Mitigating global warming: traditional versus alternative approaches in a planning versus a market context

Abstract

Economic efficiency tends to be an important argument when different means of environmental control are assessed and suggested. Considering that the most cost-efficient means are not the ones most frequently chosen and used, some other qualities seem to play an equally important role. I use findings from organisational theory and negotiation theory to better understand what is concealed in the black-box of decision-making and implementation. My empirical material consists of case studies of four different means of environmental control used in Sweden during the 1990s to mitigate the threat of global warming. These are an environmental tax, a licensing trial, municipal energy planning, and technology procurement. Each represents a particular discipline (economic, legal, physical planning, or technological) in which a context (planning or market) and an approach (traditional relay race or alternative process-oriented) are combined. Although each means has its particular niche, some qualities stand out as superior. Such means need to be divisible in space as well as in time. It is then easier to get started. Since it is just as easy to deviate from, rather than adhere to, the predetermined course after a while, some incentive must be given to the person in charge of implementation. In other words, the classic proverb of using sticks and carrots is still valid although it is not always taken to heart and practised.

Introduction

Means of environmental control can be assessed from a number of perspectives. One perspective emphasises on economic efficiency, where an input, e.g. administrative costs, is weighed against an output, e.g. reduced emissions. Regulative approaches of the command and control type tend to score low, and market-based means score high (Turner et al., 1994). Nevertheless, politicians hesitate to use economic means, so that political acceptability has become another threshold (Bohm and Russell, 1985). However, these criteria do not explain why a decision is difficult to make or why a decision that is made is not implemented. Other perspectives are thus called for in which the black-box between the end points is inspected. I use findings from organisational theory (Brunsson, 1989; Hernes, 1978) and negotiation theory (Fisher and Ury, 1982; Raiffa, 1982; Susskind and Cruikshank, 1987) to identify the strengths and weaknesses of four means of environmental control in their practical application en route to an energy system that is compatible with sustainable development. These are an environmental tax, a licensing trial, municipal energy planning, and technology procurement.