U.S. Climate Action Partnership

The U.S. Climate Action Partnership developed from the Climate Change Initiative, created in January 2006 by the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, General Electric, Environmental Defense Fund, and World Resources Institute. The initiative sought to create a joint business-environmental plan for federal climate policy, particularly a framework that would regulate greenhouse-gas emissions rather than rely exclusively on voluntary corporate action. The Natural Resources Defense Council later joined the effort, and the Pew Center recruited companies from its Business Environmental Leadership Council, including Alcoa, BP, Caterpillar, Duke Energy, DuPont, Florida Power & Light, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, and PNM Resources. The group worked privately during 2006. The Meridian Institute facilitated discussions involving companies and environmental organizations, helping participants reconcile differing views about economic impacts, emissions caps, technological change, and the design of federal legislation. The resulting recommendations were published when the coalition launched publicly as the U.S. Climate Action Partnership on January 22, 2007. Its central publication, A Call for Action, asked the President, Congress, and other stakeholders to enact an environmentally effective, economically sustainable, and fair national climate program. USCAP's policy approach emphasized a mandatory economy-wide system with emissions limits for the United States and capped sectors. Its Blueprint used 2005 as the reference year and proposed national and sectoral objectives of 97%–102% of 2005 emissions by 2012, 80%–86% by 2020, 58% by 2030, and 20% by 2050. The program was intended to provide a predictable federal framework for business investment and emissions reductions. Critics argued that the proposed timetable was not sufficiently ambitious when compared with emissions pathways discussed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change for developed countries using 1990 as the baseline. Membership expanded during 2007. In April, ConocoPhillips and AIG were reported as joining, while a further group of companies and environmental organizations joined in June, including Alcan, Boston Scientific, Dow Chemical, General Motors, Johnson & Johnson, Marsh, PepsiCo, Shell, Siemens, The Nature Conservancy, and the National Wildlife Federation. Chrysler and Ford joined in July. The coalition therefore represented an unusually broad group of companies whose commercial exposure to climate policy varied considerably, alongside organizations that had long advocated stronger environmental regulation. USCAP was a policy coalition rather than a conventional operating company. Contemporary descriptions stated that it had no substantial permanent staff and relied on external organizations for administration, facilitation, lobbying, and communications. The Meridian Institute, Lighthouse Consulting, and Powell Tate Weber Shandwick were identified in reporting as supporting its operations. This arrangement allowed the partnership to coordinate a shared public position without replacing the independent lobbying and business activities of its members. The partnership's composition generated controversy. Observers questioned the coexistence of USCAP's climate advocacy with corporate sponsorship of organizations that opposed or resisted comparable legislation. Critics also pointed to the prior involvement of some companies in the Global Climate Coalition, an industry group that had opposed greenhouse-gas controls and had sought to influence debate over the Kyoto Protocol. Other critics, including officials associated with international climate policy, argued that USCAP's long-range proposals did not provide sufficiently strong near- or medium-term reductions. Coal executive Robert Murray publicly attacked the coalition's members for aligning with environmental groups. Beginning in 2010, a number of companies departed. BP America, Caterpillar, ConocoPhillips, and John Deere said that USCAP had served its purpose or that they intended to pursue their interests separately. Xerox and Marsh were also identified as departing members. Ford announced its withdrawal on January 23, 2012. The available reference material does not document a formal dissolution, successor organization, or continuing membership roster. Accordingly, USCAP is best understood as a historically significant climate-policy coalition whose active status after the early 2010s is not established by the supplied sources.

• 2012

  Ford withdraws

  [1]U.S. Climate Action Partnershipen.wikipedia.org

  Ford announced its departure from USCAP in January.

• 2010

  Multiple corporate withdrawals

  [1]U.S. Climate Action Partnershipen.wikipedia.org

  Several corporate participants left the coalition and stated that they would pursue climate-policy interests independently.

• 2007

  Public launch of USCAP

  [1]U.S. Climate Action Partnershipen.wikipedia.org

  The coalition launched publicly on January 22 and released A Call for Action.

• 2007

  USCAP Blueprint policy targets publicized

  [1]U.S. Climate Action Partnershipen.wikipedia.org

  The partnership presented proposed U.S. emissions objectives for 2012, 2020, 2030, and 2050, based on 2005 emissions levels.

• 2006

  Climate Change Initiative formed

  [1]U.S. Climate Action Partnershipen.wikipedia.org

  The Pew Center on Global Climate Change, General Electric, Environmental Defense Fund, and World Resources Institute began a joint process to develop federal greenhouse-gas policy recommendations.

A cross-sector business and environmental coalition advocating pragmatic, mandatory, economy-wide U.S. greenhouse-gas regulation.

• Policy statement · 2007

  A Call for Action

  USCAP's initial public policy statement called for cooperation among the federal government, Congress, businesses, environmental organizations, and other stakeholders to create a mandatory national climate program. It emphasized environmental effectiveness, economic sustainability, and fairness rather than voluntary action alone.

• Climate-policy framework · 2007

  USCAP Blueprint

  The Blueprint translated the coalition's principles into proposed national and capped-sector emissions objectives. It advocated rapid creation of an economy-wide federal program and expressed targets relative to 2005 emissions levels, including objectives for 2012, 2020, 2030, and 2050.

• 2009

  Questions over conflicting corporate climate positions

  Critics questioned whether some USCAP companies supported the partnership while also backing organizations that opposed or sought to weaken climate legislation. Commentators also highlighted earlier links between several participants and the Global Climate Coalition.

  Source

Read more

• 2007A Call for Action

  United States

  USCAP publicly advocated federal legislation requiring significant greenhouse-gas reductions and promoted a cooperative business-environmental approach to climate policy.

  Outcome. The statement established USCAP's public policy identity and provided the basis for its subsequent Blueprint recommendations.

  Source
• 2007USCAP Blueprint advocacy

  United States

  The partnership promoted a national economy-wide greenhouse-gas program with emissions targets and capped sectors, seeking action by the President and Congress.

  Outcome. The proposal became the coalition's principal policy framework, although the supplied sources do not establish that all of its targets were enacted.

  Source

• 2010

  Members pursue climate policy independentlyStrategy

  Background

  Several corporate members reassessed their participation as USCAP's lobbying role and climate legislation developed.

  Action taken

  BP America, Caterpillar, ConocoPhillips, John Deere, Xerox, and Marsh were reported as withdrawing or no longer participating.

  Aftermath

  The departures reduced the coalition's corporate breadth; the supplied sources do not document a formal dissolution.

  Source

• 2007

  Adopt a mandatory economy-wide federal climate frameworkStrategy

  Background

  The coalition was formed to move beyond voluntary corporate initiatives and develop a common position for federal greenhouse-gas regulation.

  Action taken

  USCAP called for national emissions limits, capped sectors, and a federal program designed to combine environmental objectives with economic predictability.

  Aftermath

  The approach defined the partnership's public advocacy and was reflected in A Call for Action and the Blueprint.

  Source

1. 1U.S. Climate Action Partnershipen.wikipedia.org