scholarly journals Technocratic Structures of Climate Policy: Dead-end Debates, Neat Narratives and Manipulative Machiavellianism

2013 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 119
Author(s):  
Taylor A. Murray

The contemporary models of climate change policy-making in the United States are particular to this decade. The increased role for experts and expert-led policymaking is unprecedented. However this power has been paradoxical. This paper argues that an excessive role for science in discussions of climate change has undermined the public’s role, and has thus undermined the efforts on behalf of policymakers to pass comprehensive climate change policy. Two main aspects of the excessive role for science in the formation of climate policy were found to be 1. the large influence of dissenting scientists on the debate, and 2. the alienation of the public from the discourse. Further, possible scenarios for policymaking, which better balance the roles of experts, the public, and policymakers, are discussed and frameworks for the future are outlined.

2017 ◽  
Vol 95 (3) ◽  
pp. 713-729 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Kukkonen ◽  
Tuomas Ylä-Anttila ◽  
Jeffrey Broadbent

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-26
Author(s):  
Yolandi Meyer ◽  
Willem H. Gravet

Summary This article analyses the protracted climate change case of Juliana v United States of America. We consider the history of the case as well as the most recent judgment of the Federal Court of Appeals, which seems to be the final judgment in this case as it is not foreseen that the case will be appealed with any success. The Juliana case provided hope for many people in the United States that the case would be able to succeed and possibly alter climate change policy in the country. Although the latest judgment will be disappointing to climate change activists and those affected by climate change, we agree with the ruling of the majority opinion in the Court of Appeals case and believe that it is a sound legal decision despite its general disapprobation.


2021 ◽  
pp. 107049652110277
Author(s):  
Antto Vihma ◽  
Gunilla Reischl ◽  
Astrid Nonbo Andersen

The rise of authoritarian populism has disrupted the patterns of party competition in many Western societies. Related to this development, the current debates in the United States and European Union illustrate how empirical science on climate change may become intensely politicized, and all ambitious climate policies challenged in the contemporary political landscape. We set out an analytical framework with three ideal types of political strategies for opposing climate policies: climate science denialism, climate policy nationalism, and climate policy conservativism. Empirically, the article investigates populist resistance to ambitious climate change policy in the Nordic context, where countries have sought to assume global leadership in climate politics and have considerable public support for climate action. In an analysis of the evolving positions of populist parties in Denmark, Finland, and Sweden in recent elections, the article sheds light on the interconnection between populism and climate change policy.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document