Professor Barkin, I am troubled by this study. The way we measure and attribute carbon emissions has long been critically challenged. For instance, it is easy for eco modernist countries and cities to look green when they have globalized the production of the resources they consume. China produces a great deal of emissions producing goods that others, like the U.S. consume, but the CO2 falls on the producer countries. Quantification and attribution can play easily into narratives about sustainability that mask actual realities of consumption and responsibility.
Similarly, your study quantifies only fossil fuel consumption. There is merit to weighing fossil fuel consumption on its own, and you account for GDP. However, the takeaway from your study claims something much broader - that residents of conservative states emit much more, which encompasses their entire carbon footprint. The study does not account for air travel emissions, levels of consumption that have implications for CO2 far beyond fossil fuel consumption within the state, and levels of carbon absorption. Wealthier, urban residents are far more likely to travel and to consume more goods that also have major carbon implications. Many farming, logging, indigenous communities are stewarding land or managing resources that either benefit urban communities or absorb carbon. (or worsen emissions through land use change). In New York State like much of New England, land use has changed from mostly farmland to mostly forest over the last fifty years. While this is largely due to structural economic shifts, farmers here now produce something like 2.5 times as much milk and beef on much less land than they have in the past. Nor does the study account for population density - there is an immediate disadvantage in such accounting practices against more dispersed, rural settlements. I fear that these statements, if the media runs away with the headline and abstract, are likely to fan the flames of partisanship rather than contribute to a deeper understanding of interdependencies and responsibilities among urban and rural communities, and opportunities for rural and conservative states to contribute to carbon emissions reduction. Respectfully, Linda ------------------- Linda Shi Assistant Professor Department of City and Regional Planning Cornell University 213 Sibley Hall [email protected] ________________________________ From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of Samuel Barkin <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2019 5:11 PM To: Gep-Ed <[email protected]> Subject: [gep-ed] Carbon emissions and ideology in the US Dear GEP-ED colleagues, With apologies for the self-promotion, Betul Gokkir and I just published an article in JESS entitled “Are Liberal States Greener? Political Ideology and CO2 Emissions in American States, 1980-2012,” available here<https://rdcu.be/bO2m7> (alas in read-only format unless one has a subscription). The abstract is pasted below. Cheers, Sammy Samuel Barkin Professor of Global Governance University of Massachusetts Boston Abstract Are liberal states in the USA greener? Based on an analysis of panel data from American states from 1980 to 2012, this paper investigates the particular impact of citizen ideology on per-capita carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. This study contributes to the existing literature through a focus on the role of citizen ideology as a frame shaping pro-environmental behavior at the individual level when the effect of structural factors, like per-capita economic output, fossil-fuel production, and population density, are controlled for. The findings suggest not only that states with more liberal citizen ideology emit less CO2, but also that this effect both precedes and exceeds the influence of policies directly targeting climate change. Finally, this paper suggests that a change in popular perception of the environment and climate change as an American matter, as opposed to an ideological alignment issue, can lead to further decreases in CO2 emissions due to changes in citizens’ preferences and behaviors. -- 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]<mailto:[email protected]>. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/gep-ed/9FB7BC44-3084-4D73-B7F3-F6FF6463E615%40umb.edu<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/gep-ed/9FB7BC44-3084-4D73-B7F3-F6FF6463E615%40umb.edu?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. -- 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]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/gep-ed/DM6PR04MB649624DDAE6CB60AD9719272C9AA0%40DM6PR04MB6496.namprd04.prod.outlook.com.
