The Politics of Climate Instruments: Investigating Policymakers’ Belief Systems in EU Climate Policymaking
気候政策手段の政治学：EU気候政策における政策立案者の信念体系の調査 (AI 翻訳)
Anne Gerstenberg, Kai-Uwe Schnapp
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
本論文は、EU排出量取引制度（EU-ETS）を事例に、政策立案者の信念体系を分析。気候目標の一致にもかかわらず、政策手段をめぐって政治化が生じていることを示す。5つの「思考の世界」を特定し、炭素価格純粋主義者から政策ミックス支持者への学習による変化や、脱成長支持者の戦略的支援などを明らかにした。
English
This paper analyzes EU and German policymakers' belief systems regarding the EU Emissions Trading System (EU-ETS). It finds that climate policy is politicized through instruments despite goal unanimity, identifying five 'worlds of thought' including carbon pricing purists, policy mix supporters, and degrowth advocates. Instrument-based learning shifts some purists toward accepting policy mixes, while some actors rhetorically support the ETS but undermine it for industry protection.
Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.
📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters
日本のGX文脈において
日本ではカーボンプライシング（GXリーグ、排出量取引）の本格導入が進む中、政策手段をめぐる政治力学の理解は重要。本論文の「政策手段を通じた政治化」や「信念体系」の分析枠組みは、日本のGX政策形成プロセスを考察する上で示唆に富む。
In the global GX context
As carbon pricing expands globally (EU ETS, China ETS, etc.), this paper offers a novel political-science lens on instrument design and policymaker beliefs. It highlights how instrument choice becomes politicized even when climate goals are shared, relevant for understanding policy stability and change in multi-level governance systems like the EU or emerging carbon markets.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Provides a belief-systems framework for analyzing climate policy instrument politics, applicable to comparative carbon pricing studies.
🏢実務担当者:Offers insights into stakeholder belief dynamics that can inform engagement strategies in carbon market design and reform.
🏛政策担当者:Highlights how instrument-based learning can shift policy preferences, suggesting pathways for building consensus on carbon pricing mixes.
📄 Abstract（原文）
Common policy process theories underrepresent the politics of policy formulation, and ignore instruments as normatively charged meaning structures. We applied the belief systems approach of the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) to analyse the European Union’s (EU) multi-level climate policy-making in the realm of the EU’s Emissions Trading System (EU-ETS), to uncover EU and German policymakers’ beliefs. Our results demonstrate that climate policy is politicized through instruments, despite goal-unanimity. In five ‘worlds of thought’, we explicate ‘appropriate’ solutions (instrument belief) as part of implicit ideational frames, constituted by a problem-representation (policy-core beliefs), and visions of a climate-mitigated world (deep-core beliefs). The main cleavage moves around the statemarket relationship, between carbon pricing purists and more helps more policymakers. Many former purists accept a policy mix after ‘instrument-based learning’. Discursively marginalized degrowth-supporters back the ETS pragmatically, while other false-flag policymakers support it rhetorically, but undermine it for industry protection.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openaire https://doi.org/10.3224/dms.v18i1.04first seen 2026-05-05 19:06:47
🔔 こうした論文の新着を逃したくない方は キーワードアラート に登録（無料・3キーワードまで）。
gxceed は公開メタデータに基づく研究支援データセットです。要約・翻訳・解説は AI 支援で生成されています。 最終的な解釈・検証は利用者が原典資料に基づいて行うことを前提とします。