This act requires that a municipal public fund create a list of fossil fuel companies that match specific criteria, divest all holdings from the companies on this list over a 3-year period, and reinvest funds in socially responsible investments that satisfy prudent person standards. This act also requires investment offerings for participant-directed retirement funds that are devoid of holdings in fossil fuel companies. This act also urges divestment action from fiduciaries of local government investment pools and that credit agencies factor climate risks into their ratings of publicly held companies.

A resolution declaring the intent of a city that does not invest in stock to refrain from investing in fossil fuel companies in the future.

With the change in presidential administrations, the EPA's Clean Power Plan is in jeopardy, but a number of states have promoted and will continue to promote clean energy adoption. Federal regulations may change, but it is clear that with the price of solar and wind dropping, clean energy generation is the future of electricity. Carbon pricing is one major set of market mechanisms that states can use to promote the advancement of clean energy adoption. Whether a state or region chooses to implement a cap-and-trade, carbon tax, or some other mechanism, it is critical that issues of equity and justice for the communities most impacted by poverty and pollution are addressed in the policy design and implementation. This legislator toolkit provides guidance on how to support disadvantaged communities and displaced workers should a state choose to use carbon pricing as part of its plan to transition to a clean energy economy.

A resolution urging divestment, if the City does not control the Pension Board and does not otherwise invest in fossil fuel stocks.

A resolution to divest a city holding fossil fuel stocks from publicly-traded fossil fuel companies.

A resolution declaring the intent of a city without fossil fuel investments to refrain from investing in fossil fuel companies in the future.

Policy establishing sustainable procurement guidance for city purchases requiring full life cycle evaluation of materials and their economic and environmental impacts.

Companies, governments, and institutions of all kinds purchase goods and services for their own use. But what they buy - and how they buy it - has a significant impact on local communities, the environment, and the economy - and in some unexpected ways, on the success of the business itself. When organizations choose to purchase goods and services that are sustainable, in a way that is transparent, they lower their risks, boost their public relations, and become more cost-effective. What's more, they help build a broadly sustainable economy - especially when they also require sustainability from their supply chains. By choosing sustainable procurement options, buyers enhance local economic growth, harness the potential of underutilized communities, reduce income inequality, and mitigate the damage of climate change - all while making purchases their operations need. Adding sustainability and transparency to purchasing specifications improves everyday operations and, at the same time, fosters a more sustainable economy for everyone.

If you want to encourage a behaviour, make it Easy, Attractive, Social and Timely (EAST). These four simple principles for applying behavioural insights are based on the Behavioural Insights Team's own work and the wider academic literature. There is a large body of evidence on what influences behaviour, and we do not attempt to reflect all its complexity and nuances here. But we have found that policy makers and practitioners find it useful to have a simple, memorable framework to think about effective behavioural approaches.

A majority of Americans across party lines support action to address climate change and promote clean energy. Unfortunately, the Trump administration has taken a page from the establishment playbook and set up its federal agencies to do the bidding of polluters by taking us back to the reckless and dangerous policies that put the dirty energy industry's profits ahead of the health and safety of Americans. It's clear that under Trump, the federal government is now led by those who are intent on slowing the transition to a clean energy economy, and this failed leadership is bad for business, bad for public health, and bad for the economy. But the shift to a clean energy economy is already underway, driven by market forces, bolstered by consumer demand, and supported by major American companies that are already investing in clean energy.