Understanding Climate Change: Causes, Effects, And Mitigation Strategies

The Causes and Effects of Climate Change

Climate change that is widely known as global warming is the increase in the average temperatures on the surface of the earth. There is an overwhelming scientific study consensus that maintains climate change is caused by primarily fossil fuel use by humans which then produces carbon dioxide into the air as well as other greenhouse gases (While, Jonas, and Gibbs, 2010, p. 83). When these gases trap much heat within the earth’s atmosphere, they cause a lot of effects on the ecosystem such as the rise of sea levels, weather events that are quite severe and drought that makes the land susceptible to wildfire. Wildfires threaten homes, lives and habitats while the heat waves cause human deaths and similar consequences. Heat causes the polar ice caps to melt down contributing to greater damages by storm. The storms which are stronger and much frequent cause warm temperatures of the ocean. There is increase rainfall especially during the weather events that are severe cause damage and flooding (Bocken, et al. 2014, p. 49). This calls for urgent action against carbon emission by the various stakeholders so that climate change is mitigated before it is too late to do anything. Research is needed to identify alternative sources of energy and strategies to reduce carbon emissions.     

Stakeholder theory requires that all the stakeholders need to take the issue of climate change seriously and embark on strategies that are meant to mitigate the problem. This involves such ways as integrating sustainable businesses. For instance, accountants should be on the fore front in making reports that concern the issue and help urge the relevant stakeholders to support ways that mitigate it (Haszeldine, 2009, p. 1649). Managers should help put into practice such strategies to reduce carbon emission and ensure that the business implements them. All the businesses should have regulators of carbon emission who would tell the amount being emitted and help set targets for reducing emissions. The general public should avoid practices such as dumbing garbage or burning trash that increases carbon in the atmosphere. Many academic journal articles and newspapers need to carry news and reports on the issue and urge the readers on the need for positive practices that help solve the problem (Wei, et al. 2013, p. 27). Researchers need to put their findings in writing so that all the people can read and implement on the solutions to the issue.   

Most scholars who address the issue of impacts of energy tend to focus on the positive effects only but do not find out the outcomes of treaties that solve the problem of climate change. Previous research fails to look for the reason why there has been increased variability on how the stakeholders attain the targets they set towards the mitigation of the issue (Druckman, et al. 2011, p. 3579). Meanwhile, it is hard to argue that energy uses are the main causes of climate change. There are many cases when energy is used as an economic source to obtain other income objectives. Moreover, some countries do not pursue policies, which favor the energy sector. This paper is of the view that, energy geopolitics depends on interests of the state, international oil companies and other businesses, environmentalists, and issues to do with global warming. Additionally, the paper holds that norm and practices within states determine the geopolitics as much as energy resources. As a result, inter-state relationships can either strengthen or weaken international energy laws like the Paris agreement depending on the general relationship between the states (Dietz, 2009, p. 18454). In this case the study aims at filing this gap so that the reasons for the identified variability in reaching the set standards could be noted and recommendations given.  

Stakeholder Involvement in Mitigating Climate Change

During the international conventions and agreements such as the Paris and the Kyoto treaties, nations normally show large participation interest but when it comes to the implementation of part of their NDCs (nationally determined contributions), they relax; others withdraw after some time while many of those who remain have their carbon production increased rather than reducing. The study intends to evaluate some of the reasons that make these nations fail to meet the set targets and possible solutions to the problem (Wei, et al. 2013, p. 27). At the same time the nations that are meant to act as leaders towards the solution of climatic change, withdraw instead of leading by example. A country like the US has been withdrawing from treaties, related to climatic change including the most recent one of Paris. It is expected that it being one of the greatest and influential nations of the world, it should on the forefront on such matters that encourage the wellbeing of the world. The US has been depicted as the second biggest producer of carbon and related gases that bring about the issue of global warming after China (Bocken, et al. 2014, p. 49).  In this case, it is expected to prove to the world that it has a commitment towards the reduction of carbon emission and influence others to do so.

With increased emission of carbon and other greenhouse gases as well as the subsequent global warming that leads to change in climate and other effects on the globe, it calls for urgent action towards the mitigation of these emissions. Various agreements have called upon the different nations that act as key stakeholders to help come up with strategies and integrate them in their economic productions to achieve the set goals and objectives (Cui, et al.  2014, p. 1049). As a result, there has been a requirement to the different companies within countries to integrate in their production processes, sustainable technologies towards the achievement of a green economy (Dietz, 2009, p. 18454). However, some companies have achieved greater reductions in carbon as compared to others. There are various reasons associated to the varied achievements among different companies. Overemphasis on economic growth at the expense of carbon emissions is a common phenomenon to many firms (Wei, et al. 2013, p. 27).

From the analysis, it is clear enough that companies fail to achieve carbon reduction targets for varied reasons that range from overemphasis on economic growth at the expense of carbon emissions, lack of the data and reporting in relation to carbon emissions and its effects, not able to know where to begin and how to integrate the climate change mitigation plan in their operations, lack of stakeholder support, fear of failure, resource budget issues, to  the lack of internal alignment for carbon reduction (Druckman, et al. 2011, p. 3579). Many international treaties that get signed end up being flops as many nations end up withdrawing, or are unable to meet the standards that they set as targets of mitigating the carbon and GHG emissions that lead to climate change.

The key theoretical constructs in the study include carbon emission control and climate change mitigation. Climate change is the dependent variable with mitigation or control as the construct. I will operationalize it with the measure since it is the main target operational achievement among the various companies (Haszeldine, 2009, p. 1649). Carbon reduction Strategy integration for climate change mitigation is the independent variable with incentive for management as the construct. The measure will be operationalized since it determines the rate at which climate change mitigation would be achieved. The reduction of carbon gas emission helps in the mitigation of climate change. Since the levels of carbon emission determine the taking place of climate change, its reduction helps control the problem of climate change which is the direct variable in the study (Bocken, et al. 2014, p. 49). The other variable to be considered in the theoretical model includes climate change risk that has been applied as the mediating variable between the direct and indirect variables. The advantages of previous research are that it forms a base for other studies that aim at identifying solutions that the other studies have not solved. It also acts as reference point for new studies taking place so that they try and fill the gap that is left unsolved. The main disadvantage is that previous studies do not help solve the issue at hand which is climate change since they do not offer tangible recommendations into what should be done by the stakeholders to achieve set targets and help mitigate climate change.      

The study hypothesis includes; there is a direct relationship between climate change mitigation strategy integration and climate change (Keith, 2009, p. 1654). 

Proxy Measures for Theoretical Constructs

References

Bocken, N.M., Short, S.W., Rana, P. and Evans, S., 2014. A literature and practice review to develop sustainable business model archetypes. Journal of cleaner production, 65, pp.42-56.

Cui, L.B., Fan, Y., Zhu, L. and Bi, Q.H., 2014. How will the emissions trading scheme save cost for achieving China’s 2020 carbon intensity reduction target?. Applied Energy, 136, pp.1043-1052.                                                        

Dietz, T., Gardner, G.T., Gilligan, J., Stern, P.C. and Vandenbergh, M.P., 2009. Household actions can provide a behavioral wedge to rapidly reduce US carbon emissions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(44), pp.18452-18456.

Druckman, A., Chitnis, M., Sorrell, S. and Jackson, T., 2011. Missing carbon reductions? Exploring rebound and backfire effects in UK households. Energy Policy, 39(6), pp.3572-3581.

Haszeldine, R.S., 2009. Carbon capture and storage: how green can black be?. Science, 325(5948), pp.1647-1652.

Keith, D.W., 2009. Why capture CO2 from the atmosphere?. Science, 325(5948), pp.1654-1655.

Wei, M., Nelson, J.H., Greenblatt, J.B., Mileva, A., Johnston, J., Ting, M., Yang, C., Jones, C., McMahon, J.E. and Kammen, D.M., 2013. Deep carbon reductions in California require electrification and integration across economic sectors. Environmental Research Letters, 8(1), p.014038.

While, A., Jonas, A.E. and Gibbs, D., 2010. From sustainable development to carbon control: eco?state restructuring and the politics of urban and regional development. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 35(1), pp.76-93.

Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:

Turnitin Report

Formatting

Title Page

Citation

Outline

Place an Order