Suchergebnisse

Climate Challenged Society. By J.S. Dryzek, R.B. Norgaard and D. Schlossberg (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013), £16.34 (pb).

Australia is one of the largest coal exporting nations in the world and its economy is underpinned by the availability of cheap fossil fuels. It is well documented that it has failed to act on climate change, and that the conservative Howard government was particularly hostile to international action. It is also well documented that 2007 was an agenda‐setting period when climate change was elevated to national prominence. This paper details and interrogates the ultimately successful Labor national governments' efforts to establish an Australian carbon pricing mechanism. It considers whether irresistible normative forces for climate policy change overcame the previously immovable object of economic and political self‐interest, and the power of the carbon lobby. In explaining complex climate policy dynamics, temporal scales and politics, it finds great utility in John Kingdon's pragmatic "policy window"1 as an explanation for Australia's climate policy change.

This article reviews subnational participatory policy making and considers the extent to which participation—which seeks to breach the divide between citizen preference and political behavior—can be seen as deliberative practice. The process examined, TasmaniaTogether, is Australia's most participatory subnational planning and policy instrument, and is unique in that country, as well for directly linking public preference to policy design. Deliberative theory frames the examination of TasmaniaTogetherhere because it is in part concerned with exploring and overcoming the failing representative mandate that has inspired many such local participatory experiments. The study explores the tensions between deliberative theory and participatory practice, to identify common themes and forge greater relevance between the two. It considers the legitimacy of the process, its quest for community consensus, its link to policy‐setting contexts, its high level of institutionalization, and the lessons that can be learnt from it, which may in turn inform deliberative theory.Este artículo examina el grado de participación sub‐nacional en el diseño de políticas y considera el grado en el que la participación—la cual busca superar las divisiones entre las preferencias ciudadanas y comportamiento político—puede ser vista como una práctica deliberativa. El ejemplo examinado, TasmaniaTogether, es el mayor instrumento político Australiano de planeación y de participación sub‐nacional, y es también único en dicho país al vincular directamente las preferencias del público con el diseño de políticas. La teoría deliberativa enmarca aquí el estudio de TasmaniaTogetherporque está en parte preocupada con la exploración y la superación del mandato representativo cuyas deficiencias han inspirado muchos tipos de experimentos de participación locales. El estudio explora las tensiones entre la teoría deliberativa y la práctica en la participación, para identificar temas comunes y forjar una mayor relevancia entre ambas. El estudio considera la legitimidad del proceso participativo deliberativo, su búsqueda de consenso comunitario, su conexión con contextos de definición de políticas, su alto nivel de institucionalización y las lecciones que puedan ser aprendidas en dicho proceso que podrían a su vez informar a la teoría deliberativa.

While Australia has signed both the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, and the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, it has failed to ratify the latter. It is nevertheless committed to meeting its +8% Kyoto target for greenhouse gas emissions, and argues that it is on track to doing so. This paper examines Australia's non-ratification politics and greenhouse policy efforts in an attempt to explain its contrary position of resisting Kyoto, yet embracing and pursuing its emission reduction targets. Australia's behavior as a carbon-intensive nation is highly significant in the global context, and this paper focuses on the domestic factors of interests, ideas and institutions, while also considering international factors in trying to explain Australia's non-ratification of Kyoto and climate change policy development. It finds that while ideas and institutions have been modifying influences in the domestic context, political and economic interests have dominated Australia's greenhouse policy.

While Australia has signed both the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, and the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, it has failed to ratify the latter. It is nevertheless committed to meeting its + 8% Kyoto target for greenhouse gas emissions, and argues that it is on track to doing so. This paper examines Australia's non-ratification politics and greenhouse policy efforts in an attempt to explain its contrary position of resisting Kyoto, yet embracing and pursuing its emission reduction targets. Australia's behavior as a carbon-intensive nation is highly significant in the global context, and this paper focuses on the domestic factors of interests, ideas and institutions, while also considering international factors in trying to explain Australia's non-ratification of Kyoto and climate change policy development. It finds that while ideas and institutions have been modifying influences in the domestic context, political and economic interests have dominated Australia's greenhouse policy. Adapted from the source document.

Discusses the recent Green Party successes in Tasmania, namely the strong showing in the 2002 elections & performance record in the state. The campaign issue of logging of old-growth forests was notable for the Green's anti-logging stance that contrasted other parties; therefore it is argued that more voted Green due to this & other natural resource dependent development issues. 2 Tables, 9 References. L. Collins