even when taking into account the Medieval warm period and Little Ice Age, the changes we see today are unlike anything before
They do not explain the changes we have seen recently
Natural causes, The greenhouse effect, 100% natural, sustains life on earth, keeps average temperatures at 12.8 C instead of -29 C
Human causes, Enhanced greenhouse effect
Natural processes do not account for observed 20th century warming after 1965
'We have moved outside the range of historical variation' (referring to table: 800 000 year recorod of carbon dioxide concentration)
Warmer and dryer summers
Winter storm tracks
Energy supply and use
A commonly heard myt: modern wealth is due to to subsidy of cheap fossil fuel.
Local level example: women, Key role in solving societal problems related to energy consumption, deforestation, burning of vegetation, population growth and economic growth, EQUAL ACCESS to knowledge, resources, technology, planning and decision-making --> effective mitigation of climate change at the local level
GHG emissions by 20%, EU prepared for 30 % emission reduction?
Increase renewable energy 20 %
Increase energy efficiency by 20 %
Share of biofuels to 10 %
Main target: 80 % EU-wide emission reduction by 2050
Intermediate targets, 40 % reduction by 2030, 60 % reduction by 2040
But still below the Kyoto target!!
The fourth dimension is science, knowledge and innovations
The difficulty is that everything is related to everything in climate, and humans are now part of that system
U (understanding), V (vision), C (capacity to change), F (feasible
Human beings are resistant to change
Prof. Markku Kulmala: The sum of understanding, vision, capacity to change and feasible plans need to be larger than humans resistance to change.
Five Finnish municipalities act as laboratories by working to curb their GHGs ahead the EU schedule
Kuhmoinen, Mynämäki, Padasjoki, Parikkala, Uusikaupunki
These municipalities are small and have minor impact on Finland's GHGs
BUT: they can act as pilots of providing concrete solutions
Uusikaupunki is a forerunner, Improved the image of Uusikaupunki, Increased viability - new companies and residents, A new green business sector has created new jobs, Clear cost-benefits for the town - about 120 000 €/year due to energy savings, Children and young peoples are the most eager action groups!!
Why do these municipalities act?, Energy costs will be rising in the future, Local resources can be utilized in reducing energy costs (biomass, wind, geothermal heat, water), Energy efficiency are good investments; payback is competitive with low risk, Environmentally friendly products can provide economic benefits
A big message for our society, The bottow-up approach !!!, Climate change mitigation can offer 'win-win-win' situations
How to put scientific results into practice?, This is the problem.
Decline of the marine biodiversity
Increasing oil accident risks
Increase in toxic pollutants
Important modiyinf factor: climate change
Need for international cooperation
A great number of private polluting agents
Uncertainty about environmental impacts
Need for more scientific knowledge
Difficulties in formulating policies
Stratification of water, hypoxia; water ezxhange with Atlantic OCean
Transfer of surface water implies the transfer of nutriens
The vicious cycle of eutrophication
It is a common property resource; the sea is owned by nobody and everybody
Countries are free to pollute and no one can legally preevent them from doing so
Sovereign states have no supranational obligatory body; they reduce nutrient only if they want to
The loads of polluters (Poland, Russia) flows to other countries (Finland, Sweden), Polluters do not find eutrophication a big problem, Polluters profit from not purifying nutrient loads
Policy challenge: How to overcome this asymmetry?
Science challenge: How to provide sensible knowledge for policy making?
Ecological model of the Baltic Sea, The basic block of analysis, is of UTMOST importance!!
Abatement costs of nutrients: minimum cost functions
Benefits from abatement: citizens' valuation of changes in the marine environment
Behavioural hypotheses, What happens in international negotiations?
Policy challenge: How do we make a binding, self-enforcing agreement?
We ask first: How well do the BSAP and alternative, hypothetical cost-efficient agreement account for the asymmetry?
We ask then: What sort of steps are needed to overcome asymmetries and to reach a binding agreement?
Good case: Poland reduces 62400 tons N (BSAP)
Bad case: Polish agriculture expands and N loads increase by 159 000 tons making 96 000 N tons net increase
Lesson: countries are very much inderdependednt.
Poland: 66 % of P reduction and 49 % N reduction
Poland, Russia and the Baltic states: 95 % of P and 66 % of N
Denmark & Sweden: high N reduction targets
Costs and fairness? total costs (€) vs. costs/capita in watershed (€) vs. costs as a % of GDP, e.g. Lithuania costs as a GDP: 1.86. A LOT! Since e.g. Nokia's share of Finnish GDP is 1.6 --> tells a lot about the importance
Improvements?, Share the costs more evenly. Use side payments to countries bearing high costs., The benefits accreu from the resulting nutrien reductions in the sea water within each country
BSAP is NOT a cost-efficient solution
Proposals: 1) Description of the transfer of nutrients 2) Measurement of abatement costs 3) Policy responses of multiple private agents 4) value of the marine environment 5) understanding of international cooperation
In the empirical part, the following parts were researched; what kind emotions/values, lissues for relevance, and what does it mean to be in the classroom
What is objectivity - what is subjectivity
What is an opinion - what are facts?
Solutions to environmental problems are political - how to deal with that?
Interest increases when the topic is relevant to the person involved
What is topical, what is controversial
Situations of diferent viewpoints are very significant in learning processes
Individual, business, government
We need policy actions to achieve real action with individual choices
KAB K--> A--> B (knowledge, attitidunial change, behaviour)
The sum of individual actions = collective action & big change
No linear and causal links
Prisoners dilemma, sucker effect
Knowledge of what?
Values (and altruistic goals)
Individual action or supporting collective change?
Price and environmental degradation
The environment and economics: ethical reasoning
What are norms and values are prevalent in society, How do they affect the way we do things
Behavioural sciences incorporated into environmental education
Take a case problem and think what tools are needed in socity/worldwide to address it
We have increased our knowledge of climate change, at the same time we have increased our ignorance
We never quite achieved modernity because of this
Are facts separate from values?
Do facts determine values, or drive behaviour?
Are values truly subjective?
Contains a dilemma itself
There is an overproduction of science, 1 million articles published every year, 60 % of these papers are not cited in the first 5 years, Blogs, Loss of sense of the whole, Policy makers and the public overwhelmed
no one can become an expert in interdiscpilinary
this research should recognize its limits to research itself, to people's capacity for understanding, to time and money