Table 1Hypothesized compensation strategies for enacting new governance frameworks
DISPLAY Table
* The author would like to thank David O’Connor for helpful feedback on an earlier draft; the two anonymous reviewers for their suggestions on how to improve the article and the guest editor of the Special Issue – Louis Meuleman – for his kind invitation to write this paper and for the advice provided in the course of writing. The views expressed in this article are entirely the author’s and are not necessarily held by the parties acknowledged herein.
2 See New York’s Climate Mobilization Act, April 2019. For Iceland’s Climate Action Plan 2018-2030, see Ministry for the Environment and Natural Resources (
2018). For a more recent announcement at the Climate Action Summit 2019 by New Zealand, Costa Rica, Fiji, Iceland and Norway to negotiate a new ‘Agreement on Climate Change, Trade and Sustainability’, see Steenblik and Droege (
2019).
3 For a critique of German
Energiewende that focuses on competing interests, uncoordinated government ministries and weaknesses in the hierarchical, part captured, governance model used for transition, see Dohmen (
2019). See also Coggio and Gustafson (
2019).