National models of climate governance among major emitters
National models of climate governance among major emitters
复制标题
主要排放国气候治理的国家模式
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2023
影响因子：
30.7
通讯作者：
Jonas O. Meckling
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
J. Guy;Esther Shears;Jonas O. Meckling
国家气候机构构建气候减缓政策制定过程，并影响气候政策的雄心和绩效。例如，各国一直在建立科学机构，通过气候法并创建新的机构。在这里，我们首次对21个最大排放国的气候机构进行了系统比较。利用原始数据集，我们在自下而上的聚类分析中确定了四种国家气候治理模式：气候技术统治，气候发展主义者，碳碎片主义者和碳中心主义者。这些国家气候治理模式与政策雄心和绩效相关。气候技术官僚和发展主义者在政策雄心和绩效方面的得分往往高于碳碎片主义者和中央集权主义者。国家治理模式的相对雄心与某些宏观体制和宏观经济特征有关，而与其他特征无关。这表明，国内和国际决策者有可能在不同国家投资建设国家气候机构，以加强气候政策能力。国家气候机构可对政策设计和执行进程产生重大影响。本分析确定了主要排放国的四种气候治理模式，估计了它们的政策目标和绩效，然后展示了它们与宏观特征的关系。
National climate institutions structure the process of climate mitigation policymaking and shape climate policy ambition and performance. Countries have, for example, been building science bodies, passing climate laws and creating new agencies. Here we provide the first systematic comparison of climate institutions across 21 of the largest emitters. Drawing on an original dataset, we identify in a bottom-up cluster analysis four national models of climate governance: Climate Technocracies, Climate Developmentalists, Carbon Fragmentists and Carbon Centralists. These national models of climate governance are associated with policy ambition and performance. Climate Technocracies and Developmentalists tend to score higher than Carbon Fragmentists and Centralists in policy ambition and performance. The relative ambition of national models of governance is associated with some macro-institutional and macro-economic features, but not others. This suggests potential for domestic and international policymakers to invest in building national climate institutions across country settings to strengthen climate policy capacity. National climate institutions could greatly impact the process of policy design and implementation. This analysis identifies four models of climate governance for major emitters, estimates their policy ambitions and performance, then shows how they are related to macro features.