IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/revpol/v37y2020i5p578-604.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social Science and the Analysis of Environmental Policy

Author

Listed:
  • Cary Coglianese
  • Shana M. Starobin

Abstract

As much as environmental problems manifest themselves as problems with the natural environment, environmental problems—and their solutions—are ultimately social and behavioral in nature. Just as the natural sciences provide a basis for understanding the need for environmental policy and informing its design, the social sciences also contribute in significant ways to the understanding of the behavioral sources of environmental problems, both in terms of individual incentives and collective action challenges. In addition, the social sciences have contributed much to the understanding of the ways that laws and other institutions can be designed to solve environmental problems. In this review article, we distill core intellectual frameworks from among the social sciences that scaffold modern environmental policy in industrialized country contexts—focusing on key contributions principally from political science, economics, psychology, and sociology to the analysis of environmental problems and their solutions. These frameworks underlie how environmental problems are defined at multiple scales and the conceptualization and empirical testing of policy solutions that seek to shape human behavior in ways that improve environmental quality and promote sustainable economic growth. With the planet facing continued environmental threats, improving environmental policy decision‐making depends on the insights and frameworks of social science research in addition to those of the natural sciences. 正如与环境问题表现为自然环境问题的程度一样多的是,环境问题及其解决措施的本质最终是有关社会与行为的。正如自然科学为理解环境政策的必需性和影响其设计而提供基础一样,社会科学同样以显著的方式为理解环境问题的行为源(就个人激励与集体行动挑战而言)作贡献。此外,社会科学对理解法律和其他制度能通过哪些方式被设计于解决环境问题作出了诸多贡献。在这篇评论文中,我们从对工业化国家的现代环境政策予以支持的社会科学中提取核心智力框架,聚焦于主要从政治学、经济学、心理学、社会学到环境问题及其解决措施分析得出的关键贡献。这些框架强调了如何从多个层面定义环境问题,强调了对政策解决措施的概念化及实证检验,这些解决措施试图以提高环境质量和推动可持续经济发展的方式影响人类行为。鉴于地球正面临持续的环境威胁,提升环境政策决策取决于社会科学研究与自然科学的见解及框架。 Tanto como los problemas ambientales se manifiestan como problemas con el medio ambiente natural, los problemas ambientales y sus soluciones son, en última instancia, de naturaleza social y conductual. Así como las ciencias naturales proporcionan una base para comprender la necesidad de una política ambiental e informar su diseño, las ciencias sociales también contribuyen de manera significativa a la comprensión de las fuentes de comportamiento de los problemas ambientales, tanto en términos de incentivos individuales como de desafíos de acción colectiva. Además, las ciencias sociales han contribuido mucho a la comprensión de las formas en que las leyes y otras instituciones pueden diseñarse para resolver problemas ambientales. En este artículo de revisión, destilamos marcos intelectuales centrales de las ciencias sociales que estructuran la política ambiental moderna en contextos de países industrializados, enfocándonos en contribuciones clave principalmente de la ciencia política, la economía, la psicología y la sociología al análisis de los problemas ambientales y sus soluciones. Estos marcos subyacen en cómo los problemas ambientales se definen a múltiples escalas y la conceptualización y prueba empírica de soluciones de políticas que buscan moldear el comportamiento humano de manera que mejore la calidad ambiental y promueva el crecimiento económico sostenible. Con el planeta enfrentando continuas amenazas ambientales, mejorar la toma de decisiones de política ambiental depende de los conocimientos y marcos de investigación de las ciencias sociales, además de los de las ciencias naturales.

Suggested Citation

  • Cary Coglianese & Shana M. Starobin, 2020. "Social Science and the Analysis of Environmental Policy," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 37(5), pages 578-604, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:revpol:v:37:y:2020:i:5:p:578-604
    DOI: 10.1111/ropr.12376
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12376
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ropr.12376?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lyon,Thomas P. & Maxwell,John W., 2004. "Corporate Environmentalism and Public Policy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521819473, January.
    2. Starobin Shana & Weinthal Erika, 2010. "The Search for Credible Information in Social and Environmental Global Governance: The Kosher Label," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(3), pages 1-37, October.
    3. World Commission on Environment and Development,, 1987. "Our Common Future," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780192820808.
    4. Lisa A. Robinson & James K. Hammitt & Richard J. Zeckhauser, 2016. "Attention to Distribution in U.S. Regulatory Analyses," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 10(2), pages 308-328.
    5. Vincent T. Covello & Jeryl Mumpower, 1985. "Risk Analysis and Risk Management: An Historical Perspective," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(2), pages 103-120, June.
    6. Viscusi, W Kip, 1993. "The Value of Risks to Life and Health," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 31(4), pages 1912-1946, December.
    7. Munasinghe, Mohan, 1999. "Is environmental degradation an inevitable consequence of economic growth: tunneling through the environmental Kuznets curve," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 89-109, April.
    8. Ted Gayer & W. Kip Viscusi, 2016. "Determining the Proper Scope of Climate Change Policy Benefits in U.S. Regulatory Analyses: Domestic versus Global Approaches," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 10(2), pages 245-263.
    9. Maureen Cropper & James K. Hammitt & Lisa A. Robinson, 2011. "Valuing Mortality Risk Reductions: Progress and Challenges," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 3(1), pages 313-336, October.
    10. Khanna, Madhu & Quimio, Wilma Rose H. & Bojilova, Dora, 1998. "Toxics Release Information: A Policy Tool for Environmental Protection," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 243-266, November.
    11. R. H. Coase, 2013. "The Problem of Social Cost," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 837-877.
    12. Büthe Tim, 2010. "Private Regulation in the Global Economy: Guest Editor's Note," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(3), pages 1-2, October.
    13. Haas, Peter M., 1992. "Introduction: epistemic communities and international policy coordination," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(1), pages 1-35, January.
    14. Viscusi, W Kip & Aldy, Joseph E, 2003. "The Value of a Statistical Life: A Critical Review of Market Estimates throughout the World," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 5-76, August.
    15. Dan M. Kahan & Hank Jenkins-Smith & Donald Braman, 2011. "Cultural cognition of scientific consensus," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(2), pages 147-174, February.
    16. Ayres, Ian & Braithwaite, John, 1995. "Responsive Regulation: Transcending the Deregulation Debate," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195093766.
    17. Bennear, Lori S. & Olmstead, Sheila M., 2008. "The impacts of the "right to know": Information disclosure and the violation of drinking water standards," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 117-130, September.
    18. Büthe Tim, 2010. "Private Regulation in the Global Economy: A (P)Review," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(3), pages 1-40, October.
    19. Starobin, Shana & Weinthal, Erika, 2010. "The Search for Credible Information in Social and Environmental Global Governance: The Kosher Label," Business and Politics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(3), pages 1-35, October.
    20. Peter J. May, 2011. "Performance-based Regulation," Chapters, in: David Levi-Faur (ed.), Handbook on the Politics of Regulation, chapter 27, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    21. Prakash,Aseem & Potoski,Matthew, 2006. "The Voluntary Environmentalists," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521860413.
    22. Prakash,Aseem & Potoski,Matthew, 2006. "The Voluntary Environmentalists," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521677721.
    23. Charles Roger & Thomas Hale & Liliana Andonova, 2017. "The Comparative Politics of Transnational Climate Governance," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(1), pages 1-25, January.
    24. Adam B. Jaffe & Richard G. Newell & Robert N. Stavins, 2004. "Technology Policy for Energy and the Environment," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 4, pages 35-68, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    25. Konar, Shameek & Cohen, Mark A., 1997. "Information As Regulation: The Effect of Community Right to Know Laws on Toxic Emissions," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 109-124, January.
    26. Tim Büthe & Walter Mattli, 2011. "The New Global Rulers: The Privatization of Regulation in the World Economy," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 9470.
    27. Karen Palmer & Wallace E. Oates & Paul R. Portney & Karen Palmer & Wallace E. Oates & Paul R. Portney, 2004. "Tightening Environmental Standards: The Benefit-Cost or the No-Cost Paradigm?," Chapters, in: Environmental Policy and Fiscal Federalism, chapter 3, pages 53-66, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    28. Lori Snyder Bennear, 2007. "Are management-based regulations effective? Evidence from state pollution prevention programs," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(2), pages 327-348.
    29. Grant, Ruth W. & Keohane, Robert O., 2005. "Accountability and Abuses of Power in World Politics," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 99(1), pages 29-43, February.
    30. Keohane, Robert O., 2001. "Governance in a Partially Globalized World," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 95(1), pages 1-13, March.
    31. repec:reg:rpubli:282 is not listed on IDEAS
    32. Cropper, Maureen L & Oates, Wallace E, 1992. "Environmental Economics: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 30(2), pages 675-740, June.
    33. Carson, R.T. & Mitchell, R.C. & Hanemann, W.M. & Kopp, R.J. & Presser, S. & Ruud, P.A., 1992. "A Contingent Valuation Study of Lost Passive Use Values Resulting From the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill," MPRA Paper 6984, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    34. Shana M. Starobin, 2018. "Beekeepers Versus Biotech: Commodity Characteristics and Regulatory Interdependence in the Global Environmental Politics of Food," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 18(2), pages 114-133, May.
    35. Richard O. Zerbe & Howard E. McCurdy, 1999. "The failure of market failure," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(4), pages 558-578.
    36. Scott Marchi & James Hamilton, 2006. "Assessing the Accuracy of Self-Reported Data: an Evaluation of the Toxics Release Inventory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 32(1), pages 57-76, January.
    37. Kelley, Judith G. & Simmons, Beth A., 2019. "Introduction: The Power of Global Performance Indicators," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 73(3), pages 491-510, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Kenji Otsuka, 2022. "Co‐optation in co‐production: Maintaining credibility and legitimacy in transboundary environmental governance in East Asia," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(6), pages 771-797, November.
    2. Marco Migliorelli, 2021. "What Do We Mean by Sustainable Finance? Assessing Existing Frameworks and Policy Risks," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-17, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Büthe Tim, 2010. "Private Regulation in the Global Economy: A (P)Review," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(3), pages 1-40, October.
    2. Lori S. Bennear, 2008. "What do we really know? The effect of reporting thresholds on inferences using environmental right‐to‐know data," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2(3), pages 293-315, September.
    3. Starobin, Shana M., 2021. "Credibility beyond compliance: Uncertified smallholders in sustainable food systems," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    4. Hyunhoe Bae, 2012. "Reducing Environmental Risks by Information Disclosure: Evidence in Residential Lead Paint Disclosure Rule," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(2), pages 404-431, March.
    5. Fraas, Art & Egorenkov, Alex, 2015. "A Retrospective Study of EPA’s Air Toxics Program under the Revised Section 112 Requirements of the Clean Air Act," RFF Working Paper Series dp-15-23, Resources for the Future.
    6. Stavins, Robert, 2004. "Environmental Economics," RFF Working Paper Series dp-04-54, Resources for the Future.
    7. Bullock Graham, 2015. "Signaling the credibility of private actors as public agents: transparency, independence, and expertise in environmental evaluations of products and companies," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 17(2), pages 177-219, August.
    8. Bui, Linda T.M. & Kapon, Samuel, 2012. "The impact of voluntary programs on polluting behavior: Evidence from pollution prevention programs and toxic releases," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 31-44.
    9. Bu, Maoliang & Qiao, Zhenzi & Liu, Beibei, 2020. "Voluntary environmental regulation and firm innovation in China," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 10-18.
    10. Lily Hsueh, 2020. "Expanding the multiple streams framework to explain the formation of diverse voluntary programs: evidence from US toxic chemical use policy," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 10(2), pages 111-123, June.
    11. Jon D. Harford, 1997. "Firm ownership patterns and motives for voluntary pollution control," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(6), pages 421-431.
    12. Jack Clark & Gillian K. Hadfield, 2019. "Regulatory Markets for AI Safety," Papers 2001.00078, arXiv.org.
    13. Revesz, Richard & Stavins, Robert, 2004. "Environmental Law and Policy," Working Paper Series rwp04-023, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    14. Fuchs Doris & Kalfagianni Agni, 2010. "The Causes and Consequences of Private Food Governance," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(3), pages 1-36, October.
    15. Kenneth W. Abbott & David Levi-faur & Duncan Snidal, 2017. "Theorizing Regulatory Intermediaries," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 670(1), pages 14-35, March.
    16. Büthe Tim, 2010. "Global Private Politics: A Research Agenda," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(3), pages 1-26, October.
    17. Belay, Dagim G. & Jensen, Jørgen D., 2020. "‘The scarlet letters’: Information disclosure and self-regulation: Evidence from antibiotic use in Denmark," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    18. Stefan Ambec & Paul Lanoie, 2007. "When and Why Does It Pay To Be Green?," CIRANO Working Papers 2007s-20, CIRANO.
    19. Hidemichi Fujii & Kimbara Tatsuo, 2012. "Environmental Management Mechanisms in U.S. and Japanese Manufacturing Firms," International Journal of Business Administration, International Journal of Business Administration, Sciedu Press, vol. 3(6), pages 13-24, November.
    20. Aseem Prakash & Kelly Kollman, 2004. "Policy modes, firms and the natural environment," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(2), pages 107-128, March.

    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:bla:revpol:v:37:y:2020:i:5:p:578-604. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ipsonea.html .

    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.