Essay: NYC plans for carbon dioxide emission reduction policy

A policy is a set of plans or ideas that are used as a platform for decision making, particularly in economics, politics, and business. It is a set of principles, guidelines, and rules that are either adopted or formulated by a state to achieve both short-term and long-term goals. They are typically published in a booklet or any other relevant form so that it is widely accessed by people. Such plans include all considerable changes in economic reforms and foreign policies. It is the attitude of an organization policy is determined by how they choose to handle a specific issue for the betterment of the public interests. This paper seeks to analyze the City-wide plans for carbon dioxide emission reduction by summarizing the policy and its significance to the political landscape, the role of the policy, an evaluation of its costs and benefits, present the political actors by outlining the essential players as well as a description of how the policy fits in a larger political environment. It will highlight the significance of the politics of the city and how the policy relates to the built environment, the diversity, the politics and the interests of the city.
Summary of the Policy
The policy on city-wide plans for carbon dioxide emission reduction is a New York City Carbon Challenge and a voluntary leadership initiative that has partnered with institutional, public, non-profit and private sectors with a commitment towards reducing the level of greenhouse gas emission by 30% or more. It is estimated to take place for ten years. On a global scale, the urban population currently surpasses the rural population. According to the estimates established by the United Nations, by 2050, the urban populations are expected to extensively rise and double (Dhakal, 2010). The greatest growth curve is anticipated in the cities within the developing nations. Such an exponential population growth brings about myriad social, economic and environmental issues like increased demand for sanitation services, energy, transportation, and food.
All these factors will be affected by climate. Large cities like New York City are susceptible to different ravages of climate change, entailing storm surges and heat waves, following the fact that many of them are built along coasts or rivers. According to recent research, it was clear that urban areas heavily contribute local climate fluctuations due to influences on weather through the urban heat island effect and resultant particulate emissions. Such influences are however not just local because greenhouse emissions that contain a global impact. Almost 75% of global carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels use are generated from cities that cover only 3% of the Earth’s land surface (Norman, MacLean, & Kennedy, 2006).
Currently, the urban populations are heavily rising which means the level of emissions is anticipated to increase much faster than the population. According to a study established by the World Bank in 2010, while the megacities’ populations are expected to grow by almost 4% on average in the following years, the greenhouse gas emissions are expected to rise by ten percent or more on an annual basis. The citywide plans for carbon dioxide emission reduction is a state policy that has partnered with state agencies in operating towards reducing the level of greenhouse gas emissions through monitoring carbon emissions (Dhakal, 2010). The policy seeks to determine how the decision makers meet the specific climate policy demands and how citizens, business people, and other stakeholders make efforts towards making a difference for the good of the environment.
Among the essential political actors behind the policy is the city’s Mayor. The NYC Mayor’s Office provides various programmatic resources and support to help all participants in their tireless efforts to reduce GHC emissions and allow the City to achieve the target of reducing citywide emissions by 20150. The Environmental Defense Fund holds a significant role within the Mayor’s Office of Sustainability following the project’s strategic development and recruitment. It works in partnership with the building owners and company managers in making pledges towards the reduction of carbon emissions in the coming ten years (Watts et al., 2015).
Participants have a commitment to the programs by pursuing varying energy efficiency improvements, sustainability initiatives, and efficient on-site generation. A good number of participants have taken up the NYC Carbon Challenge policy, including hospitals, the largest universities within the city, residential property management firms, commercial owners and tenants, retail organizations as well as hotels (Dhakal, 2010). These ten commercial owners with more than 58 million square feet of office space are willing to commit towards reducing emissions by more than 40% come in 2026. In partnership with the Real Estate Board of New York, it is now possible to reduce the amount of population generated by commercial office buildings. The policy operates by inspiring a high commitment level within various organizations.
It has a number of costs and benefits. It is an initiative that will enable New York to achieve the sustainable goals of climate mitigation by lowering the emissions generated from green gases by almost 80%. As the involved parties explore new ideas and different opportunities towards meeting the challenge goal, they are put in a better position to reveal effective strategies for enhancing energy efficiency that can be scaled up across New York City and beyond (Huisingh et al., 2015). By creating a collaboration with the Environmental Defense Fund, a leading international nonprofit organization, the strategy has created diverse transformational solutions to pressing environmental problems. It has created a link between science, law, economics, and other private sector partnership and made huge contributions towards achieving the much-anticipated sustainability goal (Norman, MacLean, & Kennedy, 2006).
The policy has enabled all participants to move aggressively and reduce their energy consumption ratio and the resultant emissions. Currently, more than twenty-one participants have notably met the 30% goal, with approximately 19 universities, commercial offices and hospitals expanding their commitment to a fifty percent or greater reduction come 2025 (Tietenberg & Lewis, 2016). Following a standard cost-benefit analysis that was recently performed by assigning a monetary value to save lives, the study researchers made an estimate that intending to reduce a ton of carbon dioxide emission was estimated at a value of $50 to $380. This estimate justifies the point of curbing carbon dioxide emissions from a human health point of view.
The selected policy fits in the larger political environment as it is a central issue. The City of New York is compliant with the Global Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy which is a global cooperative effort among the officials in the city and mayors towards reducing GHG emissions, tracking all progress as well as preparing for the impacts of climate change. The City has heavily committed to operating with other cities across the globe through the incorporation of consistent best practices in GHG emissions accounting in a cooperative effort towards achieving the climate mitigation goals (Norman, MacLean, & Kennedy, 2006). The policy mitigation goals are based on the GPCBASIC level- in boundary transportation, waste management as well as GHG emissions from stationary energy consumption. The city has developed strategies to enhance its commitment towards the reduction of GHG emissions by 80%, using a ten-year energy efficiency policy in the buildings within the city.
A Political Analysis of the Policy
Politicians contain a great significance towards the execution of the policy. A policy implementation right is essential because the failure of it could cause political frustrations, financial wastes and disruption of the rights if the ordinary citizens. Politics contain a practical account for making effective implementation of a policy in the wider and distinctive context of government. The body advocates for in-depth strategies to ensure that the policy on carbon emissions fits in the areas of social justice and the Institute of Government on how ministers and body strategies can give their policies the best chances of being delivered. The central government advocated for strong links that ensured change was happening to understand better the manner by which those policies were working in the real world. While the political world can add many complications to the process of policy implementation, ministers still hold a crucial role in setting milestones as well as incorporating regular stock-takes in keeping the required momentum. Of importance, it relates to the interest of politicians because it provides a firm ground for campaign purposes.
The politics of the city highly advocated for the execution of the policy on carbon dioxide emission reduction by making it a significant law that all actors in various departments in the town must adhere to. The political world is coupled with multiple interventions to help the policy to meet the anticipated project expectations. These are inclusive conditions that countries must understand if they intend to manage the consequences much more effectively. The measures put in place towards increasing food security and diversification of the systems of energy essentially provide useful insights to other states with a lower capacity to respond (Tietenberg & Lewis, 2016). The policy relates to the interests of the city because reducing greenhouse gas emissions contains the capacity to reduce pre-mature deaths and other environmental uncertainties. Carbon dioxide traps heat which in turn warms the globe. A surge in the levels of carbon dioxide is as a result of human activities and industrial revolutions which is causing a number of impacts around the globe. People will be expected to adapt to healthier lifestyles like finding alternatives to driving vehicles and using energy efficient technologies (Norman, MacLean, & Kennedy, 2006).
The policy relates to the built environment following the significant interactions between food, water, and energy in terms of environmental and economic outcomes. Understanding the procedures of reducing carbon emissions from the built environment can be practically complicated. However, conceptualizing such changes is important especially when one seeks to understand how buildings and infrastructure are designed, developed, renovated and managed and how these practices influence carbon emissions. According to a report from the UK government, construction companies contain the capacity to influence almost forty-seven percent of the total CO2 emissions in the UK through demolition, design, and operation of buildings (Dhakal, 2010). Although particular contracts allow construction companies to directly influence the specifications and design of developments, a good number do not. Companies are expected to build in exact specifications of the architect regardless of whether they are sustainable or not. As a result, while the construction firms might be in a position to identify where carbon savings could be established, it is not in their interest of power to change them.
The policy on Citywide plans for carbon dioxide emission reduction is of significance following its advocacy on maintaining environmental sustainability. Emissions have both short and long-term effects across national borders, human populations as well as air quality. Execution of policies that fight against this menace is an essential move for improving the quality of life and the environment that human beings thrive in. Aggressively reducing the greenhouse gases could prevent premature deaths and create a significant impact on the lives saved. The long term consequences of the policy will be realized through the reduction of the carbon footprint for saving the environment. Incidences of health problems from particulate matter will also be reduced (Norman, MacLean, & Kennedy, 2006). The policy was caused by the growing concern on a high level of GHG emissions that threatened the quality of the environment people live in, quality of health and the general well-being. This was a climate-conscious political decision that captured the interests of different political bodies and a networked effort to facilitate its implementation and management.