Search

Societal transformations for addressing climate change are intensely contested and at risk of resistance and backlash to ambitious policy action. But they are frequently modeled through heuristics such as S‐curves which abstract from such conflicts, assuming increasing returns to scale as a driver of transformations. This is the case even while scholars accept the presence of political conflict in transformation processes. Within political science and allied disciplines, the notions of policy feedback and policy coalitions have been deployed to understand how such political conflicts may be understood. But these approaches risk gravitating toward an instrumental design impulse that inadvertently downplays conflict. We argue that policy action for societal transformations should be re‐conceptualized as an unfolding series of battle‐settlement events whereby heated episodic political struggles over a certain policy object or issue play out and eventually settle in ways that structure future debates while nonetheless remaining indeterminate and open to challenge or reversal. Such an approach reflects the varied empirical experiences of climate policy action to date which include both accumulation and reversal. It also helps explain trajectories of change that are discontinuous and lurching in contrast to common images of transformation as progressive and cumulative. We illustrate this approach through two cases of unfolding societal transformation on climate change: coal phaseout in the United Kingdom and renewable energy uptake in Australia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Against the backdrop of a fragmented and evolving governance landscape, this paper examines how effective climate commissions are in engaging the public to co-produce local climate action in the UK. Climate commissions are emerging amid heightened concerns regarding the top-down style of policymaking on climate change and resource-constrained local authorities. However, less is known about how they engage the public who are pivotal for climate action, both in signalling greater ambition from governments and through their own mitigation and adaptation efforts. This paper draws on qualitative interviews with an array of individuals both inside and outside climate commissions in the UK, and utilises Cash's theoretical framework of 'salience, legitimacy and credibility' to assess how effective climate commissions are in engaging the public to co-produce local climate action. The findings indicate a discernible chasm between commissions and the broader public. Equally however, they provide hopeful perspectives into the effect that more collaborative engagement, that speaks to local concerns and leverages local knowledge, would have on commissions' 'salience, legitimacy and credibility' and, additionally, the legitimacy of local authorities. Moreover, they suggest that deeper collaboration with local networks of community groups, who are not yet represented on commissions, could foster more sustained climate action. It concludes by considering the novel implications of these emergent insights for the Cash framework and what this means for commissions in their future engagement with the public. • Knowledge co-production resonates in both theory and practice. • Local and grassroot action is critical to meet climate mitigation and adaptation goals. • Ensuring 'salience, legitimacy and credibility' can lead to more effective climate policy. • Climate commissions need to better leverage local knowledge to drive climate action. • Community groups are under-utilised in climate conversations and decision-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The proliferation of pledges to reach net-zero emissions has revealed a wide range of understandings of what such a pledge entails. The lack of international standards to define decarbonisation pathways and the many kinds of speculative offsets available for net-zero calculations have generated a multiplication of public commitments not tethered to any specific mechanism of accountability. Many have criticised this state of affairs as a governance vacuum allowing extravagant forms of 'greenwashing,' with corporations and countries asserting ostensibly ambitious goals without adopting verifiable instruments for their delivery. This paper addresses the situation from a slightly different perspective, exploring instead how net-zero pledges create new climate publics and counter-publics. Drawing on three case studies (UK national net-zero policy, the Race to Zero campaign, and the Science Based Targets Initiative), and informed by a pragmatist understanding of 'public' and 'public formation,' we examine how the adoption of a formal but ambiguous target leads to a collective consideration of consequences, thus expanding the range of actors engaged in disputes over alternative climate futures. • Imaginations of net zero futures are unavoidably ambiguous and open to interpretation. • Setting net zero targets and delineating their consequences can enable the formation of new publics and counter publics. • This process hinges on the deployment of specific devices to imagine and deliberate on plausible futures. • The paper develops a pragmatist framework for investigating the formation of publics as a political consequence of net zero publics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Regional Studies is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This is the first in a two-part analysis of Northern Ireland’s engagement with the climate governance regime created by the UK Climate Change Act 2008. It contends that UK devolution has shaped this national regime and may itself be shaped by the national low carbon transition, particularly in the case of the UK’s most devolved region. In essence, while Northern Ireland’s consent to the application of the Act appeared to represent a long-term commitment to share power in the interests of present and future generations and thus to devolution itself, this first article argues that it was also potentially illusory. The second article argues that making an effective commitment to climate governance will require its devolved administration to allow constitutional arrangements designed for conflict resolution to mature. Failure to do so will have important implications for the UK’s putative ‘national’ low carbon transition and the longer term viability of devolution in the region. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]