President Trump's war on regulatory science

The Trump Administration has taken numerous actions that appear hostile to scientists, scientific research, and scientific data, leading some observers to assert that a war on science is underway. A more precise characterization is that the Trump Administration is engaging in a war on regulatory science, as these actions take aim specifically at regulatory science - i.e., knowledge production and synthesis carried out by EPA and other government agencies in the course of developing government regulations. The Administrative Procedure Act ("APA") and other laws may constrain some aspects of the war on regulatory science, provided that they are subject to judicial review. Internal administrative law and agency norms also can promote rule of law values, but their success depends largely on the good faith of executive branch actors and the willingness of Congress and the public to push back when norms of administrative legality are ignored. Absent such pushback, the Trump Administration's war on regulatory science could lead to irrational policies and threaten democratic governance

“YOU DON’T NEED PEOPLE’S OPINIONS ON A FACT!”: SATIRICAL COMEDY CORRECTS CLIMATE CHANGE DISINFORMATION

Satirical comedy has often been recognized as a corrective to, if not alternative for, commercial news as well as a source of accurate science information (Brewer & McKnight, 2015). In this dissertation, I analyze how satirical comedy debunks climate change myths, delivers accurate information, and promotes scientific expertise. Five interconnected assumptions guide the context and methodology of this interdisciplinary study: 1) that various actors have transformed climate change into a “manufactured scientific controversy” (Ceccarelli, 2011); 2) that satire, as a method, both assails targets and aggregates people (Hutcheon,1994); 3) that celebrity activism is impactful but problematic (Collins, 2007; Boykoff & Goodman, 2009); 4) that the YouTube comment board represents an audience study (Lange, 2008); and 5) that online comment is worthy of analysis (Reagle, 2015). This project analyzes two case studies, each consisting of two examples of satirical climate change comedy from John Oliver (his Statistically Representative Climate Change Debate and his Paris Agreement monologues) and from Jimmy Kimmel (his Scientists on Climate Change and Hey Donald Trump -- Climate Change Affects You Too segments). A three-tiered, mixed-methods approach is adopted to investigate the context, construction, circulation, and online reception of these satirical comedy videos. My project finds that the discursive integration (Baym, 2005) of satirical climate change comedy is potentially persuasive, but also risky and polarizing. Though centrist and left-of-center voices appreciate Oliver’s and Kimmel’s satirical interventions, conservative and right-of-center voices mark strict boundaries between comedy, celebrity, and climate change. It was also discovered that satirical comedy, which is accessible and viral, may intervene on YouTube’s climate change denial problem, correcting climate change falsehoods, and potentially drawing audiences away from their echo chambers and towards meaningful communication about the climate crisis. That is, many commenters use these videos as entry points to debate the causes of American climate change denial, correct climate change disinformation, and offer anecdotal evidence about the effects of climate change. At the same time, YouTube comments from the most resistant skeptics and repeat commenters provide insight into the persistence of circulating climate change myths and conflict frames. This study finally concludes that the analysis of comments on satirical climate change comedy exposes strategies for avoiding confirmation bias and the backfire effect along with techniques for creating more effective climate change communication

Alchemical Rulemaking and Ideological Framing: Lessons from the 40-Year Battle to Regulate Mercury Emissions from Electric Power Plants

Environmental mercury has long been linked to adverse health impacts on human populations. Globally ubiquitous at ambient levels in air and water, it can reach potentially unsafe levels in fish as it biologically magnifies and accumulates through aquatic and marine food webs. Vulnerable communities, including many communities of color, are particularly at risk from fish-borne mercury. Despite the fact that coal-fired electric generating units have been recognized as major sources of environmental mercury since the 1970s, and that the Environmental Protection Agency discussed possible future regulations of mercury emissions from such plants in 1975, it was not until 2014 that the Obama administration promulgated the Mercury and Air Toxics Rule regulating such emissions – and not until 2016 that the rule appeared to be firmly in place after the Environmental Protection Agency’s revised findings promulgated in response to the Supreme Court’s remand in Michigan v. EPA

The Art Of Resistance: An Arts Based Understanding Of Activism

In this project, the researcher explored the ways that millennial activists articulated the role of emotions in their activisms through artistic means. Specifically, through the production of zines, a format that eschews standardization but often reflect non-dominant positionalities, millennial activists explored their articulations, experiences, and engagement with activism. Informed by arts-based research (ABR) the researcher analyzed data from an emic perspective. Analyzing the experiences of the 14 millennial activists who reflected a heterogeneous group, the researcher represents eight themes: the demands of artistry; building community; distance in families of birth; resistance to oppression; emotion; mental health, self-care, and guilt; the South; and social media. This study makes scholarly contributions to the empirical, theoretical, and methodological spheres of education research, and student activism and is a resource for educational researchers, scholar-activists, and university administrators who work in community with young adult activists. Specifically, implications from the research include among others: changes in support and policy for historically underrepresented students, and campus response to hate-inciting speakers and events on and near college campuses, the incorporation of new technologies in student affairs outreach, new formations of university leadership, and a call for universities to be proactive to support historically underrepresented students

EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT IN PUERTO RICO: THROUGH THE LENS OF THE WICKED AND SUPER-WICKED PROBLEMS

The catastrophic damage to Puerto Rico’s infrastructure and essential services from near-constant hurricanes and earthquakes has repeatedly overwhelmed the local government’s ability to repair and recover. Despite changes to systems, processes, and decision-making within the emergency management area, the changes have failed to yield meaningful improvements to Puerto Ricans’ safety, security, or quality of life. This thesis asks whether the problem set is impervious to solution because it is not linear or simple but rather wicked or super-wicked, which are inherently complex and interconnected. By analyzing the emergency management ecosystem through the lens of the distinct characteristics of wicked and super-wicked problems as defined by Rittel, Webber, and Levin et al., this thesis concludes that no current or future attempts to prevent, mitigate, respond to, or recover from disaster will be effective unless aligned to fit the complex and ever-changing nature of the challenges faced. Moreover, this thesis highlights the critical impact of Puerto Rico’s uncertain political status as a U.S. territory and the geographical vulnerabilities because of its location as a Caribbean island on the overall emergency management capability. This thesis recommends that Puerto Rico’s emergency management stakeholders recognize these constraints and adopt approaches designed for wicked and super-wicked problems, which are characterized by dynamic, multi-faceted, and flexible tactics.Distribution Statement A. Approved for public release: Distribution is unlimited.Civilian, Department of Homeland Securit

Muddy Thinking in the Mississippi River Delta

Muddy Thinking in the Mississippi River Delta uses the story of mud to answer a deceptively simple question: How can a place uniquely vulnerable to sea level rise be one of the nation’s most promiscuous producers and consumers of fossil fuels? Organized around New Orleans and South Louisiana as a case study, this book examines how the unruly Mississippi River and its muddy delta shaped the people, culture, and governance of the region. It proposes a framework of “muddy thinking” to gum the wheels of extractive capitalism and pollution that have brought us to the precipice of planetary collapse. Muddy Thinking calls upon our dirty, shared histories to address urgent questions of mutual survival and care in a rapidly changing world. “Ned Randolph urges us to pivot our attention to the profound complexity (and deep historicity) of mud. This is a brilliant book, ingeniously conceived, deftly argued, and beautifully written.” — Patrick Anderson, author of Autobiography of a Disease “Muddy Thinking in the Mississippi River Delta describes looping patterns of multivalent extractivism, while witnessing and calling forth righteous resistance, tender coexistence, and hope amid the messy petro-delta-apocalyptic.” — Rebecca Snedeker, coauthor of Unfathomable City: A New Orleans Atlas “Randolph’s embrace of muddy alternatives to the capitalist and technopolitical vectors of the Anthropocene exemplifies beautifully how Energy Humanities can stay with the troubles of these times.” — Dominic Boyer, author of No More Fossils “Mud is Randolph’s point of departure for understanding the region’s past and future—a vehicle of disruption and constraint, certainly, but also, in Randolph’s deft reading, the very condition of possibility for sustaining life amid ecological ruin.” — Valerie Hartouni, Professor Emerita, UC San Dieg

The Case for Corporate Climate Ratings: Nudging Financial Markets

Capital markets are cast as both villain and hero in the climate playbill. The trillions of dollars required to combat climate change leave ample room for heroics from the financial sector. For the time being, however, capital continues to flow readily toward fossil fuels and other carbon-intensive industries. Drawing on the results of an empirical study, this Article posits that ratings of corporate climate risk and governance can help overcome pervasive information asymmetries and nudge investors toward more climate-conscious investment choices with welfare-enhancing effects.In the absence of a meaningful price on carbon, three private ordering initiatives are trying to mobilize capital markets as a force for good in the war on carbon. But shareholder climate activism, calls for better climate-related financial disclosures, and the divestment movement have yet to usher in the paradigm shift toward low-carbon capitalism.Corporate climate ratings overcome existing information asymmetries to nudge investors toward more carbon-conscious allocation of their assets. Every year, rating agencies like Standard & Poor’s, Moody’s, and Fitch pass judgment on over one hundred trillion dollars’ worth of securities. Modeled after these well-established ratings of creditworthiness, independent ratings of companies’ climate risk and governance can redirect the flow of capital away from high-carbon assets toward more climate-friendly options—without the need for government authorization or other market-distorting interventions.A series of survey experiments with over fifteen hundred participants test, and demonstrate, the capacity of corporate climate ratings to promote low-carbon investment. Inclusion of climate ratings among the performance metrics commonly considered by investors significantly increases investment in the stock of companies with favorable climate ratings, even when other stocks boast a stronger return profile. Variations in the ratings’ framing and format, informed by insights from behavioral economics and finance, facilitate recommendations for best practices