Multiple Models to Inform Climate Change Policy: A Pragmatic Response to the ‘Beyond the ABC’ Debate
Multiple Models to Inform Climate Change Policy: A Pragmatic Response to the ‘Beyond the ABC’ Debate
复制标题
为气候变化政策提供信息的多种模型：对“超越ABC”辩论的务实回应
DOI：
10.1068/a44404
复制
发表时间：
2011
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
T. Chatterton
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Charlie Wilson;T. Chatterton
我们感兴趣地关注了Shove（2010; 2011）和Whitmarsh & colleagues（2011）之间关于对比理论方法和亲环境行为和社会变革的表现，以及跨学科或整合的潜力，理由和优点的辩论。在这篇评论中，我们从关注近期温室气体减排的政策制定者的角度，对正在辩论的问题做出了务实的回应。这种反应是由我们中的一个（查特顿）在为期一年的研究理事会英国（RCUK）能源计划奖学金作为能源与气候变化部（DECC）的社会科学家的最近经验。
该研究金的名称为“个人和社区的能源行为”，反映了Shove（2010年）阐述的决策者对行为的主要概念化，以及政府内部对行为改变的潜力的普遍兴趣，以促进政策目标。“行为改变”政策正在被推广为立法、监管和税收等更成熟方法的一种有吸引力的替代方案（第4页，Dolan等人，2010年）。当前联合王国政府的联合协议主张“避开过去的官僚杠杆，寻找明智的方法来鼓励、支持和使人们能够为自己做出更好的选择”（第7 -8页，HMG 2010 b）。支持性的体制发展包括2010年设立内阁办公室行为洞察小组，以及最近上议院科学和技术特别委员会对“利用行为改变干预措施实现政策目标”的调查（第88页，上议院，2011年）。在这里，我们主要关注的是减缓气候变化作为政策目标，其本身往往是在更广泛的可持续发展目标的框架内。
We have followed with interest the debate in this journal between Shove (2010; 2011) and Whitmarsh & colleagues (2011) on contrasting theoretical approaches and representations of pro-environmental behaviour and social change, and of the potential, rationale and merit of interdisciplinarity or integration. In this commentary, we offer a pragmatic response to the issues being debated from the perspective of policymakers concerned with near-term reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. This response is informed by the recent experience of one of us (Chatterton) during a year-long Research Council UK (RCUK) Energy Programme Fellowship as a social scientist based in the Department of Energy & Climate Change (DECC).
The title of this Fellowship, “Individuals’ and Communities’ Energy Behaviour”, reflects the dominant conceptualisation of behaviour among policymakers as elaborated by Shove (2010), as well as the prevailing interest within government in the potential for behaviour change to contribute towards policy goals. ‘Behaviour change’ policies are being promoted as an attractive alternative to the more established approaches of legislation, regulation, and taxation (p4, Dolan et al. 2010). The current UK government’s coalition agreement argues for “shunning the bureaucratic levers of the past and finding intelligent ways to encourage, support and enable people to make better choices for themselves” (pp7-8, HMG 2010b). Supporting institutional developments include the creation of the Cabinet Office’s Behavioural Insights Team in 2010, and the recent House of Lords Science & Technology Select Committee’s inquiry into “the use of behaviour change interventions to achieve policy goals” (p88, House_of_Lords 2011). Here, we are primarily concerned with climate change mitigation as the policy goal, itself often framed within broader sustainability objectives.
英国气候辩论中的行为变化：责任、代理和政治维度的评估
影响因子：
3.9
作者：
Fudge S
通讯作者：
Fudge S