What future for the voluntary carbon offset market after Paris? An explorative study based on the Discursive Agency Approach

Lang, Sebastian; Blum, Mareike; Leipold, Sina

doi:10.1080/14693062.2018.1556152

Cited by 28 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Environmental problems and their policy solutions are often complex as they involve many stakeholders and different perspectives (Sharp & Richardson, 2001). In this way, environmental policymaking forms a continuous struggle over interpretations and the search for political truthor the dominant discourse (Lang et al, 2019). By applying a discourse analysis we can explain why certain policies are, or are not adopted within a certain time (Hajer & Versteeg, 2005).…”

Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To analyze the case of the German Packaging Act, we apply the Discursive Agency Approach (DAA) of Leipold and Winkel (2017), which already delivered novel insights in several cases of environmental politics (Albrecht, 2018;Lang et al, 2019;. The DAA combines existing analytical concepts such as Hajer's storylines and discourse coalitions (2006) with new analytical elements, to make discursive agency accessible for empirical analysis.…”

Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To enable solid empirical insights into the role of discourses and agents in this curious case of transition politics, we apply the Discursive Agency Approach (DAA) (Leipold and Winkel, 2017). With this focus, the approach differs from established studies of policy narratives, where specific stakeholders and the use of strategic practices gained less systematic attention so far (Lang et al, 2019;Leipold et al, 2019). We aim to generate an elaborated empirical understanding of the stakeholders' perspectives on political dynamics shaping policy discussions and its outcome.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Trading Radical for Incremental Change: The Politics of a Circular Economy Transition in the German Packaging Sector

Simoens¹,

Leipold²

2020

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Understanding environmental politics is crucial for sustainability transitions. We study the transition politics of the shift to a circular economy in the German packaging sector, particularly the curious case of the 2019 German Packaging Act. While the policy was born out of the unanimous wish for radical regulatory change, all stakeholders evaluate the outcome as incremental. Applying the Discursive Agency Approach and drawing upon stakeholder interviews and documents, we show that stakeholders’ perceived fear of radical changes are critical for transition politics. This fear created a lock-in of two narratives proposing conflicting organizational designs of packaging waste management. While the narrative lock-in could be resolved by trading radical for incremental change, it left many conflicts and challenges unresolved. Our findings suggest that stakeholders’ fears not only prevent radical regulatory change but also create incremental change that may intensify unresolved conflicts and, thus, further weaken the stakeholders’ capacity for future transition politics.

show abstract

Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Trading Radical for Incremental Change: The Politics of a Circular Economy Transition in the German Packaging Sector

Simoens¹,

Leipold²

2020

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There is also limited analysis of interactions between public and private schemes, or how these might be better "blended". While much has been written about international voluntary and compliance carbon markets in recent years 28,29,30 , much less is known about the national and subnational ecosystem markets that have proliferated in recent years, and how they operate or interact with each other.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrating ecosystem markets to co-ordinate landscape-scale public benefits from nature

Reed¹,

Curtis²,

Gosal³

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ecosystem markets are proliferating around the world in response to increasing demand for climate change mitigation and provision of other public goods. However, this may lead to perverse outcomes, for example where public funding crowds out private investment or different schemes create trade-offs between the ecosystem services they each target. The integration of ecosystem markets could address some of these issues but to date there have been few attempts to do this, and there is limited understanding of either the opportunities or barriers to such integration. This paper reports on a comparative analysis of eleven ecosystem markets in operation or close to market in Europe, based on qualitative analysis of 25 interviews, scheme documentation and two focus groups. Our results indicate three distinct types of markets operating from the regional to national scale, based on modes of operation, funding and outcomes: regional ecosystem markets, national carbon markets and green finance. The typology provides new insights into the operation of ecosystem markets in practice, which may challenge traditionally held notions of Payment for Ecosystem Services. Regional ecosystem markets, in particular, represent a departure from traditional models, by using a risk-based funding model and aggregating both supply and demand to overcome issues of free-riding, ecosystem service trade-offs and land manager engagement. Central to all types of market were trusted intermediaries, brokers and platforms to aggregate supply and demand, build trust and lower transaction costs. The paper proposes five options for integrating public and private funding for the provision of ecosystem services and proposes a framework for integrating national carbon markets and green finance with regional ecosystem markets. Such integration may significantly increase funding for regenerative agriculture and conservation across multiple habitats and services, whilst addressing issues of additionality and ecosystem service trade-offs between competing schemes.

show abstract

“…While discourse analysis became established as a framework for policy analysis, environmental policy discourses also evolved over the past two decades. For example, environmental multilateralism experienced growing competition from discourses promoting bilateral, non-state, or mixed public/private (hybrid) governance (Lang, Blum, & Leipold, 2019;, while ecological modernization discourses remain prominent but are continuously reinterpreted, for instance in the shape of 'green', 'circular' or 'bio-economy' discourses (Bugge, Hansen, & Klitkou, 2016). At the same time, the environmental movement has experienced repeated waves of public mobilization, e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Discourse analysis of environmental policy revisited: traditions, trends, perspectives

Leipold

Feindt²,

Winkel

et al. 2019

Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning

Self Cite

153

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since the mid-1990s, discourse analysis has become an increasingly established framework in environmental policy analysis. The field has diversified in terms of conceptual approaches, methods, topics, and geographies. This special issue revisits trends and traditions regarding theoretical and methodological approaches, 'old' and 'new' discourses, and our knowledge about discursive effects. We contextualize and discuss the twelve contributions to this special issue against the broader trajectory of the field over the past 25 years. Our analysis reveals an abundance of theoretical approaches with limited cross-fertilization, a plethora of rich case studies but few attempts at meta-analysis, and subtle accounts of discursive effects on discourse, policy and practice without an overarching framework. We suggest seven directions for the field's future evolution: a need for more comparative and multiple-case studies, theoretical cross-fertilization, pro-active integration of non-English-speaking research contexts, development of methodological capabilities to capture discursive developments across larger numbers of publics and policy arenas, a more explicit conceptualization of agency, power and materiality, a stronger collaboration with transdisciplinary approaches, and a reflexive engagement with the 'critical' ambition of discourse analysis.

show abstract

What future for the voluntary carbon offset market after Paris? An explorative study based on the Discursive Agency Approach

Cited by 28 publications

References 22 publications

Trading Radical for Incremental Change: The Politics of a Circular Economy Transition in the German Packaging Sector

Trading Radical for Incremental Change: The Politics of a Circular Economy Transition in the German Packaging Sector

Integrating ecosystem markets to co-ordinate landscape-scale public benefits from nature

Discourse analysis of environmental policy revisited: traditions, trends, perspectives

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About