Local Climate Change Policy
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Local climate change policy a comparative analysis of climate mitigation- and adaptation policy between four municipalities in Twente, The Netherlands Author: Arjen van der Vegt Amersfoort, 23 September 2015 Supervisors Universiteit Twente Dr. T. Hoppe Dr. P. Stegmaier Abstract Climate change has become increasingly manifest. Local governments have shown to play an important role in the implementation of initiatives that contribute to climate change mitigation- and adaptation. In order to improve knowledge about the way local governments deal with this ill-structured policy problem ‘climate change’, in this study, the following research question is addressed: What problems and opportunities can be identified in local climate change policy when comparing similarities and differences in views on local climate change policy between four Twente municipalities? The research question is studied using a comparative analysis amongst four cases, which are local governments in the region of Twente. Two rural municipalities and two urban municipalities have been selected. The research has a qualitative nature that includes a document study of mainly policy documents and twelve interviews; three for each municipality on different governmental levels. Interpretive policy analysis and CAQDAS have been used to analyse the collected research data from the interviews and policy documents. Results from the comparative analysis show that all municipalities lack a high budget for climate change policy implementation. A general lack of balance between climate change mitigation- and adaptation has also been found. However, from comparing the four municipalities, Hengelo has the best balance. In terms of differences it was found that urban municipality Hengelo has a relatively solid climate change policy, compared to Enschede. The same goes for rural municipality Hof van Twente that has a more solid climate change policy compared to Tubbergen. Furthermore, Hengelo and Hof van Twente have shown more commitment, which is in line with their more solid climate policy. Hengelo showed the biggest presence of catalysts, while Hof van Twente showed to have a solid position political wise. Enschede is the only municipality that gave a different meaning to the word ‘sustainability’ in their policy for financial- economical advantages. It has also been found that Tubbergen is the only municipality that hardly formulated climate change policy and admitted this should improve. Tubbergen was only able to commit to the bare minimum of climate change goals that have been determined on higher-levels of governance. Though municipalities have less budgetarial control over local climate change policy implementation, they are still bound to geographical borders. Without these borders, municipalities might be more inclined to collaborate with other municipalities within the Netherlands or even within the EU, to be more uniform in their mitigation policy solutions, which might attract more investors. A condition however is to have an operational energy-grid network in place to import the outside-border generated energy accordingly, which is not realized yet. 2 Preface The aim of this report is to graduate from the University of Twente and receive the degree ‘Master of Science' in Public Administration. I hope my findings will further increase the knowledge of local climate policy implementation in general and particularly in the province of Overijssel. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the people who supported me during this study. First of all I would like to thank Thomas Hoppe and Peter Stegmaier, both my supervisors from the University of Twente. Thomas steered me in the right direction where needed, which helped me improve the quality of my research. Peter was mainly involved in the latter stages of the research where he made valuable contributions as well that shaped my master-thesis to what it currently is. I also want to thank all the interviewees who made their precious time available to contribute to the results of this study. Finally I would like to thank everyone who supported me during my studies and during the process of writing my master-thesis. In particular, I want to thank my beloved girlfriend Viktoria for her ongoing faith and support. 3 Table of contents ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………….…………………..………..…….…………….... 2 PREFACE……………………………………………………………….……..…..………………………….………….... 3 1. INTRODUCTION……………………………………………….……………………………….……….…..…….... 6 1.1 Background…………………………………………..…………………………………..………....….......…….... 6 1.2 Research Questions…………………………………….……….……..………….………………….....…….... 6 1.3 Outline of the Report…………………………………….……….……..………….………………….....…….. 7 2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ………………………………………………...………….……..…....…….... 8 2.1 Climate Change…………………………………..………………..……………………..……..….…….…..….... 8 2.2 Frames…………………………………..……………………………………………..…….…..……………........... 8 2.3 Multi-Level Governance……………………………………………...........................…….…………........... 9 2.4 Theoretical Indicator Overview………………………………………………………………………….. 11 3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY.……………………………………………………………………….…..….... 11 3.1 Case Selection……………………………………………..……………………………………………….......... 11 3.1 Research Design……………………………………………………...………………………..……………...... 11 3.2 Data Collection………………………..………………………………………………….…………………....... 11 3.3 Data Analysis and Interpretation..……………...………….…………………………………...……..... 12 3.3.1 Interpretive Policy Analysis………..………………….………………………………......................... 12 3.3.2 CAQDAS……………..…………………………………………..……………………………………..……....... 12 3.3.3 Operationalization & Expectations Table……………………………………………...………...... 13 3.4.4 Comparative Analysis Table………………………………………………………………………..…… 14 4. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS..………………...……………………………………………….………….…..... 15 4 4.1 Size…………………………….....…………………………………….………..……………………………….….. 15 4.2 Mitigation Policy Goals…………………………….....………………..………….……………………........ 16 4.3 Mitigation Policy Plan of Action…………….….....………………...………………………………........ 17 4.4 Adaptation Policy Goals…………………………….....………………..………………………………....... 18 4.5 Adaptation Policy Plan of Action………………………………..……….…………………………........ 19 4.6 Municipal Role……………………………………………..……………….………………………………....... 20 4.7 Catalyst………………………...………………..……….....………………….………………………………...... 21 4.8 Knowledge & Expertise…………………..……….....………………….………………………………....... 22 4.9 Network……………………..……………………………..………………….………………………………....... 23 4.10 Hierarchical Governance…………..………………..………………….……………………………….... 24 4.11 Politics……….…………..……...………………………..………………….………………………………....... 25 4.12 Budget……….…………………………………………..………..………….………………………………....... 26 4.13 Subsidy………….……………………………………..…………………….………………………………....... 27 4.14 Local Initiatives………………………………..……..………………….………………………………........ 28 4.15 Current Ambitions…………………………………..………………….………………………………........ 30 4.16 Commitment…………………………………………..………………….………………………………......... 31 4.17 Comparative Analysis Table………………………………………………………..………………........ 33 5. CONCLUSION & DISCUSSION……………...……………………………………………………….…….…. 35 LITERATURE ………...…………………………….………………………………………………………...…….…. 37 Appendix A: Case Descriptions…………………………………………….……………..………………........ 42 5 1. Introduction 1.1 Background While uncertainty remains about the exact cause of climate change and what policy solutions should be implemented to deal with this “wicked” or ill-structured policy problem (Hoppe, 2008), a growing number of empirical evidence shows climate change has become increasingly manifest (IPCC 2007, KNMI 2006). As of today in 2014, a UN research report from the Nobel prize-winning IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) once more confirmed the inevitable impact that climate change has and will have on the world and society as we know it today. One could think of impacts, such as: “coastal flooding and beach erosion, extreme weather events, continental drying and drought, loss of habitat and species, decreased revenue for commercial fisheries, fluctuations in crop yields, and increased spread of vector-borne diseases like malaria and encephalitis” (Hurd et al., 2004; Parry et al., 2001; Scheraga and Grambsch, 1998; Smith et al., 2003; White, 2004, Zahran et al. 2008). In order to prevent the impacts resulting from climate change, trans-national networks, such as the UN’s “Local Agenda 21” in 1992, have recognized the need to work out local agendas for sustainable living in the 21st century with the slogan “think global, act local”, stimulating sub-national levels of government, such as provinces, regions and municipalities, to develop local climate ambitions and policies that focus on sustainable energy, climate neutrality, and energy efficiency to help reduce the impacts of climate change; also known as ‘climate change mitigation’ (Hoppe et al. 2011). While the need to deal with climate change has entered into policy rhetoric due to initiatives such as LA21 and the academic literature’s emphasis on local governance, there is little knowledge about the way local governments approach climate change and what climate change strategies are being used. In fact, recent climate policy studies on Dutch municipalities in the province of Overijssel have shown a discrepancy between departments in the perception of climate change risks, a fragmentation of local climate policy into other policy areas, and an imbalance between these different climate policy areas (Van den Berg & Coenen, 2012). To further increase knowledge about local climate policy implementation in the province of Overijssel, this study will use a comparative case study