Linking EU climate and energy policies: policy-making,implementation and reform

This contribution examines the EU’s innovative climate and energy package: how this package of binding policies has been initiated, decided, implemented and reformed. The key argument is that linking climate and energy concerns can help to explain how the EU managed to adopt an ambitious package of policies aimed at achieving 2020 goals. The combination of differently valued issues, side payments to overcome distributional obstacles and the creation of synergies contributed to a successfully negotiated outcome. The consequences for implementation and further policy development towards 2030 are explained by challenges in reproducing these joint EU-level gains at national level and by new circumstances. This may weaken the EU’s chances of realizing a low-carbon economy and ‘leadership by example’ in international climate policy.     

Insurance models and European climate change policies: an assessment

The paper outlines the role of insurance as an economic policy tool that can be used to address the issue of climate change. The magnitude of potential loss, the adverse social and economic consequences for millions of people and considerable fiscal strain imposed on government budgets by extreme weather events all indicate that governments can benefit significantly from the use of an insurance instrument capable not only of covering damage but also of providing an incentive for risk reduction behaviours. By examining the diverse insurance systems that exist in European countries and grouping them into five stylised models, natural hazards insurance is examined in terms of private and public involvement. The paper analyses the performance of different insurance models in relation to information imperfections (i.e. adverse selection and moral hazard) and market imperfections (i.e. charity hazard and transaction costs). In addition, the different models are examined in terms of the extent to which they incentivise mechanisms that facilitate the mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions, adaptation to the inevitable impacts of climate change and the development of climate risk finance management. Some concluding remarks are offered regarding the possible future development of a European insurance model as a means of developing an economically effective response to natural hazards caused by climate change.     

European air pollution assessments: co-production of science and policy

This paper examines the question whether the scientific knowledge framework produced in the context of the Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution (LRTAP) can keep its credibility, legitimacy and relevance when used in a different policy arena, e.g. the European Commission (EC) of the European Union. The paper combines a conceptual framework for considering effective assessments with the notion of boundary work and co-production of science and policy to examine differences between the roles and division of tasks between scientists and policy makers in the two different policy contexts. The paper concludes that, despite the differences between the two policy settings, user characteristics and the historical context are to a certain extent similar in LRTAP and the EU Clean Air for Europe Programme (CAFE), and that participants in the two processes partially overlap and tackle the same policy problem. The scientific knowledge framework as developed within LRTAP can maintain credibility, legitimacy and relevance when it is used in CAFE if certain conditions are fulfilled. One condition is the effective functioning of LRTAP, because the CAFE assessment process remains also dependent on the LRTAP process. Data collection and mapping efforts in the context of LRTAP form also the basis for the analyses within CAFE. Furthermore, a broadly embedded scientific basis is needed in the countries to enable each country to follow or relate to the analyses commissioned by the EU. The conceptual framework and concept of boundary work used in this paper turned out to be helpful in focusing on the dynamic relationship between science and policy.

Violence,Law, and Politics: Hannah Arendt and Robert M. Cover in Comparative Perspective

Despite many significant points of intersection between his work and that of Hannah Arendt, the legal scholar Robert Cover largely declined to engage her perspective, which posed major challenges to his own. While scholars seeking to rethink Cover's legacy in order to develop a jurisprudence of violence have criticized Cover's acquiescence to the Hobbesian model of the sovereign state, they have similarly ignored Arendt's critique of the Hobbesian model and her attempts to build an alternative to it. This article examines central issues of convergence and divergence between Arendt's and Cover's approaches to law, politics, and violence with the aim to redress this neglect of Arendt's perspective. It begins by focusing on their interpretations of the role and significance of the courtroom trial. It then compares their analysis of the character, effects, and implications of domination as a type of organized power and as a means of conceptualizing punishment, before it concentrates on their instrumental conception of violence, the issue of justification, and its relationship to power. The article concludes by arguing that Arendt's approach, which situates an analysis of law and violence within a broader critique of modernity, provides a more trenchant critical framework for examining the rise of the carceral state than does Cover's.     

The medically uninsured: problems, policies, and politics

The ranks of the medically uninsured have grown significantly in recent years, but no consensus on a policy solution has emerged. After summarizing the characteristics of the uninsured population, this paper reviews diverse policy responses and their troubled political prospects.