Currently there is no universal agreement on the degree, cause, or the severity of climate change. There is, however, a significant agreement on the rise of global emissions due to the quantitative aspects of measures and their contribution to these changes. Regional industries are all highly impacted by climatological change or are subject to likely regulatory or policy changes. Local companies, for example, may incur costs which help them comply with the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions in mitigating climate change.
Policy makers and regulators make value judgements on how to react to this data by designing policies and regulations that affect aggregate behavior and responses. In Kansas City, MO, there is no difference. In 2006, the Mayor of Kansas City, Mark Funkhouser worked on a Climate Protection Plan, pledged as part of the U.S. Conference of Mayors Climate Protection Center under the Environmental Management Commission. A committee of eleven community leaders was appointed to develop the Climate Protection Plan to guide these urban efforts in Kansas City, saving millions of taxpayer dollars while boosting real estate values and of course “creating jobs.” But how pragmatic are these approaches?
Sectoral and industry leaders have to take information from both climatologists and policy makers and turn it into corporate practice or key public milestones. The relationship between these three groups is symbiotic – there is a necessary give and take of information and data to improve the process of policy making and implementation, and this may have been lacking in the case of Kansas City. This exchange should theoretically lead to improved understanding of all facets of decision-making processes for all three groups of climate change constituents.
Further research at the city level should also aim to bring academic scholars, policy makers, and industry leaders to discuss the state of climate policy, advance the policy-making agendas at the state and regional levels, and design appropriate response at the industry and company levels. This will be crucial for Kansas City, since both the Greater Kansas City Chamber of Commerce and City of Kansas City have passed complementary resolutions to address climate change, a 180 member goal to reduce emissions by 30% by 2020. Despite best efforts to reduce emissions, recent studies have shown that emissions are still on the rise and will be at an all-time high by 2020.
So the issue begs the question: Should one group, such as the City or County, take a more aggressive approach to reducing emissions? Does it make sense to put a cap on emissions, or is it already too late? Does a cap put a negative effect on regional economic development, and hence on job creation and financial sustainability?
Credits: Data linked to sources. Images by Nathan Zoschke. Graphs by Sunny Sanwar.