Carlamere_Climate Change

The diagram starts with the Wikileaks article regarding the Copenhagen Accord. It shows the relationship between the Accord and the main countries mentioned in the Wikileaks report. The United States is a developed country connected to money and threats, spying and leveraging political allies. China is a developed country; like the United States, China also had a hand in spying through a cyber attack on the CIA. This was an attempt to find out what information the United States gathered on their spying activities. The next country is Ethiopia, which is a developing country. Ethiopia a part of political leveraging and threats made by the United States. The developing countries ended up thinking that the developed countries were taken advantage of them because of their political weakness in contrast to the larger more powerful countries. This does not seem like an attempt to reduce carbon emissions between the large and small countries alike; it reads more like a Dean Koontz book.   However, this is the world we live in; doing what is right is never as easy as it should or could be. Even when we can see the problems that we have created and know the steps that are required to slow the process of global warming we find ourselves hampered by the political system and financial greed. These are the reasons that have created the environmental mess that we call our home and will never be the way that we recover from the damage that we have done to our planet.

I like truth even though at times it can be tough to accept, but with the truth comes answers. I am thankful that Wikileaks published this information; we now know at least some of the problems we face as a society, when it comes to changing our actions. We have to start changing society’s mindset; this is done through persistence, transformability, and adaptability. Human action has changed the state of the Earth; this started approximately two centuries ago, during the industrial revolution. Humans affect climate change through mitigation and adaptation. Mitigation causes less greenhouse gas emissions, but also leads to more climate change, which promotes adaptation that creates better environmental impacts. In order to really make a change the first step we have to do is re-engineer our global economy to a low-carbon model that will redirect billions of dollars to counteract the damage we have done to the environment. The second step is for each person to create his or her own action plan on mitigation; by planning where we live might be the biggest factor in the amount of greenhouse gas we emit. Additionally, by choosing low-impact food; by eating less animal-based food for a plant-based diet will lower greenhouse emissions. Lastly, there is always a possibility to buy carbon offsets; however, this can lead to an ethical question. One can make a case that every person should do their part to reduce their carbon footprint and not just buy a credit that allows them to pollute as much as they want (Pennslyvania State University 2016).

CARLAMERE_GEOG030_CLIMATE CHANGE

References:

Pennslyvania State University. Climate Change. 2016. https://www.e-education.psu.edu/geog030.

Jordan Dodderer – Climate Change/WikiLeaks

Module9_Diagram_jzd5496

In my system diagram I seek to explain the connection between Climate Change and WikiLeaks and the various input and output sources of those two items. As inputs, to Climate change, I included the burning of fossil fuels, which leads to a build up of CO2 ppm in the atmosphere. This build up of greenhouse gasses leads to climate change. As an output of Climate change, we have the proposed climate accord. The climate accord has various outputs of its own. These are the dealings of the United States government in an attempt to win support, and seek benefits for their own country. These outputs also serve as inputs to our output problem, which is the wikileaks hack. The wikileaks scandal made the US government look bad for their various secret dealings. This scandal served as an output source.

Drawing on this lesson’s core value of understanding the cause and effect of climate change, I think that any sustainability agreements that are reached on a global level are a win for environmentalists. In an environmental setting the accord is a winning output policy. However, as a surveillance state and the issue of public and private security I do not support the actions of the US economy. I think that there is a more altruistic and ethical way of dealing with such problems. The backdoor deals and coercion are a stain on democracy. So while I support the measure and the output policy I do not support the means by which the policy was achieved and hope for better in our future.

Climate Change Module

Screen Shot 2016-04-08 at 4.41.42 PM

In my systems diagram, I focused on the core cause of climate change and examined part of the environmental and political effects of it. Primarily, I focused on the Copenhagen Accord, which works to have countries pledge to undertake specific actions that will help mitigate the core cause of climate change – emission of greenhouse gases, primarily CO2. As a primary polluter, the United States sought out support for the Copenhagen Accord since their pledge was the lowest by any other leading nation. This would benefit the United States due to being a collective action effort to reduce emissions causing climate change. To gain support, the United States used techniques, including secret cables, use of CIA to discover secret information from other countries, and manipulation. Through this, they were able to gain support of 140 countries for the Copenhagen Accord. The poorer countries did not support the Accord due to being a small contribution in climate change. Pollution is a big factor that comes from emission of greenhouse gases, and as recalled in the IPAT equation, poorer countries cannot contribute as strongly to pollution due to not having enough funds for technology and having low affluence, thus having no need for the Copenhagen Accord since countries who barely contribute to global warming do not have the funds for programs that mitigate pollution. The small focus on climate change shows how a rise in temperature can cause an unsustainable environment. Climate change affects the earth due to temperature shifts, water level shifts, and cause extreme weather events, all that require adaptation for humans and the environment to adjust to, thus causing harm in the end to both parties.

The State Department cables should not have been made public because it showed the United States in a negative light. I believe that there are some policies that can be implemented without response from the media and by publicizing the cables, the United States is seen to other parties as untrustworthy and could affect the way people support future policies that the United States tries to implement. With that being said, the United States should have conducted climate change diplomacy in a different manner that had been done. Obviously, nothing can be reversed and the United States cannot change the way they gained support for the Copenhagen Accord, but in future times, the United States should negotiate in a way that is fair to all participating countries. The use of spying and manipulation makes the United States more of an enemy than an ally to many countries, and I think the United States should establish credibility and respect through showing other countries what can be offered through actions. This is an issue of ethics, especially distributive justice, where the United States should take responsibility for what the United States has done in regards to climate change and act in a way that aids poorer countries, rather than forcing them into something. Because the United States is such a great participant in the burning of fossil fuels, it should be their responsibility to reduce their fair share of what they are producing. The burning of fossil fuels is very important to our industry and lives, but the United States can take action to reduce their own emissions through implementing a carbon offset policy for huge factories.

Module 9: Climate Diplomacy

WikiLeaks climate change nit5075My system diagram shows the connection between the WikiLeaks cables and climate change. The article explains how the United States used different tactics to gain support for the Copenhagen accord and highlighted the unethical ways to do business. The diagram starts with the climate change issue because it is the focus of the article and the reason for the Copenhagen accord. In my diagram, climate change is linked to the Copenhagen accord because the U.S saw this opportunity to boost themselves on a global scale and that the accord’s purpose is to reduce the impacts of climate change. The next linkage is the WikiLeaks Cables. This is the center for the diagram for it being the main point for the article. The WikiLeaks Cables reviled how the U.S was able to gain support for the Copenhagen accord. The WikiLeaks Cables also showed how the United States took this issue of climate change and lead the world on changing it. The result of the United States efforts to gain support for the Copenhagen Accord made 116 countries associating with the accord and 26 counties intend to associate with it. The WikiLeaks Cables is also linked to climate change because the United States tactics helped curb the effects of climate change. The last linkage in my system diagram shows the overall results of the Copenhagen accord. The article states that 75% of the 193 countries that are parties to the UN climate change convention and support the accord are responsible for over 80% of current global greenhouse gas emissions.

I believe that it was right for the State Department cables to be made public after the fact. It shows how the negotiations are made between countries and what is the true costs. This kind of collective action problem can be dealt with in different ways. The way the United States handled it would be different if another country was focused on making the accord happen. The issue of climate change is growing and cannot be solved by one country on their own. The individual and collective action changes are ways to begin to create ways reduce the impact of climate change. Some of the ways the United States conducted climate change diplomacy showcased in the WikiLeaks Cables can be unethical. The use of spying and threats were probably used as a last option, but should not have been used to gain support for an important issue like climate change. This effects everyone in the same way and the Copenhagen accord should have benefited all counties equally. Also, the United States does not look as trustworthy if they are spying on counties and threating them for support. The WikiLeaks Cables did raise awareness of how important the issue of climate change is on a global scale. The United State should have worked more closely with the counties wanting the same outcome and have an open discussion with the counties that were more hesitant with the Copenhagen accord. Another option was to go through the United Nations and follow their standards to create another accord on the issue of climate change.

Module 9- Climate Change Julie Cardillo

climate_change_jlc6217

The core ideas behind my diagram begin with people realizing how serious climate change really is. Once people realized this, the nation wanted to reduce climate change. Hence, that is why the UNFCCC created the Copenhagen Accord. The United States sought this accord as a beneficial opportunity for them, as well. However, they needed other countries to support it. The problem was many of these countries didn’t agree with the accord. I mainly wanted to illustrate, in my diagram, how the United States targeted these poor, less developed countries with the use of cables, aiding, threats , spying , and finally bribery. It seemed that money was a huge encouragement to get countries to sign the accord. In my diagram, I showed how the United States threatened Ethiopia to sign the accord by saying, “sign the accord or discussion ends now,” the United States promising to commit to Saudi Arabia’s economic desire to move away from petroleum, and how money was promised to Maldives. In addition, I showed how China used spear phishing to obtain information from Todd Stern. I then illustrate the fact that we now have 116 countries associated themselves with the accord and another 26 intend to become associated with it as well. All of these cables were exposed by WikiLeaks in 2010 and as a result trust was lost. Finally, my diagram mentioned that if people continuously reduce the use of greenhouse gases, then this collective action problem can be solved and we can eventually reach climate mitigation.

Coming from a citizen’s standpoint, I think that it was right for the cables to be revealed to the public because we should have the right to know. The way that the United States approached this caused was selfish and resulted in countries to not trust them. Basically, these countries were bribed and threatened,causing them to sign the accord for all the wrong reasons. I feel that is is a perfect example of the ends justifies the means because it’s almost as if the United States said, “Unfortunately, we have to bribe and threaten you less developed countries, so that you can sign our accord.” I do not think that it was a good idea to gain support by bribes and threats because that was not ethical at all. The United States was more concerned about the fact that they would be benefitted from this, without any consideration for other countries. I have learned that climate change is a huge issue and that nations worldwide should work together towards reducing the emission of green house gases to better the world we live in(collective action). If trust is lost (like the US caused to happen), then this issue will never be solved. Also, climate change is a collective action problem, meaning that this is a problem for every country. I think that the United States is better than this. Therefore,I think that instead the United States should have approached this by informing the countries about reducing greenhouse gases and negotiating fairly; I feel that this would have been successful. If we can all successfully come together to reduce the emission of greenhouse gases, then climate mitigation can most definitely be obtained.

Module 9- The Copenhagen Accord

Untitled document (7)

2) The diagram I created starts off with the main idea that the issue of global warming is a main concern among most countries. The United States wanted to be a key player in trying to reduce this issue, while at the same time, making sure that they will choose a plan that helps them the most. The U.S. pushed the Kyoto protocol away because there were many restrictions and laws that were aimed at larger countries, such as the U.S., and instead, the United States proposed the Copenhagen Accord. This was much more favorable to larger countries, but hurt developing countries that aren’t able to get their hands on the supplies that the larger countries have at their disposal. in order to get support for this, the U.S. began to promise money to smaller countries for their support. When any country started to doubt the U.S., the United states would then dangle the money in front of them and threaten to take the opportunity away from them. WikiLeaks then got involved when they got their hands on many of the negotiation conversations that were occurring between the U.S. and the smaller countries. They made these conversations public, showing how the U.S. was trying to force these countries’ hands into signing onto their agreement. Even with about 75% of countries supporting the Copenhagen Accord, the plan fell through because of lack of trust between the countries involved. The U.S.’s ethics were all over the place in trying to get what the ybelieved the right plan to be to help with global warming.

3) In my opinion, I believe that it was right for the cables to be made public. We as citizens have the right to know how our government is operating and should have a say in the manner in which some business is conducted. The U.S. should have tried to solve this problem in a way that helped out the most countries, or benefit at least everyone involved in some way. Instead, there was a loss of trust between countries because of the bribery and espionage. Global warming is an issue that will require every player to participate in order to be solved. Without trust, there is no way that everyone will decide on efficient steps without checking each others proposals along the way, to make sure that no one is getting a better deal. This was a rough issue for developing countries. They were given the choice of jumping on board to a plan they didn’t like in order to get financial aid right away, or stay away from it all together and miss out on a huge financial opportunity for their country. Instead of using the wrong ways to get support, the U.S. could’ve tried to modify plans to fit different countries needs and make sure that everyone got an equal deal. The smaller countries deserve respect and should not be left behind by the more developed countries. The U.S. could’ve been altruistic and made sure that all the countries could get together to solve an issue that they all play a part in, but instead, they went about this selfishly and lost trust.

 

Jason Brown