IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/climat/v163y2020i1d10.1007_s10584-020-02853-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Integrating political and technological uncertainty into robust climate policy

Author

Listed:
  • Leslie Paul Thiele

    (University of Florida)

Abstract

As climate change is unlikely to follow a linear path, climate policies should anticipate varied outcomes and be flexibly responsive. The case for such “robust policy” is compelling. However, advocates of robust approaches to policymaking often understate the challenge, as the variability of climate is just one of at least three interactive arenas of uncertainty that require attention. Emerging technologies will have a significant but indeterminate impact on climate adaptation and mitigation efforts. Uncertainty is also heightened because politics is an arena of disruptive change. The development of robust climate policy given the convergence of unknowns in the climatic, technological, and political realms entails three components: (1) diverse, distributed, and transparent participation; (2) safe-to-fail experimentation; and (3) exploratory foresight.

Suggested Citation

  • Leslie Paul Thiele, 2020. "Integrating political and technological uncertainty into robust climate policy," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 163(1), pages 521-538, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:163:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s10584-020-02853-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s10584-020-02853-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10584-020-02853-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10584-020-02853-9?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Elinor Ostrom, 2010. "Beyond Markets and States: Polycentric Governance of Complex Economic Systems," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(3), pages 641-672, June.
    2. Hong, Lu & Page, Scott E., 2001. "Problem Solving by Heterogeneous Agents," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 97(1), pages 123-163, March.
    3. Anne van Bruggen & Igor Nikolic & Jan Kwakkel, 2019. "Modeling with Stakeholders for Transformative Change," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-21, February.
    4. Robert J. Lempert & David G. Groves & Steven W. Popper & Steve C. Bankes, 2006. "A General, Analytic Method for Generating Robust Strategies and Narrative Scenarios," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(4), pages 514-528, April.
    5. Katy Roelich & Jannik Giesekam, 2019. "Decision making under uncertainty in climate change mitigation: introducing multiple actor motivations, agency and influence," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(2), pages 175-188, February.
    6. Flyvbjerg,Bent & Bruzelius,Nils & Rothengatter,Werner, 2003. "Megaprojects and Risk," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521009461, October.
    7. Bent Flyvbjerg, 2014. "What You Should Know About Megaprojects, and Why: An Overview," Papers 1409.0003, arXiv.org.
    8. Adam Dorr, 2016. "Technological change and climate scenarios," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 6(7), pages 638-639, July.
    9. Kelly Levin & Benjamin Cashore & Steven Bernstein & Graeme Auld, 2012. "Overcoming the tragedy of super wicked problems: constraining our future selves to ameliorate global climate change," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 45(2), pages 123-152, June.
    10. Ray Quay, 2010. "Anticipatory Governance," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 76(4), pages 496-511.
    11. Ober, Josiah, 2013. "Democracy's Wisdom: An Aristotelian Middle Way for Collective Judgment," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 107(1), pages 104-122, February.
    12. David H. Guston, 2008. "Innovation policy: not just a jumbo shrimp," Nature, Nature, vol. 454(7207), pages 940-941, August.
    13. Sierra C. Woodruff, 2016. "Planning for an unknowable future: uncertainty in climate change adaptation planning," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 139(3), pages 445-459, December.
    14. P. J. Lamberson & Scott E. Page, 2012. "Optimal Forecasting Groups," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(4), pages 805-810, April.
    15. Geoffrey Heal & Bengt Kriström, 2002. "Uncertainty and Climate Change," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 22(1), pages 3-39, June.
    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. Kanzola, Anna-Maria & Papaioannou, Konstantina & Petrakis, Panagiotis E., 2023. "Environmental behavioral perceptions under uncertainty of alternative economic futures," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    2. Mohsen Aboulnaga & Ahmed Abouaiana & Paola Puma & Maryam Elsharkawy & Mohamed Farid & Sarah Gamal & Elena Lucchi, 2024. "Climate Change and Cultural Heritage: A Global Mapping of the UNESCO Thematic Indicators in Conjunction with Advanced Technologies for Cultural Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(11), pages 1-39, May.

    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. Yoon‐Hee Ha & John Byrne, 2019. "The rise and fall of green growth: Korea's energy sector experiment and its lessons for sustainable energy policy," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 8(4), July.
    2. Muhammad Zeeshan Fareed & Qin Su, 2022. "Project Governance and Project Performance: The Moderating Role of Top Management Support," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-13, February.
    3. Frans Sengers & Bruno Turnheim & Frans Berkhout, 2021. "Beyond experiments: Embedding outcomes in climate governance," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 39(6), pages 1148-1171, September.
    4. Rebecca Vine, 2020. "Riskwork in the construction of Heathrow Terminal 2," SPRU Working Paper Series 2020-20, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    5. Lehtonen, Markku, 2019. "Ecological Economics and Opening up of Megaproject Appraisal: Lessons From Megaproject Scholarship and Topics for a Research Programme," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 148-156.
    6. Glenn Lyons & Greg Marsden, 2021. "Opening out and closing down: the treatment of uncertainty in transport planning’s forecasting paradigm," Transportation, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 595-616, April.
    7. Andrius Montrimas & Jurgita Bruneckienė & Vaidas Gaidelys, 2021. "Beyond the Socio-Economic Impact of Transport Megaprojects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-29, July.
    8. Rob Tulder & Nienke Keen, 2018. "Capturing Collaborative Challenges: Designing Complexity-Sensitive Theories of Change for Cross-Sector Partnerships," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 150(2), pages 315-332, June.
    9. Arun S. Malik & Stephen C. Smith, 2012. "Adaptation To Climate Change In Low-Income Countries: Lessons From Current Research And Needs From Future Research," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 3(02), pages 1-22.
    10. David Eggleton, 2018. "The Limitations of the Conceptual Framework of the Heterogeneous Engineer for Leadership in Megascience Projects," SPRU Working Paper Series 2018-15, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    11. Bhave, Ajay Gajanan & Conway, Declan & Dessai, Suraje & Stainforth, David A., 2017. "Barriers and opportunities for robust decision making approaches to support climate change adaptation in the developing world," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 68318, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    12. Moschouli, Eleni & Soecipto, Raden Murwantara & Vanelslander, Thierry, 2019. "Cost performance of transport infrastructure projects before and after the global financial crisis (GFC): Are differences observed in the conditions of project performance?," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 21-35.
    13. Shankar Sankaran & Ralf Müller & Nathalie Drouin, 2020. "Creating a ‘sustainability sublime’ to enable megaprojects to meet the United Nations sustainable development goals," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(5), pages 813-826, September.
    14. Bent Flyvbjerg, 2021. "Four Ways to Scale Up: Smart, Dumb, Forced, and Fumbled," Papers 2101.11104, arXiv.org.
    15. Marc Herz & Nicco Krezdorn, 2022. "Epic fail: Exploring project failure’s reasons, outcomes and indicators," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 1169-1193, May.
    16. Schreiner, Lena & Madlener, Reinhard, 2022. "Investing in power grid infrastructure as a flexibility option: A DSGE assessment for Germany," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    17. Hurford, A.P. & Harou, J.J. & Bonzanigo, L. & Ray, P.A. & Karki, P. & Bharati, L. & Chinnasamy, P., 2020. "Efficient and robust hydropower system design under uncertainty - A demonstration in Nepal," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    18. Anthony E. Boardman & Matti Siemiatycki & Aidan R. Vining, 2016. "The Theory and Evidence Concerning Public-Private Partnerships in Canada and Elsewhere," SPP Research Papers, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 9(12), March.
    19. Rothengatter, Werner, 2019. "Megaprojects in transportation networks," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 1-15.
    20. Förster, Bernadette & von der Gracht, Heiko, 2014. "Assessing Delphi panel composition for strategic foresight — A comparison of panels based on company-internal and external participants," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 215-229.

    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:spr:climat:v:163:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s10584-020-02853-9. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.