Dear colleagues, Thank you all very much for your response to my query about teaching resources for mock climate negotiations.
Below is my summary of the responses received, with apologies in advance if I mis-represented anyone. I found these tipc really very helpful. Thank you so much to everyone who responded. Best, Navroz Resources for Mock Climate Negotiations *Journal articles* Brown, Joseph M. 2018. “Efficient, Adaptable Simulations: a Case Study of a Climate Negotiation Game.” Journal of Political Science Education, February, 1–12. doi:10.1080/15512169.2018.1431129 <https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15512169.2018.1431129> *ABSTRACT* Instructors may be reluctant to adopt simulations because of time, labor, or material constraints, or perceived incompatibility with large classes. In fact, simple games can cover multiple key concepts with minimal time and effort by the instructor. Simple games are also adaptable to other topics and classes, including large lectures. This article presents a simulation in which students negotiate a global greenhouse gas reduction agreement. Three scenarios model basic climate change mitigation, follow-on agreements for climate stabilization, and the surprise withdrawal of signatories after a domestic leadership turnover (e.g., the 2016 U.S. presidential election). The simulation teaches key concepts such as anarchy, collective action, preference divergence, and commitment problems. Concepts such as institutions, identity, and levels of analysis arise organically from game play. The exercise has extremely low cost and setup time. It can be run in 15 minutes or extended for a full class period. The game may also be repurposed to simulate other bargaining or collective action issues. This case study shows that simulations can be efficient and adaptable. Instructors can create their own simple games to enhance comprehension of key concepts. Pros: Works well for a short couple-hour session, Orr, Shannon K., (forthcoming), “International Negotiations and State Interests: A Green Climate Fund Simulation”, Journal of Political Science Education *Truncated introduction* Climate change studies have repeatedly highlighted the need for public leaders to better understand the challenges and consequences of rising sea levels, droughts, flooding and increased storm surges due to climate change, as well as to engage with meaningful problem solving (Karlsson et al. 2011; Parker et al. 2012). The Green Climate Fund simulation presented here is an effort to engage students around problem solving for a world struggling with the differential impacts of climate change. We wanted a simulation that side-stepped the debate over whether or not climate change is real and get students to contend with the real-world issues facing decision makers today - both substantive and procedural. The simulation that we present here was designed to introduce students not only to climate change policymaking, but also to the Green Climate Fund and the process of negotiation. Rather than concentrating on either the political debate about climate change, or doom and gloom scenarios, (of which there are already ample materials available), the focus of this simulation is on taking action and collaborative decision making. This simulation grew out of an interest for students to experience a true negotiation, but to do so in a limited time period of just two 50-minute class periods including all preparation and debriefing. This meant that they had to be able to grasp the importance of the issues quickly, and be able to jump right into the negotiation, but with a clear possibility of actually coming to a resolution. We wanted to help students practice their critical thinking skills while recognizing the challenge of both developing fair “rules of engagement,” and coming to a global agreement when there are very different interests at stake and a limited time span-- thereby truly simulating the international negotiation experience. Pros: no extensive background needed *Online/software resources* *C-Roads* Negotiation simulator programme, - https://www.climateinteractive.org/tools/c-roads/ Pros: Simple, Students from past experience love it, Having negotiating team pledges translated to PPM and global temp figures a powerful feature, Multiple languages, modifiable Cons: Deforestation numbers not as intuitive *Climate Interactive’s World Climate simulation* https://www.climateinteractive.org/programs/world-climate/ Pros: Materials and resources provided excellent, works with a variety of groups, works with different lengths of time, 3 regions format, Simulation can be ran over one 1.5 hour session, Includes ‘auxillary roles’ like activists and fossil fuel lobbies which adds an additional dimensions, Has tangible dimensions which contribute to the experience (like making the LDCs sit on the floor, and maybe giving the big players more comfortable chairs, candy, or other kinds of “resources”), Cons: Prep so students become familiar with country/regional positions and debrief ideal, Might need two sessions to fully get experience, Can be improved with breakout rooms so groups can arrange meetings, EN-ROADS features a carbon tax adjustement but uses energy economic sectors so can be limited *Simulation of international negotiations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions* https://serc.carleton.edu/NAGTWorkshops/climatechange/activities/15155.html Pros: provide frameworks for rounds of negotiation and structures for each party negotiating. *Courses* Max Boykoff - CLIMATE CHANGE POLITICS & POLICY, ENVS/GEOG 3022, UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO: https://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/students/envs-geog_3022/syllabus_2018.pdf Pros: Based on a concrete roadmap (“Loss and Damage” negotiations at Katowice, Multiple disaggregated voting groups, Rich experience as spread out over multiple sessions throughout the year therefore Cons: Need to implement as part of a larger semester design. -- *Recent Publications* 1. India and Climate Change: Evolving Ideas and Increasing Policy Engagement <http://www.annualreviews.org/eprint/BcF6X9DrtiaGSfJq9kPw/full/10.1146/annurev-environ-102017-025809> , *Annual Review of Environment and Resources* *2. **More priorities, more problems? Decision-making with multiple energy, development and climate objectives <https://authors.elsevier.com/sd/article/S221462961830611X>, **Energy Research in Social Science* Dr. Navroz K. Dubash Professor, Centre for Policy Research Dharma Marg, Chanakyapuri New Delhi 110 021, India Tel: +91-11-2611-5273/74/75/76 Email: ndubash@gmail <[email protected]>.com Web page: http://cprindia.org/people/navroz-k-dubash <http://www.cprindia.org/users/navroz-k-dubash> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "gep-ed" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
