The Political Scene | The New Yorker Episode: Negotiating Climate Change Date: December 5, 2014

Episode Overview

In this episode, host Dorothy Wickenden leads a nuanced discussion with Elizabeth Kolbert (New Yorker staff writer) and Robert Stavins (director of the Environmental Economics Program at Harvard Kennedy School) on the challenges of global climate negotiations. The conversation centers on outcomes and prospects from major climate summits, especially in the wake of the recent U.S.–China climate agreement and the ongoing United Nations conference in Lima, Peru. The guests analyze international climate policy, national achievements and setbacks, and the political and economic obstacles to meaningful action—offering both a sober assessment and cautious optimism regarding progress.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Shift in International Climate Negotiations

(03:01 – 05:00)

• Division of Countries & Emissions Coverage:
  • The world has long been split between industrialized (Annex I) and developing nations. Developed countries’ emissions are now flat or declining, while developing countries, including China and India, drive emissions growth.
  • The Kyoto Protocol’s second period covered only 14% of global emissions; newer frameworks, notably following the recent U.S.–China accord, could soon cover over 40%, marking substantial step forward.
  • Quote:
    “The current structure under the second commitment period of the Kyoto protocol covers only 14% of global emissions. ... We've gone from 14% being covered to more than 40% being covered.”
    — Robert Stavins (04:00)

2. Assessing the U.S.–China Climate Agreement

(04:12 – 06:27)

• Short-Term vs. Long-Term Impact:
  • Critics argue the accord won’t cut CO₂ soon; Stavins and Kolbert counter that it’s a critical foundation for future progress.
  • Quote:
    “It’s terribly misleading to look at the short term. ... We’ve got the right foundation for meaningful steps going forward, and we didn’t have that before.”
    — Robert Stavins (04:22)
  • Kolbert points out the move's political significance in the U.S. and the risk that voluntary commitments may be insufficient or unrealized.
  • Quote:
    “Unfortunately, as with all climate talks, the proof is going to be in the pudding. ... If this next round is just voluntary commitments, then we have to see whether anyone lives up to them.”
    — Elizabeth Kolbert (05:01)

3. U.S. Domestic Climate Progress and Political Constraints

(06:27 – 08:59)

• U.S. Policy Achievements:
  • Increased vehicle fuel efficiency standards and the Clean Power Plan are noted as significant contributions but subject to legal and political instability.
  • Quote:
    “This administration ... has done as much as it can possibly do on the climate change front given the polarization in the Congress.”
    — Robert Stavins (06:41)
  • Kolbert raises doubts about whether the U.S. can fulfill even voluntary reduction pledges, given congressional resistance and legal challenges to EPA regulations.
  • Quote:
    “Can you really start making real progress on this issue if you don’t have buy-in from Congress, which is essentially ... the buy-in from the American people?”
    — Elizabeth Kolbert (07:39)

4. Public Opinion and Political Dynamics

(09:33 – 10:54)

• Changing Views but Limited Political Pressure:
  • Public acceptance of climate change is rising, and political discourse has shifted from denial to debate over solutions and costs.
  • Quote:
    “We’re seeing something different now, actually ... it is a legitimate problem. And now the discussion is more on, well, what’s the effective path forward.”
    — Robert Stavins (09:45)

5. Economic Consensus on Climate Action

(10:54 – 12:19)

• Mainstream Economists’ View:
  • General support for internalizing the ‘social cost of carbon’—estimated at $40/ton—to account for economic damages and guide policy (taxes, cap-and-trade, etc.).
  • Acknowledgement that risks of catastrophic climate feedbacks are now a part of economic analysis.
  • Quote:
    “There’s also ... an emerging consensus ... that what we need to worry about is not just what the expectation is ... but what if it turns out there are positive feedback loops ... catastrophic events. ... That’s also now mainstream thinking from the economics community.”
    — Robert Stavins (11:08)

6. Looking Ahead: The Lima Summit and Paris Agreement

(12:19 – 13:05)

• Expectations for Lima:

  • Lima is a stepping stone toward the 2015 Paris Agreement, which should set binding frameworks for monitoring and accountability.
  • Quote:
    “What I hope to see come out of this is going to be the building blocks of the 2015 Paris Agreement that combines nationally determined contributions with some meaningful monitoring, reporting, verification and comparison.”
    — Robert Stavins (12:25)

• European Perspective & Cautious Optimism:

  • Kolbert, speaking from Europe, notes European disappointment, as their ambitious actions have not been matched globally.
  • Stresses the irreversible nature of climate damage: “...unfortunately, while there are a lot of good things to point to ... the bottom line is when you actually look at the numbers which are all that count, they’re not that hopeful.”
    — Elizabeth Kolbert (13:05)
  • Balances credit for recent breakthroughs with realism about the seriousness and permanence of the challenge.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Robert Stavins on progress since Kyoto:
  “For many years ... the countries of the world were divided into two groups ... What’s happened now is ... from 14% [of emissions] being covered, to more than 40%...” (03:01)
• Elizabeth Kolbert on voluntary action:
  “If this next round is just voluntary commitments, then we have to see whether anyone lives up to them.” (05:01)
• Dorothy Wickenden on the U.S. role:
  “Isn’t it somewhat appalling, Rob, that after China, America is still the world’s second biggest polluter?” (06:27)
• Stavins on U.S. limits:
  “This administration ... has done as much as it can possibly do on the climate change front given the polarization in the Congress.” (06:41)
• Kolbert on public and congressional buy-in:
  “Can you really start making real progress on this issue if you don’t have buy-in from Congress, which is essentially ... the buy-in from the American people?” (07:39)
• Stavins on Republican rhetoric:
  “For quite a long time it was deniers or climate skepticism ... now ... it is a legitimate problem.” (09:45)
• Kolbert on irreversible impacts:
  “When you’re talking about climate change, you’re talking about irreversible effects. ... even if we live up to these commitments. So it’s a very, very mixed picture.” (13:05)

Timestamps for Important Segments

• 01:36–02:47: Introduction to the episode and guests
• 03:01–04:12: Stavins explains evolution of international climate agreements
• 04:12–06:27: Debating the effectiveness of the U.S.–China climate agreement
• 06:27–08:59: U.S. policy advances and political/legal challenges
• 09:33–10:54: Shifts in American public and political attitudes
• 10:54–12:19: Economic perspectives on climate action
• 12:19–13:05: Outlook for Lima and the path to the Paris agreement
• 13:05–14:41: European disappointment and overall risks/irreversibility

Final Thoughts

The episode offers a thorough, candid analysis of both advances and entrenched obstacles in international and U.S. climate policy. While panelists acknowledge significant recent diplomatic achievements and a shift in global participation, they remain clear-eyed about the challenges posed by voluntary commitments, political gridlock, and the creeping, irreversible nature of climate change. Actionable optimism is tempered by a sobering recognition of what is at stake.

For listeners seeking a compact yet sophisticated discussion of climate diplomacy’s state circa 2014, this episode delivers insight, context, and the lived ambiguities at play in global environmental politics.