可持续发展政策一致性的政治驱动因素:一个分析框架

IF 3 3区 社会学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Environmental Policy and Governance Pub Date : 2022-11-01 DOI:10.1002/eet.2039
Zoha Shawoo, Aaron Maltais, Adis Dzebo, Jonathan Pickering
{"title":"可持续发展政策一致性的政治驱动因素:一个分析框架","authors":"Zoha Shawoo,&nbsp;Aaron Maltais,&nbsp;Adis Dzebo,&nbsp;Jonathan Pickering","doi":"10.1002/eet.2039","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Prominent conceptualizations of policy coherence for sustainable development focus primarily on the roles of intra-governmental policy processes and institutional interactions in shaping coherence between various agendas and policies. These technocratic understandings of coherence overlook the more political drivers of coherence, such as the vested interests or ideologies that may encourage or hinder efforts to achieve coherence. This paper addresses this gap by drawing on the comparative politics literature to facilitate a political understanding of policy coherence. It introduces an analytical framework hypothesizing how ideas, institutions, and interests (the three I's) may influence policy coherence at different policy stages. As such, it includes measures of how policy coherence is applied by different actors and institutions, and whose ideas and interests may be served by pursuing or not pursuing coherence. This article provides an example of how the framework can be applied to study policy coherence between two prominent international agendas: Agenda 2030 (incorporating the Sustainable Development Goals) and the Paris Agreement. Overall, the paper argues that the three I's influence policy options and shape the ambition and importance given to different agendas, goals and actors in pursuing or resisting policy coherence. This framework is suited for assessing the political divers of policy coherence through being applied to empirical data at global or national levels.</p>","PeriodicalId":47396,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Policy and Governance","volume":"33 4","pages":"339-350"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/eet.2039","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Political drivers of policy coherence for sustainable development: An analytical framework\",\"authors\":\"Zoha Shawoo,&nbsp;Aaron Maltais,&nbsp;Adis Dzebo,&nbsp;Jonathan Pickering\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/eet.2039\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Prominent conceptualizations of policy coherence for sustainable development focus primarily on the roles of intra-governmental policy processes and institutional interactions in shaping coherence between various agendas and policies. These technocratic understandings of coherence overlook the more political drivers of coherence, such as the vested interests or ideologies that may encourage or hinder efforts to achieve coherence. This paper addresses this gap by drawing on the comparative politics literature to facilitate a political understanding of policy coherence. It introduces an analytical framework hypothesizing how ideas, institutions, and interests (the three I's) may influence policy coherence at different policy stages. As such, it includes measures of how policy coherence is applied by different actors and institutions, and whose ideas and interests may be served by pursuing or not pursuing coherence. This article provides an example of how the framework can be applied to study policy coherence between two prominent international agendas: Agenda 2030 (incorporating the Sustainable Development Goals) and the Paris Agreement. Overall, the paper argues that the three I's influence policy options and shape the ambition and importance given to different agendas, goals and actors in pursuing or resisting policy coherence. This framework is suited for assessing the political divers of policy coherence through being applied to empirical data at global or national levels.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47396,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environmental Policy and Governance\",\"volume\":\"33 4\",\"pages\":\"339-350\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/eet.2039\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environmental Policy and Governance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/eet.2039\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Policy and Governance","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/eet.2039","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

可持续发展政策一致性的突出概念主要侧重于政府内部政策进程和机构互动在形成各种议程和政策之间一致性方面的作用。这些技术官僚对连贯性的理解忽视了连贯性的更多政治驱动因素,例如可能鼓励或阻碍实现连贯性的既得利益或意识形态。本文通过借鉴比较政治文献来解决这一差距,以促进对政策连贯性的政治理解。它引入了一个分析框架,假设思想、制度和利益(三个I)如何影响不同政策阶段的政策一致性。因此,它包括衡量不同行为者和机构如何运用政策一致性,以及追求或不追求一致性可能有助于他们的想法和利益。本文举例说明了如何将该框架应用于研究两个重要国际议程之间的政策一致性:《2030年议程》(纳入可持续发展目标)和《巴黎协定》。总的来说,本文认为,三个I影响政策选择,并塑造了在追求或抵制政策一致性时给予不同议程、目标和行为者的雄心和重要性。该框架适用于通过应用于全球或国家层面的经验数据来评估政策一致性的政治差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Political drivers of policy coherence for sustainable development: An analytical framework

Prominent conceptualizations of policy coherence for sustainable development focus primarily on the roles of intra-governmental policy processes and institutional interactions in shaping coherence between various agendas and policies. These technocratic understandings of coherence overlook the more political drivers of coherence, such as the vested interests or ideologies that may encourage or hinder efforts to achieve coherence. This paper addresses this gap by drawing on the comparative politics literature to facilitate a political understanding of policy coherence. It introduces an analytical framework hypothesizing how ideas, institutions, and interests (the three I's) may influence policy coherence at different policy stages. As such, it includes measures of how policy coherence is applied by different actors and institutions, and whose ideas and interests may be served by pursuing or not pursuing coherence. This article provides an example of how the framework can be applied to study policy coherence between two prominent international agendas: Agenda 2030 (incorporating the Sustainable Development Goals) and the Paris Agreement. Overall, the paper argues that the three I's influence policy options and shape the ambition and importance given to different agendas, goals and actors in pursuing or resisting policy coherence. This framework is suited for assessing the political divers of policy coherence through being applied to empirical data at global or national levels.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Environmental Policy and Governance
Environmental Policy and Governance ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES-
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
13.30%
发文量
67
期刊介绍: Environmental Policy and Governance is an international, inter-disciplinary journal affiliated with the European Society for Ecological Economics (ESEE). The journal seeks to advance interdisciplinary environmental research and its use to support novel solutions in environmental policy and governance. The journal publishes innovative, high quality articles which examine, or are relevant to, the environmental policies that are introduced by governments or the diverse forms of environmental governance that emerge in markets and civil society. The journal includes papers that examine how different forms of policy and governance emerge and exert influence at scales ranging from local to global and in diverse developmental and environmental contexts.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Between science, authority, and responsibility: Exploring institutional logics to rethink climate governance Playing the CITES game: Lessons on global conservation governance from African megafauna Illuminating the collective learning continuum in the Colorado River Basin Science‐Policy Forums Achieving economy‐wide gains from residential energy efficiency improvements: The importance of timing and funding approach in driving the transition
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1