The clean energy claims of BP, Chevron, ExxonMobil and Shell: A mismatch between discourse, actions and investments

'You can't really separate these risks, our environment, our animals and us': Australian children's perceptions of the risks of the climate crisis

Perceptions of the risks associated with the climate crisis are shaped by a range of social and political contexts and information sources. While some have expressed concerns about the impact of the spread of climate misinformation through social media platforms on young people, others have shown that the youth climate movement has played a key role in countering misinformation. Despite this, there has been very limited research with children about how they conceptualize the risks associated with the climate crisis, how they receive climate information, and how they understand and apply this to their own and others' lives. The following qualitative study used photo-elicitation techniques and in-depth interviews with Australian children to address this gap. A total of n = 28 children (12-16 years) participated, with four themes constructed from the data using a reflexive approach to thematic analysis. Children were concerned about how the climate crisis would continue to harm their futures and the health of planet and people. They recognized that some groups and countries would experience more risks associated with the climate crisis as compared to others. While they received information from a range of different sources (school, family, social media), they mostly used social media to seek out climate information. They recognized that social media sites could be a source of climate misinformation, and argued that a range of strategies were needed to identify and counter false information about the climate crisis. Children's perspectives must be harnessed to improve information about climate risks and action.

Pension funds and fossil fuel phase-out: historical developments and limitations of pension climate strategies

Despite the decades of international climate negotiations and several landmark agreements, global efforts to date to restrict fossil fuel production in line with climate targets have been unsuccessful. As national and international policies continue to fall short of phasing out fossil fuels, increasing attention has been paid to non-state actors, like pension funds, as a potential source of more ambitious climate action. As major asset owners, large shareholders in fossil fuel companies, and historically activist investors, pension funds are theoretically well-placed to contribute to phasing out fossil fuels. Despite growing recognition of this potential role for pension funds and other major investors in climate change mitigation, there has been little attention to pension funds' historical record on climate change, or to how their climate strategies have developed and changed over time. This paper examines how the climate strategies of the largest US and European pension funds have evolved in relation to key developments in international climate agreements and the extent to which these strategies contribute to restricting fossil fuel supply. Through an analysis of the annual, governance, and sustainability reports of 6 pension funds from 1997 to 2022, we examine the strategies pension funds have adopted to address both climate change and fossil fuels. Pension funds have demonstrated responsiveness to the signals of international climate agreements, adopting a range of strategies with respect to climate change (amongst others, integrating ESG principles, increasing their sustainable investments, and setting net zero goals). Their explicit attention to fossil fuels and contribution to supply-side interventions take the form of systematic shareholder engagement, (selective) divestment, and lobbying policymakers. While pension fund climate action is growing , the ambition of their strategies is not aligned with a rapid fossil fuel phaseout; their efforts are often focussed on improving disclosure and transparency and demonstrate complacency with minimal improvements from fossil fuel companies. If pension funds are to significantly contribute to phasing out fossil fuels, redefining pension fund responsibilities and the traditional shareholder role will likely be required.

Do fossil fuel firms reframe online climate and sustainability communication? A data-driven analysis

Identifying drivers of climate misinformation on social media is crucial to climate action. Misinformation comes in various forms; however, subtler strategies, such as emphasizing favorable interpretations of events or data or reframing conversations to fit preferred narratives, have received little attention. This data-driven paper examines online climate and sustainability communication behavior over 7 years (2014-2021) across three influential stakeholder groups consisting of eight fossil fuel firms (industry), 14 non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and eight inter-governmental organizations (IGOs). We examine historical Twitter interaction data (n = 668,826) using machine learning-driven joint-sentiment topic modeling and vector autoregression to measure online interactions and influences amongst these groups. We report three key findings. First, we find that the stakeholders in our sample are responsive to one another online, especially over topics in their respective areas of domain expertise. Second, the industry is more likely to respond to IGOs' and NGOs' online messaging changes, especially regarding environmental justice and climate action topics. The fossil fuel industry is more likely to discuss public relations, advertising, and corporate sustainability topics. Third, we find that climate change-driven extreme weather events and stock market performance do not significantly affect the patterns of communication among these firms and organizations. In conclusion, we provide a data-driven foundation for understanding the influence of powerful stakeholder groups on shaping the online climate and sustainability information ecosystem around climate change.

Assessing the role of sustainable strategies in alleviating energy poverty: an environmental sustainability paradigm

The rapid urbanization and industrialization of India have caused a demand-supply gap in the electrical sector, leading to higher electric bills. Lower-income households face the worst energy poverty in the country. Sustainable strategies like corporate social responsibility are the most effective way to combat the energy crisis. This study aims to assess the contribution of corporate social responsibility (CSR) to energy poverty alleviation (EPA) by developing the role of mediating variables such as assessment of renewable energy resource (RER), feasibility of sustainable energy supply (SES), and sustainable energy development (SED). We used hybrid research methodology such as partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) to analyze the collected data from professionals, economic experts, and directors in the country in 2022. The study proved that CSR directly affects energy poverty alleviation. Besides, the findings suggest RER, SES, and SED significantly lead the energy poverty alleviation. The findings of this study will divert the attention of policymakers, stakeholders, and economists toward the corporate social responsibility to mitigate the energy crisis in Indian context. A mediating role of a renewable energy resource (RER) as a value-added contribution to this study can be strengthened more in future research. Based on the results, the study illustrates that CSR acts as a catalyst to alleviate energy poverty.

Introducing DynaPTI-constructing a dynamic patent technology indicator using text mining and machine learning

Patent data is an established source of information for both scientific research and corporate intelligence. Yet, most patent-based technology indicators fail to consider firm-level dynamics regarding their technological quality and technological activity. Accordingly, these indicators are unlikely to deliver an unbiased view on the current state of firm-level innovation and are thus incomplete tools for researchers and corporate intelligence practitioners. In this paper, we develop DynaPTI, an indicator that tackles this particular shortcoming of existing patent-based measures. Our proposed framework extends the literature by incorporating a dynamic component and is built upon an index-based comparison of firms. Furthermore, we use machine-learning techniques to enrich our indicator with textual information from patent texts. Together, these features allow our proposed framework to provide precise and up-to-date assessments about firm-level innovation activities. To present an exemplary implementation of the framework, we provide an empirical application to companies from the wind energy sector and compare our results to alternatives. Our corresponding findings suggest that our approach can generate valuable insights that are complementary to existing approaches, particularly regarding the identification of recently emerging, innovation-overperformers in a particular technological field.

Breaking free from tunnel vision for climate change and health

Climate change is widely recognised as the greatest threat to public health this century, but 'climate change and health' often refers to a narrow and limited focus on emissions, and the impacts of the climate crisis, rather than a holistic assessment of economic structures and systems of oppression. This tunnel vision misses key aspects of the climate change and health intersection, such as the enforcers of planetary destruction such as the military, police, and trade, and can also lead down dangerous alleyways such as 'net' zero, overpopulation arguments and green extractivism. Tunnel vision also limits health to the absence of the disease at the individual level, rather than sickness or health within systems themselves. Conceptualising health as political, ecological, and collective is essential for tackling the root causes of health injustice. Alternative economic paradigms can offer possibilities for fairer ecological futures that prioritise health and wellbeing. Examples such as degrowth, doughnut economics and ecosocialism, and their relationship with health, are described. The importance of reparations in various forms, to repair previous and ongoing harm, are discussed. Breaking free from tunnel vision is not simply an intellectual endeavour, but a practice. Moving towards new paradigms requires movement building and cultivating radical imagination. The review highlights lessons which can be learnt from abolitionist movements and progressive political struggles across the world. This review provides ideas and examples of how to break free from tunnel vision for climate change and health by highlighting and analysing the work of multiple organisations who are working towards social and economic transformation. Key considerations for the health community are provided, including working in solidarity with others, prioritising community-led solutions, and using our voice, skills, and capacity to address the structural diagnosis-colonial capitalism.

Harnessing the potential of nature-based solutions for mitigating and adapting to climate change

Although many governments, financial institutions, and corporations are embracing nature-based solutions as part of their sustainability and net-zero carbon strategies, some nations, Indigenous peoples, local community groups, and grassroots organizations have rejected this term. This pushback is fueled by (i) critical uncertainties about when, where, how, and for whom nature-based solutions are effective and (ii) controversies surrounding their misuse in greenwashing, violations of human rights, and threats to biodiversity. To clarify how the scientific community can help address these issues, I provide an overview of recent research on the benefits and limits of nature-based solutions, including how they compare with technological approaches, and highlight critical areas for future research.

Responsible Carbon Resource Management through Input-Oriented Cap and Trade (IOCT)

Fossil fuels store primary carbon. When they are combusted, CO2 is released into the atmosphere. The accumulation of CO2 in the atmosphere causes the anthropogenic greenhouse gas effect, which has led to the existing climate crisis. Academic literature, international climate deliberations and most domestic climate mitigation plans have so far focused primarily on reducing emissions (output orientation) and have paid little attention to supply-side climate policies. Thus, this study shows that output-oriented literature is heavily overweighted with over 7000 publications compared to input-oriented literature with just 107 publications (equivalent to 1.5% percent). The overall scope of this review article was therefore to identify the gaps of output-oriented mechanisms such as the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS), and to point out how an Input-Oriented Cap and Trade (IOCT) system might overcome those gaps. IOCT refers to limits to the carbon input into the global fossil fuel trading system instead of limiting only the emissions caused by already burned fuel. For this purpose, a global cap on the extraction of coal, gas and oil must firstly be defined. Accordingly, IOCT provides for the allocation of allowances for the extraction, processing and trading of carbon-based products. IOCT is a source-oriented approach that refers to a joint allocation of the resource consumption responsibility to the fossil fuel producer and consumer as well. This review represents a unique, comprehensive and current collection of supply-side literature that can be used as a starting point for further applied research on this topic.

A Consideration of Wildlife in the Benefit-Costs of Hydraulic Fracturing: Expanding to an E3 Analysis

High-volume hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) for natural gas in the Marcellus Shale (underlying about 24 mil ha in New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, West Virginia, Ohio, and Virginia) has become a politically charged issue, primarily because of concerns about drinking water safety and human health. This paper examines fracking in the Marcellus region, and the tradeoffs between the energy and economic potential of natural gas extraction and the environmental impacts on wildlife. Therefore, we introduce a new E3 analysis that combines the costs and benefits as regards energy, economics, and the environment. The Marcellus Shale has the most proven reserves of natural gas of any basin in the United States, at 129 trillion cubic feet. Income from natural gas development comes primarily from direct and indirect jobs, and induced jobs (those created when direct workers spend their earnings in a community), taxes and fees, and royalty and lease payments to rights holders. Fracking, however, has detrimental effects on wildlife and wildlife habitats. Terrestrial habitat effects are primarily due to landscape fragmentation from the clearing of land for pipeline and well pad development, which often removes mature forest and creates open corridors and edge habitats. An increase in forest edge and open corridors is associated with shifts in the bird community, as generalist species that do well around people increase in abundance, while forest specialists decline. Invasive plants associated with disturbance further degrade forest habitats. Aquatic habitats are also affected, both directly and indirectly. Hydraulic fracturing requires up to 20 mil L of water per well fracture, most of which comes from surface water sources in the Marcellus region. The removal of water, especially in smaller headwaters, can increase sedimentation, alter water temperature and change its chemistry, resulting in reductions in aquatic biodiversity. Given the reality that hydraulic fracturing will continue, there is a need to develop practices that best minimize negative impacts on terrestrial and aquatic habitats, as well as policies and the resolve to enforce these practices. To achieve a more sustainable balance between economic, energy, and environmental costs and benefits, we recommend that industry, scientists, non-governmental organizations, mineral rights holders, landowners, and regulators work together to develop a set of best management practices that represent the best knowledge available.