even if I know I won’t be able to repay it”
- Imagine a universal law that requires everyone in all circumstances to act according to this principle: “Everyone who needs money should borrow it, even when they know they won’t repay it”
- If no rational person would impose such a universal law, then you have the moral duty not to do the action – no matter what consequence
- how to check if people would agree –> if the universal law was implemented, would the maxim ever occur? e.g. “don’t repay borrowed money = no one lends = can’t even borrow = can’t reach maxim”
12
Q
What is a more practical approach than the categorical imperative?
A
rule utilitarianism = obey moral rules which if universally followed, would maximize social welfare
- the consequences of the act might be to lower total utility but everyone following the rule raises total utility
- e.g. voting in elections even though one person’s vote can’t influence the outcome
- e.g. Why the doctor shouldn’t slice up the traveller (ppl stop going to doctor = decrease in SW)
13
Q
Practical imperative
A
- Treating people as a means is not always a bad thing –> e.g. treat server at restaurant as a means to getting our meal is not that bad
- making “not purely as a means” practical –> server chose to accept the job so we know they get something out of it
- principle of autonomy: informed consent (no deception of coercion)
- reformulated practical imperative: Never treat other human beings in a way that violates their autonomy
14
Q
Moral Rules
A
- not dependent on outcomes or consequences
- you should follow principles or rules that you would want all people to follow
- must satisfy universality and reversibility
e.g. “always deal with people honestly”
- universality = I want everyone to be honest
- reversibility = I should be honest
- if you agree then it is a moral rule –> the duty to follow this moral rule establishes a right to expect honest dealings (you have the right to expect people to be honest with you and you have a duty to be honest to people) = deontological moral philosophy (rights based)
15
Q
Universality Rule
A
- I want everyone to follow that rule
16
Q
Reversibility Rule
A
- The rule should apply to me
17
Q
Ethics of Care
A
- the most important thing to us is relationships, so it should be the foundation for our morality (compassion) –> duty of care/compassion to those who depend on us
- Carol Gilligan, Nel Noddings + other feminists: caring is the foundation of morality –> more compassionate basis for human interaction
- rational/deontological philosophies are seen to be born out of masculine values of competition/domination
18
Q
Milton Friedman & CSR
A
- There is only one social responsibility of business –> use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits so long as it stays within the rules of the game
- employees responsibilities are to their employer
- argues it is not the CSR of businesses to 1) hire workers struggling to find jobs 2) reduce pollution beyond requirements 3) buy domestic to help economy and create jobs 4) make donations
19
Q
Argument for profit maximization
A
- a manager’s duty as an employee and an agent of principal overrides their alleged social responsibilities
- pursuing social responsibilities other than profit maximization is a form of “taxation without representation”
- pursuing profit leads to pareto efficiency (invisible hand argument) –> pursue profit maximization = decrease price of goods = more accessible
20
Q
Milton Freedman’s points against CSR
A
corporate activity that aims to help the community but reduces profit are:
- undemocratic b/c these decisions should be made thru a democratic process
- unwise b/c the businessperson has no expertise to identify/fix social problems
- ineffective b/c a manager that acts contrary to profit maximization might be fired or have less customers
TLDR: leave social issues to social workers that specialize in helping society and those who need it. What’s occurring is just “mindless” social responsibility
21
Q
Argument against Friedman’s points
A
- shareholders and board can vote on decisions = democratic
- firms know more about their product and production than any gov regulator = they know best way to fix problems they generate (e.g. firms have control over their pollution levels and how its generated)
- if shareholders and consumers endorse the firms goal it is effective
22
Q
What very important issue does Friedman ignore in his argument, and who argues that he ignores it?
A
Arrow argues that Friedman ignores market failure –> profit maximization may fail to yield efficient results in these scenarios
1) negative externalities: pollution caused by firm
2) asymmetric (imperfect) information: firm knows more than the customer about the quality of the product. They also know more than the worker about the safety of the workplace (e.g. cars, pharmaceuticals, mining, etc.)
- e.g. Cars = Ford Pinto –> compressed 2 yr manufacturing to compete against Japanese cars, the manufacturers were aware of the issue but lobbied to delay rear end testing + other so they could sell the car model, resulting in deaths from the explosion of rear ending
23
Q
What is Kenneth Arrow’s perspective?
A
markets don’t always get things right (as Friedman argued), so things like ethics can play a role in making markets work better
24
Q
What are potential solutions to market failure
A
- regulation: production standards, maximum emission levels, safety inspections, competition policy, etc.
- taxes and subsidies: tax pollution, subsidize abatement, etc.
- legal responsibility: damage suits or “torts”, legislation for labour and consumer protection, etc.
- Government produced goods when there are public goods or externalities (defense, healthcare, education, etc.)
- Industry-led solutions such as guarantees, warrantees, voluntary labelling for signalling, etc.
- Social responsibility: moral obligation to obey ethical codes
25
CSR
Concept that captures the responsibility of businesses to the environment, its stakeholders and to broader society
Questions about CSR:
1) To what extent should firms have this responsibility considering the typical tradeoffs that there are
2) Should firms focus on CSR which is closely related to their operations or CSR initiatives which are potentially very different from their business
26
Shared value
firms have benefit to their (financial) bottom line from CSR initiatives --> consumer brands find it easier to create shared value than others
- e.g. Unilever training women in rural communities to sell their product
- e.g. Arc'teryx workers making ponchos for the homeless
27
ESG Investing
investors invest in equities of firms that score highly on an ESG index --> important means of incentivizing firms to engage in CSR
28
Greenwashing
firms appear socially responsible but without having an actual impact --> e.g. glorified CSR reports released for annual reporting
29
Triple Bottom line
people/plant/profit (equal weight)
- firms expand their objectives beyond just making money to include having a positive impact on the environment and community
30
4 Justifications for CSR by Porter
1. Moral obligation - companies have a moral duty to do the right thing
2. Sustainability - companies should operate in ways to secure long-term economic performance by avoiding detrimental short term behavior (alignment with triple bottom line)
3. Freedom to operate - pragmatic approach where companies look to satisfy stakeholders, common in mining, chemicals, etc. (e.g. big company in small rural town --> big company needs the townspeople approval to work there and townspeople gain jobs + income --> interdependence between the two)
4. Reputation - companies do CSR to improve image, strengthen brand and enliven morale
31
Issues with 4 Justifications for CSR
1. moral obligation = difficult to balance competing values, interests, and costs
2. sustainability = hard to balance short term costs with long term benefits --> uncertainty in long-term benefits and advantages to companies who remain vague
3. Freedom to operate = agenda is ceded to outside groups, stakeholders often don't understand the firm, its tradeoffs, and importance of different issues --> different stakeholders cant see each other's perspectives
4. reputation = social impact and benefit to firms can be hard to measure/determine
TLDR: CSR is not likely to be enough on its own to achieve better equity and sustainability, individual and gov action is also critical
32
What is the solution to the problems with the 4 justifications for CSR
strategically integrate CSR initiative's that effect society with the impact that society has on the firm
33
Different Economic systems
Private ownership + decentralized supply/demand decisions = market capitalism (private enterprise)
- majority of the world follow this
private ownership + centralized supply/demand decisions = monopoly capitalism
public ownership + decentralized supply/demand decisions = market socialism
- current China
public ownership + centralized supply/demand decisions = state-directed socialism
- USSR 1950s
34
Different political systems
democracy = citizen participation in the political system --> leaders normally elected
- representative democracy
republic = government is subject to the people and leaders can be recalled, often democratic but can also be a monarchy (crowned republic)
monarchy = monarch head of state, can be constitutional (Canada, Australia --> gov makes decisions on behalf of citizens) or absolute (monarch actually makes decisions)
communism = system based on ideology of communism --> often combined with centrally planned economic system
despotism = rule by an individual (autocracy or dictatorship) or group of individuals (oligarchy)
35
What would the world be like if (liberal) economists were kings
1) minimal DWL --> no market failure - no interventions (e.g. price floor/ceiling, taxes, etc.), market failure = corrective policies (pigovian taxes, subsidies for abatement)
2) DWL only from a) taxes to finance transfers to the poor b) disincentives associated with the safety net (e.g. unemployment insurance, disaster relief)
36
Normative analysis
describes what should be implemented as policy based on our theories of economics and fairness
37
Issues with normative analysis
- many gov policies/actions hard to explain on the basis of normative analysis
- individual/small group interests can outweigh normal justifications
- gov failure = gov acts in a way contrary to what normative analysis prescribes
38
What is Winston Churchill's view on democracy and government?
no one says that democracy is the perfect or all-wise form of government, but it fares better than all the other forms that have been tried from time to time
39
Why is a benevolent dictator so appealing, and why does it not work?
- appealing because having a choice of respectable members of the community who promise to not give themselves airs or betray public trust sounds amazing
- in reality, there is a persistent show of corrupt, self serving and plain evil dictators (e.g. Mugabe --> promised to help the citizens, but then became power drunk and believed they deserved to be in power)
- autocratic regimes normally don't maximize social welfare
40
Challenges for democracy
requirements for healthy democracy:
1) educated electorate --> need to understand political, economic and social issues (ppl voting need to have knowledge)
2) free press --> no political party influence on information, transparency of info
4) independent judiciary --> ensure politicians are held accountable and act in public interest, transparency of info
TLDR: When facts are turned into fiction, and fiction is turned into fact, you stop debating ideas and start debating conspiracy (key challenge of democracy today)
- AI and social media make conspiracy theories more rampant and allow more like-minded individuals to gather and spread misinformation
41
Liberal democracy
3 distinct set of rights:
1) property rights = protect owners and investors from expropriation (ppl stealing their property)
2) political rights = ensure groups that win electoral contests can assume power and choose policies
3) civil rights = guarantee equal treatment before the law and equal access to public services such as education
42
Issues with modern democracies
some are moving towards illiberalism and authoritarianism
illiberal democracy (aka partial/empty democracy) = elections take place, but citizens are cut off from knowledge about the activities of those who exercise real power, they lack civil liberties and control of information
43
Types of democratic decision-making
- direct (pure) democracy = direct voting by individual citizens on alternatives
- representative democracy = election of delegates who are vested with the power to vote on alternatives, they represent the interest of individuals who voted for them
- democratic outcomes MAY NOT be efficient or fair
44
Modern populism issues
leaders draw/argue they represent the people, and if you don't agree then you're on the side of the elite (backdoor way of achieving autocracy)
- they can use democracy to stay in power, then change things to stay in power (e.g. Russia (?))
45
Issues with direct democracy
- expensive --> everyone incurs a cost to vote on issues, so making people vote on every issue can be very costly
- expertise/specialization --> voters may lack expertise to judge some issues and it can be costly to be fully informed
- aggregate preference problems --> voting does imperfect job of revealing aggregate preferences b/c it does not account for differences in the intensity of the individual preferences (some may feel more strongly than others, but everyone only gets 1 vote)
46
Median Voter Theory
If there is a singular political spectrum from left to right, with left corresponding to people emphasizing distributional fairness and right with emphasis on efficiency + procedural fairness with votes uniformly distributed across the spectrum --> if both parties want to maximize their votes they will cater to the most people possible
- this is why most parties are very slightly off center in the political spectrum because they want to capture those on the very ends as well as those more in the middle
- with each additional political party, the candidates space out a bit more evenly through the spectrum
47
Majoritarian Electoral system
winning candidate must have an absolute majority of the votes (>50%)
- alternative vote and run-off or second-round voting systems are majoritarian
- e.g. Australia (mandatory voting)
48
Plurality electoral system
requires that the winning candidate receive more votes than any other candidate
- can result in dominated winner paradox
- e.g. Canada --> % of votes =/ % of seats, so favours bigger parties
49
Advantages/Disadvantages of Plurality electoral system
Advantages:
- encourages fewer, larger, and more inclusive political parties
- tends to produce majority governments
- maintains a direct link between a local representative and his/her constituency (riding)
- simple to use and understand
Disadvantages:
- strategic voting
- less representation for smaller parties
50
Proportional electoral system
ensures a fairly close relationship between the popular vote a party receives and the number of candidates it elected
- % votes = % seats
51
Advantages/Disadvantages of proportional electoral system
Advantages:
- reduces strategic voting
- gives smaller parties more representation
- arguably fairer
52
Dominated winner paradox
Situation: 100 MP's elected from ridings with EQUAL populations
- 51% of voters in 51 ridings favour Liberal
- 100% of voters in 49 ridings favour Conservative
Overall, liberal party wins majority of seats since it won in 51 ridings even though it only had 26% of total votes from voters
- e.g. America 2016 election --> this paradox is exacerbated in the US due to the electoral seat voting = favours republicans
- e.g. Canada Federal election = favours Liberals
53
Gerrymandering
manipulating the boundaries of an electoral constituency so as to favour one party
- manipulating the boundaries of ridings (voting areas)
54
Voter suppression
discouraging or preventing specific groups of people from voting
- e.g. new laws to restrict voting access --> typically justified by alleging voter fraud (voter ID cards for polling stations)
55
Vote manipulation
installing partisan officials who can manipulate vote counting
56
Transfer seeking
process of using resources to redistribute wealth from others rather than create new wealth
- transfer of wealth, resources consumed are wasted, efficiency is compromised --> DWL associated
examples: theft/economic crime, litigation + financial market activity (insider trading), business lobbying, war (over resources), charity (beneficial transfer seeking)
57
EIG
Economic interest groups: unions, industries, professions, regions, realtors, etc.
- lobby a mix of information and inducements to politicians (campaign contributions, future jobs, etc.)
- resources used to obtain transfers from others are a transfer-seeking cost
58
Social interest groups
promote particular values or moral views (e.g. MADD)
- politicians often support groups b/c social interest groups are single-issue voters --> support them on their view = gain them (e.g. Dairy farmers)
- e.g. Christian groups got alcohol banned --> created opportunity for a black market and people began brewing their own = unregulated + dangerous (for consumption) if not made properly
59
Lobbying
an individual is paid to communicate with a public-office holder in an attempt to influence government policy
Principles of lobbying act:
1) free/open access to gov is important for public interest --> system for registration of paid lobbyist should not impede this
2) lobbying is a legitimate activity
3) desirable to know who is attempting to influence gov
60
Why don't we make lobbying illegal
- making it illegal will not stop it from occurring, but will simply make it less transparent (done under the table)
- e.g. in Canada lobbying is legal but with regulations --> idea is that its better to know than to not know
- no lobbying can sever the connection between gov/firms/individuals which can be bad
61
Examples of environmental externalities
- oil sands leak cancer-causing chemicals into downstream water supply --> health problems, death
- air pollution caused by automobile exhaust and industrial emissions = bad quality = health problems ,etc
- acid rain caused by coal burning production releasing SO2
- ozone depletion caused by chloroflourocarbons (CFCs) used in refrigeration, foam packaging, aerosol cans
- global warming due to GHG
62
Why is the optimal amount of pollution not 0?
it is a by-product of essential goods we consume, so eradicating these goods for 0 pollution would make our lives considerably worse off
- we should apply the marginalist principle to find the optimal amount of pollution
63
Pollution abatement + examples
any measure taken to reduce, control or eliminate pollution from a given environment, reduces (-) externalities of pollution
e.g. installation of scrubbers, waste treatment, carbon capture + utilization + storage
- incentivize abatement so that the optimal amount is done (not enough done = DWL)
64
Solutions to environmental externalities
1. property rights or internalizing the externality via unified ownership (mergers)
- e.g. 2 firms where 1 creates a negative externality on another, if they were to merge then the externality is internalized and will be minimized/eliminated
2. legal remedies (torts) and regulations (e.g. quality control/standards)
- can't only rely on regulation because firms can choose to just not follow it (e.g. overpollute and just pay a fine)
3. taxes on polluting activities
4. subsidies for abatement technologies
5. creation of a market (e.g. tradable permits allocation "pollution rights" that can be priced and traded (trade and cap)) --> firms can't overpollute or else they have to buy more permits + producing below the permit limit means you can sell the remaining amount = financial incentive
6. social responsibility, utilitarian ethics
65
Cap and Trade
Gov can reduce DWL associated with pollution by setting a maximum overall amount and issuing pollution permits
- firms can trade their pollution rights --> incentivizes firms to reduce emissions to sell their permits
- works b/c firms differ in their marginal benefits and costs of emission --> permits make it so they act to maximize
66
Pigouvian taxes
when taxing bads, gov gets revenue while reducing DWL
- e.g. BC progressive carbon tax --> revenue neutral but evidence to suggest it has had a positive effect on the economy
- however, taxes tend to be unpopular
- taxes can actually make people better off --> tax rebates = almost 0 cost --> framing of issues can have huge impacts
67
How to set the right tax amount?
Externality is caused by the fact that SMC > PMC
SMC = PMC + x where x is the external damage cost --> set pollution tax t = x, so
PMC + t = PMC + x = SMC
issue: difficult to measure x, and taxes will not be effective if demand is inelastic, and there are also often fairness issues (relatively high cost to low income earners)
68
Geographical impacts on the jurisdiction of externalities
important difference between pollution externalities is whether they are local or global
- e.g. particulate air pollution = mainly local
- e.g. acid rain = cross-border
- CFCs and GHGs = global --> even rational governments may set taxes too low, we need global agreements/protocols
69
Easter Island Example
400 AD --> Island is a forest
900 AD --> forest reduction notable
1400 --> Forest entirely gone
the islanders mostly ate fish and birds, with the birds mostly nesting in the forest, the islanders used the wood for: building/moving moai, housing, canoes + fishing entrapments, tools, firewood
- the forest was unable to keep up with population growth because of the climate, the dominant tree type growing there required 40-60 yrs to reach fruit-growing stage
70
Population model
1. entity reproduces without competition
2. with more of the entity, there is more reproduction --> exponential at first (births > deaths)
3. crowding effects kick in --> newborn entities must compete with large existing entity stocks for survival
4. the stock of entities reaches its maximum size where growth is 0 (carrying capacity)
inverted parabola shape --> @ highest point (middle) is where the crowding effect takes place (growth is 0)
- from start to M, that area of the parabola is unstable, any shocks (-) in resource risk extinction
- from middle to end, the area of the parabola is stable, any shocks (-) or (+) are self correcting
- REVIEW GRAPH IMAGE
TLDR: keep Harvest < growth rate of the stock, keep stock level greater than mid point to avoid risk of extinction
71
What factors affect harvest choices
- the intrinsic growth rate of the harvested
- how big/common the shocks are and how good/costly it is to monitor
- is it economic to use the resource (harvest costs high, demand low)
- is it economic to save the resource (harvest costs low, current value very high, growth rate low)
- cyclical management --> might want to overharvest some years, and underharvest others
72
Example of overharvesting
The grand banks --> area of ocean with very rich fishery
- new tech caused overharvesting of the cod in that area resulting in protections being put in place to allow population to regrow --> special interesting lobbying from 1982 to 1990 increased harvesting of fish in that area before it was almost completely stopped to protect the wildlife
1. tragedy of the commons
2. property-rights assignment --> in 1977 national jurisdiction extended from 12 to 200 miles from the coast
3. open-access problem = harvests are hard to control if preventing access and policing is difficult/impossible
4. info problems = didn't know size of resource or size of shocks
5. Tranfer seeking --> atlantic Canada lobbied for greater fishing quotas, Spanish fishermen fish canadian waters (stealing)
73
Tragedy of the commons
lack of property rights leads to an over-use of a common resource --> open-access problem
74
Open access problem
with resources that are common goods (rival and non-excludable), there is overharvesting
- e.g. oceans
- e.g. common grazing land --> people would bring their cattle and let them overgraze so they would get fatter and hold more value --> everyone doing this = no more grass
75
Non-renewable resources
fossil fuels and minerals --> do not renew themselves in human time frames
- impossible to exploit them in a way that sustains the stock for future generations
76
Sustainable standard of living (Hartwick's rule)
requires investments in productive assets to make up for resource depletion
- goal is to keep citizens from falling into poverty when natural resources are exhausted --> invest all the surplus profits generated from resource extraction into various forms of capital
- e.g. Norway Gov Pension Fund funded by Norway's oil export revenue
77
What is the challenge of sustainable living for Canada
1) mineral wealth goes to the provinces --> needs to be done at a provincial level
2) friction between provinces --> Tar sands in Alberta don't make as much money as they should b/c 90% goes to US (monopsony)
- need to find more buyers = get to a coast = pipelines --> problem of indigenous rights + BC taking environmental risk of oil leaks with no compensation from Alberta
78
What is Thomas Malthus' key argument
population grows exponentially (geometrically) whilst food production grows arithmetically
- population(s) grow until it can't feed itself --> war, pestilence and famine act as restraining mechanisms on the population
79
Have we escaped the Malthusian Trap
- birth rates lower due to improved healthcare, nutrition, parent education, etc.
- tech improvements to food production
- better institutions to prevent war --> wars not on the same scale as before + less incentive to invade (wealth is no longer as concentrated in natural resources as before)
- medical developments to reduce disease
80
Carrying capacity of Earth
4-16billion, median of 10 billion --> with resource depletion typical estimates are 1-4billion
- even within the carrying capacity, animals and plant species will go extinct, certain resources will be consumed to 0, etc.
- we are probably already exceeding the carrying capacity so population stresses will surely occur in our lifetime
81
William Vogt + Apocalyptic environmentalism & Prophets
Believe only reducing consumption and limiting population will save us --> affluence is not our greatest achievement, but our biggest problem
- unless we change, the unavoidable result will be environmental destruction --> cut back (population), cut back (consumption)
82
Norman Borlaug + Techno optimism & the wizards
Believe science and technology if properly applied, will save humans --> only getting richer and more knowledgeable will resolve our environmental crisis --> innovate, innovate
- Normal Borlaug developed a new strain of wheat resistant to black stem + new strain with thicker stems
- e.g. green movement of 1960s --> high yielding crop varieties and agronomic techniques increased grain harvests, averting 10s of millions of deaths (single most effective thing a human has ever done to save lives)
issue: tech advances/breakthroughs not guaranteed
83
NIMBY problem
Meaning: not in my back yard
NIMBY problem = the relatively small # of people who live near toxic waste dumps bear high costs while the benefits accrue to a much larger but spread out group who are far from the waste site
- locate waste where it generates the lowest costs --> those who bear those costs should be compensated by the rest
- IRL, the political struggle over where to place bads can yield outcomes that are inefficient, unfair or possibly both
- NIMBY examples: safe injection sites, garbage incinerators, prisons, wind turbines, etc.
84
International Problems
policy's can only solve problems if it is possible to assign property rights, levy taxes, impose standards/quotas, internalize externalities or provide public good (removal of public bad) services --> no international government
- transfer seeking done by countries often done since monitoring is difficult --> global problems are often prisoner's dilemmas
85
Examples of addressing international problems
CFCs:
1930s = discovered as cheap, easy to produce and non-toxic
1970s = speculation that CFCs deplete the ozone
1985 = evidence of ozone hole above South Pole
1987 = 24 countries sign Montreal protocol to cut CFCs by 50% by 1998
2003 = CFCs virtually eliminated in Canada
2050 = atmosphere regenerates to 1985 levels
86
What prevents climate action?
- hard to see the reality depending on the rate of change --> incremental impacts + people focus on short term, so its hard to make decisions that benefit the long term
- lack of incentives for individuals to do enough
- uneven consequences --> not directly affected = less impetuous
- differences across countries --> different incentives to cut emissions = Prisoners dilemma
- influence of special interest groups on gov policies + message --> emphasis on individuals needing to do their part for change to happen instead of the major firms where a majority of the pollution comes from
--> significant reductions can be done by pressuring firms (top 100 firms worldwide account for 60% of all pollution)
87
What is the split of greenhouse gases
- CO2:
fossil fuel use = 57%
deforestation and biomass decay = 20%
- CH4:
agricultural activities, waste management, energy use = 14%
- N2O:
agricultural activities/fertilizer use = 7%
88
Evidence of Climate change
Global temp rise:
- Earth's avg surface temp has risen 1.0 degree celsius since late 19th century --> majority occurring in the past 35 years
- Canada is warming 2x as fast as the average rate of them rest of the world --> Canada artic = 2.3 degree increase, rest of world = 1.7 degree increase
Warming oceans:
- top 700m of ocean show warming of more than 0.2 degrees since 1969, upper few m of ocean increased by 0.13 degrees per decade over past 100 years
Shrinking ice sheets + declining Arctic sea ice
- Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets have decreased in mass --> Greenland lost an avg of 280 billion tons of ice/year between 1993 and 2016 whilst Antarctica lost 119 tons total during the same period
- rate of Antarctica ice mass loss has tripled in the last decade
Glacial retreat + decreased snow cover
- Glaciers retreating almost everywhere around the world --> Alps, Himalayas, Andes, Rockies, etc.
- amount of spring snow covering the North Hemisphere has decreased over the past 5 decades and the snow is melting earlier
Sea level rise:
- global sea level rose approx. 20 cm in the last century --> rate in last 2 decades nearly 2x that of last century, accelerating slightly every year
Ocean acidification:
- Since beginning of industrial revolution, acidity of ocean surface waters increased 30% --> upper layer of oceans gaining 2 billion tons per year of CO2 (destroys ecosystems such as Great Barrier Reef)
Extreme events:
- # of record high temp events increasing, # of record low temp events decreasing since 1950
- increasing # of severity and frequency increases (intense rainfall, droughts, floods, hurricanes, etc.)
89
Tipping points
thresholds that make a system change from one to another qualitative state --> threshold behavior is based on self-reinforcing processes or feedback loops
e.g.
- melting ice bodies: albedo effect (water darker than ice)
- changing ocean circulation: shutdown of Atlantic thermohaline current
- changing air circulation: jet streams weakening/slowing down = persistent weather systems/more extreme weather
- threatened large-scale ecosystems: boreal forests can turn to scrub or grassland ecosystems = release large amounts of CO2
90
IPCC projections
- more droughts + heat waves, increased wildfires, more intense/stronger hurricanes, sea lvl rising 30-120 cm by 2100, artic becomes ice free, communities near equator and sea heavily impacted/displaced, mass food shortages, etc.
91
Kyoto Protocol and its failures
Signing nations agreed to reduce GHG emissions to 5.2% below 1990 levels
- US did not ratify the agreement, developing countries such as India and China excluded
issue: no penalties for non-compliance, many signers did not meet their commitments (Canada 24.2% above 1990 levels in 2003, Spain, Portugal, Greece, Ireland and others also above) however, some did (Russia, Germany, England, etc.) --> overall developed countries 5.9% down
- Canada pulled out at the end of 2011
- situation of unequal incentives + PD situation
92
Paris Agreement and its failures
2015 UN climate change conference --> aims to limit global warming to less than 2 degrees above pre-industrial levels, "binding" 55+ countries together (representing 55% of emissions as of April 2017)
issue: countries can withdraw, no penalties for non-compliance, left vague on purpose since things that reduce GHGs in one country may not work in another but that makes it hard to measure the success of different countries (no set standard)
93
Michael Mann and "The New Climate War" responses to global warming
- widespread carbon pricing (pigovian taxes or cap and trade)
- removal of subsidies to fossil fuels
- debunking false arguments (e.g. pressure on individuals to do more)
- combating climate "doomism" --> maintain optimism and put pressure on companies/gov to do more
- relying on tech is risky
- significant GHG reductions are very advisable --> implications from not making it are predictable disastrous (likely to reach a tipping point where existing state is unrecoverable)
- key challenge is how we can improve commitment to goals set in Paris agreement and others
- Global inequality will increase due to climate change --> resources needed for most impacted
- change is possible but requires continued commitment from gov, firms and individuals
COMM 394
flashcards
Decks in class (2)
# Cards
