A hard Act to follow? The evolution and performance of UK climate governance

References

• Aklin, M. and Urpelainen, J., 2013. Political competition, path dependence, and the strategy of sustainable energy transitions. American Journal of Political Science, 57 (3), 643–658. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Averchenkova, A., Fankhauser, S., and Finnegan, J., 2020. The impact of strategic climate legislation: evidence from expert interviews on the UK Climate Change Act. Climate Policy, Forthcoming. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2020.1819190
   Google Scholar
• Bailey, I. and Rupp, S., 2006. The evolving role of trade associations in negotiated environmental agreements: the case of United Kingdom climate change agreements. Business Strategy and the Environment, 15, 40–54. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.465
   Google Scholar
• Boehmer-Christiansen, S.A., 1995. Britain and the international panel on climate change: the impacts of scientific advice on global warming part II: the domestic story of the British response to climate change. Environmental Politics, 4 (2), 175–196. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/09644019508414196
   Google Scholar
• Cameron, D. (2007, March 12). We will keep up the pressure on climate change. Speech to the Green Economy Conference. http://www.conservatives.com/News/Speeches/2007/03/David_Cameron_We_will_keep_up_the_pressure_on_climate_change.aspx
   Google Scholar
• Candel, J.J.L. and Biesbroek, R., 2016. Toward a processual understanding of policy integration. Policy Sciences, 49 (3), 211–231. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-016-9248-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carter, N., 2008. Combating climate change in the UK: challenges and obstacles. The Political Quarterly, 79 (2), 194–205. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-923X.2008.00913.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carter, N. and Childs, M., 2017. Friends of the earth as a policy entrepreneur: ‘the big ask’ campaign for a UK climate change act. Environmental Politics, 27 (6), 994–1013. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2017.1368151
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carter, N. and Clements, B., 2015. From ‘greenest government ever’ to ‘get rid of all the green crap’: david Cameron, the Conservatives and the environment. British Politics, 10, 204–225. doi:https://doi.org/10.1057/bp.2015.16
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carter, N. and Jacobs, M., 2014. Explaining radical policy change: the case of climate change and energy policy under the British Labour government 2006-10. Public Administration, 92 (1), 125–141. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12046
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carter, N. and Ockwell, D., 2007. New labour, new environment? an analysis of the labour government’s policy on climate change and biodiversity loss. Report to Friends of the Earth. Available From:
   Google Scholar
• Clayton, H., Pidgeon, N., and Whitby, M., 2006. Is a cross-party consensus on climate change possible – or desirable? Report of first inquiry 2006, All Party Parliamentary Climate Change Group. Available From: http://www.gci.org.uk/Documents/Climate_Change_Consensus_Report_.pdf. [Accessed 20 May 2020]
   Google Scholar
• Committee on Climate Change (CCC), 2016. Meeting carbon budgets – implications of brexit for UK climate policy, https://d423d1558e1d71897434.b-cdn.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Meeting-Carbon-Budgets-Implications-of-Brexit-for-UK-climate-policy-Committee-on-Climate-Change-October-2016.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Committee on Climate Change (CCC), 2019. Reducing UK emissions: 2019 progress report to parliament, https://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/reducing-uk-emissions-2019-progress-report-to-parliament/#supporting-charts-and-data
   Google Scholar
• Cowell, R., et al., 2017. Energy transitions, sub-national government and regime flexibility: how has devolution in the United Kingdom affected renewable energy development? Energy Research and Social Science, 23, 169–181. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2016.10.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crawley, S., Coffé, H., and Chapman, R., 2020. Public opinion on climate change: belief and concern, issue salience and support for government action. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 22 (1), 102–121. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1369148119888827
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dubash, N., 2021. Varieties of climate governance. Environmental Politics. this issue.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dupont, C., 2015. Climate policy integration into EU energy policy: progress and prospects. New York and London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Environmental Audit Committee (EAC), 2016. Sustainability in the department for transport, Third Report of Session 2016-17, HC184. https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmenvaud/184/184.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Fankhauser, S. et al., 2018. 10 years of the UK Climate Change Act, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment/Centre for Climate Change Economics and Policy. http://www.lse.ac.uk/GranthamInstitute/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/10-Years-of-the-UK-Climate-Change-Act_Fankhauser-et-al.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Farstad, F., 2016. From consensus to polarisation: what explains variation in party agreement on climate change? PhD Thesis, University of York.
   Google Scholar
• Farstad, F., Carter, N., and Burns, C., 2018. What does Brexit mean for the UK’s climate change act? The Political Quarterly, 89 (2), 291–297. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-923X.12486
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Finnegan, J., 2019. Institutions, climate change and the foundations of long-term decision making. Working Paper 353, Centre for Climate Change Economics and Policy/Working Paper 321, Grantham research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, London School of Economics.
   Google Scholar
• Flinders, M., 2008. Walking without Order: delegated governance and the British State. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Foster, C., 2005. Joined up government and Cabinet government. In: V. Bogdanor, ed. Joined Up Government. Oxford: British Academy and Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fredriksson, P.G. and Millimet, D.L., 2004. Electoral rules and environmental policy. Economic Letters, 84, 237–244. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2004.02.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gillard, R., 2016. Unravelling the United Kingdom’s climate policy consensus: the power of ideas, discourse and institutions. Global Environmental Change, 40, 26–36. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.06.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gross, R. et al., 2009. What policies are effective at reducing carbon emissions from surface passenger transport? UK Energy Research Centre. http://www.ukerc.ac.uk/publications/what-policies-are-effective-at-reducing-carbon-emissions-from-surface-passenger-transport.html
   Google Scholar
• H. M. Government (HMG), 2009. The UK low carbon transition plan. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/228752/9780108508394.pdf
   Google Scholar
• H.M. Government (HMG), 2017. Clean Growth Strategy. London: BEIS.
   Google Scholar
• Hall, P.A., 1993. Policy paradigms, social learning and the state. Comparative Political, 25, 275–296. doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/422246
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hammond, G.P. and Norman, J.B., 2012. Decomposition analysis of energy-related carbon emissions from UK manufacturing. Energy, 41, 220–227. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2011.06.035
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harrison, K. and Sundstrom, L., 2010. Introduction: global commons, domestic decisions. In: K. Harrison and L.M. Sundstrom, eds. Global Commons, Domestic Decisions: the Comparative Politics of Climate Change. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1–22.
   Google Scholar
• Harrison, K., 2015. International carbon trade and domestic climate politics. Global Environmental Politics, 15 (3), 27–48. doi:https://doi.org/10.1162/GLEP_a_00310
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hay, C., 2001. The ‘crisis’ of Keynesianism and the rise of neoliberalism in Britain: an ideational institutionalist approach. In: J.L. Campbell and O.K. Pedersen, eds. The rise of neoliberalism and institutional analysis. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Helm, D., 2003. Energy, the State and the Market: british Energy Policy Since 1979. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Helm, D., 2004. Energy, the State and the Market: british energy policy since 1979. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Helm, D., 2005. The assessment: the new energy paradigm. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 21 (1), 1–18. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/gri001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Helm, D., Hepburn, C., and Mash, R., 2003. Credible carbon policy. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 19 (2), 438–450. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/19.3.438
   Google Scholar
• Institute for Government (2012) The climate change act (2012) available From: http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/sites/default/files/climate_change_act.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Jordan, A., et al., 2003. Policy Innovation or ‘Muddling Through’? ‘New’ Environmental Policy Instruments in the United Kingdom. Environmental Politics, 12 (1), 179–200. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/09644010412331308344a
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kattirtzi, M., Ketsopoulou, I., and Watson, J., 2020. Incumbents in transition? The role of the ‘Big Six’ energy companies in the UK. Energy Policy, 148A, 111927.
   Google Scholar
• Kayser, M.A. and Lindstädt, R., 2015. A cross-national measure of electoral competitiveness. Political Analysis, 23 (2), 242–253. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpv001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kearns, G., 1991. This Common Inheritance: green idealism versus Tory pragmatism. Journal of Biogeography, 18 (4), 363–370. doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/2845478
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuzemko, C., 2014. Politicising UK energy: what ‘speaking energy security’ can do. Policy and Politics, 42 (2), 259–274. doi:https://doi.org/10.1332/030557312X655990
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lijphart, A. (2012). Patterns of democracy: Government forms and performance in thirty-six countries. New Haven CN: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lockwood, 2016. The UK’s levy control framework for renewable electricity support: Effects and significance. Energy Policy, 97,193–201. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2016.07.026
   Google Scholar
• Lockwood, M., 2011. Does the framing of climate policies make a difference to public support? Evidence from marginal constituencies in the UK. Climate Policy, 11 (4), 1097–1112. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2011.579301
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lockwood, M., 2013. The political sustainability of climate policy: the case of the UK Climate Change Act. Global Environmental Change, 23 (5), 1339–1348. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.07.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lockwood, M., et al., 2017. The governance of industry rules and energy system innovation: the case of codes in Great Britain. Utilities Policy, 47, 41–49. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jup.2017.06.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lockwood, M., 2021. Routes to credible climate commitment: the UK and Denmark compared. Forthcoming. Climate Policy, 1–14. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2020.1868391
   Google Scholar
• Lorenzoni, I., O’Riordan, T., and Pidgeon, N., 2008. Hot air and cold feet: the UK response to climate change. In: H. Compston and I. Bailey, eds. Turning down the heat: the politics of climate policy in affluent democracies. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 104–124.
   Google Scholar
• Maclean, I., 2012. Climate change and UK politics: From Brynle Williams to Sir Nicholas Stern. Political Quarterly, 79 (2), 184–193. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-923X.2008.00916.x
   Google Scholar
• Mahoney, J. and Thelen, K., 2010. A theory of gradual institutional change. In: J. Mahoney and K. Thelen, eds. Explaining institutional change: ambiguity, agency, and power. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mallaburn, P.S. and Eyre, N., 2014. Lessons from energy efficiency policy and programmes in the UK from 1973 to 2013. Energy Efficiency, 7, 23–41. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-013-9197-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, C.J. and Swank, D., 2012. The Political Construction of Business Interests: coordination, growth and equality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, R., De Preux, L.B., and Wagner, U.J., 2014. The impact of a carbon tax on manufacturing: evidence from microdata. Journal of Public Economics, 117, 1–14. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2014.04.016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McGowan, F., 2011. The UK and EU energy policy: from awkward partner to active protagonist? In: V.L. Birchfield and J.S. Duffield, eds. Toward a Common European Union Energy Policy. US: Palgrave Macmillan, 187–213.
   Google Scholar
• McGregor, P.G., Swales, J.K., and Winning, M.A., 2012. A review of the role and remit of the committee on climate change. Energy Policy, 41, 466–473. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.11.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mildenberger, M., 2020. Carbon Captured: how business and labor control climate politics. Cambridge, MA and London: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Morseletto, P., Biermann, F., and Pattberg, P., 2017. Governing by targets: reductio ad unum and evolution of the two-degree climate target. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 17 (5), 655–676. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-016-9336-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muinzer, T. and Little, G.M., (2020) A Stocktake of Legal Research on the United Kingdom’s Climate Change Act: present Understandings, Future Opportunities. European Energy Law Report Volume XIII (UK: Intersentia): 421–442.
   Google Scholar
• Mulder, P. and De Groot, H., 2011. Energy intensity across sectors and countries: empirical evidence 1980-2005. Discussion Paper No. 171, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
   Google Scholar
• Nash, S. and Steurer, R., 2019. Taking stock of climate change acts in europe: living policy processes or symbolic gestures? Climate Policy, 19 (8), 1052–1065. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2019.1623164
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oshitani, S., 2013. Global Warming Policy in Japan and Britain: interactions between Institutions and Issue Characteristics. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pemberton, H., 2018. The civil service. In: D. Brown, R. Crowcroft, and G. Pentland, eds. Modern British Political History 1800-2000, 121–136. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pierson, P., 2004. Politics in Time: History, Institutions and Social Analysis. Princeton NJ, Princeton University Press
   Google Scholar
• Rogoff, K., 1985. The optimal degree of commitment to an intermediate monetary target. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 100 (4), 1169–1189. doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/1885679
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rutledge, I., 2010. UK energy policy and market fundamentalism: a historical overview. In: I. Rutledge and P. Wright, eds. UK Energy policy and the end of market fundamentalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1–35.
   Google Scholar
• Sasse, T., et al., 2020. Net zero: how government can meet its climate change target. Institute for Government. https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/sites/default/files/publications/net-zero-government-climate-change-target.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Schmidt, V., 2002. The Futures of European Capitalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schmidt, V., 2008. Discursive institutionalism: the explanatory power of ideas and discourse. Annual Review of Political Science, 11, 303–326. doi:https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.11.060606.135342
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schubert, S.R., Pollak, J., and Kreutler, M., 2016. Energy Policy of the European Union. London: Palgrave  Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Scruggs, L., 2001. Is there really a link between neo-corporatism and environmental performance? Updated evidence and new data for the 1980s and 1990s. British Journal of Political Science, 31 (4), 686–692. doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123401220262
   Google Scholar
• Siaroff, A., 1999. Corporatism in 24 industrial democracies: meaning and measurement. European Journal of Political Research, 36, 175–205. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.00467
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Solorio, I. and Fairbrass, J., 2017. The UK and EU renewable energy policy: the relentless British policyshaper. In: I. Solorio and H. Jörgens, eds. A Guide to EU Renewable Energy Policy. Cheltenham and Northampton MA: Edward Elgar Publishing, 104–120.
   Google Scholar
• Staffell, I., 2017. Measuring the progress and impacts of decarbonising British electricity. Energy Policy, 102, 463–475. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2016.12.037
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steinmo, S. and Thelen, K., 1992. Historical institutionalism in comparative politics. In: S. Steinmo, K. Thelen, and F. Longstreth, eds. Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1–32.
   Google Scholar
• Sustainable Development Commission (SDC), 2007. Lost in Transmission? The role of Ofgem in a changing climate. London: SDC.
   Google Scholar
• Thatcher, M. and Stone Sweet, A., 2002. Theory and Practice of Delegation to Non-Majoritarian Institutions. West European Politics, 25 (1), 1–22. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/713601583
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Toke, D., 2002. Wind Power in UK and Denmark: Can Rational Choice Help Explain Different Outcomes? Environmental Politics, 11, 83–100. 10.https://doi.org/1080/714000647
   Google Scholar
• Torney, D., 2019. Climate laws in small European states: symbolic legislation and limits of diffusion in Ireland and Finland. Environmental Politics, 28 (6), 1124–1144. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2019.1625159
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woodman, B. and Mitchell, C., 2011. Learning from experience? The development of the Renewables Obligation in England Wales 2002-2010. Energy Policy, 39, 3914–3921. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.03.074
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar