|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
094979
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2010.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article analyses the extent to which national policies in the highly internationalised environmental sector are influenced by the policy preferences of political parties. The focus is on policy outputs rather than environmental performance as the central indicator of policy change. Based on a discussion of the relevant theoretical literature competing hypotheses are presented. For an empirical test, a dataset is used that includes information on the number of environmental policies adopted in 18 OECD countries at four points in time between 1970 and 2000. The results show that not only international integration, economic development and problem pressure, but also aspects of party politics, influence the number of policies adopted. The number of environmental measures increases if the governmental parties adopt more pro-environmentalist policy positions. This effect remains robust even when controlling for the institutional strength of governments, the left-right position of parties in government, the inclusion of an ecological or left-libertarian party inside the (coalition) government, and the presence of a portfolio that deals exclusively with environmental issues.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
115105
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2012.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
As it has long been debated who is a front-runner and who is a laggard state in terms of environmental protection it is rather surprising that the topic has received rather scant attention as far as quantitative, large-n research endeavours are concerned. Of course, there is a broad literature on the topic. However, existing studies have shortcomings. The criteria on which the assessments rely are often neither equivalent cross-nationally nor are they communicated clearly enough (i.e., not transparent). Although ambitious efforts have been invested to rank countries in terms of their environmental performance, little systematic research exists that clearly determines leaders and laggards in terms of their policies (policy performance) and states' ranking, accordingly.
To the best of our knowledge no empirical study has so far conducted a comprehensive and quantitative leader-laggard assessment policy analysis. Against this backdrop, we aim to provide such a paper. We especially strive to test the validity of "common knowledge" classifications or rankings derived from assessments in the literature.
We demonstrate that while some known frontrunner states are indeed leaders if assessed from a broader policy data perspective, other countries commonly assigned a leader role find themselves in a lower position instead. In addition, some nations commonly excluded from the frontrunners are located unexpectedly high in the rankings. Even leader-laggard reversals occur if our results would be compared to existing classifications. Most importantly, the analyses show a considerable temporal dynamic. While often claimed or assumed, this has not been proven as clearly until now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|