| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
166432
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article examines China's Electric Power Law and the recent policies governing China's electricity sector from the energy-climate-environment dimension. Using the fragmented authoritarianism framework, it captures the legal system that is still rooted in the pre-reform era, and the antinomic policy making that is driven by the policy imperative to accommodate the shifting pattern of energy supply, the growing awareness over climate mitigation and environmental protection. By examining the most recent policy imperatives on regulating new investment and efficiency, and pricing deregulation, this article focuses on changes in the policy arena and their impacts on the regulatory governance of China's electricity sector. Using the methodology of qualitative study, this article critically investigates these policy changes that generate incompatible regulatory concerns. The incompatibility creates competing regulatory concerns over energy-climate-environment in the policy making process, and generates discord between China's central and provincial governments. Dealing with the challenges will depend on developing a legal framework for China's electricity sector. Findings of this article echoes with energy law scholars’ point of view that energy law has a much bigger role to play to balance different or competing policy agendas to deliver better energy policy that delivers the expected outcomes for society.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
166566
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Interdisciplinary energy research is essential. It advances our understanding of potential transitions from high to low carbon energy systems. However, it is easier to propose than deliver. It requires translation into a simpler language, to aid communication, but not at the expense of the conceptual language that drives our understanding of complex energy systems. We combine legal, political science, and policy studies to show how to balance the need to communicate accessibly and recognise legal and policymaking complexity. We begin with a statement so accepted in legal studies that it has become a truism: the law in the books is not the same as the law in action. The allocation of legal competences is only one influence on policymaking in a complex system. We describe three key ways to conceptualise this relationship between law, policy, and energy systems, focusing on the: (1) ‘on paper’ legal separation of powers between different governments, (2) interaction between law and policy in practice, including blurry boundaries between formal responsibility and informal influence, and (3) role of law as one of many contributors to policymaking. We use these approaches to explain the implications of Brexit for UK energy policy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|