DOCSLIB.ORG

Corporate Governance and Climate Change: Making the Connection

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Corporate Governance and Climate Change: Making the Connection Corporate Governance and Climate Change: Making the Connection Authored by A Publication of Douglas G. Cogan March 2006 Ceres commissioned this report from the Investor Responsibility Research Center (IRRC). Ceres is a national coalition of investors, environmental groups and other public interest organizations working with companies to address sustainability challenges such as global climate change. Ceres directs the Investor Network on Climate Risk, a group of more than 50 institutional investors from the U.S. and Europe managing nearly $3 trillion in assets. IRRC is a research firm that has been a leading source of high quality, impartial information on corporate governance and social responsibility issues affecting investors and corporations since 1972. IRRC was acquired by Institutional Shareholder Services in August 2005. IRRC wrote and prepared this report for informational purposes. Although IRRC exercised due care in compiling the information contained herein, IRRC makes no warranty, express or implied, as to the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of the information, nor does it assume, and expressly disclaims, any liability arising out of the use of this information by any party. The views expressed in this report are those of the author and do not constitute an endorsement by IRRC or Institutional Shareholder Services. Changing circumstances may cause this information to be obsolete. This report was made possible through grants from the Energy Foundation, the Henry P. Kendall Foundation, the Nathan Cummings Foundation, the United Nations Foundation/Better World Fund, and the Wallace Global Fund. The opinions expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the sponsors. The author wishes to thank Peter DeSimone, Sol Kwon and Susan Williams of the Investor Responsibility Research Center for their critical role in conducting primary research on the companies profiled in this report. The author also wishes to thank Heidi Welsh of IRRC for her help in building a database to manage this flow of information. This report could not have been completed without their efforts. The author also wishes to thank Dan Bakal, Debra Hall and Andrew Logan of Ceres, who reviewed company profiles and provided valuable insight and information. The author also wishes to thank Carolyn Mathiasen of IRRC, Jim Coburn and Dan Mullen of Ceres, as well as Miranda Anderson of David Gardiner and Associates, who reviewed drafts of this summary report and provided helpful editing suggestions. The author wishes to thank Christopher Clark of Cave Dog Studio, for his instrumental role in preparaing the final report, which required patience and perseverance. Finally, the author wishes to thank Peyton Fleming of Ceres, who helped manage this project from beginning to end. His contributions are reflected throughout this report, for which the author is especially grateful. Copyright 2006 by Ceres Copyrighted IRRC material used with permission by Ceres Ceres, Inc. 99 Chauncy Street Boston, MA 02111 www.ceres.org Investor Responsibility Research Center, Inc. 1350 Connecticut Ave., NW Washington, DC 20036 www.irrc.com Contents Click on section titles below to hyperlink to actual content. Hyperlinks also available on company scores table (page 4). Foreword by Mindy Lubber, Ceres President v Executive Summary 1 How Companies are Scored 3 100 Company Scores 4 Climate Change: A Growing Sense of Urgency 7 Climate Change and Corporate Governance: Making the Connection 11 Why Companies Must Act Now 11 What CEOs Are Saying 14 What Companies Should Do 14 Investor Actions 15 How Companies were Selected for this Report 17 How Companies Are Scored 19 High Scoring Industries 20 Middle Scoring Industries 22 Low Scoring Industries 23 Company Scores (by Industry) 25 Appendix: Profiles of 100 Companies Chemicals Air Products & Chemicals Inc. 32 BASF AG 35 Bayer AG 38 Dow Chemical Co. 41 DuPont (EI) de Nemours 44 Imperial Chemical Industries PLC (ICI) 47 Monsanto Company 50 PPG Industries Inc 53 Praxair Inc. 55 Rohm and Haas Co. 58 Electric Utilities American Electric Power Co. Inc. 62 AES Corporation 65 Calpine Corp. 67 Cinergy Corp. 70 Constellation Energy Group Inc. 73 Dominion Resources Inc. 75 DTE Energy Co. 78 Duke Energy Corp. 81 Edison International 84 Corporate Governance & Climate Change Contents Entergy Corp. 87 Exelon Corp. 90 FirstEnergy Corp. 93 FPL Group Inc. 96 PG&E Corp. 99 Progress Energy Inc. 102 Sempra Energy 105 Southern Company 108 TXU Corp. 111 Xcel Energy Inc. 114 Motor Vehicles BMW (Bayerische Motoren Werke AG) 118 DaimlerChrysler AG 120 Ford Motor Co. 123 General Motors Corp. 126 Honda Motor Co. 129 Nissan Motor Co Ltd. 132 Toyota Motor Corp. 135 Volkswagen AG 138 Industrial Equipment ABB Ltd. 142 Caterpillar Inc. 145 Deere & Co. 147 General Electric Co. 149 Hitachi Ltd. 152 Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd. 155 Siemens AG 157 United Technologies Corp. 160 Metals & Mining Alcan Inc. 164 Alcoa Inc. 167 Anglo American PLC 170 BHP Billiton Ltd. 173 Mittal Steel Company NV 176 Newmont Mining Corp. 178 Nippon Steel 180 Nucor Corp. 183 Phelps Dodge Corp. 185 United States Steel Corp. 187 Forest Products Abitibi-Consolidated 190 Georgia-Pacific Corp. 192 International Paper Co. 194 MeadWestvaco Corp. 196 Weyerhaeuser Co. 198 Corporate Governance & Climate Change Contents Petroleum Amerada Hess Corp. 202 Anadarko Petroleum Corporation 204 Apache Corp. 207 BP PLC 209 Burlington Resources Inc. 212 Chevron Corp. 214 ConocoPhillips 217 Devon Energy Corp. 220 El Paso Corp. 222 Exxon Mobil Corp. 224 Marathon Oil Corp. 227 Murphy Oil Corp 229 Occidental Petroleum Corp. 231 Royal Dutch Shell plc 233 Statoil Asa 236 Sunoco Inc. 239 Tesoro Corp. 241 Total SA 243 Valero Energy Corp. 246 Valero Energy Corp. 247 Williams Companies Inc. 248 Coal Arch Coal Inc. 250 CONSOL Energy Inc. 252 Foundation Coal Holdings Inc. 254 Peabody Energy Corp. 256 Rio Tinto PLC 258 Food Production Archer-Daniels-Midland Co. 262 Altria Group Inc. 264 Bunge Ltd. 266 ConAgra Foods Inc. 267 General Mills Inc. 268 Nestlé SA 270 PepsiCo Inc. 272 Unilever PLC 274 Airlines Air France-KLM Group 278 AMR Corp. 280 British Airways 282 FedEx Corp. 285 Southwest Airlines 287 UAL Corp. 288 United Parcel Service Inc. 289 Corporate Governance & Climate Change Foreword Companies and investors can no longer afford to ignore global warming. A preponderance of evidence shows that worldwide temperatures are rising, glaciers are melting and hurricanes are becoming more fierce. This confluence of events is forcing governments worldwide to enact limits on the pollutants that are trapping heat in the atmosphere. These trends present enormous risks and opportunities for companies and investors. With the launch of the Kyoto Protocol and expanding greenhouse gas limits, power companies and other energy-intensive businesses face growing risks from the energy they use and how efficiently they use it. Companies also face risks from direct physical impacts, including stronger and more frequent storms, droughts, floods and sea level rise. In turn, forward-thinking companies that fine-tune their operations and develop new climate-friendly products can prosper from climate change. This report is the first comprehensive measurement of how 100 leading global companies are preparing and positioning themselves to face these challenges. It pays particular attention to the job that corporate executives and board members are doing to enact well-functioning governance systems to face the climate challenge. The report employs a “Climate Change Governance Checklist” to evaluate how 76 U.S. and 24 non-U.S. companies are addressing climate change through board oversight, management performance, public disclosure, emissions accounting and strategic planning. The results are encouraging. In 2003, Ceres released a report on 20 companies showing that major U.S. businesses were largely ignoring these issues. By contrast, this report shows that corporate leaders in many key industries are now facing the challenge head-on—companies such as DuPont, Cinergy, American Electric Power and General Electric, which earned the highest scores in their respective industries. Yet for all of the positive momentum in elevating climate as a governance priority, most American companies lag behind their international peers—a trend that is already resulting in competitive advantages for overseas companies developing low-carbon technologies in the auto and power sectors. No less worrisome, dozens of U.S. businesses in various climate-vulnerable sectors—including power, oil and gas, coal, air transportation and food products—are ignoring the issue with ‘business as usual’ responses that are putting their companies, and their shareholders, at risk. This report is a valuable tool for company executives, board members, investors and Wall Street analysts. Here’s how each group should use it: • Company executives should evaluate their own company’s performance relative to their particular set of circumstances and their industry peers. If their governance scores fall short, they should pursue the four key steps to manage climate risks and opportunities outlined later in this report. • Board members at low-scoring companies should address the issue with management and begin educating themselves on the business and financial dimensions of this issue. • Investors should evaluate how companies score relative to their industry peers—especially in high-risk sectors such as electric power, oil/gas and the auto industry—and should engage with poor corporate performers. • Wall Street analysts should use the information in this report as a basis for rewarding companies that are responding to these challenges, and assigning risk to those that are not. Tackling these issues is an enormous challenge. It requires that corporate leaders deliver short-term financial returns while also building capacity for the challenges that climate change presents in the long term. Companies such as GE and DuPont have stepped up to the challenge, but many other U.S. companies have not. There’s simply too much at stake for that not to change. Mindy S.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Economics of the Green Investment Bank: Costs and Benefits, Rationale and Value for Money
    The economics of the Green Investment Bank: costs and benefits, rationale and value for money Report prepared for The Department for Business, Innovation & Skills Final report October 2011 The economics of the Green Investment Bank: cost and benefits, rationale and value for money 2 Acknowledgements This report was commissioned by the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS). Vivid Economics would like to thank BIS staff for their practical support in the review of outputs throughout this project. We would like to thank McKinsey and Deloitte for their valuable assistance in delivering this project from start to finish. In addition, we would like to thank the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC), the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), the Committee on Climate Change (CCC), the Carbon Trust and Sustainable Development Capital LLP (SDCL), for their valuable support and advice at various stages of the research. We are grateful to the many individuals in the financial sector and the energy, waste, water, transport and environmental industries for sharing their insights with us. The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors and not those of BIS or any other party, and the authors take responsibility for any errors or omissions. An appropriate citation for this report is: Vivid Economics in association with McKinsey & Co, The economics of the Green Investment Bank: costs and benefits, rationale and value for money, report prepared for The Department for Business, Innovation & Skills, October 2011 The economics of the Green Investment Bank: cost and benefits, rationale and value for money 3 Executive Summary The UK Government is committed to achieving the transition to a green economy and delivering long-term sustainable growth.
    [Show full text]
  • Labour's Zero-Based Review
    Labour’s Zero-Based Review Interim Report Number 15: Department for Energy and Climate Change Labour’s Zero-Based Review Interim Report No.15 DEPARTMENT FOR ENERGY AND CLIMATE CHANGE FOREWORD The leader of the Labour Party, Ed Miliband, and the Shadow ChanCellor, Ed Balls, have made Clear that departmental budgets will be cut not only in 2015-16, but each year until we have achieved our promise to balanCe the books. Across every part of the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC), we need to take a tighter approach to finanCial management of taxpayers’ money, and reform the framework within which the energy market operates so that it is fair for bill payers. Under the Tory’s failing plan, energy bills have risen, and energy Companies have failed to pass on falling wholesale Costs. Record numbers of families with children Cannot afford to heat their homes. Investors face unCertainty and indeCision about the future of our energy system. And the mismanagement of taxpayers’ money, such as through the Government’s poor-value Green Deal Home Improvement Fund, and the NuClear Decommissioning Authority’s budget, have seen tens of millions of pounds wasted. Britain needs a government that will stand up to the energy Companies to deliver fairer prices and a better deal for bill payers. A government that is serious about tackling the sCandal of fuel poverty and cold homes. And a government that is putting in place the vital reforms neCessary for investment in the low Carbon future of our energy system, and to deliver value for money for the taxpayer.
    [Show full text]
  • The Changing Landscape of Climate Governance
    PENN: CURRENT RESEARCH ON SUSTAINABLE URBAN DEVELOPMENT The Changing Landscape of Climate Governance The Role of Cities as Political Actors and Policy Implementers WILLIAM BURKE-WHITE Richard Perry Professor and Inaugural Director, Perry World House Professor of Law, Penn School of Law LAURA BARRON Program and Communications Manager, Penn Institute of Urban Research 2 Penn: Current Research on Sustainable Urban Development | The Changing Landscape of Climate Governance: Role of Cities as Political Actors and Policy Implementers FINDING THE POLITICAL WILL TO ADDRESS CLIMATE CHANGE: GLOBAL, NATIONAL, AND LOCAL PERSPECTIVES Addressing the impacts of climate change and limiting further impact is the most critical aspect of achieving global environmental sustainability, as laid out in the United Nation’s SDGs and New Urban Agenda. The experiences of the past decades, however, have demonstrated that stopping climate change is a challenge not only of effective implementation of mitigation and adaptation techniques, but also of finding the political will to undertake bold moves needed to deal with existing climate change and limit future global warming. Climate change, often described as a problem of the global commons, requires commitment and coordination across most, if not all, nation states. The bold moves needed today require significant political will to drive cooperation where problems are complex, time-horizons are long, interests poorly aligned, and institutions weak. Traditionally, climate politics has been focused at the international level of governance—through international institutions and international legal agreements among national governments that can work together to coordinate needed global responses (Bodansky 2001). International diplomatic meetings and agreements from Rio to Kyoto, Copenhagen to Paris, have been the locus of action for international political and legal commitments to address climate challenges.
    [Show full text]
  • The Performance of the Department of Energy & Climate Change 2012-13
    DEPARTMENTAL OVERVIEW The performance of the Department of Energy & Climate Change 2012-13 NOVEMBER 2013 Our vision is to help the nation spend wisely. Our public audit perspective helps Parliament hold government to account and improve public services. The National Audit Office scrutinises public spending for Parliament and is independent of government. The Comptroller and Auditor General (C&AG), Amyas Morse, is an Officer of the House of Commons and leads the NAO, which employs some 860 staff. The C&AG certifies the accounts of all government departments and many other public sector bodies. He has statutory authority to examine and report to Parliament on whether departments and the bodies they fund have used their resources efficiently, effectively, and with economy. Our studies evaluate the value for money of public spending, nationally and locally. Our recommendations and reports on good practice help government improve public services, and our work led to audited savings of almost £1.2 billion in 2012. Contents Introduction Aim and scope of this briefing 4 Part One About the Department 5 Part Two Recent NAO work on the Department 24 Appendix One The Department’s sponsored bodies at 1 April 2013 29 Appendix Two Results of the Civil Service People Survey 2012 30 Appendix Three Publications by the NAO on the Department since April 2011 32 Appendix Four Cross-government reports of relevance to the Department since April 2011 34 Links to external websites were valid at the time of publication of this report. The National Audit Office is not responsible for the future validity of the links.
    [Show full text]
  • Tyndall Centre Briefing Note 40
    Review of the Fourth Carbon Budget - Call for Evidence www.theccc.org.uk/call-for-evidence Question and Response form When responding please provide answers that are as specific and evidence-based as possible, providing data and references to the extent possible. Please limit your response to a maximum of 400 words per question. Questions for consideration: A. Climate Science and International Circumstances The Committee’s advice assumes a climate objective to limit central estimates of temperature rise to as close to 2C as possible, with a very low chance of exceeding 4C by 2100 (henceforth referred to as “the climate objective”). This is broadly similar to the UNFCCC climate objective, and that of the EU. In order to achieve this objective, global emissions would have to peak in the next few years, before decreasing to roughly half of recent levels by 2050 and falling further thereafter. The UNFCCC is working toward a global deal consistent with such reductions, to be agreed by 2015. Earlier attempts (e.g. at Copenhagen in 2009, before the fourth budget was recommended or legislated) have failed to achieve a comprehensive global deal to limit emissions. It is difficult to imagine a global deal which allows developed countries to have emissions per capita in 2050 which are significantly above a sustainable global average, implying the need for emissions reductions in the UK of at least 80% from 1990 levels by 2050. The EU has not yet agreed a package beyond 2020, but the European Commission is consulting on a range of issues relating to development of climate and energy targets for 2030.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary for Policymakers. In: Global Warming of 1.5°C
    Global warming of 1.5°C An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty Summary for Policymakers Edited by Valérie Masson-Delmotte Panmao Zhai Co-Chair Working Group I Co-Chair Working Group I Hans-Otto Pörtner Debra Roberts Co-Chair Working Group II Co-Chair Working Group II Jim Skea Priyadarshi R. Shukla Co-Chair Working Group III Co-Chair Working Group III Anna Pirani Wilfran Moufouma-Okia Clotilde Péan Head of WGI TSU Head of Science Head of Operations Roz Pidcock Sarah Connors J. B. Robin Matthews Head of Communication Science Officer Science Officer Yang Chen Xiao Zhou Melissa I. Gomis Science Officer Science Assistant Graphics Officer Elisabeth Lonnoy Tom Maycock Melinda Tignor Tim Waterfield Project Assistant Science Editor Head of WGII TSU IT Officer Working Group I Technical Support Unit Front cover layout: Nigel Hawtin Front cover artwork: Time to Choose by Alisa Singer - www.environmentalgraphiti.org - © Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The artwork was inspired by a graphic from the SPM (Figure SPM.1). © 2018 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Revised on January 2019 by the IPCC, Switzerland. Electronic copies of this Summary for Policymakers are available from the IPCC website www.ipcc.ch ISBN 978-92-9169-151-7 Introduction Chapter 2 ChapterSummary 1 for Policymakers 6 Summary for Policymakers Summary for Policymakers SPM SPM Summary SPM for Policymakers Drafting Authors: Myles R.
    [Show full text]
  • Climate Change and Democratic Representation Can Select Committees Influence a Company’S Environmental, Social and Governance Credentials?
    Climate Change and Democratic Representation Can Select Committees influence a company’s environmental, social and governance credentials? Stanley Kwong 2 Executive Summary The House of Commons Select Committees (Committees) are a group of MPs from different political parties tasked with examining policy issues, holding the government and companies to account, and making proposals for new laws. An area where Committee assertiveness is particularly evident is in relation to topics concerning sustainability. This is in part driven by large scale environmental disasters that warranted Committee investigation. For example, inquiries concerning BP’s oil rig catastrophe (by the Energy and Climate Change Committee) and Volkswagen’s diesel emissions scandal (by the Environmental Audit Committee) drew widespread public and media interest. Public awareness on climate change issues has further elevated Committee work in this area, with a particular emphasis on scrutinising companies that hold poor sustainability practices that affect wider society. From an economic perspective this is typical of a negative externality, with Professor Stern (2008) calling global warming ‘the greatest market failure of all time’. However, the climate crisis may be more pronounced than a solely economic failure. In particular, it may also highlight fundamental deficiencies and systemic failures in the governance of liberal democracies. In this context, the emergence of mechanisms of deliberative democracy, such as the Climate Assembly UK, have grown in popularity as formats that aim to cultivate citizen representation and participation. Nevertheless, the public continue to look to elected representatives for action, particularly on the gap that remains on private sector company oversight. This is where the Committees’ distinctive investigative approach can be a key component in driving forward the climate dialogue, by adding a unique layer of public and investigative pressure on companies.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bottom-Up Alternative: the Mitigation Potential of Private Climate Governance After the Paris Agreement
    \\jciprod01\productn\H\HLE\42-2\HLE205.txt unknown Seq: 1 30-JUL-18 10:11 THE BOTTOM-UP ALTERNATIVE: THE MITIGATION POTENTIAL OF PRIVATE CLIMATE GOVERNANCE AFTER THE PARIS AGREEMENT Maria L. Banda* ABSTRACT The 2015 Paris Agreement on Climate Change has sought to inject renewed energy into the international climate regime. As a “bottom-up” treaty, however, it allows States to set their own emissions targets. Even before the U.S. withdrawal, States Parties’ commitments fell far short of what is required to achieve the treaty’s objectives. The low level of State ambition, coupled with the lack of an international enforcement mechanism, means that pri- vate initiatives—including through courts, investor actions, and voluntary business commit- ments—will be critical, especially in the U.S., if the climate regime is to deliver on its goals. This Article seeks to contribute to both the theoretical and empirical literature on private climate governance and develop a richer understanding of bottom-up options for the imple- mentation of the Paris Agreement where State leadership is weak or lacking. First, it develops an analytical framework to evaluate the effectiveness, or the mitigation potential, of private climate governance. Second, it provides a critical assessment of three promising forms of pri- vate climate governance: (a) disclosure of company emissions and climate risks; (b) voluntary commitments to reduce emissions; and (c) carbon labeling. The Article shows empirically that these private initiatives face a number of constraints that make them unlikely to generate significant mitigation action in the near term without regulatory backing. However, other bottom-up options, such as climate litigation, can play an important role in closing the ambi- tion deficit by increasing government accountability and facilitating the de facto implementa- tion of the Paris Agreement in the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • MCA Climate Action Plan
    13 51 6 Al Sb C Aluminium Solar cells Antimony Carbon 27 29 79 Co Cu Au Cobalt Copper Gold Batteries 26 3 25 Fe Li Mn Hydrogen Iron Lithium Manganese 12 28 41 Mg Ni Nb Magnesium CCUS Nickel Niobium 50 92 30 Sn U Zn Tin Uranium Zinc EV & hybrids Nuclear Mineral Wind Rare earth energy sands energy elements Copyright © 2020 Minerals Council of Australia CLIMATE ACTION PLAN PREAMBLE minerals.org.au Supporting ongoing climate action by Australia’s minerals industry The MCA and all of its Sustained climate action across all nations is 4. Accelerated development of the This 2020-2023 plan furthers the minerals well as taking a lead on commodity stewardship required to reduce the risks of human-induced minerals required for a low emissions sector’s public commitment to addressing looking at global procurement practices, circular members are taking serious climate change and to support world-wide future including aluminium, copper, nickel, climate change on an ongoing basis consistent economy, and traceability of commodities action on climate change decarbonisation as we transform to a lower zinc, iron, uranium, base metals, lithium, with the MCA’s climate statement. It outlines a through their lifecycle. emissions future. minerals sands, and rare earths series of actions focused on three key themes: and are committed to the Practical and cost-effective options are already Our sector improves the lives of millions of 5. Global and domestic partnerships 1. Support developing technology pathways to being developed and put into action across the Paris Agreement and its goal people in Australia and overseas through the with governments, regulators, customers, achieve significant reductions in Australia’s minerals value chain.
    [Show full text]
  • Climate Change & Audit
    No 2| 2020 Climate Change & Audit Journal Our responsibility towards “ future generations 1 Table of contents 13 32 The United Nations providing Climate action – already at scientific facts to assess climate the forefront of EU policy change and its impacts through making for a decade the IPCC - worth a Nobel Prize By Mauro Petriccione, Director-General By Abdalah Mokssit, Secretary of the for Climate Action (CLIMA), European Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Commission 37 INTERVIEW Interview with Iliana Ivanova and Nikolaos Milionis, ECA Members Stepping up climate action audits… to address climate change realities 92 06 EDITORIAL 32 Climate action – already at the forefront of EU 08 European climate policy in 2020: at the crossroads policy making for a decade between leadership aspirations and struggles to By Mauro Petriccione, Director-General for Climate Action put promises into practice (CLIMA), European Commission Charlotte Unger, Institute for Advanced Sustainability Studies 37 Stepping up climate action audits… to address (IASS) climate change realities 13 The United Nations providing scientific facts to IInterview with Iliana Ivanova and Nikolaos Milionis, assess climate change and its impacts through the ECA Members IPCC - worth a Nobel Prize By Gaston Moonen By Abdalah Mokssit, Secretary of the Intergovernmental Panel 43 Auditing EU actions on climate change: what on Climate Change (IPCC) issues and challenges EU auditors faced? 18 It takes more than markets: first lessons from the By Phil Wynn Owen, former ECA
    [Show full text]
  • Innovations in Global Governance Peace-Building, Human Rights, Internet Governance and Cybersecurity, and Climate Change
    September 2017 Innovations in Global Governance Peace-Building, Human Rights, Internet Governance and Cybersecurity, and Climate Change Deborah Avant, Susanna P. Campbell, Eileen Donahoe, Karen Florini, Miles Kahler, Mark P. Lagon, Tim Maurer, Amol Mehra, Robert C. Orr, Jason Pielemeier, and Sarah Sewall The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) is an independent, nonpartisan membership organization, think tank, and publisher dedicated to being a resource for its members, government officials, business executives, journalists, educators and students, civic and religious leaders, and other interested citizens in order to help them better understand the world and the foreign policy choices facing the United States and other countries. Founded in 1921, CFR carries out its mission by maintaining a diverse membership, with special programs to promote interest and develop expertise in the next generation of foreign policy leaders; convening meetings at its headquarters in New York and in Washington, DC, and other cities where senior government officials, members of Congress, global leaders, and promi- nent thinkers come together with CFR members to discuss and debate major international issues; sup- porting a Studies Program that fosters independent research, enabling CFR scholars to produce arti- cles, reports, and books and hold roundtables that analyze foreign policy issues and make concrete policy recommendations; publishing Foreign Affairs, the preeminent journal on international affairs and U.S. foreign policy; sponsoring Independent Task Forces that produce reports with both findings and policy prescriptions on the most important foreign policy topics; and providing up-to-date infor- mation and analysis about world events and American foreign policy on its website, CFR.org.
    [Show full text]
  • Climate Change Adaptation Policy Formulation Among Local Governments: a Policy Instruments Approach
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
    [Show full text]