Suchergebnisse

Vor dem Hintergrund der erheblichen ökonomischen Potentiale öko-effizienter Technologien einerseits und den Schwierigkeiten einer Politikintegration andererseits besteht das Ziel des Beitrages zur Governance darin, eine Bestandsaufnahme der Integration von Umwelt- und Innovationsaspekten in aktuellen europäischen Politiken durchzuführen. Dabei werden wie in früheren Studien zur Umweltpolitikintegration nicht alleine die Normen, Strategien und Institutionen betrachtet, sondern darüber hinaus das tatsächliche Ausmaß der Politikintegration sichtbar gemacht. Ferner wird untersucht, inwieweit drei übergreifende europäische Strategien (Lissabon-Strategie, Strategie für nachhaltige Entwicklung und Strategie für bessere Rechtsetzung) in Richtung einer verstärkten Integration wirken. Die empirische Grundlage des Projekts ist die Analyse der genannten EU-Strategien sowie eine Evaluation von 23 EU-Politiken aus verschiedenen Politikbereichen (z. B. Forschung, Wirtschaft, Umwelt, Handel, Verkehr). Nicht jede europäische Politik ist gleichermaßen geeignet, Umweltinnovationen zu fördern. Daher steht zunächst im Vordergrund, das Potenzial einer Politik zur Förderung von Umweltinnovationen zu bemessen und darauf aufbauend zu analysieren, inwieweit dieses Potenzial tatsächlich ausgeschöpft wird. Der mögliche und tatsächliche Beitrag der derzeitigen EU-Politik für eine ökologische Industriepolitik wird durch eine Reihe von Kriterien operationalisiert, mit denen das Innovationspotenzial und die tatsächliche Innovationsorientierung der Politiken bewertet werden kann. Die Auswertung der 23 EU-Politiken zeigt ein recht heterogenes Bild mit einer großen Anzahl von hohen Werten in Bezug auf ihr Potenzial zur Förderung von ökologisch-effizienten Innovationen. Das Bild für die tatsächliche Innovationsorientierung ist noch uneinheitlicher, aber mit insgesamt niedrigeren Werten. Ein Vergleich der verschiedenen Politikbereiche macht deutlich, dass Umweltpolitiken das größte Potenzial zur Förderung von Umweltinnovationen haben, gefolgt von Innovationspolitiken und Wirtschaftspolitiken. Die Studie offenbart eine Reihe von Defiziten und Handlungsoptionen bei der Integration der drei Politikbereiche, die am Schluss der Ausführungen diskutiert werden. (ICG2)

Sustainable development is a cross-cutting issue par excellence that necessitates a very high degree of policy coordination. This is especially true considering that the European Union's 2001 Sustainable Development Strategy demands that all European Union (EU) policies actively support the sustainable development of other countries, particularly those in the developing world. In order to fulfil this ambitious obligation, the EU has pledged to consider the impacts that all new policies have within and outside the EU as part of a new Impact Assessment (IA) regime. This paper aims to evaluate how well the new IA regime has helped address the 'external' dimensions of sustainability through the analysis of potential effects of EU policies on non-EU countries. It finds that the IA procedure does not currently function as an effective instrument for the implementation of the Union's commitment to promoting sustainability in the developing world. Other coordination mechanisms need to be considered given the horizontal and vertical complexity of this challenge.

Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA) - understood as the formalised analytical activities initiated or carried out by central government administrations when designing specific policy instruments - is currently receiving high levels of political attention. It is seen as a tool to improve regulatory quality and to promote cross-cutting objectives such as sustainable development. Often conceived as an economic analysis of costs and benefits, RIA tends to be depicted as 'neutral' assessment process that informs decision makers about 'facts'. This does not explain, of course, why RIA often becomes an arena for political conflict involving both government departments and stakeholders. Based on empirical research on the design and practical application of RIA across the European Union, this paper explores the relationship between RIA, policy-making and politics. The aim is to shed light on what knowledge is produced, how it is used by different actors and what role it plays in decision-making. Based on this analysis, we explore to what extent and under what conditions RIA can serve as a tool for more evidence-based and sustainability-oriented policy-making processes.

Die Förderung von Umweltinnovationen ist ein wichtiges Politikziel der Europäischen Union. Jedoch ist die Umsetzung in konkrete Maßnahmen noch häufig von Schwierigkeiten und Defiziten gekennzeichnet. Dies ist das Ergebnis einer systematischen Untersuchung von 24 europäischen Einzelpolitiken und drei Rahmenstrategien der EU. Die Studie zeigt außerdem, welche Ansatzpunkte auf EU-Ebene bestehen, Umweltinnovationen verstärkt zu fördern.

Procedures for the ex ante assessment of public policies are currently in vogue across the OECD. Their design is typically informed by a rational-instrumental model of problem solving, which assumes that knowledge is collected, evaluated, and then translated straightforwardly into 'better policies'. But this model has been little affected by more than three decades of academic research which has demonstrated that the reality of everyday policy making is far messier. In this paper we analyse whether the uptake of ex ante assessment of policies is nonetheless capable of creating opportunities for policy deliberation and learning informed by new assessment knowledge. Drawing on an analysis of policy assessment procedures in three countries and the European Union, we find that there are several ways in which assessment knowledge is used in the policy process. Moreover, we argue that policy learning occurs despite, rather than because of, the instrumental design of new assessment procedures, which tends to act as a barrier to open deliberation and knowledge utilisation.

Procedures for the ex ante assessment of public policies are currently in vogue across the OECD. Their design is typically informed by an instrumentally rational model of problem solving, which assumes that knowledge is collected, evaluated and then trans-lated straightforwardly into 'better policies'. This model has, it seems, been little af-fected by more than three decades of academic research which has demonstrated thathe reality of every-day policy- making is far messier. This paper analyses whether the uptake of ex ante assessment of policies is nonetheless capable of providing new op-portunities for knowledge to inform processes of policy deliberation and learning. Drawing on an analysis of policy assessment procedures in three countries and the European Commission, it finds that there are several ways in which assessment knowl-edge is used in the policy process. Moreover, its argues that policy learning occurs de-spite, rather than because of the instrumental design of the new assessment proce-dures, which tends to act as a barrier to open deliberation and knowledge utilisation.

A recent discussion paper Sufficiency as a "Strategy of the Enough": A Necessary Debate by the German Advisory Council on the Environment (SRU) aims to intensify the debate on sufficiency, a central but neglected element of future-oriented policy. It defines sufficiency
as the need to limit the consumption and production of ecologically critical goods and services, mainly by the economically rich, as a basis for reducing distributional injustices and environmental impacts. Rather than proposing specific measures, the paper deliberately aims to explain the
need for sufficiency from various scientific disciplines, and invite discussion. Here, the authors of the discussion paper provide a short overview of the analyses and arguments in English.

In March 2019, German-speaking scientists and scholars calling themselves Scientists for Future, published a statement in support of the youth protesters in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland (Fridays for Future, Klimastreik/Climate Strike), verifying the scientific evidence that the youth protestors refer to. In this article, they provide the full text of the statement, including the list of supporting facts (in both English and German) as well as an analysis of the results and impacts of the statement. Furthermore, they reflect on the challenges for scientists and scholars who feel a dual responsibility: on the one hand, to remain independent and politically neutral, and, on the other hand, to inform and warn societies of the dangers that lie ahead. ; ISSN:0940-5550

In March 2019, German-speaking scientists and scholars calling themselves Scientists for Future, published a statement in support of the youth protesters in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland (Fridays for Future, Klimastreik/Climate Strike), verifying the scientific evidence that the youth protestors refer to. In this article, they provide the full text of the statement, including the list of supporting facts (in both English and German) as well as an analysis of the results and impacts of the statement. Furthermore, they reflect on the challenges for scientists and scholars who feel a dual responsibility: on the one hand, to remain independent and politically neutral, and, on the other hand, to inform and warn societies of the dangers that lie ahead. © 2019 G. Hagedorn et al.; licensee oekom verlag.This Open Access article is published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License CCBY4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0).