+1(978)310-4246 credencewriters@gmail.com
  

Description

Running head: Annotated Bibliography
Annotated Bibliography
1
Running head: Annotated Bibliography
2
Funk, C. and Kennedy, B. (2017). The Politics of Climate. [Online] Pew Research Center:
Internet, Science & Tech. Available at:
http://www.pewinternet.org/2016/10/04/the politics-of-climate/.
According to a recent, in-depth study by Pew Research Center, political schisms
on climate issues go far beyond views on whether climate change is happening and
whether humans are to blame. These schisms cut through every part of the climate
debate, right down to people’s confidence in the reasons that motivate climate scientists
to conduct their studies. The survey shows major political differences in perceptions
about the potential for ecosystem destruction and what can be done to reduce climate
change impacts. The decision made by the United States President to pull out of the
Paris accord on the climate change plan left many people wondering.
In fact, environmental scientists have argued that his decision buried the hopes
of finding better solutions to the climate change-related problems that affect the world.
As a result, poor people in different countries are likely to continue suffering since they
are the first victims of climate change. Furthermore, pulling out of the Paris accord
means that America refused to contribute to the United Nations Climate Fund.
Therefore, most climate change policies will lack enough political players to fund and
implement them, which is likely to put most poor and developing countries in danger.
The world continues to face divided views about climate change issues like
never before. In fact, these problems have extended beyond beliefs on whether humans
are playing a role in the climate change that the world is experiencing. Due to the threat
that climate change poses on earth, countries, including America, usually find solutions
to the problems caused by climate. When political leaders in the world needed to work
together to prevent climate change problems, President Donald Trump stunned the
world when he announced his intentions to pull out of the Paris climate accord. To
understand the impact of the dramatic decision on climate change that President Donald
Trump made, it is important to analyze hurts or benefits, both short and long-term, on
the planet.
Jotzo, F., Depledge, J., & Winkler, H. (2018). US and international climate
policy under President Trump. Climate Policy, 18(7), 813–817.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2018.1490051
The 2016 Presidential elections resulted in electing Donald Trump as the United
state President, which has raised many concerns about international relations and
policy, and about American national policies, regulations, and practices. Climate change
Running head: Annotated Bibliography
3
is a significant issue for Trump’s presidency and political base, and organizations are
being dissolved, climate science and its effects are being overseen and its financial
support is being threatened. The announcement of President Trump about the
withdrawal of the United States from the Paris Accord became a significant move
against the former president Barack Obama. After a significant period in Trump’s
administration, Climate Policy has shared several publications related to ongoing United
States climate policy and its potential impacts and outcomes, a couple of them
counterweight in a thematic section in this concern of the journal.
Kemp, L. (2017). Better out than in. Nature Climate Change, 7(7), 458-460. Doi:
10.1038/nclimate3309
In 1992, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
(UNFCCC) was adopted to support international cooperation on climate change. At the
third Conference of the Parties in 1997, negotiations within the framework led to the
Kyoto Protocol (COP). It was thought to be a promising step in climate action because it
set globally binding carbon reduction goals. Due to a lack of clarity on specifics and
lengthy talks, the parties took a long time to ratify the agreement, and it did not enter
into force until 2005. We did not ratify the agreement. Although there were high hopes
for a strong outcome at COP21 in Paris in 2015, all expectations were for a deal that set
a goal of keeping global warming below 2 degrees Celsius. The alliance of Small Island
Developing States (SIDS) and Least Developed Countries (LDCs) was effective in their
campaign for a more stringent goal of fewer than 1.5 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels, which they said was necessary to shield them from the harmful effects
of climate change. The momentum from Paris was maintained, as were the promises
made at the conference.
Nordhaus, W. (2007). Economics: Critical assumptions in the stern review on climate
change. Science, 317(5835), 201-202. Doi: 10.1126/science.1137316
How much and how quickly can we react to the global warming threat? The
Stern Analysis states that climate change would cause substantial harm and that
countries should make dramatic and urgent reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.
However, an analysis of the Review’s radical revision of climate change economics
shows that it is predicated using a near-zero-time discount rate and a particular utility
function.
Running head: Annotated Bibliography
4
O, Uma. W, Elizabeth. (2019) Reversing Course on Environmental Justice under the
Trump Administration. Utah Law Faculty Scholarship. 172.
https://dc.law.utah.edu/scholarship/17
The Trump Administration’s dismissal of climate science and renouncement of
the Paris Agreement speaks to a cognizant refusal to require steps to anticipate and
equally
important
to
protect
against
climate
alter
impacts.
This
position
straightforwardly hurts low-income communities of color within the United States and
around the globe, which are anticipated to involve the most exceedingly bad
environmental, financial, and wellbeing impacts of climate alter. Climate adjustment
planning aimed at planning for and minimizing these impacts has all but ceased beneath
the Trump Organization; instep, President Trump centers on reviving the sickly coal
division, one of the foremost contaminating businesses in U.S. history
P, J. (2017). Op-Ed: Trump’s Paris accord exit will save the environmental movement from
itself. [Online] CNBC. Available at: https://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/31/trump-paris
accord-exit-is-good-for-the-environment-commentary.html.
President Trump has undoubtedly rescued the environmental movement from
itself by taking the world’s largest economy out of yet another amorphous and
unenforceable international climate agreement. Millions of conservative and centerright Americans now have a far greater chance of entering the environmental
movement. For decades, the green movement in the United States and worldwide has
been off the rails, owing to its erroneous belief in globalist politics and big government
as solutions to environmental problems. The problem, in reality, is big government and
centrally organized schemes like the Paris Accord.
Rob Crilly (2017). Donald Trump pulls the US out of the Paris climate accord to ‘put
American workers first. [Online] The Telegraph. Available at:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/01/trump- pull-Paris-accordseek-better-deal/.
Environmentalists and the president’s political critics quickly denounced the
decision, claiming it signaled the end of America’s position as a global leader. Mr. Trump,
on the other hand, expressed optimism for a settlement, saying he would immediately
begin working on a more equitable agreement that would benefit American workers.
The US president said he wanted to reassert American sovereignty during a belligerent
White House rose garden speech. “We don’t want other countries and leaders laughing
at us any longer,” he said, adding that the existing agreement could cost the US 2.7
Running head: Annotated Bibliography
5
million jobs by 2025. Right after President Trump announced that he would be pulling
out of the Paris accord, many countries wondered about his motives, since the United
States was one of the countries that pushed harder during the negotiation process. Many
political analysts argued that the possibility of trusting America on foreign policy
became low. In the long term, the US being out of the Paris accord makes climate change
mitigation more challenging in other international negotiations. In fact, the US pullout
from the Paris accord opens up a geographical space, especially in the climate change
leadership, which is hard to cover. In other words, such a decision, especially from a
superpower, makes the next negotiations of international policy harder than ever
before.
Research shows that climate change impacts are not happening in the future, but
most of them have already begun. The international scientific assessment on climate
change issues has made it clear that most of the impacts are already happening. For
example, their assessments suggest that most developing countries that depend on the
agricultural sector have already been affected by climate change. Developing countries
that depend on agriculture continue to suffer since political leaders have already shut
down their hopes of recovering from damage. Therefore, no doubt developing countries
continue to suffer climate change outcomes due to politics played in different countries’
decision-making.
Sælen, H., Hovi, J., Sprinz, D., & Underdal, A. (2020). How US withdrawal might influence
cooperation under the Paris climate agreement. Environmental Science & Policy,
108, 121–132.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2020.03.011
On June 1, 2017, President Trump The United States has declared its intention to
withdraw from the Paris Agreement. Domestic and worldwide climate arrangements
have been petulant within the United States for decades, coming about within the
consistent 1997 Byrd–Hagel determination passed by the US Senate to restrict US
enrollment in any worldwide climate agreement without substantive commitments for
major developing economies or that would something else harmed the US economy.
Whereas the George W. Bush organization rejected the Kyoto Convention, the Obama
administration pointed to an agreement that does not require the Senate’s counsel and
assent. Trump’s declaration caused residential US political difference and a few US
governors who have received support at the state-level to achieve climate policies
pledged to meet their share of the US NDC.
Running head: Annotated Bibliography
6
The Conversation. (2017). Why Trump’s decision to leave Paris accord hurts the US and
the world. [Online] Available at: http://theconversation.com/why-trumpsdecision-to-leave Paris-accord-hurts-the-us-and-the-world-78707
Most Americans, including Republicans and Democrats, expressed their
disappointment when President Donald Trump withdrew from the Paris accord they
thought was an opportunity to solve some of the climate change problems at hand. For
many years, farmers in the US have always been leaders of agricultural innovations that
the world has seen. However, some of the challenges like hostile climate change have in
most cases affected their productivity. With the Paris accord, most American farmers
thought that the plan would yield solutions to save them. Therefore, Trump’s decision to
withdraw the US from the Paris accord has had a direct negative impact on American
farmers. Such politics of climate change affect different people in the short term and the
long run. The entire Paris Agreement is focused on goodwill: there are no punitive
measures or enforcement mechanisms in place. The Green Climate Fund, which
transfers money from developed to developing countries for building resilience,
mitigating, and adjusting to the effects of climate change, is another example of goodwill.
The United States has promised $3 billion and delivered $1 billion, but it is unlikely to
increase its contribution. This alone squanders a lot of goodwill. It would also be a big
source of irrigation for both small island states and developing countries that are not to
blame for global warming. In Paris, the United States’ leadership was critical. Why
should someone else follow the United States’ lead if we don’t and we have a moral and
ethical duty to do so as the nation that has contributed the most to total greenhouse gas
emissions to date. Unless a mandatory carbon tax is introduced, fossil fuels will prove to
be the most cost-effective energy source. Of course, this isn’t true because of all the
negative implications for air quality and climate change.
ZHENG, G., CHAO, Q., & ZHANG, Y. (2016). Paris climate change conference: A fresh start
of international climate governance in the new era. Chinese Journal of Urban and
Environmental Studies, 04(01), 1650004. Doi: 10.1142/s2345748116500044
The Paris Agreement was eventually reached at the Climate Change Conference in
Paris after lengthy negotiations. The Agreement’s desirability does not require
affirmation when the context is considered, even though the procedure is tortuous and
arduous. Global warming is evident, posing a significant challenge to the global
economy, social and economic development, and the natural and ecological climate.
Human activity is the predominant cause of current global warming, according to
Running head: Annotated Bibliography
7
scientific evidence. To achieve the international community’s sustainable growth,
addressing climate change should be the direction that leads the entire society to
transition to low-carbon, green, and circular development. World leaders met in Paris to
negotiate climate change actions and assist in establishing an international climate
governance mechanism after 2020. Positive political will and understanding of win–win
cooperation is growing stronger as policymakers and the international community
increasingly fined a consensus on the topic of combating climate change. The Paris
Agreement marks the beginning of a new international climate governance period,
enabling parties to engage in more inclusive and realistic ways.
Zhang, H.-B., Dai, H.-C., Lai, H.-X., & Wang, W.-T. (2017). U.S. withdrawal
from the Paris Agreement: Reasons, impacts, and China’s response.
Advances in Climate Change Research, 8(4), 220–225.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accre.2017.09.002
President Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Paris climate accord has earned
him solid criticism from leaders and advisors from the home and international level,
followed by protest and disappointments. It was on 4 August 2017, the United States
provided legal paperwork to the United Nations on the withdrawal from the Paris
climate accord. This raised a lot of questions, out of which these three remain very
significant to this day, due to the impact the United States has created by an astounding
and dumbfounding decision.
1: Why did the president decide to withdraw from the negotiations, even when he
was on the positive side of the deal and had complete knowledge about the level of
criticism he needed to face from internal leaders and international ones?
2: What is the potential possibility of submissiveness with the Paris Accord after
the withdrawal of the United States?
3: What will be China’s counter to this decision?
First, it states that this decision of President Trump is meant to be a success for
Stephen Bannon, Mr. Trump’s ex-chief strategist, and Scott Pruitt, the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) administrator, but it has no advantage outcome
for the United States or global climate governance. Second, this decision of pulling back
from the accord has made U.S mitigation goals unachievable, viewing the abidance
possibility of the Paris Accord bleaker. Third, the U.S. withdrawal intention has made a
large void between the climate support that has been promised by the developed
countries to the developing and under-developed nations and without a doubt creates
Running head: Annotated Bibliography
8
an opportunity to take the leading position for nations such as China and the European
Union. Fourth, the most huge and significant effect of this decision will be the nonattendance of the United States from upcoming arbitrations. Fifth, the U.S. will not hold
any power to single-handedly strip an international organization and the opportunity of
the emergence of a nation like China as a Superpower nation on climate change.
International climate governance will be stepping into an evolutionary period that will
influence transmission in leadership. Fifth, the U.S. will not hold any power to singlehandedly strip an international organization and the opportunity of the emergence of a
nation like China as a Superpower nation on climate change. International climate
governance will be stepping into an evolutionary period that will influence transmission
in leadership.
How to write a literature review:
A literature review surveys scholarly articles, books and other sources (e.g. dissertations,
conference proceedings) relevant to a particular issue, area of research, or theory, providing the
central argument, summary, and critical evaluation of each work. The purpose is to offer an
overview of significant literature published on a topic.
Similar to primary research, development of the literature review requires four stages:
â–ª
â–ª
â–ª
â–ª
Problem formulation: Identify a topic/research questions
Literature search—finding materials relevant to the subject being explored
Data evaluation—determining which literature makes a significant contribution to the
understanding of the topic
Analysis and interpretation—discussing the findings and conclusions of pertinent literature
In assessing each piece, consideration should be given to:
â–ª
â–ª
â–ª
â–ª
Provenance—What are the author’s credentials? Are the author’s arguments supported by
evidence (e.g. primary historical material, case studies, narratives, statistics, recent
scientific findings)?
Objectivity—Is the author’s perspective even-handed or prejudicial? Is contrary data
considered or is certain pertinent information ignored to prove the author’s point?
Persuasiveness—Which of the author’s theses are most/least convincing?
Value—Are the author’s arguments and conclusions convincing? Does the work ultimately
contribute in any significant way to an understanding of the subject?
Literature reviews should comprise the following elements:
â–ª
â–ª
â–ª
â–ª
â–ª
A clear statement of research topic/questions being examined.
An overview of the subject, issue or theory under consideration, along with the objectives of
the literature review
Division of works under review into categories (e.g. those in support of a particular
position, those against, and those offering alternative theses entirely)
Explanation of how each work is similar to and how it varies from the others
Conclusions as to which pieces are best considered in their argument, are most convincing
of their opinions, and make the greatest contribution to the understanding and
development of their area of research
After the literature review:
•
•
•
Reassess your research questions – do you feel that after doing research your want to revise
your research questions; do you feel you will be able to find enough material, is the question
too broad, too narrow, or requires more than a semester to do research.
Rewrite your RQ and make a list of possible explanations already provided in the literature independent variables.
Is anything missing? What unique explanation can you add to the literature.
How to write a literature review:
A literature review surveys scholarly articles, books and other sources (e.g. dissertations,
conference proceedings) relevant to a particular issue, area of research, or theory, providing the
central argument, summary, and critical evaluation of each work. The purpose is to offer an
overview of significant literature published on a topic.
Similar to primary research, development of the literature review requires four stages:
â–ª
â–ª
â–ª
â–ª
Problem formulation: Identify a topic/research questions
Literature search—finding materials relevant to the subject being explored
Data evaluation—determining which literature makes a significant contribution to the
understanding of the topic
Analysis and interpretation—discussing the findings and conclusions of pertinent literature
In assessing each piece, consideration should be given to:
â–ª
â–ª
â–ª
â–ª
Provenance—What are the author’s credentials? Are the author’s arguments supported by
evidence (e.g. primary historical material, case studies, narratives, statistics, recent
scientific findings)?
Objectivity—Is the author’s perspective even-handed or prejudicial? Is contrary data
considered or is certain pertinent information ignored to prove the author’s point?
Persuasiveness—Which of the author’s theses are most/least convincing?
Value—Are the author’s arguments and conclusions convincing? Does the work ultimately
contribute in any significant way to an understanding of the subject?
Literature reviews should comprise the following elements:
â–ª
â–ª
â–ª
â–ª
â–ª
A clear statement of research topic/questions being examined.
An overview of the subject, issue or theory under consideration, along with the objectives of
the literature review
Division of works under review into categories (e.g. those in support of a particular
position, those against, and those offering alternative theses entirely)
Explanation of how each work is similar to and how it varies from the others
Conclusions as to which pieces are best considered in their argument, are most convincing
of their opinions, and make the greatest contribution to the understanding and
development of their area of research
After the literature review:
•
•
•
Reassess your research questions – do you feel that after doing research your want to revise
your research questions; do you feel you will be able to find enough material, is the question
too broad, too narrow, or requires more than a semester to do research.
Rewrite your RQ and make a list of possible explanations already provided in the literature independent variables.
Is anything missing? What unique explanation can you add to the literature.

Purchase answer to see full
attachment

  
error: Content is protected !!