ABSTRACT

Has the Swedish Climate Policy Framework – including the new Swedish Climate Act – adopted in June 2017, been conducive to advancing climate mitigation, and if so, to what extent and in which aspects? Although Sweden is often described as a frontrunner in climate work, several evaluations prior to the adoption of the Climate Policy Framework and the Climate Act concluded that Swedish climate policy has suffered from both implementation and monitoring deficits, as well as from the fact that climate goals and strategies were non-legally binding. Taken together, such deficits make the stable, long-term prioritizing of climate mitigation over other sector policies increasingly difficult, thus limiting the possibilities to reach future targets. This article focuses on three dimensions of climate policy integration – assessing policy processes, outputs and outcomes – with the aim to analyse political developments and policy outcomes in Sweden after the implementation of the Climate Policy Framework and the Climate Act. The results of a comprehensive set of interviews with policy experts and high-level decision-makers show that the framework is believed to have had important effects, mainly in terms of changing both policy language, cross-sector coordination, and increasing the prioritization of the climate issue. Thus the study (1) contributes to a better theoretical and empirical understanding of Climate Change Acts as instruments for climate policy integration; (2) paves the way for future comparative studies; and (3) presents important practical lessons for policy makers on the effects of legal mechanisms to achieve climate mitigation.

Key policy insights

• Climate Acts provide a legal framework for governmental climate activities.

• A comprehensive framework including three dimensions of climate policy integration – assessing process, output and outcome, should be used to evaluate Climate Act effects.

• The Swedish Climate Policy Framework and Climate Act has induced a weak type of climate policy integration, showing effects on climate policy debate, coordination, policy measure implementation and policy support.

• The framework sends strong signals of political will to address climate change, but the non-inclusion of targets and instruments in the Swedish Climate Act is causing debate and insecurity regarding what policy instruments will be implemented

摘要

2017 年 6 月通过的瑞典气候政策框架——包括新的瑞典气候法案——是否有利于推进气候减缓，如果有，在多大程度上和在哪些方面？尽管瑞典经常被描述为气候工作的领跑者，但在通过气候政策框架和气候法案之前的几项评估得出的结论是，瑞典的气候政策在实施和监测方面都存在缺陷，以及气候目标和战略不具有法律约束力。综上所述，此类赤字使得将减缓气候变化置于其他部门政策之上的稳定、长期优先事项变得越来越困难，从而限制了实现未来目标的可能性。本文重点关注气候政策整合的三个维度——评估政策过程、产出和成果——旨在分析瑞典在实施气候政策框架和气候法案后的政治发展和政策成果。与政策专家和高层决策者进行的一系列综合访谈的结果表明，该框架被认为产生了重要影响，主要是在改变政策语言、跨部门协调和提高气候问题。因此，研究 (1) 有助于更好地理解气候变化法案作为气候政策整合的工具；(2) 为以后的比较研究铺平道路；(3) 为政策制定者提供有关实现气候减缓的法律机制效果的重要实践经验教训。

关键政策见解

• 气候法案为政府气候活动提供了法律框架。

• 一个包括气候政策整合三个维度的综合框架——评估过程、产出和结果，应该用于评估气候法案的影响。

• 瑞典气候政策框架和气候法案引发了一种弱类型的气候政策整合，显示出对气候政策辩论、协调、政策措施实施和政策支持的影响。

• 该框架发出了应对气候变化的强烈政治意愿信号，但瑞典气候法案中未将目标和工具包括在内正在引发关于将实施哪些政策工具的辩论和不安全感