The future of climate action: Policy under a Biden presidency
The future of climate action: Policy under a Biden presidency
WRITTEN BY CHARMI MEHTA
6 January 2021
As we watched the deeply polarised US Presidential elections closely, liberals across the world hoped for a win — for healthcare, immigration, and climate policy. President Donald Trump’s administration has faced criticism owing to his disregard for the roles and responsibilities that the US assumed in a post-USSR unipolar world. Six months into office, he announced his decision to quit the 2015 Paris Agreement. This, along with consistent cuts in environmental funding, decelerated global momentum that was so painstakingly built, putting at risk the political mileage that climate action had gathered after two decades of inertia.
One of the key expectations from the Biden-Harris administration is that it will re-engage in the international arena and re-embrace multilateralism, moving away from Trump’s protectionist policies. The key focus areas of their election campaign were COVID-19 and climate issues. The Biden-Sanders unity task force action plan for America 2020 embodies the principles of equity, empathy and engagement as it outlines plans for building a clean energy economy that preserves the democracy, demography and diversity of the country. It promises a reversal of the Trump-era concessions that were granted to oil and coal conglomerates, along with restoring National Park land that was extended for development. Considering the string of devastating climate-related calamities that the US has witnessed over the last four years, 68 per cent of Americans felt climate change was now a serious problem. This election can, in many ways, be interpreted as a mandate to act on climate change.
The time is opportune for the US to rebuild its goodwill by integrating climate diplomacy within the larger umbrella of foreign policy outreach. We saw a glimpse of this in 2016 during Obama’s China visit when the two largest carbon-emitting nations pledged emission cuts and financial contributions post-Paris.
The world is at a point where it needs another breakthrough — much like Paris 2015. Political and personal capital invested by a few leaders and organisations brought member states to the negotiating table to formulate a consensus-driven, progressive and dynamic agreement. Based on the principles of equity, it recognises that though members have a common motivation to act, they must accept their differentiated responsibilities and capabilities to be able to act, owing to historical differences in economic growth. The Agreement aims to hold the increase in global average temperatures to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels (pursuing efforts to limit the rise to 1.5°C) above pre-industrial levels.
All eyes on the United States
Climate financing schemes promised by the US have been ambiguous. It faces a mighty task domestically — as the world’s second-largest carbon emitter, its 2015 INDC (Intended Nationally Determined Contributions) target of reducing emissions by 26-28 per cent below 2005-levels by 2025 is going to need revision due to the support that the government extended to the domestic oil industry over the last four years. Biden has clearly stated that he intends to turn the US into a net-zero emissions country by 2050 which, as per projections, can contribute to reducing the global temperature rise by 0.1°C. This places immense responsibility on the country to act on its energy choices. However, he has also clarified that while the US will transition away from oil, he does not plan to ban hydraulic fracturing (fracking) entirely (which employs 7.5 million people).
Political, economic, legal and diplomatic institutions associated with climate change will determine how the Biden administration can reform the US' role in this area of international policy. Their $2 trillion stimulus and the plan to create 2 million new green jobs — a twin strategy to fight climate change and aid economic revival — will unfold in the coming months. The incoming administration will need to identify areas of bipartisan convergence on a subject on which the two parties have remained divided for decades.
The partisan divide on climate change also signals the need for identifying areas of action that can be brought into force swiftly. The Biden-Sanders unity task force, headed by newly appointed climate envoy and former Secretary of State John Kerry and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), outlines specific policy initiatives that the administration can implement without legislative approval. This includes extensive plans by the Democratic Party to expand labour programmes, federally-fund infrastructure growth and transform the country’s transportation system. It undertakes responsibility for incentivising the adoption of electric / low-pollution / net-zero emission vehicles while also proposing the installation of 50,000 charging stations across the country. The document seeks to establish the Party’s progressive stand. However, it falls short in its lack of quantifiable promises. It does not pledge any monetary allocations to schemes nor does it outline any regulatory / executive or legislative hindrances these plans might face — both of which are often indicators of intent and action on policy initiatives.
Image credit: Christopher Michel/Flickr.
A thorough reading of the US Government’s budget allocations also gives us deeper insight into its policy priorities. The data presented here is from Trump’s tenure — when any form of climate action was outrightly dismissed. This shows us how even robust political systems and mature democracies such as the US are prone to fiscal capture by the administration in charge. This should serve as a cautionary tale — the institutionalisation of finance (in the form of established funds and institutions disbursing them) must become a reality if climate action is to witness longevity (similar to infrastructure finance). The International Affairs Budget (a budget head that consolidates international development assistance) has a 1 per cent rise from FY2019 to FY2020. The Economic Support Fund (ESF) and Development Assistance (DA) are the two major heads under which development initiatives are financed. The ESF saw a major cut but the Assistance to Europe, Eurasia, and Central Asia (AEECA) and the USAID-OE has seen a minor increment. Furthermore, the request to form the new State Department-led Economic Support and Development Fund (ESDF) to coordinate its international development finance initiatives, has been rejected for the third time.
Additionally, while Congress sanctioned $300 million for a new ‘Countering Chinese Influence Fund’, it cut the $6.4 million annual contribution to the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)/UNFCCC for FY2019. If the world is to remain on track to achieve our targets then policy must reflect promises made.
For now, Biden has promised to re-enter the Paris Agreement, which is a necessity but in no way adequate. As of 2020, the world is steadily on the pathway to limiting temperature rise to 2.9°C, which is 0.7°C below the 3.6°C estimate agreed during Paris 2015 (Climate Action Tracker). This achievement (despite the withdrawal of the US and Russia) is due to the remarkable progress made by other nations. Since Biden is expected to be a one-term president, efforts must be made to build bipartisan support on this matter to avoid a future walkout and fiscal/regulatory capture. In fact, the time is opportune for the US to rebuild its goodwill by integrating climate diplomacy within the larger umbrella of foreign policy outreach.
We saw a glimpse of this in 2016 during Obama’s China visit when the two largest carbon-emitting nations pledged emission cuts and financial contributions post-Paris. Much has changed since then — several countries such as Australia, Saudi Arabia and Turkey, have followed the US in slowing down their environmental progress, with their active participation now in doubt. Biden must therefore aim to forge stronger ties and global alliances if he hopes to keep the pledges and progress made at Paris alive.
Against the clock
Developing countries are setting ambitious targets to cut back greenhouse gases (GHGs) and fossil-based energy, but lack necessary financial resources to achieve these targets. So far 127 countries (accounting for around 63 per cent of global emissions) have made net-zero emissions announcements, which is expected to limit the prospective rise in global temperatures to 2.1°C. This incorporates the US’ commitments, as per Biden’s ‘carbon neutrality by 2050’ pledge (Biden & Sanders, 2020); without this, it would be 126 countries contributing to 51 per cent of global emissions, taking the rise to 2.24°C. This also includes China, who very recently announced a 2060 target to achieve net-zero emissions.
One major player yet to formalise its next set of targets is India, which is set to achieve most of its 2015 targets and is expected to accelerate its action plans, with investments in renewable energy and electric vehicle assets and infrastructure, as suggested in their (2020-21) National Budget documents. Indian Railways have already announced a net-zero emissions target for 2030, with the country also looking to achieve a 40 per cent share for renewable energy in its electricity mix by 2030.
Joe Biden’s win has renewed confidence in climate negotiations, giving the Paris Agreement a new lease of life and the rest of the world must take advantage of this. Coordinated climate alliances, regional action plans and consensus-driven policy agreements can infuse fresh energy and promote inclusionary policy-making. Aligning economic development with climate objectives is no longer a moral choice but a financially sound one, as technological advances in renewable energy have shown us.
Much of our success in meeting our temperature goals will depend on the next decade — the pledges made, committed action, the delivery of finance and most importantly, the political will garnered for all action to be formidable and earnest. Funds, functionaries, and forecasting models will be crucial in our attempts to limit global warming this century.
DISCLAIMER: All views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily represent that of the 9DASHLINE.com platform.
Author biography
Charmi Mehta is a Researcher with the Finance Research Group, Mumbai. She has a Masters in Public Policy from the National Law School of India University and is an Editorial Assistant at 9DASHLINE. Image credit: Joe Biden/Flickr.