Science and Evidence-Based Climate Change Policy: Collaborative Approaches to Improve the Science–Policy Interface

Author(s):  
Edward A. Morgan ◽  
Gabriela Marques Di Giulio
2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 200-214 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Kukkonen ◽  
Tuomas Ylä-Anttila

In this article, we argue that the science–policy interface can be understood as a discourse network constituted by discursive interaction between scientific organizations and other actors that both use scientific arguments in conjunction with other policy arguments. We use discourse network analysis to investigate the climate change policy process in Finland between 2002 and 2015, focusing on the role of and relationships between scientific actors and arguments in the discourse networks. Our data consist of policy actors’ written testimonies on two law proposals, the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol (2002) and the enactment of the Finnish Climate Law (2015). Our results show that two competing discourse coalitions have influenced the development of climate change policy in the 2000s. In 2002, the dominant coalition was economic, prioritizing economic growth over climate change mitigation. In 2015, the climate coalition that argued for ambitious mitigation measures became dominant. The majority of scientific actors were part of the dominant economy coalition in 2002 and part of the dominant ecology coalition in 2015. The centrality of scientific arguments increased over time, and both discourse coalitions used them progressively more. These developments reflect the increasingly central position of science in Finnish climate policymaking. We contribute to the literature on the science–policy interface by operationalizing the interface as a set of connections in a discourse network and by showing how the analysis of discourse networks and their properties can help us understand the shifts in the role of science in policymaking over time.


2021 ◽  
pp. 165-186
Author(s):  
Robert C. Ferrier ◽  
Rachel C. Helliwell ◽  
Helen M. Jones ◽  
Nikki H. Dodd ◽  
M. Sophie Beier ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel Coleman ◽  
Rebecca Clifford ◽  
Catherine Hewitt ◽  
Jim McCambridge

Abstract Background Policies which reduce affordability and availability of alcohol are known to be effective in reducing alcohol harms. Public support is important in policy decision making and implementation, and it may be possible to intervene to improve public support for alcohol policy measures. This systematic review aims to explore the effects of interventions to increase public support for evidence based policy measures in relation to either public health or climate change, and to examine underpinning theory and content of effective interventions.Methods The electronic search strategy was built around the constructs "public support or opinion", "health or climate change policies" and "interventions". Backward and forward searching was conducted, and authors of included papers contacted. Studies were included if they aimed to intervene to improve public support for public health or climate change policy measures, were controlled trials, and targeted the general public.Results Sixteen studies were included in this review, of which 13 had sufficient data for inclusion in meta analyses. The pooled effect estimates for continuous and binary data both show improvements in public support for policy measures as a result of evaluated interventions. The pooled standardised mean difference (n=8 studies) is 0.13 (95% C.I. 0.08-0.17), and the pooled odds ratio (n=5 studies) is 1.72 (95% C.I. 1.33-2.21). Careful attention to message framing, with or without narrative persuasion, appears particularly important content for efficacious interventions.Conclusion This systematic review demonstrates the efficacy of interventions to improve public support for public health policies.


2020 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nathalie Seddon ◽  
Elizabeth Daniels ◽  
Rowan Davis ◽  
Alexandre Chausson ◽  
Rian Harris ◽  
...  

Non-technical summary Ecosystems across the globe are vulnerable to the effects of climate change, as are the communities that depend on them. However, ecosystems can also protect people from climate change impacts. As the evidence base strengthens, nature-based solutions (NbS) are increasingly prominent in climate change policy, especially in developing nations. Yet intentions rarely translate into measurable, evidence-based targets. As Paris Agreement signatories revise their Nationally Determined Contributions, we argue that NbS are key to meeting global goals for climate and biodiversity, and we urge researchers to work more closely with policy-makers to identify targets that benefit both people and ecosystems.


2010 ◽  
pp. 115-132 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Agibalov ◽  
A. Kokorin

Copenhagen summit results could be called a failure. This is the failure of UN climate change policy management, but definitely the first step to a new order as well. The article reviews main characteristics of climate policy paradigm shifts. Russian interests in climate change policy and main threats are analyzed. Successful development and implementation of energy savings and energy efficiency policy are necessary and would sufficiently help solving the global climate change problem.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guido Godínez-Zamora ◽  
Luis Victor-Gallardo ◽  
Jam Angulo-Paniagua ◽  
Eunice Ramos ◽  
Mark Howells ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ross Gittell ◽  
Josh Stillwagon

<p>This paper explores the influence of US state-level policies meant to address climate change on clean technology industry development. The largest influence of climate change policies is identified as being on energy research employment. Only some policies seem to contribute positively to clean tech employment while other policies appear to discourage employment growth. The magnitudes of the short term effects, even when statistically significant, are modest. Negative impacts on employment are identified for several mandate-oriented, so called command and control, policies including vehicle greenhouse gas standards, energy efficiency resource standards, and renewable portfolio standards with the former two having increasing negative effects over time. The findings suggest that climate change policy advocates should be careful to not assume that there will be positive clean tech employment benefits from state-level energy and environmental policies. Instead, the benefits from these policies may derive primarily from other considerations beyond the scope of this paper, including health and environmental benefits and reduction of dependence on foreign energy sources.</p>


AJIL Unbound ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 115 ◽  
pp. 80-85
Author(s):  
Daniel Bodansky

After four years of not simply inaction but significant retrogression in U.S. climate change policy, the Biden administration has its work cut out. As a start, it needs to undo what Trump did. The Biden administration took a step in that direction on Day 1 by rejoining the Paris Agreement. But simply restoring the pre-Trump status quo ante is not enough. The United States also needs to push for more ambitious global action. In part, this will require strengthening parties’ nationally determined contributions (NDCs) under the Paris Agreement; but it will also require actions by what Sue Biniaz, the former State Department climate change lawyer, likes to call the Greater Metropolitan Paris Agreement—that is, the array of other international actors that help advance the Paris Agreement's goals, including global institutions such as the International Maritime Organization (IMO), the Montreal Protocol, and the World Bank, as well as regional organizations and non-state actors. Although the Biden administration can pursue some of these international initiatives directly through executive action, new regulatory initiatives will face an uncertain fate in the Supreme Court. So how much the Biden Administration is able to achieve will likely depend significantly on how much a nearly evenly-divided Congress is willing to support.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document