Climate Governance Antagonisms: Policy Stability and Repoliticization
In this forum, we highlight a discord in strategies around climate change policy and politics. On one hand, there is widespread concern for the pursuit of climate policy : stability in the design of policy and institutions, but particularly making policy and institutional development . However, much...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Global environmental politics 2022-05, Vol.22 (2), p.1-11 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 11 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 1 |
container_title | Global environmental politics |
container_volume | 22 |
creator | Paterson, Matthew Tobin, Paul VanDeveer, Stacy D |
description | In this forum, we highlight a discord in strategies around climate change policy and politics. On one hand, there is widespread concern for the pursuit of climate policy
: stability in the design of policy and institutions, but particularly making policy and institutional development
. However, much recent literature has revived an insistence on the inevitability of political conflict for pursuing the often large transitions needed to mitigate and adapt to accelerating climate change. Here, addressing climate change requires conflict, to weaken the power of incumbent actors that have blocked ambitious climate policy enactment for decades. Scholarship deploying each perspective tends to explicitly accept the need for radical sociotechnical transformations to address the climate crisis, but each entails radically different approaches to how to pursue decarbonization. The article outlines a research agenda focused on thinking about how these two apparently contradictory dynamics in climate politics interact, to advance our understanding of what sorts of strategies might open up political space for rapid transformations. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1162/glep_a_00647 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_proje</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_projectmuse_journals_853325_S1536009122200000</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2894381432</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3847-70e971547213d96419fe8ea3a8794830295aa7ddf7b8016c74e7e3f8466bd1263</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kE1LAzEQhoMoWKs3f8CCFw-uTibZJOtJKbUKBcXqOaS72ZKyX262hfbXu0tFK-hcZhieeWfmJeScwjWlAm8Wua210QCCywMyoBETIUBMD_saRcgUwDE58X4JAAwkHZDxKHeFaW0wqda2KU2Z2OC-bM2iKp0v_G3wUuUu2QSz1sxd7tpNYMo0eLV1125d4ramdVV5So4yk3t79pWH5P1h_DZ6DKfPk6fR_TRMmOIylGBjSSMukbI0FpzGmVXWMKNkzBUDjCNjZJpmcq6AikRyKy3LFBdinlIUbEgudrp1U32srG_1slp1V-deo4o5U5Qz7KirHZU0lfeNzXTddE82G01B90bpfaM6nH-LLm3SFitvf3RVxBhGetab2XuJiNBHN3a5Gyvc3hn_bLj7A-2RNaJDzaiiCBoBUQPXFPXW1b8lPgFqiI1d</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2894381432</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Climate Governance Antagonisms: Policy Stability and Repoliticization</title><source>Political Science Complete</source><source>PAIS Index</source><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>MIT Press Journals</source><source>EBSCOhost Business Source Complete</source><creator>Paterson, Matthew ; Tobin, Paul ; VanDeveer, Stacy D</creator><creatorcontrib>Paterson, Matthew ; Tobin, Paul ; VanDeveer, Stacy D</creatorcontrib><description>In this forum, we highlight a discord in strategies around climate change policy and politics. On one hand, there is widespread concern for the pursuit of climate policy
: stability in the design of policy and institutions, but particularly making policy and institutional development
. However, much recent literature has revived an insistence on the inevitability of political conflict for pursuing the often large transitions needed to mitigate and adapt to accelerating climate change. Here, addressing climate change requires conflict, to weaken the power of incumbent actors that have blocked ambitious climate policy enactment for decades. Scholarship deploying each perspective tends to explicitly accept the need for radical sociotechnical transformations to address the climate crisis, but each entails radically different approaches to how to pursue decarbonization. The article outlines a research agenda focused on thinking about how these two apparently contradictory dynamics in climate politics interact, to advance our understanding of what sorts of strategies might open up political space for rapid transformations.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1526-3800</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1536-0091</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1162/glep_a_00647</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>One Broadway, 12th Floor, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142, USA: MIT Press</publisher><subject>Climate change ; Climate policy ; Conflict ; Decarbonization ; Development policy ; Environmental policy ; Politicization ; Politics ; Radicalism ; Stability</subject><ispartof>Global environmental politics, 2022-05, Vol.22 (2), p.1-11</ispartof><rights>Copyright © The Massachusetts Institute of Technology.</rights><rights>Copyright MIT Press Journals, The 2022</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3847-70e971547213d96419fe8ea3a8794830295aa7ddf7b8016c74e7e3f8466bd1263</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3847-70e971547213d96419fe8ea3a8794830295aa7ddf7b8016c74e7e3f8466bd1263</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://direct.mit.edu/glep/article/doi/10.1162/glep_a_00647$$EHTML$$P50$$Gmit$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27843,27901,27902,53984,53985</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Paterson, Matthew</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tobin, Paul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>VanDeveer, Stacy D</creatorcontrib><title>Climate Governance Antagonisms: Policy Stability and Repoliticization</title><title>Global environmental politics</title><description>In this forum, we highlight a discord in strategies around climate change policy and politics. On one hand, there is widespread concern for the pursuit of climate policy
: stability in the design of policy and institutions, but particularly making policy and institutional development
. However, much recent literature has revived an insistence on the inevitability of political conflict for pursuing the often large transitions needed to mitigate and adapt to accelerating climate change. Here, addressing climate change requires conflict, to weaken the power of incumbent actors that have blocked ambitious climate policy enactment for decades. Scholarship deploying each perspective tends to explicitly accept the need for radical sociotechnical transformations to address the climate crisis, but each entails radically different approaches to how to pursue decarbonization. The article outlines a research agenda focused on thinking about how these two apparently contradictory dynamics in climate politics interact, to advance our understanding of what sorts of strategies might open up political space for rapid transformations.</description><subject>Climate change</subject><subject>Climate policy</subject><subject>Conflict</subject><subject>Decarbonization</subject><subject>Development policy</subject><subject>Environmental policy</subject><subject>Politicization</subject><subject>Politics</subject><subject>Radicalism</subject><subject>Stability</subject><issn>1526-3800</issn><issn>1536-0091</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kE1LAzEQhoMoWKs3f8CCFw-uTibZJOtJKbUKBcXqOaS72ZKyX262hfbXu0tFK-hcZhieeWfmJeScwjWlAm8Wua210QCCywMyoBETIUBMD_saRcgUwDE58X4JAAwkHZDxKHeFaW0wqda2KU2Z2OC-bM2iKp0v_G3wUuUu2QSz1sxd7tpNYMo0eLV1125d4ramdVV5So4yk3t79pWH5P1h_DZ6DKfPk6fR_TRMmOIylGBjSSMukbI0FpzGmVXWMKNkzBUDjCNjZJpmcq6AikRyKy3LFBdinlIUbEgudrp1U32srG_1slp1V-deo4o5U5Qz7KirHZU0lfeNzXTddE82G01B90bpfaM6nH-LLm3SFitvf3RVxBhGetab2XuJiNBHN3a5Gyvc3hn_bLj7A-2RNaJDzaiiCBoBUQPXFPXW1b8lPgFqiI1d</recordid><startdate>20220501</startdate><enddate>20220501</enddate><creator>Paterson, Matthew</creator><creator>Tobin, Paul</creator><creator>VanDeveer, Stacy D</creator><general>MIT Press</general><general>The MIT Press</general><general>MIT Press Journals, The</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope><scope>SOI</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20220501</creationdate><title>Climate Governance Antagonisms: Policy Stability and Repoliticization</title><author>Paterson, Matthew ; Tobin, Paul ; VanDeveer, Stacy D</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3847-70e971547213d96419fe8ea3a8794830295aa7ddf7b8016c74e7e3f8466bd1263</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Climate change</topic><topic>Climate policy</topic><topic>Conflict</topic><topic>Decarbonization</topic><topic>Development policy</topic><topic>Environmental policy</topic><topic>Politicization</topic><topic>Politics</topic><topic>Radicalism</topic><topic>Stability</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Paterson, Matthew</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tobin, Paul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>VanDeveer, Stacy D</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Global environmental politics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Paterson, Matthew</au><au>Tobin, Paul</au><au>VanDeveer, Stacy D</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Climate Governance Antagonisms: Policy Stability and Repoliticization</atitle><jtitle>Global environmental politics</jtitle><date>2022-05-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>22</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>1</spage><epage>11</epage><pages>1-11</pages><issn>1526-3800</issn><eissn>1536-0091</eissn><abstract>In this forum, we highlight a discord in strategies around climate change policy and politics. On one hand, there is widespread concern for the pursuit of climate policy
: stability in the design of policy and institutions, but particularly making policy and institutional development
. However, much recent literature has revived an insistence on the inevitability of political conflict for pursuing the often large transitions needed to mitigate and adapt to accelerating climate change. Here, addressing climate change requires conflict, to weaken the power of incumbent actors that have blocked ambitious climate policy enactment for decades. Scholarship deploying each perspective tends to explicitly accept the need for radical sociotechnical transformations to address the climate crisis, but each entails radically different approaches to how to pursue decarbonization. The article outlines a research agenda focused on thinking about how these two apparently contradictory dynamics in climate politics interact, to advance our understanding of what sorts of strategies might open up political space for rapid transformations.</abstract><cop>One Broadway, 12th Floor, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142, USA</cop><pub>MIT Press</pub><doi>10.1162/glep_a_00647</doi><tpages>11</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1526-3800 |
ispartof | Global environmental politics, 2022-05, Vol.22 (2), p.1-11 |
issn | 1526-3800 1536-0091 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_projectmuse_journals_853325_S1536009122200000 |
source | Political Science Complete; PAIS Index; Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; MIT Press Journals; EBSCOhost Business Source Complete |
subjects | Climate change Climate policy Conflict Decarbonization Development policy Environmental policy Politicization Politics Radicalism Stability |
title | Climate Governance Antagonisms: Policy Stability and Repoliticization |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-05T17%3A58%3A15IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_proje&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Climate%20Governance%20Antagonisms:%20Policy%20Stability%20and%20Repoliticization&rft.jtitle=Global%20environmental%20politics&rft.au=Paterson,%20Matthew&rft.date=2022-05-01&rft.volume=22&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=1&rft.epage=11&rft.pages=1-11&rft.issn=1526-3800&rft.eissn=1536-0091&rft_id=info:doi/10.1162/glep_a_00647&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_proje%3E2894381432%3C/proquest_proje%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2894381432&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |