For all its economic capacity, population size, and resource base, California remains only one among the 50 United States and, essentially, is a subnational actor attempting to play a role in the climate change policy arena on par with the nation-states of the world. This raises a series of questions about the substance and breadth of the state's new policy and what has motivated it. The state's policy declarations and initial flurry of activities are impressive. As with all so broad and sweeping initiatives, it remains to be seen the extent to which policy goals can and will be translated into operational rules and regulations, incentives and sanctions, and actual accomplishments across all the sectors of the state's economy over the course of not just months and years but the decades to come.
Betsill, M.M., & Rabe, B.G. (in press). Climate change and multilevel governance. In D. Mazmanian & M. Kraft (Eds.), Toward sustainable communities (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
2.
Brown, E.G., Jr. (2007, June 19). Comments on draft environmental impact report for Coyote Valley Specific Plan. Sacramento: California Department of Justice.
3.
Brown, S. (2005). Global climate change and California. Sacramento: California Energy Commission.
4.
California Air Resources Board. (2007, October). Expanded list of early action measures to reduce greenhouse emissions in California recommended for board consideration: Proposed early actions to mitigate climate change in California. Sacramento : Author.
5.
California Air Resources Board. (2008a). Draft scoping plan: A framework for change. Retrieved July 25, 2008, from http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/document/sp_executivesummary_draft.pdf
6.
California Air Resources Board. (2008b). Greenhouse gas inventory data-Draft 2020 forecast. Retrieved August 7, 2008, from http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/data/forecast.htm
7.
California Energy Commission. (2007). Scenario analysis of California's electricity system: Preliminary results for the 2007 Integrated Energy Policy Report. Retrieved August 3, 2008, from http://www.energy.ca.gov/2007publications/CEC-200-2007-010/CEC-200-2007-010-SD.PDF
8.
California Environmental Protection Agency. ( 2007, December). State agency greenhouse reduction report card . Sacramento: Author.
9.
Center for Clean Air Policy. (2006, January 19). Cost effective GHG mitigation measures for California: Summary report. Sacramento, CA: Author.
10.
Clemencon, R. (2008). The Bali Road Map: A first step on the difficult journey to a post-Kyoto Protocol agreement. The Journal of Environment & Development, 17, 70-94.
11.
Climate Action Team. (2006, March). Climate Action Team report to Governor Schwarzenegger and the California legislature . Sacramento: California Environmental Protection Agency.
12.
Electric Power Research Institute. (2007, June). Program on technology innovation: Economic analysis of California climate initiatives: An integrated approach (Vol. 1, summary for policymakers) . Retrieved August 3, 2008, from http://www.epriweb.com/public/000000000001014641.pdf
13.
Environmental Justice Action Committee. (2008 ). Recommendations and comments of the Environmental Justice Advisory Committee on the implementation of the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32) on the draft scoping plan. Retrieved August 15, 2008, from http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/ejac/meetings/080708/ejac_comments_outline.pdf
14.
EU Commission. (2008). Reducing CO2 emissions from light-duty vehicles. News report. Retrieved August 7, 2008, from http://ec.europa.eu/environment/air/transport/co2/co2_home.htm
15.
Griffin, K. (2008). AB 32: Interim decision on greenhouse gas regulation in the electricity and natural gas sectors (Presentation to the California Energy Commission business meeting). Retrieved July 25, 2008, from http://www.energy.ca.gov/2008publications/CEC-999-2008-007/CEC-999-2008-007.PDF
16.
Hanemann, W.M., & Farrell, A.E. (2006, January). Managing greenhouse gas emissions in California. Berkeley: University of California, Berkeley, CaliforniaClimate Change Center.
17.
Hooghe, L., & Marks, G. (2003). Unraveling the central state, but how? Types of multi-level governance. American Political Science Review , 97(2), 233-243.
18.
Jacoby, D.H., & Ellerman, A.D. (2004). The safety valve and climate policy. Energy Policy, 32, 481-491.
19.
Kingdon, J.W. (2003). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies (2nd ed.). New York: Longman.
20.
Market Advisory Committee. (2007, June 30). Recommendations for designing a greenhouse gas cap-and-trade system for California. Sacramento: California Air Resources Board.
21.
Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency, 549 U.S. 497 (2007).
22.
Mayhew, D.R. (1974). Congress: The electoral connection. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
23.
Ohame, K. (1995). The end of the nation state and rise of regional economies. New York: Free Press .
24.
Pew Center on Global Climate Change. (2008 ). Carbon cap or offset requirement for power plants. Retrieved August 1, 2008, from http://www.pewclimate.org/what_s_being_done/in_the_states/cap_and_offset_map.cfm
25.
Rabe, B.G. (2007, August-September). Governing the climate from California . Paper presented at the 2007 annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago.
26.
Schwarzenegger, A. (2005, June 1). Executive order S-3-05 (climate change) . Sacramento: State of California .
27.
Slaughter, A.-M. (2004). A new world order. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
28.
Stavins, R., Jaffe, J., & Schatzki, T. (2007, March). Too good to be true? An examination of three economic assessments of California climate change policy (Working Paper RWP07-016). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
