© 2011 – Routledge
232 pages | 10 B/W Illus.
Climate Policy Changes in Germany and Japan compares two decades of climate policy development in Germany and Japan. It examines whether there is any difference between the types and levels of policy change in the two countries, and, if so, what factors account for the difference. Using a comparison of climate policy changes in Germany and Japan from 1987 to 2005 as a basis, it also discusses the effectiveness and the limits of existing theories of policy change and policy process, most notably the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF), Punctuated Equilibrium Approach and Multiple Stream Approach, and explores the theoretical question as to how long-term, paradigmatic policy change takes place. The book lastly presents a hypothetical model of the mechanisms of paradigmatic policy change.
The two countries form a useful comparative approach to the issue of climate change. They represent the range of types and levels of changes in policies to control CO2 emissions in the industrial and energy sectors (dependent variables), while also demonstrating similarities in a number of independent variables: the size and structure of their economies; their shares in global GHG emissions; their general policy-making styles, including strong administrative systems and close relationships between ministries and industries; and their general environmental policies.
Climate Policy Changes in Germany and Japan will be of interest to students and scholars of environmental and comparative politics.
1. Introduction 2. Historical Background of Climate Change Issues 3. Climate Policy Changes in Japan from 1987 to 2005 4. Climate Policy Changes in Germany from 1987 to 2005 5. Beliefs of Actors in Japan and Germany 6. The Introduction of the Cap and Trading Scheme in Germany – Factors to Determine the Major Policy Change in Germany 7. A Comparative Analysis of Climate Policy Change in Germany and Japan: A Path to Paradigmatic Policy Change. Annex I: List of Interviewees. Annex II: Questionnaire Concerning Actors’ Beliefs