122 research outputs found

    Taking Action to Reduce Waste: Quantifying Impacts of Model Use in a Multiorganizational Sustainability Negotiation

    Get PDF
    We use a role-play simulation to examine how using quantitative models influences the process and outcome of sustainability negotiations. Our experimental approach involved 74 teams of five parties negotiating the details of a pilot test to compost and/or recycle used paper coffee cups. Approximately half of these negotiation teams were given a quantitative model—a life cycle assessment (LCA). We measured both negotiation process and outcome variables, in particular identifying favorable agreements—the mutually exclusive set of agreements that either minimized carbon dioxide emissions or maximized the parties’ collective earned value. We found that most teams used a quantitative model; nearly half of those cocreated their own while negotiating. In our sample, teams that used a model, even those cocreating the model while negotiating, reached agreement more quickly than teams not using a model. Teams that cocreated the LCA reached a higher number of favorable agreements. We observed two dominant manners of model use: using the model to test alternatives while developing an agreement and verifying that a tentative agreement would sufficiently reduce carbon dioxide emissions. We conclude that using a quantitative model during a sustainability negotiation can help to increase the chances of obtaining a favorable agreement without lengthening the negotiation duration.Starbucks Coffee Compan

    The Mercury Game: Evaluating a Negotiation Simulation that Teaches Students about Science–Policy Interactions

    Get PDF
    Environmental negotiations and policy decisions take place at the science–policy interface. While this is well known in academic literature, it is often difficult to convey how science and policy interact to students in environmental studies and sciences courses. We argue that negotiation simulations, as an experiential learning tool, are one effective way to teach students about how science and policy interact in decision-making. We developed a negotiation simulation, called the Mercury Game, based on the global mercury treaty negotiations. To evaluate the game, we conducted surveys before and after the game was played in university classrooms across North America. For science students, the simulation communicates how politics and economics affect environmental negotiations. For environmental studies and policy students, the mercury simulation demonstrates how scientific uncertainty can affect decision-making. Using the mercury game as an education tool allows students to learn about complex interactions between science and society and develop communication skills.This research was funded by the U.S. National Science Foundation (#1053648)

    Measuring Welfare Loss Caused by Air Pollution in Europe: A CGE Analysis

    Get PDF
    Abstract and PDF report are also available on the MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change website (http://globalchange.mit.edu/).To evaluate the socio-economic impacts of air pollution, we develop an integrated approach based on computable general equilibrium (CGE). Applying our approach to Europe shows that even there, where air quality is relatively high compared with other parts of the world, health-related damages caused by air pollution are substantial. We estimate that in 2005, air pollution in Europe caused a consumption loss of around 220 billion Euro (year 2000 prices, around 3 percent of consumption level) and a social welfare loss of around 370 billion Euro, measured as the sum of lost consumption and leisure (around 2 percent of welfare level). In addition, we estimated that a set of 2020-targeting air quality improvement policy scenarios, which are proposed in the 2005 CAFE program, would bring 18 European countries as a whole a welfare gain of 37 to 49 billion Euro (year 2000 prices) in year 2020 alone.This study received support from the MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, which is funded by a consortium of government, industry and foundation sponsors

    Splitting the South: China and India’s Divergence in International Environmental Negotiations

    Get PDF
    International environmental negotiations often involve conflicts between developed and developing countries. However, considering environmental cooperation in a North-South dichotomy obscures important variation within the Global South, particularly as emerging economies become more important politically, economically, and environmentally. This article examines change in the Southern coalition in environmental negotiations, using the recently concluded Minamata Convention on Mercury as its primary case. Focusing on India and China, we argue that three key factors explain divergence in their positions as the negotiations progressed: domestic resources and regulatory politics, development constraints, and domestic scientific and technological capacity. We conclude that the intersection between scientific and technological development and domestic policy is of increasing importance in shaping emerging economies’ engagement in international environmental negotiations. We also discuss how this divergence is affecting international environmental cooperation on other issues, including the ozone and climate negotiations

    Global Aerosol Health Impacts: Quantifying Uncertainties

    Get PDF
    Abstract and PDF report are also available on the MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change website (http://globalchange.mit.edu/).Atmospheric fine particulate matter <2.5 μm (PM2.5) can cause cardiovasculatory and respiratory damages and mortalities. Assessing population exposure to and damages from PM2.5 is important for policy, but measurement networks are only available in a few regions. We assess variation resulting from using different sources of concentration information to constrain PM2.5 exposure worldwide, and compare the magnitude of this variation to uncertainties in epidemiological exposure-response functions and economic valuation of health impacts. We find that only 10% of global population is in areas constrained by ground-based data. We calculate and compare regionally-averaged population-weighted concentrations using two atmospheric models: the MIT/NCAR CAM3 aerosol-climate model, and the GEOS-Chem atmospheric chemistry model; and a satellite-derived PM2.5 product. We examine the contributions of different aerosol components to population-weighted PM2.5, and find large differences in exposure between U.S. and global populations. We use the MIT Emissions Prediction and Policy Analysis Health Effects model (EPPA-HE) to assess global health impacts and related economic costs, and conduct probabilistic uncertainty analysis of concentration-response functions. We use these combined approaches to project uncertainty ranges for health impacts and related economic costs from present-day PM2.5. We find large uncertainties in simulated PM2.5, especially globally; the magnitude of concentration variation among estimation methods is comparable to uncertainties in epidemiological functions and economic valuations. We identify major contributors to concentration variation, notably the parameterization of atmospheric dust. We estimate an annual global welfare cost of present-day (2000-2005) PM2.5 of US280billion(rangeUS 280 billion (range 120 – 510 billion), and related annual mortalities at 1.3 million per year (630,000 – 2.1 million).United States Environmental Protection Agency’s Science to Achieve Results (STAR) program (RD-83427901-0) and the MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, which is funded by a consortium of government, industry and foundation sponsor

    Meeting Potential New U.S. Climate Goals

    Get PDF
    We explore the performance of a potential addition to U.S. climate policy using authority under Section 115 of the Clean Air Act, with special attention to distributional effects among the states. This portion of the Act concerns trans-boundary air pollution, and under its provisions a national greenhouse target could be allocated among the states, with the details of state implementation optionally guided by a model rule as under other provisions of the Act. With trading allowed among the states, such a measure could lead to a national price on the covered gases. While we adopt features of a possible Section 115 implementation, the illustrative analysis is applicable to similar cap-and-trade programs that might be adopted under other authorities. We investigate the implications of such a policy using MIT’s U.S. Regional Energy Policy (USREP) model, with its electric sector replaced by the Renewable Energy Development System (ReEDS) model developed by the U.S. National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Existing federal and state climate policies are assumed to remain in place, and a national constraint on CO2 emissions is applied to achieve 45% or 50% reductions below the 2005 level by 2030. We apply the policies in a Baseline and a Low-Cost Baseline, the latter with more aggressive assumptions of technology cost improvements. The U.S. is aggregated to 18 individual states and 12 multi-state regions, and the effects of the national emissions restriction are investigated under three alternative methods by which the EPA might allocate these targets among the states. We find the cost of achieving either target to be modest - allowing for nearly identical economic growth, even without taking account of air quality and climate benefits. The alternative allocation methods generate varying per capita revenue outcomes among states and regions and drive most of the welfare impact through a direct income effect. It is assumed that states distribute permit revenue to their residents in equal lump-sum payments, which leads to net benefits to lower income households. Under the Low-Cost Baseline, carbon prices in 2030 are about ⅓ those in the Baseline, and the overall pre-benefit welfare effects are negligible. Considering climate benefits evaluated using the social cost of carbon and particulate matter air pollution health benefits, less the mitigation costs, we find net benefits in all cases, with slightly larger net benefits with the 50% reduction below 2005 emissions
    • …
    corecore