International Relations

Two factors have resuscitated interest in nuclear power throughout the developed world: high hydrocarbon prices and concerns about climate change. This paper considers the advantages and disadvantages of nuclear power as a mechanism for achieving climate change mitigation and energy security objectives. It also highlights some of the methodological problems faced by governments trying to decide which energy technologies to support in the future, including uncertainties about the comparative economics of nuclear power and other low-carbon options, particularly renewables. Special consideration is given to issues including lifecycle emissions, radioactive wastes, the proliferation of nuclear weapons, water and fuel availability issues, and the relationship between forms of electrical generation and the character and functioning of the electrical grid.

Sven Steinmo's engaging and informative book offers both a theory of political change and a methodological critique of some approaches to political science. Borrowing concepts and terminology from evolutionary science, Steinmo analyzes the institutional history of Sweden, Japan, and the United States (U.S.) beginning when their modern democratic institutions were established. He highlights how the development of each society has been characterized by a complex interplay of historical factors, strongly influenced by chance events.

Rational choice institutionalism is a set of tools and theoretical approaches that seeks to explain the emergence and functioning of political institutions based on a particular model of human nature, and with reference to particular types of problems. 1 Terry Moe summarizes the approach concisely, asking: "How can individuals who are self-interested and opportunistic overcome their collective action problems to cooperate for mutual gain?" 2 The approach is applicable in many distinct policy areas, including education, the environment, and the regulation of primary resource industries. The approach is largely derived from the study of institutions like the U.S. Congress, and is frequently deployed to analyze deliberative institutions of this type, often in a highly model-driven and quantitative way. It is also deeply associated with economics, both methodologically and in terms of its perspective on how human behaviour can be most parsimoniously and effectively modelled. The power of the approach derives from the wide variety of circumstances in which individuals can be reasonably well modelled as rational and self-interested actors, as well as cases where political problems can be interpreted as a process of organizing collective action. The limitations of the approach arise partly in cases where its underlying assumptions are challenged, as well as in relation to problems not easily or comprehensively modelled as efforts at collective action. The five readings considered here illustrate both the power and limitations of the approach, while raising questions about the way in which it can enrich scholarly understanding of public policy-making.

The basic claim of the policy feedback literature is that the implementation and operation of public policy affects the general public in ways that influence the conditions for future policy-making. 1 As Andrea Louise Campbell describes: "existing policies feed back into the political system, shaping subsequent policy outcomes". 2 These effects take the form of increases or decreases in overall levels of political participation, shifts in the form of participation undertaken, and the formation and strategic behaviour of new interest groups both inside and outside of government. These effects can also function by "shaping the identities, interests, and incentives of key social actors". 3 Changes in old-age income policy (Social Security) in the United States and the substantial growth in the degree of political participation by the elderly are a key example of such dynamics at work. 45 Other policy areas that yield usable case studies include incarceration, tax reform, airline deregulation, reform of agricultural subsidies, and welfare reform. One theoretical question raised by the literature is how the 'feedback' account varies from the idea of 'path dependency', or from the evolutionary conception of institutional change elaborated by Sven Steinmo and others. 678 As with these sections of the literature, analysis of feedback effects focuses on integrating time into policy analysis to avoid the "distorted view" that 1 As early as 1935, E.E. Schattschneider remarked that "

Over the past four years, the University of Toronto (U of T) community has dedicated a great deal of effort to considering the wisdom of fossil fuel divestment as well as the university’s appropriate response to the challenge of climate change. In September 2013, Toronto350.org first submitted a petition calling for fossil fuel divestment by the university; an updated version was submitted in April 2015. In November 2014, President Gertler established an ad hoc Advisory Committee on Divestment from Fossil Fuels to consider the petition and how the university should respond to climate change in general. In June 2015, the Committee issued a call for submissions to the U of T community. In April 2015, organizers from Toronto350.org presented to the Committee.

In December 2015, the Committee issued their unanimous recommendations to President Gertler [the “Report”]. The Committee accepted the main argument of the Brief: that the activities of the fossil fuel industry constitute social injury, and that U of T ought to divest from some fossil fuel industry investments in response.

What factors explain the success of campus fossil fuel
divestment (CFFD) campaigns, as defined with three metrics?

RQ(A): Where success is institutional response
RQ(B): Where success is policy diffusion between CFFD campaigns and
target institutions
RQ(C): Where success is skill development in student activists, continued
involvement in climate activism, and evolving theories of change

Unless referencing this draft specifically, use the final version at: https://www.academia.edu/34414398/Proposal_Canadian_Campus_Fossil_Fuel_Divestment_Campaigns_and_the_Development_of_Activists

During the Harper years, Canada's international reputation suffered from a perception that the country strongly privileges oil and gas profits over the integrity of the global climate. While a change of tone has been noted with the new Trudeau government, the cautious and incremental approach to carbon pricing coupled by the decision to approve major new fossil fuel infrastructure raises questions about how responsible a global actor Canada really is. Canada's 150th anniversary provides an opportunity to consider questions about Canada's role in confronting serious global issues, as well as the apparent disjuncture between Canada's history as a natural resource exporter and the steps needed to build a low carbon future. At the same time, the commercial and political imperatives driving major energy infrastructure projects (particularly fossil fuel projects) stand at odds with the Trudeau government's commitment to improving relations between Canadian governments and aboriginal peoples. In particular, they clash with the principle of free, prior, and informed consent which Canada has agreed to implement via the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). The question of how much fossil fuel infrastructure to build and where is linked to deep enduring themes in Canadian politics, from national unity and federalism to Canada's role on the global stage and the place of indigenous peoples within Canada. At a minimum, adjudicating between these competing claims raises challenges for the present federal and provincial governments. Quite possibly, it also reveals a fundamental incoherence in Justin Trudeau's overall policy agenda.

Extensive media coverage has been devoted to the proposed Keystone XL and Northern Gateway pipelines. Analysis of this coverage allows for analysis of pro-and anti-pipeline frames employed to try to sway public opinion and the choices of decision makers. It also provides a starting point for a network analysis of the organizations and individuals involved in pipeline resistance.

Fossil fuel divestment campaigns across Canada have tried different approaches and achieved different outcomes, but they have all been motivated in part by the objective of training and motivating student activists. The question this study seeks to answer is: In what ways have the different experiences of these campaigns affected the subsequent views and behaviours of those involved?

Starting in July 2012, the climate change non-governmental organization 350.org proliferated the idea of fossil fuel divestment campaigns at universities. They provided a “campaign in a box” with a common demand for divestment from the 200 corporations with the largest fossil fuel reserves over five years and a standard set of tactics, then supported individual campaigns largely by shaping the overall media narrative. Campaigns were launched across Canada with the strategic objectives of persuading universities to divest, delegitimizing the fossil fuel industry in the eyes of the public and decision makers, and recruiting and developing a new cadre of climate change activists. Using the contentious politics theoretical framework, this dissertation provides an anatomy of the campus fossil fuel divestment (CFFD) movement, including the political opportunity structure in which it arose, the mobilizing structures campaigns used to organize labour and make decisions, and the activist repertoires they employed. My chief research question is how involvement in the CFFD movement influenced the political beliefs and behaviours of activists. Based on my interviews with organizers in Canadian campaigns, a review of the journalistic media and published scholarship on divestment, and social media monitoring of campaigns, I conclude that the main effect of the CFFD movement on activist beliefs was to differentially socialize them into climate justice (CJ) and CO2-energy (CO2-e) worldviews. These differ in their account of the root causes of climate change, and most notably in the political project which they call for in response. For CJ advocates, climate change is one manifestation of profound global injustices including colonialism and racism. Eliminating the problem of climate change thus requires eliminating those causes, and thus a radical global programme of political and economic reform. CO2-e advocates question whether the issue linkages at the heart of the CJ strategy are analytically convincing and, more importantly, part of a sound strategy for avoiding the worst projected effects of unconstrained climate change. While the CJ worldview has helped overcome some of the emotional and motivational problems that block effective climate action, it only speaks to a limited subset of the population that embraces the progressive assumptions behind it. Producing a sufficient coalition to enact effective climate change policies and keep them in place requires support from non-progressive flanking coalitions who share an interest in climatic stability but do not embrace the rest of the CJ agenda.