Categories of failure in climate change mitigation policy in Australia
Categories of failure in climate change mitigation policy in Australia
复制标题
澳大利亚减缓气候变化政策的失败类别
DOI：
10.1177/0952076714565832
复制
发表时间：
2015
影响因子：
3.1
通讯作者：
B. Head
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
J. Newman;B. Head
关于公共政策失败的讨论由于对"失败"一词的定义缺乏共识而受到阻碍。可以看出，与政策失败有关的论点往往将实际上是离散的失败形式混为一谈，例如未能实现目标，声称分配结果不利，并将选举结果不利归咎于具体的政策决定。本文试图通过提出一种多维方法来统一和澄清关于政策失败的论述，这种方法可以在单个政策或计划中识别失败的各个方面。这种多层面的政策失败的方法，然后被应用到澳大利亚的气候变化政策，以证明如何政策的某些方面可以被解释为失败，而其他方面可以同时被解释为成功，即使是由同一个观察员。正如这个例子所表明的那样，应该避免在全球范围内宣布一项公共政策是"成功"还是"失败"，而应该更准确地评估发生了什么样的失败，谁受到了影响，以及以何种方式受到影响。
Discussions of failure in public policy have been hampered by a lack of consensus on a definition of the term ‘failure’. It can be shown that arguments relating to policy failure tend to conflate forms of failure that are actually discrete, such as failure to meet objectives, claims of negative distributional outcomes and negative electoral outcomes attributed to specific policy decisions. This article attempts to unify and clarify the discourse on policy failure by presenting a multi-dimensional approach that can identify separate aspects of failure within a single policy or program. This multi-dimensional approach to policy failure is then be applied to climate change policy in Australia, in order to demonstrate how some aspects of a policy can be interpreted as failed while others can simultaneously be interpreted as successful, even by the same observer. As this example illustrates, global pronouncements of a public policy as a ‘success’ or ‘failure’ should be avoided in favour of more precise evaluations of what kind of failure occurred, and who was affected and in what ways.