Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Developed and Developing Nations

The Porter Hypothesis at 20: Can Environmental Regulation Enhance Innovation and Competitiveness?

U.S green house emissions 1
US Green House Gas Emissions
Policy, Politics and the International Community

green house emissions 2
Part A
TOPIC REFLECTION
Since its inception in the 1960s, the US greenhouse policy has had positive impacts on the
reduction of greenhouse gasses from power plants. The recent political controversies around it
raise eyebrows but the law still stands strong. The US is one of the first countries to embrace
environmental laws under the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The Clean Air Act is
among the policies and it forms a combination of different legislation targeting air pollution
(EPA, 2014). The adoption of the policy across the US has been instrumental in its
implementation across the globe. However, the law faces criticism by business-oriented leaders
like Donald Trump who feel that it discourages investors. Its punitive measures include hefty
fines worth millions of dollars for its violations. This has reduced investment activities in the
energy sector, hence the clash between the Obama and Trump administration on the policy
(Korte, 2017). Trump is against policies on power plants, climate change and greenhouse gas
emissions. This leads to questions about the environmental policies, actors, and processes
involved.
Scientific findings reveal massive effects on greenhouse gasses (Tenenbaum, Jackson, & Shaftel,
2017). On the other hand, Donald Trump trashes efforts to mitigate the effect by repealing the
Obama’s policies on climate change as an agenda of national security (Lavelle, 2017). This
analysis provides insights into the intentions of key actors in international policies. An analysis
of Trump’s decisions and reactions from the global community reveals the scope of this policy,

green house emissions 3
its human rights and business factors (Nanda & Pring, 2012). President Obama’s Clean Power
Plan targeting electric power plants supports the reduction of carbon emissions into the
environment. The law identifies electric plants as leading pollutants in greenhouse gas emissions.
The international community as watchdogs is keen on its impact of environmental protection
laws on humanity at large (Yeung, 2016). The success of the international law depends on its
inclusivity, justice and durability. The law is powerful because it provides guidelines for
individual states. Its existence over the years reveals over 30% reductions in carbon effects in the
U.S (Badbury, Obeiter, Draucker, Wang, & Stevens, 2013). This prevents single actors like
Trump from doing away with the law. The purpose and impact of the environmental law makes it
a powerful tool in the global system.
Glasson, Therivel, & Chadwick (2013) highlight the role of principal actors in environmental
policies. Benefiting millions, the Clean Power Plan protects from health effects such as
premature deaths, and it mitigates health complications like asthma. The law is not overbearing
because it provides guidelines for power plants to operate efficiently. It encourages the use of
renewal energy sources like solar and bio energy too. Public participation in the law makes it
popular because it encourages consumer participation in energy efficiency and reduced pollution.
Its specific elements address all areas affected including electricity generation points, states and
consumers. It has the support of environmental groups, conservative political groups, the federal
government and the public. The law has undergone screenings to identify its core issues and
impact. Its application in different parts of the globe reaffirms its usefulness making it
irrevocable.

green house emissions 4
PART B
ANNONNATED BIBLIOGRAPHY (1000 words)
Santoro, R; Howarth, R; Ingraffea, A. 2011. Mathane and the greenhouse-gas footprint of
natural gas from shale formations. Climate Change. Vol 106, pp, 679-690
Santoro, Howarth, & Ingraffea (2011) give evidence of the existence of green house gases in the
environment. Although this research is not focused on electricity generated emisions, it
acknowlegdes the footprints of green house generation. The research points at methane as a
more powerful gas than carboon in the destruction of the ozone layer. This counteracts Trumps
sentiments that there is no evidence of greenhouses. Trump as a head of state has the power to
scrap off the executive orders and regulations within the Obama plan (Korte, 2017). The research
also points to the fact that the emission of the gasses increase over time. In support of this
research Rosa & Dietz (2012) give emphasis to its systematic effects. From the articles, human
activities and natural factors contribute to cliate change. The research shows its negative effect
on human health as it stress changes in the environment. Obama’s policies had a target of
reducing the emissions by 40% and its success shows more than 30% breakkthoughs over the
years (Badbury et al., 2013). This article supports research into climate change highlighting the
consequences of human action and natural causes. The article supports the need for a
collaborated effort between state, non state and individual actors in curbing climate change
effects.

green house emissions 5
Whitmarsh, L. 2011. Skepticism and uncertainty about climate change: Dimensions,
determinants and change over time. Global Environmental Change. Vol 21 (2), pp 690-700
Political or state influences on the environmental policy stems from differences in dimensions
(Whitmarsh, 2011). The article explains that political and media elements stand against proven
scientific evidence because of ignorance and misunderstandings. The author brings out political
beliefs and personal values as factors in the skepticism. From the analysis it is possible that
Donald trump’s stand on the policy comes from his business influence. As a leader with a strong
background in entrepreneurship, Trump disapproves of climate change due to the cost-benefit
factors used in business. His background in business shapes the basis for his beliefs and practices
in politics. The research also points out that leaders may base their decisions on individual
characteristics or knowledge background. Such people tend to view climate issues as an
exaggeration or falsehood. The article also suggests that some of these claims are biased. Wise,
et al (2014) support this point citing the role of decision makers in making policy changes. There
is evidence on the incremental changes in environmental laws caused by leaders and the Obama
plan is an example. However, some of the actors have good intentions while others are wrong in
their perspective. This article brings to light the contrasting ideas between the two leaders.
Lovell, H; Schroeder, H. 2012. The role of non-nation state actors and side events in the
international climate negotiations. Climate Policy, Vol 12 (1), pp 23-37
Non-state actors have interests and values as noted by the research (Lovell & Schroeder, 2012).
The international organizations are responsible for negotiations with state actors on climate

green house emissions 6
change issues. Greenhouse emissions have adverse effects on human health and life. The article
notes that the environment also affects the economy because generations face high mortality
rates. The study highlights the role of the international players in engaging with the community
on power energy saving for reduction on domestic effects. Researchers in NGOs agree that
greenhouse emissions contain nitrogen oxides, mercury, sulfur dioxide, and arsenic pollutants,
which are toxic. Failure to control these emissions lead to high increases of toxic gases in the
atmosphere causing catastrophic impacts on public health and the ecosystem. The article
reiterates the role of the United Nations community in mitigating the threatening effects of the
gases, which affect the welfare of humanity. According to the article, joint effort strengthens this
agenda (Dieperink, Van Zeijl, Lamers, & Hegger, 2012). The article supports united efforts
towards making the world a safe place. It provides proof of the risks at hard with highlights of
impending futures dangers. The study considers climate change as a complex issue that affects
all humanity but requires a multifaceted approach.
Stinnett, M.D; Tir, J. 2012. Weathering climate change: Can institutions mitigate
international water conflict. Journal of Peace Research. Vol 49 (1), pp 211-225
Stinnet & Tir (2012) explains the role of institutions in resolving global issues. The
article discusses climate change issues and its effects on natural resources. It brings out joint
international management strategies that involve signatories to agrements. From the article, it is
evident that climate change is an issue of security concern that calls for international
intervention. This is why the Obama plan adopted it as a security agenda under the federal
governemnt. The study supports the use of institutions in solving human welfare problems. It

green house emissions 7
points out that constraints of the environment tend to increase international tensions and
conflicts. This places Trumps sentiments at stake because it thretens the existence of national,
and international agreements. The article also cite some historical cases of violation of treaties
that led to military conflicts. In the study, international institutions can reduce security threats
posed by climate change factors. In support of this study, Oels (2013) explains that governability
is critical in mitigating national and global risks. This article supports the incorporation of
climate issues under the national security docket. Although its focus is on watersources, it draws
relevant attention to the war against greenhouse emissions in developed and developing nations.
Lanoie, P; Elgie, S; Cohen, M, A; Ambec. 2013. The porter hypothesis at 20: Can
environmental regulation enhance innovation and competitiveness? Review of Environmental
Economics and Policy, Vol 7 ( 1), pp 2-22
Lanoie, Elgie, Cohen, & Ambec ( 2013) bring out the eonomic importance of
environmental regulations using reknown strategist Michael Porter’s theory. The discussion
makes clarrification on any misconceotions arising from the the business community. It tries to
explain Donald Trump perspective while, confirming to the business community the business
viability of climate protection laws. The article gives examples of how reduced pollution
maximizes on profits through a competitive advantage. It disagrees and agrees with studies
which blame the contemporary economic system for enviromental pollution. However this article
gives empirical data on the implications behind the regulations. In its evidence based analysis, it
shows proof that business activities are at the center stage in environmental degradation. It
suggests that the laws encourage innovation, competitiveness and business performance. Other

green house emissions 8
researchers supporting this idea discuss the adoption of practices such as waste management and
efficiency for business regulations (Wong & Sthiannopkao, 2013). The study gives insights
through themes on the economic benefits of environmental policy in a nation. The article is
relevant because it presents discusions around a common contemporary notion of competitive
advanatages. The article advocates for the incorporation of environmental concerns as part of
competitive strategies.

green house emissions 9
References
Badbury, J. A., Obeiter, M., Draucker, L., Wang, W., & Stevens, A. (2013). Clearing the air:
Reducing upstream greenhouse gas emissions from US natural gas systems. Washington
DC: World Resource Institute.
Dieperink, C., Van Zeijl, A., Lamers, M., & Hegger, D. (2012). Conceptualising joint knowledge
production in regional climate change adaptation projects. Success conditions and levers
for action. Environmental Science & Policy, 18, 52-65.
EPA. (2014, February 6). EPA proposes first guidelines to cut carbon pollution from existing
power plants/ clean power plan is flexible proposal to ensure a healthier environment,
spur innovation and strengthen the economy. Retrieved from United States
Enviironmental Protection Agency:
https://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/bd4379a92ceceeac8525735900400c27/5bb6d
20668b9a18485257ceb00490c98!OpenDocument
Glasson, J., Therivel, R., & Chadwick, A. (2013). Introduction to environmental impact
assessment. Routledge.
Korte, G. (2017, March 28). Here are 10 Obama environmental policies Trump wants to scrap.
Retrieved September 9, 2017, from usatoday.com:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/03/28/the-obama-environmental-
regulations-trump-wants-scrap/99729650/
Lanoie, P., Elgie, s., Cohen, M., & Ambec, S. (2013, January 1). The Porter hypothesis at 20:
Can environmental regulation enhance innovation and competitiveness? Review of
Environmental Economics and Policy, 7(1), 2-22.

green house emissions 10
Lavelle, M. (2017, April 25). Trump's climate cuts could result in half-billion extra tons of Co2
in the Air. Inside Climate News. Retrieved September 7, 2017, from
https://insideclimatenews.org/news/25042017/donald-trump-climate-change-clean-
power-plan-paris-agreement
Lovell, H., & Schroeder, H. (2012). The role of non nation state actors and side events in the
international climate negotiations. Climate Policy, 23-37.
Nanda, V., & Pring, G. (2012). International environmental law and policy for the 21st Century.
Martinus Nijhoff publishers .
Oels, A. (2013). Rendering climate change governable by risk: From profitability to contingency.
Geoforum, 17-29.
Rosa, E. A., & Dietz, T. (2012). Human drivers of national greenhouse-gas emissions. Nature
Climate Change, 2(8), 581.
Santoro, R., Howarth, R., & Ingraffea, A. (2011). Methane and the greenhouse-gas footprint of
natural gas from shale fromations. Climate Change, 106, 679-690.
Stinnet, M. D., & Tir, J. (2012). Weathering climate change: Can institutions mitigate
international water conflict? Journal of Peace Research, 18, 211-225.
Tenenbaum, l., Jackson, R., & Shaftel, H. (2017, September 6). Climate change: How do we
know? Retrieved from NASA: https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/
Whitmarsh, L. (2011, May). Scepticicms and uncertainty aboout climate change: Dimensions,
determinants and change over time. Global environmental Change, 21(2), 690-700.
Wise, R. M., Fazey, I., Smith, S., Park, S., Eakin, H., Archer, ,. E., & Campbell, B. (2014).
Reconceptualising adaptation to climate change and response. Global Environmental
Change, 28, 325-336.

green house emissions 11
Wong, H. M., & Sthiannopkao, S. (2013, October 1). Handling e-waste in developed and
developing countries: Initiatives, practices and consequences. Science of the Total
Environment, 463-464, 1147-1153.
Yeung, P. (2016, May 15). Paris climate change agreement has "failed" poor countries, report
says. The Independent UK. Retrieved September 7, 2017, from
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/paris-climate-agreement-
report-oxfam-a7030446.html