Search

This article provides an analysis of the origins and effects of UK climate governance. It is centrally concerned with the relationships between politics and climate institutions, both in how political conditions have shaped the emergence of climate governance, and in how the resulting institutions subsequently structure climate politics. The analysis brings out three key themes. First, a focus on the CCA can overlook the enduring importance of the parallel climate governance architecture provided by the European Union. Second, it is important to see UK climate governance within a wider political and institutional context, as these results of this context, especially tensions between ambition and instability, have influenced its evolution. Third, this design, and other aspects of the evolution of UK climate governance framework, have in turn had implications for the strengths and weaknesses of the framework and how it has met key governance challenges. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The rise of right-wing populism (RWP) poses a challenge for the climate agenda, as leaders and supporters tend to be climate sceptics and hostile to policy prescribing action on climate change. However, there is a surprising dearth of research that investigates the nature and causes of this association. Two kinds of explanation are considered, drawing on the literature on populism. One is termed ‘structuralist’, drawing on accounts of the roots of populism in economic and political marginalisation amongst those ‘left behind’ by globalisation and technological change. A second focuses on the ideological content of RWP, especially its antagonism between ‘the people’ and a cosmopolitan elite, with climate change and policy occupying a symbolic place in this contrast. It is argued that there are limits to the structuralist approach, and that an ideologically based explanation is more compelling. An agenda for future research on RWP and climate science and policy is proposed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Eight years after the launch of the Stern Review of the economics of climate change, a new major report on economic growth and climate change ( Better Growth, Better Climate) has been published by a Global Commission on the Economy and Climate, chaired by Nicholas Stern. While this comprehensive review of recent evidence has some overlap with the original Stern Review, it focuses more on the short-term costs and benefits of action needed to reduce carbon emissions in specific parts of the economy such as cities, energy and agriculture. Perhaps the most noted conclusion of the report is that policies which governments should be pursuing anyway, because they will reduce pollution, improve health, raise productivity and reduce congestion, will cut carbon emission by between 50 and 90 per cent of what is needed to get to a 2°C pathway. This is an important report that will have considerable influence, although it has had lower public visibility than the original Stern Review. However, it also points to the need for a better understanding of the politics of climate policy, and why the opportunities to adopt policies that have multiple long-term public benefits do not get taken. While Better Growth, Better Climate does have a chapter on the political economy of change, the analysis is limited, and could be deepened by bringing in the growing literature on the politics of climate policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

After a decade in which public concern for climate change seems to have peaked and fallen away in the face of economic priorities and political populism, Matthew Lockwood asks how the environmental movement can build broad coalitions of support to tackle these vital issues. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Highlights: [•] The 2008 Climate Change Act has failed to produce political certainty and investor confidence. [•] Public interest implementation theory is applied to analysis of the political sustainability of the Act. [•] Climate change is a difficult policy problem due to low political salience and immediate costs. [•] The Act has produced some institutional innovation and positive policy feedback effects. [•] However, opponents have not been neutralised, investment effects are incomplete and the Act remains at risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines how states organize themselves internally to address climate change. Topics covered include the definitional categories for climate institutions, the ways that states address three core climate governance challenges, including through coordination, building consensus, and strategy development, and the ways that institutions and national political contexts influence and shape each other.