The Best to Address the Problem..

Over the course of this blog, we have looked at many different actors, regulations, and initiatives in Wisconsin that deal with climate change. Each has done something to help improve our current climate change situation. Whether it be government regulations like the Clean Air Act and the Clean Power Plan, a network of actors like 350.org and the Wisconsin League of Conservation Voters, a market governance like Focus on Energy, or new initiatives like the Wisconsin Initiative on Climate Change Impacts, we have witnessed many attempts to combat climate change. Climate change can not be improved without a combination of modes of governance, all working separately but towards a common goal. The government is good for enacting policies that people must follow. Networks are a good way to bring people with a common interest together to fight for their cause. Markets are important because money incentives make people more likely to move towards environmentally cleaner products and services. So while some actors may be doing a better job of accomplishing their goal, it's important to have all modes of governance on board for combating climate change. Based on what we have looked at in this blog, I think the Wisconsin League of Conservation Voters, 350.org, Clean Air Act, WICC, and Clean Power Plan have the most potential to address climate change. 

It's going to take a host of actors to combat climate change.

Our course textbook has discussed environmental governance, and Evans concludes by posing some hypotheses about what makes environmental governance work. I address three of the eight that I think apply well to climate change governance.

Getting the right mix of approaches is critical.
Evans states that there "is no magic bullet for solving environmental issues because the problems and potential solutions vary greatly" (Evans, 214). It takes many different modes of governance to combat the problem of climate change. We need actors on all levels using different techniques because climate change is a complex problem and doesn't have a simple fix. We have seen throughout this blog that actors are combating different problems to try to mitigate climate change. For example, Obama's Clean Power Plan is a government regulation that is working to reduce carbon emissions from power plants. While this is an important step in the right direction, climate change is due to more than just carbon emissions. Networks like 350.org and the Wisconsin League of Conservation Voters work to influence policy makers. 350.org calls important issues to attention through protests and petitions. They are also working to educate society on our climate change issues. The League works to bring politicians and policies into the government that will improve our climate crisis. They also work to keep those that will make climate change worse out of our government. We can see that our work towards mitigating climate change wouldn't be possible with only one of these actors.

Governments matter.
Governments are an important aspect of environmental governance. They have the ability to shape markets, innovations, and policies. Having the government help work towards a solution is a very important aspect. For climate change, we see that the government has put regulations in place to help mitigate climate change. The Clean Air Act and the Clean Power Plan have been important tools to regulate emissions as well as bring problems to public eye. When the Clean Air Act was enacted, many people were unaware of what was causing the air pollution. Furthermore, I think today many people are ignorant or turn a blind eye to how much pollution our power plants release. Government policies can be used to kick-start a new movement of innovations. Obama commented about how he hopes his Clean Power Plan will help lead the world to create other policies and initiatives to reduce emissions, and just in time for the Paris Climate Talks.

Obama at the Paris Climate Talks, 2015. A meeting of world leaders to address climate change.

Networks and markets are the best things we have.
It is unlikely that all the governments of the world will come together and agree on things. While networks and markets aren't perfect, Evans argues that they are the best tool we have for environmental governance. I would have to say, based on the networks I've researched, I would have to agree with Evans. The U.S. government has done some really great things to help with climate change, but it has take years to do so. With climate change being an ever pressing issue, we need to see changes occur faster. Networks like the Wisconsin League of Conservation Voters are working to make policy changes at a quicker rate simply by voting. When a group of people come together for a common cause, they can achieve more. We've also looked at 350.org, which networks around the world to demand changes from the norm to combat climate change. Markets are also important to incentivize cleaner technologies. FOE encourages customers to purchase cleaner energy products and services. 

Sources;
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/08/03/fact-sheet-president-obama-announce-historic-carbon-pollution-standards 
http://350.org/ 
http://conservationvoters.org/about/nonpartisan/ 
https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQTwMYdEkIYJ-SZBnvoCYasJIGnZ09sWANY8H41QfzJ5D7HFI7fEw
http://www.unep.org/NewsCentre/InsertImage.asp?ImageSizeID=3&DocumentID=629&ArticleID=6641