the environment as a policy problem

8/2/2019 the environment as a policy problem

1/31

Click to edit Master subtitle style

4/17/12

Chapter 7: Theenvironment as a policy

problemNusaibah binti RoslanSiti Aisah binti MuhammadMaryam Jamilah binti Md Yusoff


2/31

4/17/12

Topic contents

Core characteristics of theenvironment as a policy problem

The traditional policy paradigm Political obstacles to change

Achieving policy change

Conclusion


3/31

4/17/12

ore c arac ers o eenvironment as a policy

problem1. Public goods2. Transboundary problems

3. Complexity and uncertainty4. Irreversibility

5. Temporal and spatial variability

6. Administrative fragmentation

7. Regulatory intervention


4/31

4/17/12

1.Public goods

Environmental resources = public goods. Mean that each individuals consumption

leads to no subtraction from any otherindividuals consumption of that good.

Both non-rival and non-excludable.


5/31

4/17/12

Problem for policymaker:

Efforts to protect the environment mayencounter significant collective-actionproblems.

Each has the incentive to free-ride on thejoint efforts of others to solve the problem.

Type ofresources

Problems Challenge forpolicymakers

Common-pool(fauna,forest)

People benefit fromthese stocks by

depleting thecommon pool.

Ensure themaintenance of

the overallstocks.

Common-sink(fresh air)

individuals use thisresource to disposeof waste materials.

How to controltheir level ofpollution.


6/31

4/17/12

2.Transboundary problems

Not respect nationalboarders.

An individual overnment

Climatechange

Ozonedepletion

Marinepollution


7/31

4/17/12

3.Complexity anduncertainty

Often difficult to identify the complex andinterdependent relationships between naturaland human made phenomena.

Policies that deal with one discrete problem

may have unintended and damagingconsequences elsewhere.

Underline the importance of science, scientistsand professional expertise in environmental

policymaking. Scientific judgements will always be provisional

and open to revision.

Make it difficult for policymakers to makeadequate responses to new problems.


8/31

4/17/12

4.Irreversibility

Once the Earths carrying capacity isexceeded, then environmental assetsmay be damaged beyond repair.

Scarce resources may be exhaustedand species may become extinct.

Technological advances mayeventually enable solar energy andwind power completely to replacedepleted fossil fuels as generators of

energy, but probably only if there is


9/31


10/31

4/17/12

6.Administrativefragmentation The administrative structure of

government is usually divided intodistinct policy sectors with specific

responsibilities. Often engage in narrow sectoral

objectives with little consideration for

their environmental impact. Eg: the agriculture ministry might

encourage intensive farming

methods, while responsibility for


11/31

4/17/12

7.Regulatory intervention

Can involve a mix of policyinstruments.

Impose some kind of cost on keyinterests in society and may havesignificant distributive consequences.

Provoke howls of outrage frombusinesses and trade unions.

The effectiveness may be limited bythis historical tension betweeneconomic rowth and environmental


12/31


13/31

4/17/12

-cont.

Many policies were prone to animplementation deficit involving ashortfall between policy intent and

outcome. Fundamentally flawed in design and

practice.

The emergence of the alternativeparadigm of sustainabledevelopment, the traditional

paradigm has proved very resistant


14/31

4/17/12

Political obstacles to change

1. The power of business & producers.

2. Administrative fragmentation.


15/31

4/17/12

1.The power of business &producers A primary aim of any government is

to manage the economy, henceseeks the co-operation of business

groups . As insider groups, businesses will

usually remain within the law.

More influence compared toenvironmental groups because theyhave more resources at their

disposal.


16/31

4/17/12

The three dimensions ofpower


17/31

4/17/12

2.Administrativefragmentation

Fragmentation of government intosectoral division

Most countries, plurastic patterns ofenvironmental policymaking seem tobe the exception rather than rule.


18/31

4/17/12

IRON TRIANGLE

PRODUCER

GROUP

Congressionalcommittee

ADMINISTRATIVE

AGENCY


19/31

4/17/12

Policynetwork

fragment

Used to support the

argument that sectoralfragmentation ofgovernment furtherentrenches the structural

power of producer overmany areas ofenvironmental decision-making

Cluster of public andprivate actors connectedto each other byresource dependencies


20/31

4/17/12

Policy network

Policycommunities

Closed

Stablemembership

Issue network

Less stable

Predictable


21/31

4/17/12

Achieving Policy Change

Agenda setting

The advocacy coalition framework

Policy communities and exogenouschange

The rise and fall of nuclear power

T f P li Ch


22/31

4/17/12

First order

Secondorder

Third order

Taxonomy of Policy Change Change affect the levels or setting of basic

policy instruments, such as adjustments to

an emissions standard or tax rate

Change also sees no change in the overallpolicy goals, but involves alteration in the

instrument used to achieve them, perhapsthe replacement of an emissions standardby an eco-tax

Change is marked by a radical shift in theoverall goals of policy that reflects afundamental paradigm shift. Such radicalchanges are rare and usually follow awide-ranging process of societal debateand reflection on past experience, orsocial learning.


23/31


24/31

4/17/12

Stage 4 gradual decline of intensepublic interest: people havesecond thoughts. Attention is

distracted by new issues.

Stage 5post-problem: public interest

wanes but the institutions, policiesand programmes set up tosolve the problem remain in

place.


25/31

4/17/12

The advocacy coalition framework

Sebatier(1998) argues that isunrealistic to distinguish agenda-setting so sharply from the wider

policy process as a major source ofpolicy change.

ACF is a comprehensive model of

policy process emphasizing the roleof ideas, information and analysis asfactors contributing to policy changeat all stage of the policy process

-


26/31

4/17/12

Have 3 level hierarchy

i. Deep core beliefs are the broadphilosophical values that apply to

all policy sub-system

ii. Policy core beliefs are thefundamental values and strategiesacross that specific policy sub-system

iii. Secondary aspects are thenarrower beliefs about specificaspects of the problem and policy

implementation


27/31

4/17/12

ACF provides considerable insightinto the way policy network focus on

interest and power. ACF is particularly relevant to issues

where there is some technical

complexity and open political conflict

Can be useful tool for explaining

policy outcomes.


28/31

Click to edit Master subtitle style

4/17/12

Policy Communities and ExogenousChange

qExogenous Factors can play a catalytic role in changing

power relations.qFive External Factors seem particularly significant inshaping environmental policy:

1. A sudden crisis may throw a policy community into disarray.2. A policy community may be disturbed when a government is

confronted by a new problem,such as climate change orfood safety,for which the dominant interest in the policycommunity have no immediate solution.

3. Changes in external relations can disrupt the structuralconditions underpinning a policy community.

4. The emergence ofnew social movements and pressure

groups has contributed to the growing importance ofenvironmental issues on the political agenda.

5. Political actors,notably ministers,have the capacity to usetheir despotic power to break up a policy community and toallow access to new groups.

q. Nuclear power provides an interesting example of policy change

because a combination of exogenous factors has disruptedestablished patterns of policymaking to produce a radical reversal

e se an e a an


29/31

4/17/12

e se an e a anrise again?) of Nuclear

Power

Late 1950s-1980s,as strong pro-nuclear policycommunities developed,most industrialised nationsinvested heavily in the expansion of nuclear energy.

Since the 1980s,an extraordinary coincidence ofexogenous factors has profoundly weakened these

entrenched policy communities,resulting in a dramaticreversal of the enthusiastic pro-nuclear consensus amongstpolicy elites.

By the mid-1990s,most North American and WesternEuropean nations had abandoned all plans to build new

nuclear reactors and the industry appeared to be interminal crisis.

A decade on,there is growing evidence of renewedgovernment interest in nuclear power in an ironic newguise:as a carbon-free energy solution to mitigateclimate change.


30/31

4/17/12

In 1950s-1960s,two key factors explained governmentsupport for nuclear power:

a) for nuclear powers such as Britain,France and theUSA,the military objective to develop nuclear weaponsgenerated a demand for plutonium,which could only beextracted from reprocessed spent uranium(from nuclear

power station).

b) the belief that nuclear power offered amodern,technological solution to future energy

requirements was widespread.All governments,includingmany with no pretensions to develop nuclear weapons,werepersuaded that nuclear power had the potential to providean abundant supply of cheap energy to underpin futureeconomic growth.


31/31

4/17/12

Since the mid-1990s,the nuclear industry has been in deep crisis.

In 2001,there were no reactors under construction anywhere in

Western Europe or North America,with a moratorium on theconstruction of new reactors in five out of eight European nationswith nuclear power.

All 5 exogenous factors identified in the previous sectioncontributed to the destabilisation of pro-nuclear policycommunities.

Exogenous factors have disrupted established patterns ofpolicymaking,leading many Western countries to call a halt to theirnuclear expansion programmes.

Even whilst it was in crisis in North America and Europe,severalindustrialising nations,notably South Korea,China and India wereinvesting heavily in nuclear power.

The longer the nuclear industry in each country can delay theimplementation of a serious closure programme,the more chance ithas that new exogenous factors may swing the argument back in itsfavour.

i id f d f l

Documents

the environment as a policy problem