Suchergebnisse

ABSTRACTSince May 2019, several German cities and municipalities have declared a 'climate emergency', an action which makes climate impact assessments mandatory for all projects or policy proposals. How have the processes in the local governments changed in response to the emergency status? How have the processes in the city and municipal councils changed? And how, if at all, has the relationship between elected politicians (who make up the city and municipal councils) and bureaucrats (who make up the local government) changed? Based on 13 interviews carried out with representatives of city and municipal councils and local governments, we show, first, that local governments expect a higher workload and to spend more time on cross-sectoral coordination and cooperation. Second, the issue of climate change is now part of the political agenda in the local councils. Third, the administrative actors are now in a stronger position vis-à-vis the political ones as they can de facto veto projects or policies. Overall, we conclude that local-level climate politics has changed following the declaration of the emergency status; however, the design of the corresponding policies has not changed to reflect the cross-sectoral character of responses to climate change.

The COVID-19 pandemic has forced governments to impose major restrictions on individual freedom in order to stop the spread of the virus. With the successful development of a vaccine, these restrictions are likely to become obsolete—on the condition that people get vaccinated. However, parts of the population have reservations against vaccination. While this is not a recent phenomenon, it might prove a critical one in the context of current attempts to manage the COVID-19 pandemic. Consequently, the task of designing policies suitable for attaining high levels of vaccination deserves enhanced attention. In this study, we use data from the Eurobarometer survey fielded in March 2019. They show that 39% of Europeans consider vaccines to cause the diseases which they should protect against, that 50% believe vaccines have serious side effects, that 32% think that vaccines weaken the immune system, and that 10% do not believe vaccines are tested rigorously before authorization. We find that—even when controlling for important individual-level factors—ideological extremism on both ends of the spectrum explains skepticism of vaccination. We conclude that policymakers must either politicize the issue or form broad alliances among parties and societal groups in order to increase trust in and public support for the vaccines in general and for vaccines against COVID-19 in particular, since the latter were developed in a very short time period and resulted—in particular in case of the AstraZeneca vaccine—in reservations because of the effectiveness and side effects of the new vaccines. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11077-021-09428-0.

What motivated national governments to join the Clean Energy Ministerial (CEM), a climate club founded in 2010? And to what extent have the club members participated in policy initiatives developed by the CEM? Our analysis shows that combinations of (a) the expected benefits of club membership and (b) the leadership of the USA induced the governments of Australia, Brazil, Canada, China and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) to join the CEM. The importance of these two factors varied across countries. Participation levels in the CEM's policy initiatives varied over time. While this variation happened in a 'proportionate' manner for Australia, Canada and China, we observed singular instances of 'disproportionate' changes in levels of policy effort for the UAE and Brazil. Overall, our findings suggest that climate clubs constrain the behaviour of its members by discouraging them from engaging in sustained policy under-reactions.

The concept of agenda-setting has resulted in vibrant research in political science. The aim of this Special Issue is to advance the state of research on water governance by alluding to the possibilities for applying this particular theoretical perspective to water issues. Agenda-setting concerns how and when issues enter the public debate (discussion agenda) or are taken into account by policymakers with a view to proposing policies (decision agenda). Simply put, agenda-setting is about the process of drawing or paying attention to certain issues. Despite the intuitiveness of this concept, the underlying political and societal processes related to water governance are complex and require careful research designs in order to realize the full potential of agenda-setting research. The contributions to this Special Issue combine theoretically convincing research on agenda-setting with research on issues in water ...

Abstract: What motivated national governments to join the Clean Energy Ministerial (CEM), a climate club founded in 2010? And to what extent have the club members participated in policy initiatives developed by the CEM? Our analysis shows that combinations of (a) the expected benefits of club membership and (b) the leadership of the USA induced the governments of Australia, Brazil, Canada, China and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) to join the CEM. The importance of these two factors varied across countries. Participation levels in the CEM's policy initiatives varied over time. While this variation happened in a 'proportionate' manner for Australia, Canada and China, we observed singular instances of 'disproportionate' changes in levels of policy effort for the UAE and Brazil. Overall, our findings suggest that climate clubs constrain the behaviour of its members by discouraging them from engaging in sustained policy under-reactions.

This study seeks to introduce the concept of Varieties of Capitalism to the study of multi-actor implementation arrangements. It illustrates the analytical value of this classification scheme by drawing from original empirical data and addresses two key research questions, namely how do public and private actors cooperate in delivering on public policy, and which factors determine the scope of their cooperation? To address these questions, the article examines governance arrangements adopted by individual European Union member states for implementing the Youth Guarantee. The Youth Guarantee was selected because all European Union member states must and have indeed already started to implement it, meaning it provides a broad empirical base for observing different types of public–private coordination. The findings demonstrate that a hierarchical structure in a country's political economy and prior expenditure on active labour market policies result in different governance arrangements.

With Brexit imminent, the debate on the need for differentiated integration (DI) by means of opting-out has gained new momentum. At the same time, non-member states decide to adopt European Union (EU) rules as exemplified by the European Neighbourhood Policy. In light of these opposing observations, we examine the EU's disposition to supply DI. We outline the strategic interactions of the EU member states or non-members in the context of two forms of DI: opting-out and inducing-in. In the case of opting-out, EU member states can refrain from adopting EU rules; inducing-in refers to providing non-member states with incentives to adopt EU rules. We show that the information asymmetries inherent to the strategic interactions result in a situation in which the EU is likely to supply opportunities to opt-out for member states to a much greater extent than necessary. Furthermore, the EU is likely to offer more compensation to non-member states in exchange for adopting EU rules than it would actually need to.

AbstractUnemployment experiences can have consequences for how people think about democracy and where they stand vis‐à‐vis the state. We investigate how young people's experiences with public employment services can shape levels of external political efficacy—the feeling that decision‐makers are responsive to citizen needs. The personal and direct experiences one gathers at this pivotal time in life can also leave their mark on political attitudes. We analyze an original dataset on German youth to test how encounters with such agencies affect young people's political efficacy, finding that perceptions of helpfulness and being treated fairly and with respect increase the likelihood of being politically efficacious. The findings highlight the importance of personal experiences and bureaucratic interactions for vulnerable young people's democratic attitudes.

This study seeks to introduce the concept of Varieties of Capitalism to the study of multi-actor implementation arrangements. It illustrates the analytical value of this classification scheme by drawing from original empirical data and addresses two key research questions, namely how do public and private actors cooperate in delivering on public policy, and which factors determine the scope of their cooperation? To address these questions, the article examines governance arrangements adopted by individual European Union member states for implementing the Youth Guarantee. The Youth Guarantee was selected because all European Union member states must and have indeed already started to implement it, meaning it provides a broad empirical base for observing different types of public–private coordination. The findings demonstrate that a hierarchical structure in a country's political economy and prior expenditure on active labour market policies result in different governance arrangements.