Suchergebnisse

AbstractThe United States is experiencing growing impacts of climate change but currently receives a limited policy response from its national leadership. Within this policy void, many state governments are stepping up and taking action on adaptation planning. Yet we know little about why some states adopt State Adaptation Plans (SAPs), while others do not. This article investigates factors that predict the emergence of SAPs, both in terms of policy adoption and policy intensity (goal ambitiousness). Applying the diffusion of innovation theory, I consider the relative influence of internal state characteristics, regional pressures, and test for conditional effects between government ideologies and severity of the problem. The results show interesting differences between predictors that influence policy adoption and ambitiousness. States are more motivated to adopt a policy when faced with greater climate vulnerability, have more liberal citizenry, and where governments have crossed policy hurdles by previously passing mitigation plans. The intensity of policies and goal setting, moreover, is more likely to be driven by interest group politics and diffuse through policy learning or sharing information among neighboring states in Environmental Protection Agency regions. These findings support an emerging scholarship that uses more complex dependent variables in policy analysis. These variables have the potential to differentiate symbolic from substantive policies and capture finer information about predictors of importance.

Emerging research highlights increasing subnational activity on climate change. While most researchers explore mitigation of climate change, far less attention has been directed towards climate adaptation. In this dissertation I explore the sub-national politics surrounding climate adaptation in the United States through three broad questions. 1) At the state level, why do some states adopt adaptation plans while others do not? Are there any emerging patterns among predictors for policy, and do these vary across policy adoption (yes/no) and policy goals and ambitiousness? 2) Within urban politics, in what ways do local politics shape adaptation efforts given the relative risks faced by cities and the broader political context of climate decision-making? Are there differences in factors predicting commitment across size - mainly small, medium and large cities? And 3) to better understand the quality of collaborative partnerships in adaptation planning, I ask multiple interrelated questions such as which agencies are more likely to collaborate with one another to develop and implement strategies for climate adaptation, and do we see any patterns among these partnerships? Which stakeholders are involved in building climate resilience, and what are the means and tools used for these collaborations? Further, what is the importance given to collaboration within adaptation policy documents, and at what stages of the policy process are these partnerships most evident?The findings from this research contribute to the Diffusion of Innovation (DOI) theory, collaborative governance and public participation, and well as environmental decision-making on climate change adaptation among states and local governments.

AbstractTraditionally, diffusion policy scholars sought to understand state climate change policy leadership by exploring the speed of policy adoption. This study moves beyond these approaches by exploring factors that influence adoption as well as those that influence the content of a policy or policy goal intensity. Through the exploration of the first "wave" of state GHG reduction targets during the early 2000s, we create an innovative policy commitment variable that standardizes state emissions targets and explores the specific factors influencing these mitigation goals. Our results suggest that internal political factors (Democratic control of the legislature), lower state carbon dioxide emissions and dependency on coal production increases the likelihood of target adoption. However, the degree of GHG reduction commitments (content) are dependent on both internal and external factors, such as neighboring states adoption, carbon dioxide emission levels, citizen ideology, environmental interest groups, natural gas production and solar energy potential. These results support the growing literature on differentiating adoption and the content of a policy when analyzing the spread of policy ideas. Additionally, it suggests the limitations of states as climate leaders.