Suchergebnisse

AbstractBoth supply- and demand-oriented solutions are important in cleaning up the electricity sector. However, their successful deployment calls for the removal of various barriers. This paper looks at China's electricity industry, one of the world's largest emitters of greenhouse gases, by relating the regulatory framework to the environmental dimension of sustainable electricity development. It develops an analytical framework by drawing upon the literature on the deployment of supply- and demand-side solutions, regulatory governance, and environmental policy integration. The paper finds that, in China's electricity sector, environmental considerations are subordinate to economic and development goals in policymaking and enforcement. Under the current regulatory framework, regulatory policies/instruments are not conducive to removing barriers to the effective deployment of the solutions.

Both supply- and demand-oriented solutions are important in cleaning up the electricity sector. However, their successful deployment calls for the removal of various barriers. This paper looks at China's electricity industry, one of the world's largest emitters of greenhouse gases, by relating the regulatory framework to the environmental dimension of sustainable electricity development. It develops an analytical framework by drawing upon the literature on the deployment of supply- and demand-side solutions, regulatory governance, and environmental policy integration. The paper finds that, in China's electricity sector, environmental considerations are subordinate to economic and development goals in policymaking and enforcement. Under the current regulatory framework, regulatory policies/instruments are not conducive to removing barriers to the effective deployment of the solutions. (China Q/GIGA)

AbstractRegulation is now considered an integral instrument in developing policy toolkit to support market‐led, pro‐poor growth in developing and transition economies. Institutional environment in general and regulatory governance in particular have increasingly been viewed as a factor of competitiveness. In search for better governance, regulatory reform is critical. This article assesses regulatory reform in selected developing and transition economies by reporting the results of a survey on the application of regulatory governance policies, tools and institutions. It is found that in these countries regulatory reform has not shifted in approaches and objectives to taking a systematic view of regulatory governance and the means of promoting and enhancing it. It is suggested that, in order to improve regulatory governance, focus should be put on each of the three elements: regulatory policies, tools and institutions, and that centralised and concerted efforts are needed to integrate the elements. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

COVID-19 accentuates the case for a global, rather than an international, development paradigm. The novel disease is a prime example of a development challenge for all countries, through the failure of public health as a global public good. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the falsity of any assumption that the global North has all the expertise and solutions to tackle global challenges, and has further highlighted the need for multi-directional learning and transformation in all countries towards a more sustainable and equitable world. We illustrate our argument for a global development paradigm by examining the implications of the COVID-19 pandemic across four themes: global value chains, digitalisation, debt, and climate change. We conclude that development studies must adapt to a very different context from when the field emerged in the mid-20th century. ; Annika Surmeier receives funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme under grant agreement No. 799041.

COVID-19 accentuates the case for a global, rather than an international, development paradigm. The novel disease is a prime example of a development challenge for all countries, through the failure of public health as a global public good. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the falsity of any assumption that the global North has all the expertise and solutions to tackle global challenges, and has further highlighted the need for multi-directional learning and transformation in all countries towards a more sustainable and equitable world. We illustrate our argument for a global development paradigm by examining the implications of the COVID-19 pandemic across four themes: global value chains, digitalisation, debt, and climate change. We conclude that development studies must adapt to a very different context from when the field emerged in the mid-20th century. ; Annika Surmeier receives funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme under grant agreement No. 799041.