Suchergebnisse

With the 2015 Paris Agreement, global climate governance increasingly depends on domestic climate policy ambitions, also in large developing countries such as Brazil and India, which are prominent representatives for developing countries in the international climate negotiations. Although the environmental policy literature expects ministries of environment to be important drivers of domestic climate policy, studies find that the climate policy ambitions of the Brazilian and Indian environmental ministries differ considerably. With a long-term analytical approach building on historical institutionalism, this article analyses and compares the climate policy roles of the Brazilian and Indian ministries of environment. The comparative analysis finds that three factors in particular influence the environmental ministries' climate policy ambitions: first, the historical view of environmental policy as a domestic or an international issue; second, the ministry's formal role in international climate negotiations; and third, the subsequent development of institutional climate logics.

AbstractCooperation between environmentalists, scientists, and governmental actors was a crucial driver behind Brazil's efforts to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the forest sector from 2004 onward. The same climate coalition's advocacy work to reduce emissions in the energy sector, Brazil's second‐most emitting sector, has been unsuccessful. Why has climate‐policy development been so different in the two sectors? Building on the advocacy coalition framework, this paper analyzes the climate coalition's role, systematically comparing how the coalition has worked to influence policy development in the two key sectors for Brazilian GHG emissions between 2003 and 2015. The paper finds that strong climate‐coalition unity, unambiguous scientific knowledge, economic growth, and international pressure functioned as a constellation of factors that enhanced the climate coalition's ability to take advantage of a climate‐policy window and frame deforestation as a core climate concern. The same constellation of factors was missing in the energy sector.

Introduction : normative power Europe, the liberal order, and global climate justice -- Reconfiguring the global climate justice debate -- Charting the development of EU involvement in the global climate regime -- Securitisation and climate justice -- The EU and global climate justice seen from the outside -- The productive ambiguity in the EU's climate policies -- Conclusion : the EU, climate change and balancing global justice.

"This book examines the European Union's contribution to the development of the global climate regime within the broader framework of global justice. It argues that the procedural dimension of justice has been largely overlooked so far in the assessment of EU climate policy and reveals the EU has significantly contributed to the development of the climate regime within its broader efforts to 'solidarise' international society. At the same time, the book identifies deficits of the climate regime and limits to the EU's impact and explains why the EU policy towards global climate change has shifted over time. Finally, however, it argues that these policies should not be assessed in terms of being either wholly positive or negative, but that they are shot through with ambiguities. This book will be of key interest to scholars, students and practitioners of climate change, climate politics, environmental and climate justice studies, and more broadly to EU Studies and International Relations"--