scholarly journals Making Climate Change Policy Work at the Local Level: Capacity-Building for Decentralized Policy Making in Japan

2012 ◽  
Vol 85 (4) ◽  
pp. 767-788 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yasuo Takao
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Capacity Building ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Local Level ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
Change Policy ◽  
Policy Work

Declarations: Root and Branch Unthinking

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Peter J. Taylor ◽  
Geoff O’Brien ◽  
Phil O’Keefe
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Social Science ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
Complex Problem ◽  
Jane Jacobs ◽  
Change Policy ◽  
Fit For Purpose

This chapter takes the failure of current climate change policy as a given and seeks explanations and ways forward. Policy-making should be firmly grounded in the essential nature of anthropogenic climate change – a complex problem and an existential threat. It is found wanting in three fundamental aspects. International relations with its competitive preposition is found to be not fit for purpose as decision-making arena. The scientific input for decision-making underplays the ‘anthropo’ bit of climate change and therefore is found unfit for purpose. And social science contributions are found not fit for purpose because of their innate state-centric bias. To overcome the resulting impasse requires critical unthinking. The work of Jane Jacobs is chosen as guide to unthinking thereby foregrounding cities. An invitation is issued for others to provide alternate unthinking.

Assessing the Operationalization of Cultural Theory through Surveys Investigating the Social Aspects of Climate Change Policy Making

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 651-665 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claire Cambardella ◽  
Brian D. Fath ◽  
Andrea Werdenigg ◽  
Christian Gulas ◽  
Harald Katzmair
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Risk Perceptions ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Cultural Theory ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
Natural World ◽  
Policy Preferences ◽  
Social Aspects ◽  
Change Policy ◽  
The Social

AbstractCultural theory (CT) provides a framework for understanding how social dimensions shape cultural bias and social relations of individuals, including values, view of the natural world, policy preferences, and risk perceptions. The five resulting cultural solidarities are each associated with a “myth of nature”—a concept of nature that aligns with the worldview of each solidarity. When applied to the problem of climate protection policy making, the relationships and beliefs outlined by CT can shed light on how members of the different cultural solidarities perceive their relationship to climate change and associated risk. This can be used to deduce what climate change management policies may be preferred or opposed by each group. The aim of this paper is to provide a review of how CT has been used in surveys of the social aspects of climate change policy making, to assess the construct validity of these studies, and to identify ways for climate change protection policies to leverage the views of each of the cultural solidarities to develop clumsy solutions: policies that incorporate strengths from each of the cultural solidarities’ perspectives. Surveys that include measures of at least fatalism, hierarchism, individualism, and egalitarianism and their associated myths of nature as well as measures of climate change risk perceptions and policy preferences have the highest translation and predictive validity. These studies will be useful in helping environmental managers find clumsy solutions and develop resilient policy according to C.S. Holling’s adaptive cycle.

Resolving the Adaptation Paradox: Exploring the Potential for Deliberative Adaptation Policy-Making in Bangladesh

2011 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 62-88 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica Ayers
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
Vulnerable Groups ◽  
Local Context ◽  
Global Risk ◽  
Adaptation Policy ◽  
Change Policy ◽  
Starting Point

Climate change adaptation presents a paradox: climate change is a global risk, yet vulnerability is locally experienced. Effective adaptation therefore depends on understanding the local context of vulnerability, which requires deliberative and participatory approaches to adaptation policy-making. But, how can local inclusiveness be achieved in the context of global environmental risk, and what sorts of institutions are needed? This article examines one avenue for the participation of vulnerable groups in adaptation policy-making: National Adaptation Programmes of Actions (NAPAs). Drawing on the case study of Bangladesh, this article shows that the “adaptation paradox” creates a tension between local and global definitions of climate change risk, affecting the legitimacy of participatory processes under the NAPA. I propose that early analysis and engagement of existing local institutional frameworks as a starting point for national adaptation planning is one possible entry point for meaningful local deliberation in global climate change policy-making processes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document