Power, coalitions and institutional change in South African climate policy
Power, coalitions and institutional change in South African climate policy
复制标题
南非气候政策中的权力、联盟和制度变革
作者：
Britta Rennkamp
摘要本文探讨了推动和阻碍南非气候政策制度变革的权力关系、联盟和冲突。分析发现，最有争议的气候政策是那些造成分配冲突的政策，在这些政策中，强大的、非贫穷的行为者可能会因其基于化石燃料的业务而遭受真实的损失。这一发现反对排放和减贫之间相互竞争的目标的假设。然而，行为者使用的话语涉及减排、就业、减贫和经济福利之间可能相互竞争的目标。分析涉及如何解决影响减缓气候变化和同时促进社会经济发展这两个目标的公共政策问题的更广泛问题。南非是一个中等收入国家，面临着同时努力减排和减贫的挑战。体制变革受到限制，特别是在制定气候预算和碳税的过程中。由于不平等的权力关系，对立的联盟成功地拖延了这些进程的实施。南非气候政策的体制变革主要表现为政策创新要素的分层。在所审查的气候政策的所有三个案例中，新政策都建立在现有法规的基础上：气候变化应对白色文件、碳税和可再生能源方案。政府和民间社会的支持联盟与主要来自受影响行业的反对派之间的权力关系不平衡，导致体制变革非常脆弱。南非政府在过去7年中成功推动了气候政策的制度变革。煤炭相关行业及其游说团体的强大联盟限制了制度变革，并设法推迟了碳定价措施的实施。一个管理成功的可再生能源方案已开始将煤电和核电部门转变为采用可持续能源技术。该方案容易受到政府间反对，需要最高政治级别的管理。与减贫措施的潜在冲突并不是积极阻碍实现气候目标的体制变革的主要关切。绝大多数非贫困行为者经常利用与贫困有关的话语，将他们的利益提升到公众关注的问题。
ABSTRACT This paper examines power relations, coalitions and conflicts that drive and hinder institutional change in South African climate policy. The analysis finds that the most contested climate policies are those that create distributional conflicts where powerful, non-poor actors will potentially experience real losses to their fossil fuel-based operations. This finding opposes the assumption of competing objectives between emissions and poverty reduction. Yet, actors use discourse that relates to potentially competing objectives between emissions reductions, jobs, poverty reduction and economic welfare. The analysis relates to the broader questions on how to address public policy problems that affect the two objectives of mitigating climate change and simultaneously boosting socio-economic development. South Africa is a middle-income country that represents the challenge of accommodating simultaneous efforts for emissions and poverty reduction. Institutional change has been constrained especially in the process towards establishing climate budgets and a carbon tax. The opposing coalitions have succeeded in delaying the implementation of these processes, as a result of unequal power relations. Institutional change in South African climate policy can be predominantly characterized as layering with elements of policy innovation. New policies build on existing regulations in all three cases of climate policy examined: the climate change response white paper, the carbon tax and the renewable energy programme. Unbalanced power relations between coalitions of support in government and civil society and opposition mainly from the affected industry result in very fragile institutional change. Key policy insights The South African government has managed to drive institutional change in climate policy significantly over the past 7 years. Powerful coalitions of coal-related industries and their lobbies have constrained institutional change and managed to delay the implementation of carbon pricing measures. A successfully managed renewable energy programme has started to transform a coal- and nuclear-powered electricity sector towards integrating sustainable energy technologies. The programme is vulnerable to intergovernmental opposition and requires management at the highest political levels. Potential conflict with poverty reduction measures is not a major concern that actively hinders institutional change towards climate objectives. Predominantly non-poor actors frequently use poverty-related discourse to elevate their interests to issues of public concern.