@phdthesis{CamposdeAndrade2023, author = {Campos de Andrade, Andr{\´e} Luiz}, title = {Governing climate change in Brazil}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-58733}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-587336}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {xxvii, 272}, year = {2023}, abstract = {Enacted in 2009, the National Policy on Climate Change (PNMC) is a milestone in the institutionalisation of climate action in Brazil. It sets greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction targets and a set of principles and directives that are intended to lay the foundations for a cross-sectoral and multilevel climate policy in the country. However, after more than a decade since its establishment, the PNMC has experienced several obstacles related to its governance, such as coordination, planning and implementation issues. All of these issues pose threats to the effectiveness of GHG mitigation actions in the country. By looking at the intragovernmental and intergovernmental relationships that have taken place during the lifetime of the PNMC and its sectoral plans on agriculture (the Sectoral Plan for Mitigation and Adaptation to Climate Change for the Consolidation of a Low-Carbon Economy in Agriculture [ABC Plan]), transport and urban mobility (the Sectoral Plan for Transportation and Urban Mobility for Mitigation and Adaption of Climate Change [PSTM]), this exploratory qualitative research investigates the Brazilian climate change governance guided by the following relevant questions: how are climate policy arrangements organised and coordinated among governmental actors to mitigate GHG emissions in Brazil? What might be the reasons behind how such arrangements are established? What are the predominant governance gaps of the different GHG mitigation actions examined? Why do these governance gaps occur? Theoretically grounded in the literature on multilevel governance and coordination of public policies, this study employs a novel analytical framework that aims to identify and discuss the occurrence of four types of governance gaps (i.e. politics, institutions and processes, resources and information) in the three GHG mitigation actions (cases) examined (i.e. the PNMC, ABC Plan and PSTM). The research results are twofold. First, they reveal that Brazil has struggled to organise and coordinate governmental actors from different policy constituencies and different levels of government in the implementation of the GHG mitigation actions examined. Moreover, climate policymaking has mostly been influenced by the Ministry of Environment (MMA) overlooking the multilevel and cross-sectoral approaches required for a country's climate policy to mitigate and adapt to climate change, especially if it is considered an economy-wide Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC), as the Brazilian one is. Second, the study identifies a greater manifestation of gaps in politics (e.g. lack of political will in supporting climate action), institutions and processes (e.g. failures in the design of institutions and policy instruments, coordination and monitoring flaws, and difficulties in building climate federalism) in all cases studied. It also identifies that there have been important advances in the production of data and information for decision-making and, to a lesser extent, in the allocation of technical and financial resources in the cases studied; however, it is necessary to highlight the limitation of these improvements due to turf wars, a low willingness to share information among federal government players, a reduced volume of financial resources and an unequal distribution of capacities among the federal ministries and among the three levels of government. A relevant finding is that these gaps tend to be explained by a combination of general and sectoral set aspects. Regarding the general aspects, which are common to all cases examined, the following can be mentioned: i) unbalanced policy capabilities existing among the different levels of government, ii) a limited (bureaucratic) practice to produce a positive coordination mode within cross-sectoral policies, iii) the socioeconomic inequalities that affect the way different governments and economic sectors perceive the climate issue (selective perception) and iv) the reduced dialogue between national and subnational governments on the climate agenda (poor climate federalism). The following sectoral aspects can be mentioned: i) the presence of path dependencies that make the adoption of transformative actions harder and ii) the absence of perceived co-benefits that the climate agenda can bring to each economic sector (e.g. reputational gains, climate protection and access to climate financial markets). By addressing the theoretical and practical implications of the results, this research provides key insights to tackle the governance gaps identified and to help Brazil pave the way to achieving its NDCs and net-zero targets. At the theoretical level, this research and the current country's GHG emissions profile suggest that the Brazilian climate policy is embedded in a cross-sectoral and multilevel arena, which requires the effective involvement of different levels of political and bureaucratic powers and the consideration of the country's socioeconomic differences. Thus, the research argues that future improvements of the Brazilian climate policy and its governance setting must frame climate policy as an economic development agenda, the ramifications of which go beyond the environmental sector. An initial consequence of this new perspective may be a shift in the political and technical leadership from the MMA to the institutions of the centre of government (Executive Office of the President of Brazil) and those in charge of the country's economic policy (Ministry of Economy). This change could provide greater capacity for coordination, integration and enforcement as well as for addressing certain expected gaps (e.g. financial and technical resources). It could also lead to greater political prioritisation of the agenda at the highest levels of government. Moreover, this shift of the institutional locus could contribute to greater harmonisation between domestic development priorities and international climate politics. Finally, the research also suggests that this approach would reduce bureaucratic elitism currently in place due to climate policy being managed by Brazilian governmental institutions, which is still a theme of a few ministries and a reason for the occurrence of turf wars.}, language = {en} } @article{EdenhoferKalkuhlOckenfels2020, author = {Edenhofer, Ottmar and Kalkuhl, Matthias and Ockenfels, Axel}, title = {Das Klimaschutzprogramm der Bundesregierung}, series = {Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik}, volume = {21}, journal = {Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik}, number = {1}, publisher = {De Gruyter}, address = {Berlin}, issn = {1465-6493}, doi = {10.1515/pwp-2020-0001}, pages = {4 -- 18}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Das Klimaschutzgesetz hat einen Paradigmenwechsel eingeleitet: den Einstieg in eine CO2-Bepreisung als k{\"u}nftiges Leitinstrument der Klimapolitik. Auf den ersten Blick ist der CO2-Preis unter einer F{\"u}lle von F{\"o}rdermaßnahmen und ordnungsrechtlichen Regelungen versch{\"u}ttet, deren Wirksamkeit und Kosten h{\"o}chst unsicher sind. Der CO2-Preis ist aber so angelegt, dass er langfristig das dominante Instrument einer europ{\"a}isch harmonisierten Klimapolitik werden kann. Der angedeutete Paradigmenwechsel der deutschen Klimapolitik {\"o}ffnet damit die T{\"u}r, die europ{\"a}ische und internationale Kooperation zu st{\"a}rken. Dazu ist es aber notwendig, neben der europ{\"a}ischen auch die globale Klimapolitik neu auszurichten. Auch dort sollten sich die Verhandlungen statt auf nationale Mengenziele auf CO2-Preise konzentrieren. Die erforderliche Kooperation wird m{\"o}glich, wenn die Regierungen Transferzahlungen strategisch und reziprok nutzen. So k{\"o}nnte die Effektivit{\"a}t der Klimapolitik erh{\"o}ht werden und es ließen sich die entstehenden Verteilungskonflikte entsch{\"a}rfen.}, language = {de} } @phdthesis{Ehnert2019, author = {Ehnert, Franziska}, title = {Climate Policy in Denmark, Germany, Estonia and Poland}, series = {New horizons in environmental politics}, journal = {New horizons in environmental politics}, publisher = {Edward Elgar Publishing}, address = {Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA}, isbn = {978-1-78897-939-9}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {220}, year = {2019}, abstract = {Ministerial administrations are pivotal in the process of defining problems and developing policy solutions due to their technocratic expertise, particularly when this process is applied to climate policy. This innovative book explores how and why policies are changed or continued by employing in-depth studies from a diverse range of EU countries. Climate Policy in Denmark, Germany, Estonia and Poland works to narrow the research gap surrounding administrative institutions within the field of climate policy change by integrating ideas, discourses and institutions to provide a better understanding of both climate policy and policy change. Differences in approach to democratization and Europeanization between Western and Central Eastern European countries provide rich empirical material for the study of policy formulation. This timely book demonstrates how the substance and formation of policies are shaped by their political and administrative institutional contexts. Analytical and accessible, this discerning book will be of value to scholars and students of climate policy, public policy and public administration alike. Providing lessons on institutional reform in climate and energy policy, this explorative book will also be of interest to practitioners and policy-makers.}, language = {en} } @article{Fuhr2012, author = {Fuhr, Harald}, title = {Klimawandel und Entwicklungspolitik}, series = {Klimapolitik International}, journal = {Klimapolitik International}, editor = {Kleinw{\"a}chter, Kai}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam}, address = {Potsdam}, issn = {1868-6222}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-81301}, pages = {31 -- 40}, year = {2012}, abstract = {Der Autor diskutiert die Chancen und Risiken bei der Einbindung des S{\"u}dens in die internationale Klimapolitik. Lange Zeit hatten die Entwicklungsl{\"a}nder am wenigsten zum Klimawandel beigetragen, w{\"a}ren aber am st{\"a}rksten von ihm betroffen. Mittlerweile jedoch tragen diese L{\"a}nder in erheblichem Maße selbst zum Klimawandel bei. Allerdings setzen deren Regierungen auf Zeit. Sie erwarten Ressourcentransfers. Dies verst{\"a}rkt auch alte Probleme des ‚Rent-Seeking'.}, language = {de} } @phdthesis{Hanschmann2019, author = {Hanschmann, Raffael Tino}, title = {Stalling the engine? EU climate politics after the 'Great Recession'}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-44044}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-440441}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, pages = {XXVIII, 303}, year = {2019}, abstract = {This dissertation investigates the impact of the economic and fiscal crisis starting in 2008 on EU climate policy-making. While the overall number of adopted greenhouse gas emission reduction policies declined in the crisis aftermath, EU lawmakers decided to introduce new or tighten existing regulations in some important policy domains. Existing knowledge about the crisis impact on EU legislative decision-making cannot explain these inconsistencies. In response, this study develops an actor-centred conceptual framework based on rational choice institutionalism that provides a micro-level link to explain how economic crises translate into altered policy-making patterns. The core theoretical argument draws on redistributive conflicts, arguing that tensions between 'beneficiaries' and 'losers' of a regulatory initiative intensify during economic crises and spill over to the policy domain. To test this hypothesis and using social network analysis, this study analyses policy processes in three case studies: The introduction of carbon dioxide emission limits for passenger cars, the expansion of the EU Emissions Trading System to aviation, and the introduction of a regulatory framework for biofuels. The key finding is that an economic shock causes EU policy domains to polarise politically, resulting in intensified conflict and more difficult decision-making. The results also show that this process of political polarisation roots in the industry that is the subject of the regulation, and that intergovernmental bargaining among member states becomes more important, but also more difficult in times of crisis.}, language = {en} } @article{HarnischWienges2012, author = {Harnisch, Astrid and Wienges, Sebastian}, title = {Wie Klimaschutz finanzieren?}, series = {Klimapolitik International}, journal = {Klimapolitik International}, editor = {Kleinw{\"a}chter, Kai}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam}, address = {Potsdam}, issn = {1868-6222}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-81328}, pages = {50 -- 58}, year = {2012}, abstract = {Zur Finanzierung von Klimaschutz m{\"u}ssen {\"o}ffentliche Mittel gezielt eingesetzt werden. Dies beinhaltet auch die Rahmenbedingungen f{\"u}r private Finanzstr{\"o}me signifikant zu verbessern. Anhand einer Problemanalyse bestimmen die Autoren Eckdaten f{\"u}r diese Hebelwirkung. {\"O}ffentliche Anschubfinanzierung kann somit die Grundlage f{\"u}r private Investitionen sein. Dies wird exemplarisch an der Internationalen Klimaschutzinitiative des Bundesumweltministeriums diskutiert.}, language = {de} } @article{HaugBerkhout2012, author = {Haug, Constanze and Berkhout, Frans}, title = {Abschied von KyotoPlus?}, series = {Klimapolitik International}, journal = {Klimapolitik International}, editor = {Kleinw{\"a}chter, Kai}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam}, address = {Potsdam}, issn = {1868-6222}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-81355}, pages = {73 -- 81}, year = {2012}, abstract = {Die Ergebnisse des Klimagipfels von Kopenhagen sind eine bittere Entt{\"a}uschung f{\"u}r die EU. Ihr ist es nicht gelungen, ihren F{\"u}hrungsambitionen beim globalen Klimaschutz gerecht zu werden und die Konferenz zur Weichenstellung f{\"u}r ein rechtsverbindliches Klimaabkommen nach 2012 zu nutzen. Damit steht die Union vor grundlegenden strategischen Fragen zum Kurs ihrer Klimapolitik.}, language = {de} } @article{Hentschel2012, author = {Hentschel, Karl-Martin}, title = {Klimapolitik am Ende?}, series = {Klimapolitik International}, journal = {Klimapolitik International}, editor = {Kleinw{\"a}chter, Kai}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam}, address = {Potsdam}, issn = {1868-6222}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-81299}, pages = {21 -- 30}, year = {2012}, language = {de} } @article{Kleinwaechter2012, author = {Kleinw{\"a}chter, Kai}, title = {Einleitung}, series = {Klimapolitik International}, journal = {Klimapolitik International}, editor = {Kleinw{\"a}chter, Kai}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam}, address = {Potsdam}, issn = {1868-6222}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-81267}, pages = {9 -- 10}, year = {2012}, language = {de} } @article{KraemerKleinwaechter2012, author = {Kr{\"a}mer, Raimund and Kleinw{\"a}chter, Kai}, title = {Brandenburg ist klimapolitisch gut aufgestellt!}, series = {Klimapolitik International}, journal = {Klimapolitik International}, editor = {Kleinw{\"a}chter, Kai}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam}, address = {Potsdam}, issn = {1868-6222}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-81285}, pages = {11 -- 20}, year = {2012}, language = {de} }