Pricing carbon: the politics of climate policy in Australia

Abstract

This article provides an overview of the politics of climate policy with a focus on carbon pricing politics under recent Australian Labor governments. It reviews and explains the impact of politics upon climate policy and draws attention to the influence of the fossil fuel lobby. It reviews historical context, including early, failed attempts to set and pursue emissions reduction; the domestic and international recalcitrance of neoliberal leaders; and the recent shift to embrace carbon pricing. It considers the impact of politics upon climate policy outcomes, piecing together political and policy efforts to price carbon, and drawing attention to the agenda setting of the Australian States and Territories, and of Kevin Rudd both as Labor opposition leader and as Prime Minister. It argues that the capacity of industry to thwart effective carbon pricing was only checked by institutional influences once Labor assumed minority government in 2010. In these circumstances, Labor relied upon the Australian Greens, not only to support in part its government in office, but also to pass legislation in the Senate where the Greens hold the balance of power. Under these circumstances, carbon pricing could be negotiated and agreed upon by a Multi-Party Committee on Climate Change (MPCCC) comprising the government and its parliamentary supporters, including independents and the Greens. Whilst political and economic interests have largely shaped Australia's climate change agendas, it is concluded that policy shifts are nevertheless possible where there is a propitious combination of political, normative, and institutional influences.

The role of climate change risk perception, response efficacy, and psychological adaptation in pro-environmental behavior: A two nation study

“…Attempts by the government, the left-leaning Australian Labor Party, to introduce carbon pricing were repeatedly thwarted by powerful interests both within and outside the parliament (legislation introducing a carbon reduction scheme twice failed to gain majority parliamentary support). Although quite volatile, both the political agenda and community opinion at the time were swinging away from climate action (Crowley, 2013). What appears common to the context of both surveys, however, is that climate change was an important and controversial political issue at the time.…”

The Clean Energy Ministerial: Motivation for and policy consequences of membership

“…During the tenure of Prime Minister John Howard (1996)(1997)(1998)(1999)(2000)(2001)(2002)(2003)(2004)(2005)(2006)(2007) and his coalition government, climate policymaking in Australia was strongly affected by the interests of the fossil fuel and mineral sectors (Crowley, 2013;Young and Coutinho, 2013) and reflected a close alliance with the administration of US President George W. Bush (Lawrence, 2009). Toward the latter period of his government, Prime Minister Howard came under pressure to address climate change due to a drought crisis.…”

Breaking the Treadmill? Climate Change Policy Networks and the Prospects for Low Carbon Futures in Australia and Finland

“…Previous research on climate change politics in Australia and Finland suggests that this may indeed be the case in both countries. In Australia, previous research has pointed to the industry driven character of climate change policy processes from the mid-1990s onwards, typified by the strong role of the Australian Industry Greenhouse Network (Crowley 2013), and highlighted the "disproportionate corporate influence over the state" due to the long-established "coal industry-state nexus" (Baer 2016, 194-195). Research has also pointed to the abiding relationship between "discursive and policy hostility" enacted by policymakers that characterizes the interconnected climate and energy debate (Hudson 2017).…”