IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/tcpoxx/v21y2021i2p251-263.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The impact of strategic climate legislation: evidence from expert interviews on the UK Climate Change Act

Author

Listed:
  • Alina Averchenkova
  • Sam Fankhauser
  • Jared J. Finnegan

Abstract

This paper assesses the importance of a strategic legal framework for action against climate change, using the UK Climate Change Act as an example. Passed in 2008, the Climate Change Act is one of the earliest and most prominent examples of framework legislation on climate change. It contains several innovative features that have since been replicated in other framework laws. We use stakeholder interviews to assess the strengths of the Act and whether it has succeeded in creating an integrated, informed and forward-looking policy process. Respondents felt that the Act had established a firm long-term framework with a clear direction of travel. However, they differed on whether the Act provided sufficient policy certainty and protection against political backsliding. Most respondents felt that the Act had changed the institutional context and the processes through which climate change is addressed. As a result, interviewees believe that the Act has helped UK climate policy to become better informed, more forward looking and better guided by statutory routines.Key policy insights A strong legal framework with statutory targets, processes and institutions can be an important tool for effective climate change governance.A broad-based framework law can make action on climate change more predictable, more structured and more evidence-based.The UK Climate Change Act is a model for such framework legislation, with important institutional features that have already been emulated in other framework laws.The main such features are statutory short-term and long-term emissions targets, a new independent advisory body (the Committee on Climate Change), clear accountability and an iterative approach to adaptation planning.

Suggested Citation

  • Alina Averchenkova & Sam Fankhauser & Jared J. Finnegan, 2021. "The impact of strategic climate legislation: evidence from expert interviews on the UK Climate Change Act," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(2), pages 251-263, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:tcpoxx:v:21:y:2021:i:2:p:251-263
    DOI: 10.1080/14693062.2020.1819190
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/14693062.2020.1819190
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/14693062.2020.1819190?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ann Hindley, 2022. "Understanding the Gap between University Ambitions to Teach and Deliver Climate Change Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-17, October.
    2. Gransaull, Gareth & Rhodes, Ekaterina & Fairbrother, Malcolm, 2023. "Institutions for effective climate policymaking: Lessons from the case of the United Kingdom," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    3. Sam Fankhauser & Sugandha Srivastav & Ingrid Sundvor & Stephanie Hirmer & Gireesh Shrimali, 2023. "Net zero portfolio targets for development finance institutions: Challenges and solutions," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 14(5), pages 716-729, November.
    4. Shengqing Xu, 2023. "China’s climate governance for carbon neutrality: regulatory gaps and the ways forward," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-10, December.
    5. Arun Ulahannan & Stewart Birrell, 2022. "Designing Better Public Transport: Understanding Mode Choice Preferences Following the COVID-19 Pandemic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-15, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:tcpoxx:v:21:y:2021:i:2:p:251-263. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/tcpo20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.