Understanding the Role of Science in Policy

Today, I – alongside nearly 40 other academics – announced our support for natural climate solutions (NCS) as an essential part of the path to net zero. In a letter to the U.N.’s Article 6.4 Supervisory Body and the Science Based Targets initiative, we highlight why climate policy must emphasize durability and scalability to deliver effective, large-scale action. NCS like reforestation, peatland protection, and cropland soil conservation, offer gigaton-scale mitigation potential today, while also delivering biodiversity, water, and community co-benefits. Excluding NCS risks sidelining some of the most immediately available and impactful climate tools. Learn more about the importance of durability and how NCS effectively scale climate action here: https://lnkd.in/gAV4MiZ4 To add your name as a scientist, fill out this form: https://lnkd.in/gRReNvsv Onward with science and nature. #ClimateAction #NetZero #NaturalClimateSolutions #Sustainability #ScienceBasedTargets naturebase.org

I'm delighted to announce the release of the Flagship Report of the Global Climate Policy Project at Harvard and MIT Working Group on Climate Coalitions on "Building a Climate Coalition: Aligning Carbon Pricing, Trade, and Development." We build on two important facts: 💡 Over 80% of emissions in the steel, cement, aluminum and fertilizers industries are _already_ covered by existing or planned carbon pricing systems. 💡 These industries account for over 20% of global carbon emissions. Our analysis shows that:   ✅ A climate coalition could cut emissions 7x more than current policies — equal to Canada’s annual emissions. ✅ It could raise nearly $200 billion per year in revenues, mostly from domestic carbon pricing. ✅ Price impacts on key materials would be modest, with minimal consumer effects. ✅ A graduated approach would allow low- and middle-income countries to join fairly, backed by technology transfer, finance, and capacity-building.   With #COP30 in Brazil on the horizon — and Brazil making this a signature initiative — the moment is ripe for countries to move from fragmented carbon border adjustments to a cooperative framework that advances climate, trade, and development together.   Read the full report here (same doc in 2 places):   ➡️ https://ceepr.link/3VmgC7g ➡️ https://lnkd.in/e6bhEhTR   I'm honored to partner with the phenomenal working group: Joseph Aldy, Candido Bracher, Vaibhav Chaturvedi, Kimberly Clausing, Christian Gollier, Frank Jotzo, Marcelo Medeiros, Athiphat Muthitacheroen, Axel Ockenfels, Mari Elka Pangestu, Daouda Sembene, PhD, E. Somanathan, Dustin Tingley, Jennifer Winter. And special thanks to the report team, led by Arathi Rao including Ruchee Bhatta, Kevin Hsu, Anna Neumann, Fanming Meng, Marilyn Pereboom and Naomi Shimberg who made this all happen. Thanks especially to the leadership of Ambassador André Aranha Corrêa do Lago, Finance Minister Fernando Haddad and his team led by Rafael Dubeux, including Cristina Reis and Jose Pedro Nevors for putting this proposal - which could meaningfully cut emissions and raise resources for adaptation and mitigation - on the agenda heading into #COP30. #ClimateAction #CarbonPricing #Trade #COP30 #ClimateCoalition

Behaviour change is often framed as a matter of individual choice: give people better information, the right financial incentive, or a small push in the right direction, and change will follow. But many climate-relevant behaviours do not work like that. They are shaped by the broader systems in which people are embedded. Take home insulation, for example. Whether people insulate depends not only on motivation or costs, but also on a much wider set of conditions, including the availability of skilled installers, the stability of government policy, the complexity of administrative procedures, the availability of trusted advice, and the experiences and expectations of others around them. These factors do not operate in isolation. They interact in ways that can either support change or generate friction that reinforces the status quo. This is where a systems perspective is especially useful. Instead of locating behaviour change primarily at the level of the individual, it asks how personal, social, and structural factors interact to make certain behaviours easier or harder. This has implications for policy: the most impactful interventions are unlikely to be isolated campaigns or one-off incentives, but efforts to change the structures that shape behaviour. In a recent project at SEVEN - University of Amsterdam, commissioned by the Ministry for Climate Policy and Green Growth, we applied this systems perspective to two important challenges in the Netherlands: increasing home insulation to the standard required for gas-free heating and shifting electricity use away from peak hours. Across three group model-building sessions, we brought together stakeholders from policy, science, civil society, and practice to jointly map the structures underlying these behaviours. We then identified feedback loops that could accelerate or hinder progress, and distilled a set of policy recommendations with high leverage. This was a very rewarding and insightful collaboration, and I especially enjoyed working closely with Sezin Ekinci and Ted Jan Post. If you are interested, you can find a short summary of our work and the full report here: https://lnkd.in/eBDUiuZ9

What if climate change is quietly eroding one of the most fundamental determinants of health, our social connections? A new review article in Nature Health, led by my colleague Samia Akhter-Khan, Ph.D., synthesizes growing evidence that climate change is deeply intertwined with social connection and loneliness. Extreme weather events, environmental degradation, and displacement do not act only as physical stressors. They disrupt social infrastructures, fragmenting relationships, communities, and support systems. The review shows that social isolation is not just a consequence of climate change. It is a pathway through which climate-related exposures translate into worse mental and physical health outcomes. From an Eco-Affective Health perspective, this is a critical shift. Mental health is not only environmentally exposed. It is socially mediated within environmental systems. Climate change may function as an eco-affective disruptor, altering how individuals relate to others, to place, and to collective life. Loneliness, in this context, is not merely a psychological state. It is a systemic signal of socio-environmental breakdown. But the paper also highlights something equally important: Social connection is not only vulnerable. It is protective. Strengthening social ties, community infrastructures, and collective engagement may be one of the most powerful, and overlooked, climate resilience strategies. This is not just about mental health. It is about how societies adapt, organize, and survive under environmental pressure. This is not alarmism. It is systems science. Article link: https://lnkd.in/dC2VQcqv Also, follow our work at ewahlab.com #EWAHLab #EcoAffectiveHealth #ClimateMentalHealth #PlanetaryHealth #SocialConnection #Loneliness #ClimateChange #WellbeingScience #EnvironmentalPsychology #GlobalMentalHealth

When faced with new policies, firms must decide whether to "wait and see" or invest in new #technologies and processes to comply. But how can companies make informed decisions when #policy implementation is uncertain? My latest research with Eun-Hee Kim and Maggie Zhou offers insights! We found that firms can gauge policy implementation commitment by analyzing communication exchanges between regulatory agencies and policymakers. Costlier agency communication signals stronger future policy implementation, encouraging firms to invest in long-term technologies. Empirically, we delved into the early years of the European Union's Emissions Trading Scheme (EU-ETS), a policy aimed at reducing #greenhouse gas emissions. We examined the European electric power investments in #renewable energy facilities (2004-2009) in response to country-level agency communications to the EU Commission. During this period, #carbon allowances were freely given away, #emission caps were not binding, and it was unclear whether country agencies would strictly implement the #EU-ETS. These, combined with the plunging price of carbon during the 2007–2009 financial crisis, cast doubt on any concrete, short-term return on emissions-reducing investments. Read our full paper to learn how firms can strategically respond to policy implementation uncertainty. https://lnkd.in/guzzc7Fz #policyuncertainty #strategy #sustainability #energy #regulation USC Marshall School of Business

"Evidence is of irreplaceable value to policymaking. However, holding regulatory action to too high an evidentiary standard can lead to systematic neglect of certain risks. In historical policy debates (e.g., over tobacco ca. 1965 and fossil fuels ca. 1985) "evidence-based policy" rhetoric is also a well-precedented strategy to downplay the urgency of action, delay regulation, and protect industry interests. Here, we argue that if the goal is evidence-based AI policy, the first regulatory objective must be to actively facilitate the process of identifying, studying, and deliberating about AI risks. We discuss a set of 15 regulatory goals to facilitate this and show that Brazil, Canada, China, the EU, South Korea, the UK, and the USA all have substantial opportunities to adopt further evidence-seeking policies." A provocative paper, filled with interesting evidence and insights, from Stephen Casper, David Krueger, Dylan Hadfield-Menell

A student recently commented to me that the news cycle feels dominated with climate pessimism. But I disagreed. As I thought more about it, I realized that it is more important than ever to remain resilient and to fill our own news cycle with climate optimism. Everyday I try to spend time honoring the accomplishments and contributions of individuals actively driving sustainability initiatives for communities worldwide. I thought I would add some climate optimism to your feed today! ⭐ Dr. Ayana Elizabeth Johnson, Founder of Urban Ocean Lab, is a marine biologist and policy expert working at the intersection of conservation and social justice. ⭐ Vanessa Nakate, a climate justice activist from Uganda, is committed to amplifying the voices of African activists and raising awareness about the impact of climate change on the continent. ⭐ Catherine Coleman Flowers, a MacArthur Genius Grant recipient, is a leading environmental justice advocate and author, working to address sanitation and water issues in marginalized communities. ⭐ Dr. Dorceta E Taylor, an environmental sociologist, is a leading scholar on environmental justice, sustainability, and diversity in the environmental movement.    These leaders exemplify the importance of cultivating a global workforce with green skills and the powerful role that women play in this field. From their research, speeches, podcasts, articles, and so much more, their work has unlocked insights that are changing the world.     #SustainabilityLeaders #Inspiration

The biggest problem with today’s physical climate risk models isn’t the hazard data or climate variables, it’s how buildings are treated. In many models, building vulnerability is an afterthought, if it’s considered at all. Why? Because the current generation of climate risk tools relies on loss models originally developed for the insurance industry or publicly available resources like FEMA’s HAZUS. These models use top-down historical claims data, such as NFIP claims, and are built for portfolio-level or regional loss estimation, not for understanding specific losses or damage causes at individual properties. HAZUS itself acknowledges this limitation. When you look at the underlying claims data, the issue becomes clear: losses are highly scattered even for the same hazard intensity (e.g. flood depth vs loss data from NFIP claims collected since the 1970's). The best these models can do is group buildings into broad archetypes and fit loss curves through a wide cloud of outcomes to represent the average. But, there is no explanation of why one claim results in zero loss while another leads to a total loss for the same flood depth because that data isn't being collected. The insurance industry can live with this (for now) because the logic works good enough at scale. Across thousands of properties, severe over- and under-estimates tend to balance out. But at a single-asset level, that variance matters enormously. It can significantly alter perceptions of risk and more importantly, influence your decisions about individual buildings including retrofits, capital planning, acquisitions, or site selection. The disconnect between portfolio logic and asset-level decision-making is where many climate risk assessments fall short today. If we want climate risk analysis to inform real decisions, we need to model vulnerability very differently.

Climate Risk Planning 🌎 Climate risks are a present-day business challenge, requiring structured planning to ensure long-term resilience. Integrating climate risk considerations into decision-making processes strengthens an organization's ability to navigate uncertainty and mitigate disruptions. The first step is defining governance by clarifying roles and oversight. Assigning accountability for climate risks ensures clear leadership commitment and structured management. Once governance is in place, identifying key climate threats and assessing their potential impact allows for a better understanding of exposure and vulnerabilities. Not all risks carry the same level of urgency. Prioritizing them based on severity and critical vulnerabilities helps allocate resources efficiently. This assessment guides the development of mitigation actions and adaptation measures to minimize disruptions and enhance business continuity. Engaging stakeholders internally and externally strengthens climate risk planning. Consultation and collaboration ensure that diverse perspectives contribute to informed decision-making and effective risk management. Scenario analysis and planning further refine this approach by modeling climate risks, testing strategies, and identifying gaps in resilience. Risk planning must be an ongoing process. Monitoring progress through key performance indicators provides insight into evolving risks and ensures transparency in risk management efforts. Regular updates allow for continuous adaptation as new climate developments emerge. A structured approach to climate risk planning strengthens long-term resilience and reduces exposure to uncertainty. These steps provide a framework for organizations seeking to integrate climate considerations into business strategies while addressing regulatory, financial, and operational challenges. Climate risks will continue to evolve, making it essential to stay ahead with proactive planning and regular assessment. #sustainability #sustainable #business #esg #climatechange #risks

Climate models rely on weak data for durable #CarbonRemoval, yet these same models shape today’s climate policy Most climate policy experts tend to focus on the #NDCs as the fundamental tool for creating political buy-in to scale up durable removals. But what informs the NDCs? The #IPCC reports. What informs the IPCC reports? The Integrated Assessment Models (IAMs). The IPCC’s Sixth Assessment Report (AR6) illustrates the problem well. Of the 121 model runs in AR6 scenarios aligned with “well below 2°C” and “above 1.5°C” pathways: 120 deployed BECCS, 28 (!) deployed DACCS None (!) represented biochar or ERW. Carbon Direct has just published an in-depth analysis of the problem and potential solutions. The narrow scope of novel and durable carbon removals in IAMs also shapes many countries' NDCs and long-term strategies. I'd add that there is another important element - the IPCC guidelines for the national greenhouse gas inventories (the GHG accounting rules for the governments), which have also suffered from the same shortcomings. It's great to learn that Carbon Direct is collaborating with three leading research institutions with well-established IAMs: Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Utrecht University, and the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, to close this gap and represent removals more accurately in climate modelling: updating the latest cost assumptions, learning curves, and growth constraints for existing carbon removal technologies, while adding new representations of DACCS, biochar, and ERW. Have a look at their short blog post laying out the key issues: https://lnkd.in/eEczTaW2 There's a link to a longer white paper at the end of the blog. It's well worth the read!