Environment & Climate Change

Stephen Walt advises that in order to prepare students of public policy schools for a rapidly changing world, faculty should teach historical cases where the prevailing theories led to bad policy choices, and where new ones had to be devised to address a novel set of circumstances. 

Joseph S. Nye argues that history shows that globalization is largely driven by technological changes that reduce the importance of distance, and that will not change.

While the Paris Agreement provides the framework for the nations of the world to slow the growth of CO2 emissions, additional policy and technological tools will have to be deployed to meet the challenge of climate change. That’s the perspective expressed by Daniel Bodansky, the Regents’ Professor of Law at the Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law at Arizona State University, during the latest episode of “Environmental Insights: Discussions on Policy and Practice from the Harvard Environmental Economics Program,” a podcast produced by the Harvard Environmental Economics Program.

Harvard Kennedy School’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs today announced the appointment of Lori Garver and Beth Sanner as non-resident Senior Fellows. Garver is a former Deputy Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Agency (NASA) and current CEO of Earthrise Alliance. Sanner was Deputy Director of National Intelligence for Mission Integration and is now Professor of Practice at the University of Maryland's Applied Research Lab for Intelligence Security. They will both share their experience and expertise with students and faculty of Harvard Kennedy School and the greater Harvard community.      

Stephen Walt enumerates the challenges the U.S. president should prepare for in 2021.

In an interview,  the Intelligence Project's Calder Walton examines the recent assessment from entire U.S. intelligence community on the impacts of climate change on U.S. national security.

Joseph Nye analyzes why the Cold War metaphor in relation to  the U.S. and China, although convenient, is lazy and potentially dangerous. It obscures and misleads us by underestimating the real challenge we face — and offering ineffective strategies.

Stephen Walt argues that what 9/11 means to future generations depends less on what actually occurred on that day or on how the United States and others responded and more on what the United States and others do from this day forward. 

During the Cold War, US grand strategy focused on containing the power of the Soviet Union. China's rise now requires America and its allies to develop a strategy that seeks not total victory over an existential threat, but rather managed competition that allows for both cooperation and rivalry within a rules-based system.

Stephen Walt asks whether the United States is a good model for other liberal states and whether its policy judgments are ones that others should trust and follow, especially with respect to foreign policy.  He argues that—on balance—the answer to both questions is "no."