绿色复苏——克服政策不一致,实现可持续性转型

IF 3 3区 社会学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Environmental Policy and Governance Pub Date : 2023-02-09 DOI:10.1002/eet.2049
Sara Gottenhuber, Björn-Ola Linnér, Victoria Wibeck, Åsa Persson
{"title":"绿色复苏——克服政策不一致,实现可持续性转型","authors":"Sara Gottenhuber,&nbsp;Björn-Ola Linnér,&nbsp;Victoria Wibeck,&nbsp;Åsa Persson","doi":"10.1002/eet.2049","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Policy coherence is crucial in the 2030 Agenda's transformative ambitions and heralded as of paramount importance to ensure the successful implementation of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals and climate policy targets. Despite political efforts to achieve policy coherence, apparent trade-offs and goal conflicts have emerged – even in a proclaimed ‘front-runner’ country like Sweden. This paper examines the role of ideas in proposing and legitimising policy options and achieving policy coherence in the light of the Swedish recovery debate in 2020 following the COVID-19 pandemic. Ideas of a green economic recovery put forward in the public debate are examined through thematic text and frame analysis. We show that ideas of a green transition, boosted by economic recovery spending, draw on a synergistic frame in combining social, environmental, and economic policy options, carrying a potential for coherency. However, the absence of a discussion on power, as in who stands to gain what under which circumstances, coupled with an inherent understanding of a temporal hierarchy of policy priorities does not only impact the ability to design coherent policies but may have considerable impacts on the prospects of achieving sustainability transformations.</p>","PeriodicalId":47396,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Policy and Governance","volume":"33 5","pages":"546-560"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/eet.2049","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Greening recovery – Overcoming policy incoherence for sustainability transformations\",\"authors\":\"Sara Gottenhuber,&nbsp;Björn-Ola Linnér,&nbsp;Victoria Wibeck,&nbsp;Åsa Persson\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/eet.2049\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Policy coherence is crucial in the 2030 Agenda's transformative ambitions and heralded as of paramount importance to ensure the successful implementation of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals and climate policy targets. Despite political efforts to achieve policy coherence, apparent trade-offs and goal conflicts have emerged – even in a proclaimed ‘front-runner’ country like Sweden. This paper examines the role of ideas in proposing and legitimising policy options and achieving policy coherence in the light of the Swedish recovery debate in 2020 following the COVID-19 pandemic. Ideas of a green economic recovery put forward in the public debate are examined through thematic text and frame analysis. We show that ideas of a green transition, boosted by economic recovery spending, draw on a synergistic frame in combining social, environmental, and economic policy options, carrying a potential for coherency. However, the absence of a discussion on power, as in who stands to gain what under which circumstances, coupled with an inherent understanding of a temporal hierarchy of policy priorities does not only impact the ability to design coherent policies but may have considerable impacts on the prospects of achieving sustainability transformations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47396,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environmental Policy and Governance\",\"volume\":\"33 5\",\"pages\":\"546-560\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/eet.2049\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environmental Policy and Governance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/eet.2049\",\"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.2049","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: 0

摘要

政策一致性在《2030年议程》的变革雄心中至关重要,并被认为对确保成功实施17项可持续发展目标和气候政策目标至关重要。尽管为实现政策一致性做出了政治努力,但仍出现了明显的权衡和目标冲突——即使在瑞典这样一个被称为“领跑者”的国家也是如此。本文根据新冠肺炎大流行后瑞典2020年的复苏辩论,研究了各种想法在提出政策选择并使其合法化以及实现政策一致性方面的作用。通过主题文本和框架分析,对公众辩论中提出的绿色经济复苏理念进行了研究。我们表明,在经济复苏支出的推动下,绿色转型的理念借鉴了社会、环境和经济政策选择的协同框架,具有连贯性的潜力。然而,缺乏关于权力的讨论,例如谁将在什么情况下获得什么,再加上对政策优先事项的时间层次的固有理解,不仅影响设计连贯政策的能力,而且可能对实现可持续性转变的前景产生重大影响。
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
Greening recovery – Overcoming policy incoherence for sustainability transformations

Policy coherence is crucial in the 2030 Agenda's transformative ambitions and heralded as of paramount importance to ensure the successful implementation of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals and climate policy targets. Despite political efforts to achieve policy coherence, apparent trade-offs and goal conflicts have emerged – even in a proclaimed ‘front-runner’ country like Sweden. This paper examines the role of ideas in proposing and legitimising policy options and achieving policy coherence in the light of the Swedish recovery debate in 2020 following the COVID-19 pandemic. Ideas of a green economic recovery put forward in the public debate are examined through thematic text and frame analysis. We show that ideas of a green transition, boosted by economic recovery spending, draw on a synergistic frame in combining social, environmental, and economic policy options, carrying a potential for coherency. However, the absence of a discussion on power, as in who stands to gain what under which circumstances, coupled with an inherent understanding of a temporal hierarchy of policy priorities does not only impact the ability to design coherent policies but may have considerable impacts on the prospects of achieving sustainability transformations.

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