Analysing and evaluating Climate change policy in Australia: The strengths and weaknesses
The aim of this essay is to analyse and evaluate climate change policy in Australia. The essay argues that Australia’s climate change policy mainly considers the interests of businesses, therefore it holds back significant steps towards reducing gas emission. 2007 election was a starting point to bring some differences into the policy, for instance the new government signed the Kyoto Protocol. Compared to other policies, Climate Change policy is new and in its early years and it will take many more years to improve and enforce the policy. This essay would mainly analyse the former government’s climate change policy. The argument starts with defining the concept of policy.
What is policy?
According to Fopp (2008, p.6) a policy is a document which is “a response to a community or social need or problem”. In this case climate change policy is a response to a problem which is a big threat to Australian land, economy and community.
Australia has its own climate change policy. In Australia, the debate on climate change began in the late 1980’s “as a response to rising global awareness of the issue” (Howe 2007, p.1). From the start there were differences and disagreements between what is right for the environment and what is right for the economy and these disagreements ultimately dictated government policy directions (Howe 2007, p.1). Arguably, all governments, communities and industries are facing a complex policy challenge (Minchin 2001). Climate change is a global issue that has created significant uncertainties for decision-makers, “in terms of the timing and scale of the possible impacts of climate change and in the challenge of developing an effective policy response” (Minchin 2001).
Australia as a highly vulnerable country
Amongst all developed countries Australia is the most vulnerable country (Pittock 2005, p.256). Several factors increase severity of exposure to climate change such as vulnerability to warming, already stressed water resources and regional reductions in rainfall (Pittock 2005, pp.256-257). Australia’s geographical situation and land has made this continent more vulnerable to climate change (Australia’s climate change policy 2007, p.1). Among all continents Australia is the driest inhabited continent which has a highly variable climate (Australia’s climate change policy 2007, p.1). Australia’s vulnerability to drought and its natural resources such as the Great Barrier Reef and the proximity of its urban settlements to coastal regions means that the impacts are quite significant for this continent (Australia’s climate change policy 2007, p.1).
International and Australian government responses
Internationally one of the most recognized treaty towards solving the issue of climate change is the Kyoto Protocol which is “an international treaty designed to limit global greenhouse gas emissions by assigning individual emissions targets to developed countries” (Department of Climate Change 2008, p.3). In 2007 Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd signed the instrument of ratification of the Kyoto Protocol (Department of Climate Change 2008, p.3)
In Australia, in early 1990, the federal government clearly stated that “the government will not proceed with measures which have net adverse economic impacts nationally or on Australia’s trade competitiveness in the absence of similar action by major greenhouse gas producing countries” (Howe 2007, p.2). In Australia during the 1990’s Government policy were removing as many restrictions on business as possible (Howe 2007, p.3). The majority of large companies and industry associations in Australia were opposing any government plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions which could damage their business activities (Howe 2007, p.3). To be more precise the government policy was mainly based on “‘no regrets’ measures or measures that were in the commercial interests of polluters” (Howe 2007, p.3).
In 1980 the Australian Business Roundtable was established (Howe 2007, p.4). It was formed of CEOs from 20 of Australia’s largest companies (Howe 2007, p.4). The aim of Australian Business Roundtable was ‘to influence decision makers and shape public policy to ensure the best possible environment for business to succeed’ (Howe 2007, p.4).
Aims and objectives of the policy
The objectives of Australia’s climate change policy are firstly to achieve global reductions in emissions that will avoid dangerous climate change; and secondly to maintain the strength of Australia’s economy (Australia’s climate change policy 2007, p.4). Achieving the second objective would be through “providing competitive, clean, low emission and affordable energy to Australian households and businesses; remaining a major supplier of energy and resources to international markets; and preparing for the impacts of unavoidable climate change” (Australia’s climate change policy 2007, p.4). The aim of Australia’s climate change policy framework is to reduce domestic emissions at least economic cost, to develop key low emissions technologies, to improve energy efficiency and supporting households and communities, to reduce emissions, to support world class climate science and adapting to the impacts of unavoidable climate change (Australia’s climate change policy 2007, pp.4-5); and to pursue effective international responses to climate change that involve all major emitters, and that reflect our domestic policies (Australia’s climate change policy 2007, p.5).
Australia’s climate change policy is built on three pillars (Wong 2008, p.1). The first one is reducing Australia's greenhouse gas emissions, the second one is adapting to climate change that could not be avoided and the third one is helping to shape a global solution (Wong 2008, p.1). All these needs huge amount of money and resources. The funding for the policy mainly comes from the Australian government (Howe 2007, p.12). Australia’s climate change policy is working towards achieving the target of approximately 108 per cent of 1990 level of emissions over the period 2008-12 (Australia’s climate change policy 2007, p.6).
Excluded factors
It is argued that Australia’s climate change policy is not gender literate (Salleh 2008, p.1). When governments and think tanks deliberate on strategies for combating climate change, they will very likely avoid one highly significant variable. This variable is that global warming's causes, effects, and solutions, are gendered. Those who frame Australia's climate change policy have not taken into account that “women's ecological footprint is negligible in comparison with men's or those women and children will be the main victims of global warming”. It is not known whether Australian climate change policy will rectify women's under-representation at every level of climate change negotiations or not. In times of climate change dialogue sociological factors are often not considered, although the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change does have potential in this respect (Salleh 2008, p.1). According to Salleh (2008, p.4) “global warming causes, effects, and solutions are gendered, and therefore, gender justice is a prerequisite of sound environmental governance”.
Dealing with climate change
In regards to that status of the issue of climate change Roze (2008) states that “climate change is an economic, social and environmental issue”. In dealing with climate change Wong (2008, p.1) argues that using market-based mechanisms is the best way to drive as emission reductions. Wong (2008, p.1) also suggests that setting targets to reduce emissions and imposing action on those industries and companies that are carbon intensive are not enough actions. It is also argued that “an integrated solution to climate change will require governmental and business investment additional to least-cost options and regulation to drive the deep emission cuts that are required to transition away from a carbon-based economy” (Roze 2008).
Critics of Australia’s climate change policy
Howe (2007, p.16) criticizes the Australian government’s climate change policies and states that they really are “business development plans” (Howe 2007, p.16). Further critics come from Hamilton (2001, p.73) where he points out that under John Howard’s government the industry and energy departments was dominating the formulation of climate change policy (Hamilton 2001, p.73). As Hamilton (2001, p.73) points out “the environmental dependent had been progressively co-opted by an industry viewpoint” (Hamilton 2001, p.73).
The effectiveness of Australia’s climate change policy
Mercer (2007) points out that a new report by Australia's Climate Institute shows that Australia’s climate change policy is failing as the level of gas emission has been more than what the governments had predicted. It is also argued that Australia will exceed the Kyoto Protocol’s level of gas emission (Mercer 2007). In contrast, it is claimed that Australia is on track to meet Kyoto target (Hammer 2008). However Australia’s climate institute does not praise this improvement and states that “even if we are on track to meet Kyoto, we shouldn't be congratulating ourselves for increasing emissions. We need to reduce emissions. We should be aiming for a 20% reduction in emissions by 2020, not a 20% increase” (Hammer 2008).
In conclusion, it is pointed out that Australia is more vulnerable to climate change compared to other developed countries. Also it is pointed out that climate change is an economic, social and environmental issue and needs further cooperation among government and businesses to enforce and develop the policy. The aim and objectives of the policy is also highlighted. It is also pointed out that the government is confident in its efforts to achieve Kyoto target by 2012. In the essay it is argued that Australia’s climate change policy is mainly in the interest of businesses.
References:
The aim of this essay is to analyse and evaluate climate change policy in Australia. The essay argues that Australia’s climate change policy mainly considers the interests of businesses, therefore it holds back significant steps towards reducing gas emission. 2007 election was a starting point to bring some differences into the policy, for instance the new government signed the Kyoto Protocol. Compared to other policies, Climate Change policy is new and in its early years and it will take many more years to improve and enforce the policy. This essay would mainly analyse the former government’s climate change policy. The argument starts with defining the concept of policy.
What is policy?
According to Fopp (2008, p.6) a policy is a document which is “a response to a community or social need or problem”. In this case climate change policy is a response to a problem which is a big threat to Australian land, economy and community.
Australia has its own climate change policy. In Australia, the debate on climate change began in the late 1980’s “as a response to rising global awareness of the issue” (Howe 2007, p.1). From the start there were differences and disagreements between what is right for the environment and what is right for the economy and these disagreements ultimately dictated government policy directions (Howe 2007, p.1). Arguably, all governments, communities and industries are facing a complex policy challenge (Minchin 2001). Climate change is a global issue that has created significant uncertainties for decision-makers, “in terms of the timing and scale of the possible impacts of climate change and in the challenge of developing an effective policy response” (Minchin 2001).
Australia as a highly vulnerable country
Amongst all developed countries Australia is the most vulnerable country (Pittock 2005, p.256). Several factors increase severity of exposure to climate change such as vulnerability to warming, already stressed water resources and regional reductions in rainfall (Pittock 2005, pp.256-257). Australia’s geographical situation and land has made this continent more vulnerable to climate change (Australia’s climate change policy 2007, p.1). Among all continents Australia is the driest inhabited continent which has a highly variable climate (Australia’s climate change policy 2007, p.1). Australia’s vulnerability to drought and its natural resources such as the Great Barrier Reef and the proximity of its urban settlements to coastal regions means that the impacts are quite significant for this continent (Australia’s climate change policy 2007, p.1).
International and Australian government responses
Internationally one of the most recognized treaty towards solving the issue of climate change is the Kyoto Protocol which is “an international treaty designed to limit global greenhouse gas emissions by assigning individual emissions targets to developed countries” (Department of Climate Change 2008, p.3). In 2007 Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd signed the instrument of ratification of the Kyoto Protocol (Department of Climate Change 2008, p.3)
In Australia, in early 1990, the federal government clearly stated that “the government will not proceed with measures which have net adverse economic impacts nationally or on Australia’s trade competitiveness in the absence of similar action by major greenhouse gas producing countries” (Howe 2007, p.2). In Australia during the 1990’s Government policy were removing as many restrictions on business as possible (Howe 2007, p.3). The majority of large companies and industry associations in Australia were opposing any government plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions which could damage their business activities (Howe 2007, p.3). To be more precise the government policy was mainly based on “‘no regrets’ measures or measures that were in the commercial interests of polluters” (Howe 2007, p.3).
In 1980 the Australian Business Roundtable was established (Howe 2007, p.4). It was formed of CEOs from 20 of Australia’s largest companies (Howe 2007, p.4). The aim of Australian Business Roundtable was ‘to influence decision makers and shape public policy to ensure the best possible environment for business to succeed’ (Howe 2007, p.4).
Aims and objectives of the policy
The objectives of Australia’s climate change policy are firstly to achieve global reductions in emissions that will avoid dangerous climate change; and secondly to maintain the strength of Australia’s economy (Australia’s climate change policy 2007, p.4). Achieving the second objective would be through “providing competitive, clean, low emission and affordable energy to Australian households and businesses; remaining a major supplier of energy and resources to international markets; and preparing for the impacts of unavoidable climate change” (Australia’s climate change policy 2007, p.4). The aim of Australia’s climate change policy framework is to reduce domestic emissions at least economic cost, to develop key low emissions technologies, to improve energy efficiency and supporting households and communities, to reduce emissions, to support world class climate science and adapting to the impacts of unavoidable climate change (Australia’s climate change policy 2007, pp.4-5); and to pursue effective international responses to climate change that involve all major emitters, and that reflect our domestic policies (Australia’s climate change policy 2007, p.5).
Australia’s climate change policy is built on three pillars (Wong 2008, p.1). The first one is reducing Australia's greenhouse gas emissions, the second one is adapting to climate change that could not be avoided and the third one is helping to shape a global solution (Wong 2008, p.1). All these needs huge amount of money and resources. The funding for the policy mainly comes from the Australian government (Howe 2007, p.12). Australia’s climate change policy is working towards achieving the target of approximately 108 per cent of 1990 level of emissions over the period 2008-12 (Australia’s climate change policy 2007, p.6).
Excluded factors
It is argued that Australia’s climate change policy is not gender literate (Salleh 2008, p.1). When governments and think tanks deliberate on strategies for combating climate change, they will very likely avoid one highly significant variable. This variable is that global warming's causes, effects, and solutions, are gendered. Those who frame Australia's climate change policy have not taken into account that “women's ecological footprint is negligible in comparison with men's or those women and children will be the main victims of global warming”. It is not known whether Australian climate change policy will rectify women's under-representation at every level of climate change negotiations or not. In times of climate change dialogue sociological factors are often not considered, although the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change does have potential in this respect (Salleh 2008, p.1). According to Salleh (2008, p.4) “global warming causes, effects, and solutions are gendered, and therefore, gender justice is a prerequisite of sound environmental governance”.
Dealing with climate change
In regards to that status of the issue of climate change Roze (2008) states that “climate change is an economic, social and environmental issue”. In dealing with climate change Wong (2008, p.1) argues that using market-based mechanisms is the best way to drive as emission reductions. Wong (2008, p.1) also suggests that setting targets to reduce emissions and imposing action on those industries and companies that are carbon intensive are not enough actions. It is also argued that “an integrated solution to climate change will require governmental and business investment additional to least-cost options and regulation to drive the deep emission cuts that are required to transition away from a carbon-based economy” (Roze 2008).
Critics of Australia’s climate change policy
Howe (2007, p.16) criticizes the Australian government’s climate change policies and states that they really are “business development plans” (Howe 2007, p.16). Further critics come from Hamilton (2001, p.73) where he points out that under John Howard’s government the industry and energy departments was dominating the formulation of climate change policy (Hamilton 2001, p.73). As Hamilton (2001, p.73) points out “the environmental dependent had been progressively co-opted by an industry viewpoint” (Hamilton 2001, p.73).
The effectiveness of Australia’s climate change policy
Mercer (2007) points out that a new report by Australia's Climate Institute shows that Australia’s climate change policy is failing as the level of gas emission has been more than what the governments had predicted. It is also argued that Australia will exceed the Kyoto Protocol’s level of gas emission (Mercer 2007). In contrast, it is claimed that Australia is on track to meet Kyoto target (Hammer 2008). However Australia’s climate institute does not praise this improvement and states that “even if we are on track to meet Kyoto, we shouldn't be congratulating ourselves for increasing emissions. We need to reduce emissions. We should be aiming for a 20% reduction in emissions by 2020, not a 20% increase” (Hammer 2008).
In conclusion, it is pointed out that Australia is more vulnerable to climate change compared to other developed countries. Also it is pointed out that climate change is an economic, social and environmental issue and needs further cooperation among government and businesses to enforce and develop the policy. The aim and objectives of the policy is also highlighted. It is also pointed out that the government is confident in its efforts to achieve Kyoto target by 2012. In the essay it is argued that Australia’s climate change policy is mainly in the interest of businesses.
References:
Australia’s Climate Change Policy 2007, Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, viewed 2 July 2008,
Department of Climate Change 2008, Tracking to the Kyoto target: Australia’s Greenhouse Emissions Trends1990 to 2008–2012 and 2020 , viewed 1 July 2008,
Fopp, R 2008, What is policy?, course contents: Week 2, Policy and Globalisation, University of South Australia, Adelaide.
Hamiltion, C 2001, Running from the Storm: The development of climate change, UNSW Press, Australia.
Hammer, C 2008, Australia on track to meet Kyoto target, The Age, viewed 2 July 2008,
Howe, W.A 2007, An Assessment of Australia's Climate Change Policies, Australian Law Postgraduate Network Paper Series, Macquarie University, viewed 29 June 2008,
Mercer, P 2007, Study Shows Australia's Climate Change Policy is Failing, viewed 30 June 2008,
Minchin, N 2001, Responding to Climate Change: Providing A Policy Framework For a Competitive Australia, University of NSW, Law Journal, viewed 1 July 2007, <>.
Pittock, A.B 2005, Climate Change: Turning Up the Heat, CSIRO Publishing, Australia.
Roze, S 2008, Vested interests shaping government policy, viewed 30 June 2008, < article="7271">.
Salleh, A 2008, Is Australia's Climate Policy Gender Literate?, viewed 27 June 2008,
Wong, P 2008, Climate change an opportunity for innovation and growth, viewed 1 July 2008,
posted by Xalid Azizi | 6:57 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home