The Search for an Effective Climate Change Public Policy: Can the G-20 Countries Guide the Rest of the World?

Öz

Climate change debates and policy making efforts -despite criticism of being inadequate- have recently covered the agenda of many policy actors including governments, non-governmental organizations, private sector and international organizations. Among these actors, G20 members can serve as a policy R&D center that sets an example for the rest of the world due to their strong economic and human capital. In this context, the climate policy outputs of the G20 countries were analyzed using the content analysis methodology, based on the policy orientations created within the scope of the research. The benchmark countries in the field of climate change were determined as a result of the multi-criteria analysis, and the policy patterns of these countries were comparatively analyzed. The policy transfer opportunity for other countries, especially developing countries, was discussed. Accordingly, the necessity of developing resilience in adaptation policies and the importance of establishing carbon budgets, planning a comprehensive energy transformation, integrating transportation policies with the energy sector, prioritizing principles such as public interest and transparency, and utilizing market and financial instruments effectively in mitigation policies have emerged.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• climate change
• climate laws
• climate strategies
• policy orientations
• adaptation policies
• mitigation policies
• comparative public policy analysis
• policy transfer
• multi criteria analysis
• environmental policies

Etkili İklim Değişikliği Kamu Politikası Arayışı: G-20 Ülkeleri Dünyanın Geri Kalanına Yol Gösterici Olabilir mi?

Öz

İklim değişikliği tartışmaları ve buna yönelik kamu politikası oluşturma çabaları son dönemde hükümetler, sivil toplum kuruluşları, özel sektör ve uluslararası kuruluşlar gibi birçok politika aktörünün gündeminde yer almaktadır. Bu aktörler içerisinde G20 üyeleri, ekonomik ve beşeri sermaye açısından güçlü yapıları nedeniyle dünyanın geri kalanına örnek olacak bir politika üretimi merkezi olarak ele alınabilir. Bu bağlamda, G-20 ülkelerinin iklim politikası çıktıları, bu araştırma kapsamında oluşturulan politika odakları çerçevesinde içerik analizine tabii tutulmuş, ayrıca çoklu kriter analizi sonucu iklim alanında başarılı politikalar ürettiği tespit edilen ülkelerin politika odakları karşılaştırmalı olarak analiz edilmiş ve başta gelişmekte olan ülkeler olmak üzere diğer ülkelere yönelik politika transferi imkanları tartışılmıştır. Buna göre, uyum politikalarında özellikle dirençliliği artırması üzerinde çalışması gerektiği, azaltım politikalarında ise karbon bütçelerinin oluşturulması, kapsamlı bir enerji dönüşümünün planlanması, ulaştırma politikalarının enerji sektörüyle buluşturulması, kamu yararı ve şeffaflık gibi ilkelerin ön planda tutulması ve iklim değişikliğiyle mücadelede piyasa araçları ve finansal enstrümanlarının etkin kullanılması gibi unsurların önemi ortaya çıkmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• iklim değişikliği
• iklim yasaları
• iklim stratejileri
• politika odakları
• uyum politikaları
• azaltım politikaları
• karşılaştırmalı kamu politikası analizi
• politika transferi
• çoklu kriter analizi
• çevre politikaları

Kaynakça

1. Armstrong, A. K., Krasny, M. E., & Schuldt, J. P. (2018). Communicating Climate Change. Cornell University Press; Comstock Publishing Associates.
2. Bennett, C. (1991). What is policy convergence and what causes it? British journal of political science, 21(2), 215-233.
3. Berger, P., & Luckmann, T. (1967). The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
4. Beth, E., & Stuart, L. (2013). Climate Change and Order, The End of Prosperity and Democracy. In David Elliott, Energy, Climate and the Environment. New York: Palgrave Mcmillan.
5. Biermann, F., & Dingwerth, K. (2004). ‘Global Environmental Change and the Nation State. Global Environmental Politics, 4(1), 1-22.
6. BloombergNEF. (2021). Climate Policy Factbook: Three priority areas for climate action.
7. Burroughs, W. J. (2010). Climate Change: A Multidisciplinary Approach. Cambridge University Press.
8. Cooper, A. F. (2010). The G20 as an improvised crisis committee and/or a contested steering commitee for the world. International Affairs, 86(3), 741-757.

9. David F. (ed.), C. S. (2009). Legal Aspects of Carbon Trading: Kyoto, Copenhagen, and beyond. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
10. Davies, H., Nutley, S., & Smith, P. (2000). What works? Evidence-based policy and practice. Bristol: Policy Press.
11. Lisa, E., Schipper F., (2008). The Earthscan Reader on Adaptation to Climate Change. Routledge.
12. Erdogan, E. (2023), Politika Transferi Bağlamında İklim Değişikliğine Yönelik Kamu Politikalarının Karşılaştırmalı Analizi, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Hacettepe University
13. Erkkilä, T., & Piironen, O. (2014, 50 2). Shifting fundaments of European higher education governance: Competition, ranking, autonomy and accountability. Comparative Education .
14. Evans, M., & Davies, J. (1999). Understanding Policy Transfer: A Multi-Level, Multi Disciplinary Perspective. Public Administration, 77(2), 362-385.
15. Fyson, C., Geiges, A., Gidden, M., Srouji, J., & Schumer, C. (2021). 2021: Closing the gap: the impact of G20 climate commitments on limiting global temperature rise to 1.5°C. Climate Analytics, World Resources Institute.
16. G20. (2009). G20 Leaders Statement: The Pittsburgh Summit. Retrieved from G20 Information Centre: http://www.g20.utoronto.ca/2009/2009communique0925.html
17. Gillespie, A. (2022, 11 14). Global atmospheric carbon dioxide levels continue to rise. Retrieved from NOAA Research News.
18. Gough, I. (2011). Climate Change and Pulic Policy Futures. London: The British Academy.
19. Hall, P. (1993). Policy paradigms, social learning and the state: the case of economic policy making in Britain. . Comparative politics, 25, 275-296.
20. Hoffman, S. (1997). State Sovereignty, Change and Persistence in International Relations. Pennsylvania.: Pennsylvania State University Press,.
21. Howlett, M. (2000). Beyond legalism? Policy ideas, implementation styles and emulation-based convergence in Canadian and US environmental policy. Journal of public policy, 20(3), 305-329.
22. International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD); ODI Global Advisory; Oil Change. (2020). Doubling Back and Doubling Down: G20 scorecard on fossil fuel funding. International Instutute for Sustainable Development.
23. Ikenberry, J. (1990). The international spread of privatisation policies: inducements, learning and policy bandwaggoning. In E. S. Waterbury, The political economy of public sector reform. Boulder: Westview Press.
24. Ikenberry, J. (1990). The International spread of privatisation policies: inducements, learning and policy bandwaggoning. The Political economy of public sector reform, Routledge.
25. Johnstone, I. (2021). The G20, climate change and COVID-19: critical juncture or critical wound. Fulbright Review of Economics and Policy, 1(2), 227-245.
26. Lasswell, H. (1970, 1). The emerging conception of the policy sciences. Policy sciences, 1, 3-14.
27. Lee, J. (2010, July 7). milankovitch cycles. Retrieved from www.eoearth.org.
28. Lindsey, R. (2016, February 9). Global Impacts of El Nino and La Nina. Retrieved from www.climate.gov.
29. Luterbacher, U., & Sprinz, D. F. (2018). lobal Climate Policy: Actors, Concepts, and Enduring Challenges. The MIT Press.
30. Majone, G. (1991). Cross-national sources of regulatory policy-making in Europe and the United States. Journal of public policy, 11(1), 19-106.
31. May, P. (1992). Policy learning and failure. Journal of public policy, 12(4), 331-354.
32. Melillo, J., Richmond, T., & Yohe, G. (214). Climate Change Impacts in the United States: The Third National Climate Assasment. U.S. Global Change Research Program.
33. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). (2016). earthobservatory.nasa.gov. Retrieved from earthobservatory sitesi: https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/89469/global-temperature-record-broken-for-third-consecutive-year
34. Premfors, R. (1998). Reshaping the Democratic State: Swedish Experiences in a Comparative Perspective. Public Administration, 76(1), 141-159.
35. Rose, R. (1991). What is lesson drawing? Journal of public policy, 11(1), 3-30.
36. Rose, R. (2005). Learning from comparative public policy: a practical guide. London; New York: Routledge.
37. Schneider, S. H., Rosencranz, A., Mastrandrea, M. D., & Kuntz-Duriseti, K. (2009). Climate Change Science and Policy. Washington: Island Press.
38. Sargut, Ş. Ö. (2020). Örgüt Kuramları. Ankara: İmge.
39. Sobacı, M. Z. (2009). İdari Reform ve Politika Transferi: Yeni Kamu İşletmeciliğinin Yayılışı. . Ankara: Turhan Kitapevi.
40. Srivastav, A. (2019). The Science and Impact of Climate Change. Springer .
41. Stehr, N. (2016). Exceptional Circumstances: Does Climate Change Trump Democracy?”. Issues in Science and Technology, 32(2).
42. Stern, H. (2009). Prosperity., A Blueprint for a Safer Planet: How to Manage Climate Change and Create a New Era of Progress and. London: The Bodley Head.
43. Tiefenbacher, J. P. (2020). Global Warming and Climate Change. IntechOpen.
44. Tutu, D. (2019, October 3). Climate change is the apartheid of our times. Retrieved from financial times: https://www.ft.com/content/9e4befae-e083-11e9-b8e0-026e07cbe5b4
45. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). (2009). Global green new deal: policy brief march 2009. Retrieved from https://www.unep.org: https://www.unep.org/resources/report/global-green-new-deal-policy-brief-march-2009
46. Walker, G., & Burningham, K. (2011). Flood risk, vulnerability and environmental justice: Evidence and evaluation of inequality in a UK context. Critical Social Policy, 31(2), 216–240.