FIRST<\/strong>: Our theme for Monday afternoon, May 9^{th<\/sup><\/strong>, is: Jobs vs. the Environment: Must We Choose?<\/strong> This question is both important and timely, since it consistently surfaces in political campaigning and other public discourse around climate change.<\/p>\n\n\n\n}

Contrary to the frequently-stated view that job creation and environmental protection are mutually exclusive, economist Robert Pollin<\/strong> contends that full employment and substantial GHG reductions are indeed possible\u2014if nations can soon agree on devoting 1.5% of annual GDP to invest in energy efficiency and renewable energy resources. (He estimates that only 0.5% of global GDP is currently so invested each year.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A key feature in Pollin\u2019s analysis is the necessity to provide generous assistance to displaced fossil-fuel workers and adversely affected communities. For some background, see the attached chapter, \u201cExpanding Job Opportunities through Clean Energy Investments,\u201d from Pollin\u2019s compact book, Greening the Global Economy <\/em>(Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2015).)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Some guiding questions: To what extent do proposals at the federal level address the need to assisted displaced workers and affected communities? (See, for example, President Obama\u2019s 2015 Climate Action Plan, copy attached.) And to what extent (if any) might revenues from establishing a price on carbon be earmarked to fund such transition costs for displaced workers and affected communities?<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n