Abstract
The chapter reviews the evolution of policies and controversy on climate change in the US since its inclusion in the Paris Agreement to the recent transition from the Trump to the Biden presidency. Adopting two key concepts to understand the context of policy-making—namely, the emergence of the administrative presidency and contested federalism—the chapter starts by discussing the Clean Power Plan and establishment of vehicle emission standards as a loose core of policies aiming at a reduction of carbon emissions. Shifting its focus from executive action to legislative debate, the case study then reviews the structure of agents and coalitions involved in controversy about climate policy proposals in both chambers of Congress. This survey includes proposals on the adherence to the Paris Agreement, carbon pricing, and more comprehensive programmatic resolutions on climate change such as the Green New Deal. Combining qualitative insights with the results of the quantitative content analysis, a key finding of the case study is the fragmentation of policy discourse advocating action against climate change, and the high degree of volatility of the policy debate resulting from changes in the presidency and political majorities in Congress.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
This resolution (S.Res. 98 of the 105th Congress), named after its two sponsors Chuck Hagel (R-NE) and Robert Byrd (D-WV), was adopted unanimously in the US Senate on 25 July 1997 (97-0) and requires that the US should not ratify international agreements on climate change requiring a reduction of GHG emissions from Annex I countries (ie., advanced industrialized countries such as US) without the inclusion of new commitments for developing countries, or one that can be seen to result in serious harm to the economy of the United States. Furthermore, the resolution also requires the US government to accompany any agreement on climate change submitted to the Senate for ratification by a detailed explanation of `any legislation or regulatory actions that may be required (…) and should also be accompanied by an analysis of the detailed financial costs and other impacts on the economy of the United States which would be incurred by the implementation of the protocol or other agreement’. The resolution is commonly seen as a major reason for why the US did not proceed to ratify the Kyoto Protocol through consent of the US Senate, even if it had no legally binding effect as a resolution expressing the ‘sense of the Senate’ (cp. Brewer 2015: 228f.).
- 2.
A country page for the United States containing both the 2016 and 2021 NDC can be found on the website of the NDC Registry of the UNFCCC at: https://www4.unfccc.int/sites/NDCStaging/pages/Party.aspx?party=USA (last accessed: 18 August 2021).
- 3.
The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) was established in 2009 and currently includes eleven states in the North-East of the US (Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont and Virginia). The initiative establishes a cap on emissions by power plants and includes a system of auctions through which allowances are issued to producers and programs for the promotion of energy efficiency and clean energy programs funded through its revenues. More information is available at the RGGI website at http://www.rggi.org.
- 4.
A survey of initiatives launched by C40 can be found in its 2020 Annual report, available online at: https://c40-production-images.s3.amazonaws.com/other_uploads/images/2827_C40_Annual_Report_2020_vMay2021_lightfile.original.pdf?1622806882 (last accessed: 19 August 2021).
- 5.
In this context, only passing mention can be made of the fact that Scott Pruitt was a controversial figure as Administrator of the EPA from 17 February 2017 to 9 July 2018, primarily because of his well-known and critical stance towards the scientific consensus on climate change and its effects, but also his previous role as Attorney General of Oklahoma, during which he led numerous legal challenges against federal environmental legislation and the EPA itself. The departure of Pruitt was the EPA was accompanied by numerous accusations of fraud and legal investigations concerning his conduct in office, conflicts of interests, and use of personal privileges in office. His successor Andrew Wheeler served as his successor until the end of the Trump administration and was confirmed for the position of EPA Administrator in the US Senate on 28 February 2019. Having served as deputy administrator of the EPA since April 2018, Wheeler also has ties to political networks critical of climate science and climate policy, having worked for a law firm representing interests of the coal industry and as an aide for US Senator James Inhofe, one of the foremost critics of action against climate change and previous chairman of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works (cp. New York Times: “Trump Nominates a Coal Lobbyist to Be No. 2 at E.P.A.”, 5 October 2017, URL: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/05/climate/trump-epa-andrew-wheeler.html, and New York Times: “Trump Says He’ll Nominate Andrew Wheeler to Head the E.P.A.”, 16 November 2018, URL: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/16/climate/trump-andrew-wheeler-epa.html).
- 6.
- 7.
For easier comparison of the miles per gallon (MPG) standard with those measured in liters consumed per 100 km as commonly used in a European setting, consider that 1 US gallon is 4.54609 L and 100 km corresponds to a distance of 62.1371 US miles (1 US mile is 1.60934 km). Obviously, this implies that higher figures relating to the miles per gallon (MPG) standard mean stricter fuel efficiency standards. More specifically, a reach of 20 miles per gallon as typical for bigger pick-up trucks and SUVs corresponds to a consumption of about 14.1 L per 100 km; other corresponding values of both standards are: 30 MPG = 9.4 L/100 km, 40 MPG = 7.1 L/100 km, 50 MPG = 5.7 L/100 km, and 60 miles per gallon = 4.7 L/100 km.
- 8.
Cp. the announcement on the website of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA): https://web.archive.org/web/20130305181919/http://www.nhtsa.gov/About+NHTSA/Press+Releases/2011/President+Obama+Announces+Historic+54.5+mpg+Fuel+Efficiency+Standard.
- 9.
See the SAFE regulations factsheet on the NHTSA website at: https://www.nhtsa.gov/corporate-average-fuel-economy/fact-sheet-safe-vehicles-rule.
- 10.
Cp. coverage in the New York Times article: “E.P.A. Announces Tightest-Ever Auto Pollution Rules”, 20 December 2021, URL: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/20/climate/tailpipe-rules-climate-biden.html.
- 11.
Cp. coverage in the New York Times: “Trump to Revoke California’s Authority to Seet Stricter Auto Emissions Rules”, 17 September 2019, URL: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/17/climate/trump-california-emissions-waiver.html.
- 12.
Cp. coverage in the New York Times: “California Sues the Trump Administration in Its Escalating War Over Auto Emissions”, 20 September 2019, URL: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/20/climate/california-auto-emissions-lawsuit.html?action=click&module=RelatedLinks&pgtype=Article.
- 13.
For easier comparability with European measurements, these standards correspond to a consumption of about 7.6 L per 100 km (37mpg) and 5.2 L per 100 km (54.5 mpg).
- 14.
According to the NHTSA declaration of 29 July 2011, an agreement on 2025 targets was made with Ford, GM, Chrysler, BMW, Honda, Hyundai, Jaguar/Land Rover, Kia, Mazda, Mitsubishi, Nissan, Toyota and Volvo (URL: https://web.archive.org/web/20130305181919/http://www.nhtsa.gov/About+NHTSA/Press+Releases/2011/President+Obama+Announces+Historic+54.5+mpg+Fuel+Efficiency+Standard).
- 15.
Cp. New York Times article: “Defying Trump, 5 Automakers Lock in a Deal on Greenhouse Gas Pollution”, 17 August 2020, URL: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/17/climate/california-automakers-pollution.html.
- 16.
Cp. New York Times article: “Automakers Drop Efforts to Derail California Climate Rules”, 2 February 2021, URL: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/02/climate/automakers-climate-change.html.
- 17.
See footnote 11.
- 18.
Cp. the company’s public statement ‘Ford to Lead America’s Shift to Electric Vehicles’ covering the creation of a new ‘Mega Campus’ in Tennessee and twin battery plans in Kentucky, 27 September 2021, URL: https://media.ford.com/content/fordmedia/fna/us/en/news/2021/09/27/ford-to-lead-americas-shift-to-electric-vehicles.html.
- 19.
A website of the Climate Solutions Caucus in the US Senate hosted by Senator Chris Coons can be found at the following URL: https://www.coons.senate.gov/climate-solutions-caucus/; a website of the Climate Solutions Caucus in the House of Representatives hosted by House Member Ted Deutch can be found at the URL: https://teddeutch.house.gov/climate/; additional information is also provided on a website hosted by the Citizens’ Climate Lobby at the URL: https://citizensclimatelobby.org/climate-solutions-caucus/ (all last accessed: 20 August 2021).
- 20.
Statement quoted from the Climate Solution Caucus website, URL: https://teddeutch.house.gov/climate/ (last accessed: 21 August 2021).
- 21.
A website of the SEEC hosted by House Member Paul Tonko can be found at the following URL: https://seec-tonko.house.gov (last accessed: 20 August 2021).
- 22.
Based on membership lists of both the SEEC and the Climate Solutions Caucus on their respective websites, overall 16 of the 71 members of the SEEC can be identified as belonging also the Climate Solutions Caucus. These are, in alphabetical order of their last names: Don Beyer, Earl Blumenauer, Susanne Bonamici, Salud Carbajal, Matt Cartwright, Judy Chu, Jim Himes, Derek Kilmer, Ann Kuster, Alan Lowenthal, Jerry McNerney, Jimmy Panetta, Ed Perlmutter, Scott Peters, Robert Scott, and Peter Welch (for URLs of websites, see footnotes 4 and 6, last accessed and membership lists scrutinized on 21 August 2021).
- 23.
The composition and activities of the Subcommittee on Environment and Climate Change can be reviewed at: https://energycommerce.house.gov/subcommittees/environment-and-climate-change-117th-congress.
- 24.
A summary of the framework including a list of the nine key principles can be reviewed on Paul Tonko’s House of Representatives website at: https://tonko.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=829; the full document of the climate action framework is accessible at: https://tonko.house.gov/uploadedfiles/tonko_-_climate_principles_116th.pdf.
- 25.
A section of Ocasio-Cortez’s website dedicated to the Green New Deal agenda can be found at the following URL: https://ocasio-cortez.house.gov/gnd (last accessed: 20 August 2021).
- 26.
Reports and coverage can be retrieved from the Sunrise Movement homepage at: https://www.sunrisemovement.org/actions/pelosi-sit-in/ (last accessed: 29 August 2021).
- 27.
The procedure file for the House Resolution recognizing the duty of the Federal Government to create a Green New Deal can be retrieved from: https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-resolution/109/text (last accessed: 29 August 2021).
- 28.
For more detailed coverage of the vote, cp.: “Senate Blocks Green New Deal”, in: The Hill, 27 March 2019; and “Democrats to Move on from Green New Deal”, in: The Hill, 28 March 2019.
- 29.
The procedure file for the Senate resolution recognizing the duty of the Federal Government to create a Green New Deal (S. Res. 59) can be retrieved from: https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-resolution/59?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22green+new+deal%22%5D%7D&s=2&r=3 (last accessed: 29 August 2021).
- 30.
By common understanding, the group of initially four and subsequently six Democratic House Members referred to with this term includes, in alphabetical order of last name, Representatives Jamaal Bowman (NY), Cori Bush (MO), Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez (NY), Ilhan Omar (MN), Ayanna Presley (MA), and Rashida Tlaib (MI).
- 31.
The website of the League of Conservationist Voters can be found at: https://www.lcv.orgn (last accessed: 1 September 2021).
- 32.
The website of the group can be found at: http://climatehawksvote.com (last accessed: 1 September 2021).
- 33.
“Politics: Uncompromising Climate Hawk Advances in Tight Illinois Primary”, in: ClimateWire, 22 March 2018.
- 34.
The website of the Citizens’ Climate Lobby can be found at: https://citizensclimatelobby.org (last accessed: 1 September 2021).
- 35.
The website of BELC can be found on the homepage of C2ES at: https://www.c2es.org/our-work/belc/ (last accessed: 1 September 2021).
- 36.
The website of the PPI can be found at: http://www.progressivepolicy.org (last accessed: 1 September 2021).
- 37.
Cp. Bledsoe’s personal website on the PPI homepage at: https://www.progressivepolicy.org/people/paul-bledsoe-2/, or, e.g., ClimateWire of 4 August 2020: “Campaign 2020: Why Biden’s Car Plan Might Not Be a Clunker”.
- 38.
The website of New Consensus can be found at: https://newconsensus.com (last accessed: 1 September 2021); for additional background, see also: “People: Ocasio-Cortez’s Chief of Staff Exits to Push Green New Deal”, in: ClimateWire, 5 August 2020; and “Q&A: This Scholar Is Writing the Green New Deal Policy Book”, in: ClimateWire, 28 June 2019.
- 39.
Cp. “Politics: White House Won’t Review Climate Science Before Election”, in: ClimateWire, 9 July 2019.
- 40.
Cp. “EPA: Green Groups Petition to Bar Ebell from Agency”, in: ClimateWire, 15 November 2016.
- 41.
Cp. Ebell’s personal website on the CEI homepage at: https://cei.org/experts/myron-ebell/ (last accessed: 1 September 2021).
- 42.
Cp. the mission statement on the CO2 Coalition’s website: https://co2coalition.org/co2-fundamentals/ (last accessed: 1 September 2021).
- 43.
Cp. “EPA: Emails Show To-Do List for Tearing Down Climate Rules”, in: ClimateWire, 4 June 2018.
- 44.
Cp. “EPA: Pruitt’s Climate Clash Was Declared Dead. There Is a Plan B”, in: ClimateWire, 14 March 2018.
- 45.
This observation is certainly owed at least partly to the particular choice of empirical material selected here—namely, its focus on legislative and policy documents with an official character and public appearances in front of large audiences. This finding would certainly change if the material was broadened to unofficial statements and the blogosphere, but this does not take away the relevance of our current finding: Within official policy discourse, even declared opponents of action against climate change do not openly contest its existence.
References
Ahmad, Fatima, Jennifer Huang, and Bob Perciasepe. 2017. “The Paris Agreement Presents a Flexible Approach for US Climate Policy.” Climate & Carbon Law Review 4: 283–91.
Ajl, Max. 2021. A People’s Green New Deal. London: Pluto Press.
Andrews, Richard. 2020. Managing the Environment, Managing Ourselves. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Aronoff, Kate, Alyssa Battistoni, Daniel Aldana Cohen, and Thea Riofrancos. 2019. A Planet to Win: Why We Need a Green New Deal. London and New York: Verso.
Arroyo, Vicki. 2017. “State and Local Climate Leadership in the Trumpocene.” Carbon & Climate Law Review, no. 4: 303–13.
Atkinson, Hugh. 2018. The Politics of Climate Change Under President Obama. London and New York: Routledge.
Bailey, Christopher J. 2015. US Climate Change Policy. Transforming Environmental Politics and Policy. Farnham and Surrey Burlington, VT: Ashgate.
Bodansky, Daniel, and O’Connor, Sandra Day. 2015. “Legal Options for U.S. Acceptance of a New Climate Change Agreement.” Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, Washington, DC. https://www.c2es.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/legal-options-us-acceptance-new-climate-change-agreement.pdf.
Brewer, Thomas L. 2015. The United States in a Warming World: The Political Economy of Government, Business, and Public Responses to Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, George, and Benjamin K. Sovacool. 2017. “The Presidential Politics of Climate Discourse: Energy Frames, Policy, and Political Tactics from the 2016 Primaries in the United States.” Energy Policy 111 (C): 127–36.
Bulkeley, Harriet. 2014. Transnational Climate Change Governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
C2ES. 2019. “Getting to Zero: A U.S. Climate Agenda.” Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, Washington, DC. https://www.c2es.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/getting-to-zero-a-us-climate-agenda-11-13-19.pdf.
Carlarne, Cinnamon Piñon. 2010. Climate Change Law and Policy: EU and US Approaches. Oxford [u.a.]: Oxford University Press.
Carlson, Ann, and Dallas Burtraw, eds. 2019. Lessons from the Clean Air Act: Building Durability and Adaptability into U.S. Climate and Energy Policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
ClimateWire. 2017. “Congress: Climate Club: Sincere of Just Politically Convenient?” E&E News, 2017, Vol. 10, No. 9 edition.
———. 2018. “Congress: 2 More Republicans Join Climate Solutions Caucus.” E&E News, 2018, Vol. 10, No. 9 edition.
———. 2019a. “Congress: Tonko Unveils ‘Framework’ for Climate Legislation.” E&E News, 2019a, Vol. 10, No. 9 edition.
———. 2019b. “Politics: Bipartisan Climate Caucus Eyes a Comeback.” E&E News, 2019b, Vol. 10, No. 9 edition.
Collomb, Jean-Daniel. 2014. “The Ideology of Climate Change Denial in the United States.” European Journal of American studies 9 (9–1). https://doi.org/10.4000/ejas.10305.
Conlan, Timothy J. 2017. “The Changing Politics of American Federalism.” State and Local Government Review 49 (3): 170–83. https://doi.org/10.1177/0160323X17741723.
Danish, Kyle. 2018. “Current Developments: North America.” Carbon & Climate Law Review 1: 62–64.
Darwall, Rupert. 2017. Green Tyranny: Exposing the Totalitarian Roots of the Climate Industrial Complex. First American edition. New York: Encounter Books.
Dunlap, Riley E. 2019. “Partisan Polarization on the Environment Grows Under Trump.” Gallup.Com, 2019. https://news.gallup.com/opinion/gallup/248294/partisan-polarization-environment-grows-trump.aspx.
Dunlap, Riley E., and Aaron M. McCright. 2011. “Organized Climate Change Denial.” Edited by John S. Dryzek. The Oxford Handbook of Climate Change and Society, 144–60. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199566600.003.0010.
Durney, Jessica. 2017. “Defining the Paris Agreement: A Study of Executive Power and Political Commitments.” Carbon & Climate Law Review, no. 3: 234–42.
EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 2016. “Factsheet: The Clean Power Plan by the Numbers. Cutting Carbon Pollution from Power Plants.” https://archive.epa.gov/epa/sites/production/files/2015-08/documents/fs-cpp-by-the-numbers.pdf.
Fabbrini, Sergio, ed. 2005. Democracy and Federalism in the European Union and the United States: Exploring Post-National Governance. London and New York: Routledge.
Fisher, Dana R., Philip Leifeld, and Yoko Iwaki. 2013. “Mapping the Ideological Networks of American Climate Politics.” Climatic Change 116 (3): 523–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-012-0512-7.
Freeman, Jody. 2011. “The Obama Administration’s National Auto Policy: Lessons from the ‘Car Deal.’” Harvard Environmental Law Review 343 (35).
———. 2013. “Climate and Energy Policy in the Obama Administration.” Pace Environmental Law Review 30 (1): 375.
Gehler, Michael, ed. 2005. Towards a European Constitution: A Historical and Political Comparison with the United States. Bd. 3. Wien: Böhlau.
Glicksman, Robert. 2017. “The Fate of the Clean Power Plan in the Trump Era.” Carbon & Climate Law Review 11 (4): 292–302.
Guliyev, Farid. 2020. “Trump’s ‘America First’ Energy Policy, Contingency and the Reconfiguration of the Global Energy Order.” Energy Policy, no. 140: 1–10.
Hollibaugh, Gary E., Jr. 2016. “Rethinking the Administrative Presidency: Trust, Intellectual Capital, and Appointee-Careerist Relations in the George W. Bush Administration.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 26 (4): 818–20. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muw030.
Holt, Robert T., and Leonard S. Robins. 2009. “Political Climates and the Global Climate: The First Six Months of the Obama Administration and the Congress.” Environmental Practice 11 (3): 220–27. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1466046609990111.
Holthaus, Eric. 2015. “Buried in Obama’s Climate Plan: A Promise of Business as Usual to the Fossil Fuel Industry.” Slate. https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2015/08/obama-s-clean-power-plan-analysis-business-as-usual-for-the-fossil-fuel-industry.html.
Houle, David, Erick Lachapelle, and Mark Purdon. 2015. “Comparative Politics of Sub-Federal Cap-and-Trade: Implementing the Western Climate Initiative.” Global Environmental Politics 15 (3): 49–73. https://doi.org/10.1162/GLEP_a_00311.
Inhofe, James M. 2012. The Greatest Hoax: How the Global Warming Conspiracy Threatens Your Future. 1st ed. Washington, DC: WND Books.
Jenkins-Smith, Hank, Daniel Nohrstedt, Christopher Weible, and Karin Ingold. 2017. “The Advocacy Coalition Framework: An Overview of the Research Program.” In Theories of the Policy Process, edited by Christopher Weible and Paul Sabatier, 135–72. New York: Westview Press.
Jones, Michael D., and Mark K. McBeth. 2010. “A Narrative Policy Framework: Clear Enough to Be Wrong?” Policy Studies Journal 38 (2): 329–53. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2010.00364.x.
Jotzo, Frank, Joanna Depledge, and Harald Winkler. 2018. “US and International Climate Policy Under President Trump.” Climate Policy 18 (7): 813–17.
Karapin, Roger. 2016. Political Opportunities for Climate Policy: California, New York, and the Federal Government. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kincaid, Graciela, and J. Timmons Roberts. 2013. “No Talk, Some Walk: Obama Administration First-Term Rhetoric on Climate Change and US International Climate Budget Commitments.” Global Environmental Politics 13 (4): 41–60. https://doi.org/10.1162/GLEP_a_00197.
Klein, Ezra. 2020. Why We’re Polarized. London: Profile Books.
Konisky, David M., and Neal D. Woods. 2018. “Environmental Federalism and the Trump Presidency: A Preliminary Assessment.” Publius: The Journal of Federalism 48 (3): 345–71. https://doi.org/10.1093/publius/pjy009.
Kramer, Ronald. 2020. “Rolling Back Climate Regulation: Trump’s Assault on the Planet.” Journal of White Collar and Corporate Crime 1 (2): 123–30.
Leggett, Jane. 2019. “Potential Implications of U.S. Withdrawal from the Paris Agreement on Climate Change.” Congressional Research Service. https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/IF10668.pdf.
Leggett, Jane, and Richard Lattanzio. 2016. “Climate Change: Frequently Asked Questions About the 2015 Paris Agreement.” Congressional Research Service. https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R44609.pdf.
Mann, Michael E. 2021. The New Climate War: The Fight to Take Back Our Planet. New York: Public Affairs, Hachette.
Mehling, Michael. 2017. “A New Direction for US Climate Policy: Assessing the First 100 Days of Donald Trump’s Presidency.” Carbon & Climate Law Review, no. 1: 3–23.
Mehling, Michael, and Antto Vihma. 2017. “‘Mourning for America’. Donald Trump’s Climate Change Policy.” Finnish Institute of International Affairs. https://www.fiia.fi/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/analysis8_mourning_for_america-2.pdf.
Menon, Anand, and Martin A. Schain. 2006. Comparative Federalism: The European Union and the United States in Comparative Perspective. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
Milkoreit, Manjana. 2019. “The Paris Agreement on Climate Change—Made in USA?” Perspectives on Politics 17 (4): 1019–37.
Mormann, Felix. 2017. “Constitutional Challenges and Regulatory Opportunities for State Climate Policy Innovation.” SSRN Scholarly Paper ID 2928840. Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network. https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2928840.
Parker, Charles F., and Christer Karlsson. 2018. “The UN Climate Change Negotiations and the Role of the United States: Assessing American Leadership from Copenhagen to Paris.” Environmental Politics 27 (3): 519–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2018.1442388.
Pettifor, Ann. 2020. The Case for the Green New Deal. London: Verso.
Prakash, Varshini, and Guido Girgenti. 2020. Winning the Green New Deal: Why We Must, How We Can. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Rabe, Barry. 2011. “Contested Federalism and American Climate Policy.” Publius: The Journal of Federalism 41 (3): 494–521.
———. 2018. Can We Price Carbon? Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Ramseur, Jonathan. 2019. “Market-Based Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Legislation: 108th Through 116th Congresses.” Congressional Research Service. Washington, DC. https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R45472.pdf.
Resh, William G. 2015. Rethinking the Administrative Presidency: Trust, Intellectual Capital and Appointee-Careerist Relations in the George W. Bush Administration. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Richards, Mark J. 2016. “Regulating Automakers for Climate Change: US Reforms in Global Context.” Environmental Policy and Governance 26 (6): 498–509. https://doi.org/10.1002/eet.1726.
Saad, Lydia. 2017. “Global Warming Concern at Three-Decade High in U.S.” Gallup.Com. 2017. https://news.gallup.com/poll/206030/global-warming-concern-three-decade-high.aspx.
———. 2019. “Americans as Concerned as Ever About Global Warming.” Gallup.Com. 2019. https://news.gallup.com/poll/248027/americans-concerned-ever-global-warming.aspx.
Sabatier, Paul, and Christopher Weible. 2007. “The Advocacy Coalition Framework. Innovation and Clarifications.” In Theories of the Policy Process, ed. Paul Sabatier, 189–222. Westview: Westview Press.
Sbragia, Alberta M. 2008. “American Federalism and Intergovernmental Relations.” In The Oxford Handbook of Political Institutions, edited by Sarah Binder, R. A. W. Rhodes, and Bert Rockman. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
Selby, Jan. 2019. “The Trump Presidency, Climate Change, and the Prospect of a Disorderly Energy Transition.” Review of International Studies 45 (3): 471–90.
Selin, Henrik, and Stacy D. VanDeveer. 2021. “Climate Change Politics and Policy in the United States: Forward, Reverse and Through the Looking Glass.” In Climate Governance Across the Globe: Pioneers, Leaders and Followers, edited by Rüdiger Wurzel, Mikael Skou Andersen, and Paul Tobin, 123–41. Abingdon, OX [u.a.]: Routledge.
Shanahan, Elizabeth A., Michael D. Jones, and Mark K. McBeth. 2011. “Policy Narratives and Policy Processes.” Policy Studies Journal 39 (3): 535–61. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2011.00420.x.
Sneed, Annie. 2016. “Why Automakers Keep Beating Government Standards.” Scientific American. 2016. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-automakers-keep-beating-government-standards/.
Sussman, Glen, and Byron W. Daynes. 2013. US Politics and Climate Change: Science Confronts Policy. Boulder, CO [u.a.]: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Thompson, Frank, Kenneth Wong, and Barry Rabe. 2020. Trump, the Administrative Presidency, and Federalism. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
Tomain, Joseph. 2017. Clean Power Politics: The Democratization of Energy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
UNFCCC. 2016. “United States of America, Nationally Determined Contribution (Archived First Version).” https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/NDC/2022-06/U.S.A.%20First%20NDC%20Submission.pdf.
———. 2021. “United States of America: Nationally Determined Contribution. Reducing Greenhouse Gases in the United States: A 2030 Emissions Target.” https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/NDC/2022-06/United%20States%20NDC%20April%2021%202021%20Final.pdf.
Vandeweerdt, Clara, Bart Kerremans, and Avery Cohn. 2016. “Climate Voting in the US Congress: The Power of Public Concern.” Environmental Politics 25 (2): 268–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2016.1116651.
Vezirgiannidou, Sevasti-Eleni. 2013. “Climate and Energy Policy in the United States: The Battle of Ideas.” Environmental Politics 22 (4): 593–609. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2013.806632.
Vogel, David. 1995. Trading Up: Consumer and Environmental Regulation in a Global Economy. Cambridge, MA [u.a.]: Harvard University Press.
Vogel, David, and Johan F. M. Swinnen, eds. 2011. Transatlantic Regulatory Cooperation: The Shifting Roles of the EU, the US and California. Cheltenham and Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.
Weathers, Melinda R., and Brenden E. Kendall. 2016. “Developments in the Framing of Climate Change as a Public Health Issue in US Newspapers.” Environmental Communication 10 (5): 593–611. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2015.1050436.
Weibust, Inger, and James Meadowcroft, eds. 2014. Multilevel Environmental Governance: Managing Water and Climate Change in Europe and North America. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
White House. 2013. “Remarks by the President on Climate Change, Georgetown University.” Whitehouse.Gov. 2013. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2013/06/25/remarks-president-climate-change.
———. 2014a. “Remarks by the President at U.N. Climate Change Summit.” Whitehouse.Gov. 2014a. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2014a/09/23/remarks-president-un-climate-change-summit.
———. 2014b. “U.S.-China Joint Announcement on Climate Change.” https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2014b/11/11/us-china-joint-announcement-climate-change.
———. 2017. “Statement by President Trump on the Paris Climate Accord—The White House.” 2017. https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/statement-president-trump-paris-climate-accord/.
———. 2021. “President Biden’s Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.” Washington, DC. https://www.whitehouse.gov/bipartisan-infrastructure-law/.
———. 2015a. “Remarks by President Obama at the First Session of COP21.” Whitehouse.Gov. 2015a. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2015a/11/30/remarks-president-obama-first-session-cop21.
———. 2015b. “Remarks by the President in Announcing the Clean Power Plan.” https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2015b/08/03/remarks-president-announcing-clean-power-plan.
———. 2015c. “Statement by the President on the Paris Climate Agreement.” Whitehouse.Gov. 2015c. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2015c/12/12/statement-president-paris-climate-agreement.
Ye, Jason. 2014. “Comparison of Carbon Pricing Proposals in the 113th Congress.” Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, Washington, DC. https://www.c2es.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/113th-congress-carbon-pricing-proposals.pdf.
———. 2018. “Carbon Pricing Proposals in the 115th Congress.” Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, Washington, DC. https://www.c2es.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/comparison-of-carbon-pricing-proposals-in-the-115th-congress.pdf.
———. 2020. “Carbon Pricing Proposals in the 116th Congress.” Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, Washington, DC. https://www.c2es.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/carbon-pricing-proposals-in-the-116th-congress.pdf.
Zevin, Avi. 2018. “Current Developments: North America.” Carbon & Climate Law Review, no. 3: 274–77.
———. 2019. “Current Developments: North America.” Carbon & Climate Law Review 3: 223–27.
Zhang, Yong-Xiang, Qing-Chen Chao, Qiu-Hong Zheng, and Huang Lei. 2017. “The Withdrawal of the U.S. from the Paris Agreement and Its Impact on Global Climate Change Governance.” Advances in Climate Change Research, no. 8: 213–19.
Zhou, Jack. 2016. “Boomerangs Versus Javelins: How Polarization Constrains Communication on Climate Change.” Environmental Politics 25 (5): 788–811. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2016.1166602.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Wendler, F. (2022). US Climate Politics Since the Paris Agreement. In: Framing Climate Change in the EU and US After the Paris Agreement. Palgrave Studies in European Union Politics. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04059-7_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04059-7_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-04058-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-04059-7
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)