Behavioral Science and Climate Policy

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Howlett ◽  
Stuti Rawat
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Behavioral Science ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
Policy Issue ◽  
Wicked Problem ◽  
Political Scientist ◽  
Systematic Analysis ◽  
Analysis And Design ◽  
Change Policy

Behavioral science consists of the systematic analysis of processes underlying human behavior through experimentation and observation, drawing on knowledge, research, and methods from a variety of fields such as economics, psychology, and sociology. Because policymaking involves efforts to modify or alter the behavior of policy-takers and centers on the processes of decision-making in government, it has always been concerned with behavioral psychology. Classic studies of decision-making in the field derived their frameworks and concepts from psychology, and the founder of policy sciences, Harold Lasswell, was himself trained as a behavioral political scientist. Hence, it should not be surprising that the use of behavioral science is a feature of many policy areas, including climate change policy. This is given extra emphasis, however, because climate change policymaking and the rise of climate change as a policy issue coincides with a resurgence in behaviorally inspired policy analysis and design brought about by the development of behavioral economics. Thus efforts to deal with climate change have come into being at a time when behavioral governance has been gaining traction worldwide under the influence of works by, among others, Kahneman and Tversky, Thaler, and Sunstein. Such behavioral governance studies have focused on the psychological and cognitive behavioral processes in individuals and collectives, in order to inform, design, and implement different modes of governing. They have been promoted by policy scholars, including many economists working in the area who prefer its insights to those put forward by classical or neoclassical economics. In the context of climate change policy, behavioral science plays two key roles—through its use of behaviorally premised policy instruments as new modes of public policy being used or proposed to be used, in conjunction with traditional climate change policy tools; and as a way of understanding some of the barriers to compliance and policy design encountered by governments in combating the “super wicked problem” of climate change. Five kinds of behavioral tools have been found to be most commonly used in relation to climate change policy: provision of information, use of social norms, goal setting, default rules, and framing. A large proportion of behavioral tools has been used in the energy sector, because of its importance in the context of climate change action and the fact that energy consumption is easy to monitor, thereby facilitating impact assessment.

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.

Communicating about Climate Change with Policymakers

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ishani Mukherjee ◽  
Michael Howlett
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
Policy Instruments ◽  
Policy Decision ◽  
Wicked Problem ◽  
Change Policy ◽  
Policy Advisory Systems ◽  
Advisory Systems ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Policy Problems

Policy communication and the resulting influence that information has on policy decision-makers is an especially pertinent topic when it comes to problems of climate change. Notorious for its complexity, uncertainty, and divergence of viewpoints, climate change has earned the title of being the major “wicked” or “super-wicked” problem of our times. A proliferation of expertise, interests, and capacities mark the climate change policymaking landscape and this density of players warrants an advanced framework to understand the ways in which the variety of climate-pertinent knowledge is communicated to policymakers. Moving beyond undifferentiated “two-communities” models of knowledge utilization in policymaking which limit the discussion to the bilateral interactions between knowledge experts or “producers” and information “consumers” of the public sector, this article explores the concept of a policy advisory system, which embodies the different sets of influence that various policy actors can have during policy decision-making and how communication between and among actors is a significant aspect of climate change policymaking. The concept of policy advisory systems is an important new development in the policy studies literature and one that is analytically very applicable to climate policy contexts. Suitably generalizable across representative policy settings, policy advisory systems are comprised of distinct groups of actors who are engaged in the definition of policy problems, the articulation of policy solutions, or the matching of policy problems to solutions. We explore how individual members of these separate sets of actors—namely the epistemic community, which is occupied in discourses about policy problems; the instrument constituencies which define policy instruments; and the advocacy coalitions which compete to have their choice of policy alternatives adopted—interact and communicate with policymakers across climate change policy activities.

scholarly journals Weaponizing the EPA

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Craig A. Jones
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Environmental Protection Agency ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
Executive Power ◽  
Wicked Problem ◽  
President Obama ◽  
Climate Agreements ◽  
Change Policy ◽  
Political Partisanship

In its broadest sense, presidential control encompasses all the actions, in both word and deed, whereby presidents "go it alone" to adopt policies in the absence of congressional will to do so, and sometimes directly contrary to it. This dissertation studies how President Obama used rhetorical and administrative tools of presidential control to address the "wicked problem" of climate change. The "administrative presidency" and the "rhetorical presidency" are familiar political science terms, but in the case of climate change policy, they appear to be moving policymaking in a new and perhaps profound direction, which this study refers to as "post-deliberative policymaking." Applying these two areas of scholarship together to the wicked problem of climate change creates a helpful window through which to study how President Obama utilized administrative and rhetorical strategies and tools during his presidency. In particular, the study examines how he rhetorically constructed and rationalized his use of the Environmental Protection Agency to implement federal climate change regulations via the federal Clean Power Plan. Among the insights revealed by this analysis are how President Obama, in an age of acute political partisanship and polarization, positioned the role of the bureaucracy, how he invoked executive power, and what his actions reveal and may portend about executive views of democratic institutions and norms. This dissertation analyzes President Obama's rhetoric through a study of his speeches from 2009 through 2015 that explicitly or implicitly reference climate change, greenhouse gases, and the Clean Power Plan, but also related topics, such as energy policy and climate agreements.

scholarly journals 3 Challenges, 3 Errors, and 3 Solutions to Integrate Frontline Communities in Climate Change Policy and Research: Lessons From California

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angel Santiago Fernandez-Bou ◽  
J. Pablo Ortiz-Partida ◽  
Leticia M. Classen-Rodriguez ◽  
Chantelise Pells ◽  
Kristin B. Dobbin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Local Knowledge ◽  
Information Exchange ◽  
Climate Adaptation ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
Mitigation Strategies ◽  
Climate Change Research ◽  
Change Policy ◽  
Unequal Access

Frontline communities of California experience disproportionate social, economic, and environmental injustices, and climate change is exacerbating the root causes of inequity in those areas. Yet, climate adaptation and mitigation strategies often fail to meaningfully address the experience of frontline community stakeholders. Here, we present three challenges, three errors, and three solutions to better integrate frontline communities' needs in climate change research and to create more impactful policies. We base our perspective on our collective firsthand experiences and on scholarship to bridge local knowledge with hydroclimatic research and policymaking. Unawareness of local priorities (Challenge 1) is a consequence of Ignoring local knowledge (Error 1) that can be, in part, resolved with Information exchange and expansion of community-based participatory research (Solution 1). Unequal access to natural resources (Challenge 2) is often due to Top-down decision making (Error 2), but Buffer zones for environmental protection, green areas, air quality, and water security can help achieve environmental justice (Solution 2). Unequal access to public services (Challenge 3) is a historical issue that persists because of System abuse and tokenism (Error 3), and it may be partially resolved with Multi-benefit projects to create socioeconomic and environmental opportunities within frontline communities that include positive externalities for other stakeholders and public service improvements (Solution 3). The path forward in climate change policy decision-making must be grounded in collaboration with frontline community members and practitioners trained in working with vulnerable stakeholders. Addressing co-occurring inequities exacerbated by climate change requires transdisciplinary efforts to identify technical, policy, and engineering solutions.

Copenhagen Agreement - A New Paradigm of Climate Problem Solving

2010 ◽  
pp. 115-132 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Agibalov ◽  
A. Kokorin
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Energy Savings ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
New Order ◽  
Paradigm Shifts ◽  
New Paradigm ◽  
Energy Efficiency Policy ◽  
Policy Paradigm ◽  
Change Policy

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document