Last year we launched the first edition of the Hobart and William Smith Colleges Public Affairs Journal to begin a passionate, informed dialogue around issues of our time. Our first contributors tackled disease and disaster relief and questioned current policy towards drugs and marriage. Through their work, the internationally focused values of serivce, compassion and intellectual thought provided in our liberal arts education became exemplified in print. As an editorial board, we were pleased with the results, but already ready to begin a more focused, analytical second edition.

        We invited community leaders, faculty, alumni, and non-profit directors to share their insights and passions, through letters and submissions sharing a glimpse of how the term ‘public affairs’ touches their world. The fluidity of the term is apparent in the breadth and diversity of the topics embarked upon in our first and current issue, a concept dealt with in our introduction by Thomas E. Tighe, of Direct Relief International. It was through them that this second edition found the connection. From the classroom to the professor’s office, the nonprofit war zone, and government office to community hall, we found a group of committed, compassionate individuals willing to share their thoughts and begin the second round of dialogue.

        On behalf of our staff, I invite you to analyze, question and debate the issues presented between this cover; to recognize what is missing and contribute in the future. Without you, we become a string of hollow pages; with you a meaningful discourse begins.

It wasn’t long ago that the term “public affairs”, much like the term “public service,” would be understood as relating to activities of government.

Things are tidy when public affairs are defined by public servants, who in turn are empowered to develop and implement public policy. But, the circularity of logic – “it is public policy because it was the appropriate policymakers who decided it” – doesn’t make much sense upon reflection, and it doesn’t offer much insight into what is good public policy and what is not.

But of course times change. Issues of public policy that were previously stovepiped in their appropriate and recognized boxes don’t fit there anymore. Perhaps they never fit as neatly as we thought they did when, say, building a road was simply understood to be an infrastructure project to be handled by the responsible roadplanning experts in government. Now, a proposed road will likely engage the interests of people outside of government interested in its environmental, economic, or social effects, and their input will shape the debate if not the course of the road itself.

History gets exciting whenever anyone -- but particularly well informed, committed, and thoughtful people -- say“ Excuse me, but that particular matter being discussed is about things I care about or know about or is about me -- so, with all due respect, I am, beginning right now, involved.”

That sentiment, articulated better, is what the Hobart and William Smith
Public Affairs Journal reflects, and it is why I am particularly pleased to offer this introduction of the Journal’s second edition.

"Seriously," you may ask, “what are the chances of a small non-profit in a small upstate New York community actually having much of an impact?” Based on our experience over the past ten years, we would have to answer that the odds are very good! Success for Geneva’s Children was a spontaneous by-product of the Geneva Head Start strategic planning process. The 1996 version of this triennial exercise brought together a number of extremely dedicated people who expressed an interest in continuing their dialogue after they completed the required community needs assessment. We were very fortunate to have a natural leader within the group. Judith Meyers, Ph.D., the wife of the thenpresident of Hobart and William Smith Colleges, had been brought into the needs assessment as a community representative; her very strong background in clinical and community psychology was exactly what we needed to help shape the mission and goals of our grass-roots organization. Judith’s knowledge and experience were invaluable in creating a collaborative, informal “umbrella” group that would bring together city and county agencies, not-for-profits, the local school district and medical community … everyone who had a role to play in the lives of Geneva’s young people. Judith’s basic guidance at out initial meetings was: “If you’re here to see what you can get, you’re at the wrong meeting – if you’re here to see what more you can give, in collaboration with others, to improve conditions for our children … you’re in the right place.” And so the Geneva Collaborative for Children was born. The title of our first report to the community was “Success for Geneva’s Young Children” – we liked it so much, that we adopted the name for our fledgling organization (the “Young” was dropped several years later, when we expanded the scope of our efforts to include older children). [Dr. Meyers now serves as President and CEO of the Child Health and Development Institute of Connecticut. The fact that we enjoyed her pro bono services during our formative years was a key ingredient in making our dream a reality.]

Abstract
The governments of China and the US now recognize the importance of reducing future emissions of greenhouse gases. The technological options touted by both are likely to have limited effect in the near term as these options continue the reliance on fossil fuels for producing electricity and fueling our vehicles. Tackling the complex issue of climate change and the responsibilities for various countries in different stages of development requires truly unconventional approaches including tradable emission allowances and the adoption of transformational technologies, such as hydrogen fuel cells. International climate change negotiations should focus on establishing longer term (2020 or 2025) emission caps for all countries. Clearly, developing countries, such as China, will not agree to any caps that limit their potential for near-term economic development. They may, however, be willing to agree to future caps if they are given financial incentives to do so. Carbon allowances could provide the incentive they require. Countries must also strengthen collaboration on advanced technologies, such as hydrogen fuel cells. Fuel cells have several limitations at present, but rapid progress has been reported in many key areas in recent years. Solving some of these obstacles to the overall viability of fuel cells is an area where international collaboration and cooperation can and should be fostered.