This page has only limited features, please log in for full access.
This work sets out to apply the Policy Coherence Framework (PCF) to the case of climate policy, taking into account the European, German and Thuringian political levels of analysis. It combines an analysis of vertical coherence between these levels and horizontal coherence within and between different sectoral policies. The study demonstrates disparities between coherence within climate policy itself and between other policy sectors as regards forest area development. It further reveals some contradictions between economic and ecological goals in German climate policy, particularly as concerns the role of forests. According to the authors, this observation can, at least in part, be explained by the national security obligations of Germany as a nation state. This assumption is supported by the observation that the regional level of Thuringia is more consistent with the supranational level of the European Union, both of which can “afford” to favour ecology over economy due to not being nation states. Another finding suggests that the broad and ambiguous definition of climate policy causes many contradictions, leading to an “omnipresence” of climate policy, and in doing so, strips it of its meaning and, consequently, practical relevance.
Justus Eberl; Evgenia Gordeeva; Norbert Weber. The Policy Coherence Framework Approach in a Multi-Level Analysis of European, German and Thuringian Climate Policy with a Special Focus on Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF). World 2021, 2, 415 -424.
AMA StyleJustus Eberl, Evgenia Gordeeva, Norbert Weber. The Policy Coherence Framework Approach in a Multi-Level Analysis of European, German and Thuringian Climate Policy with a Special Focus on Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF). World. 2021; 2 (3):415-424.
Chicago/Turabian StyleJustus Eberl; Evgenia Gordeeva; Norbert Weber. 2021. "The Policy Coherence Framework Approach in a Multi-Level Analysis of European, German and Thuringian Climate Policy with a Special Focus on Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF)." World 2, no. 3: 415-424.
This article seeks to analyse the security dilemma in light of the transforming international system of today. Hereby, K. Waltz’s three images of war (men, the state, the international system) were taken as the basic approaches to the causes of the problem, while the carcass for the formulated systemic macro-models (federal world government, mature anarchy, balance of power) was provided by the key IR theories. The logic behind this approach lies in the belief that the international system periodically re-structures itself as to form the most stable structure possible for the respective period in history. The analysis revealed that the foundation of a federal world government could be excluded with near absolute certainty, while the prevalence of either the mature anarchy or the balance of power model was found to depend on whether the mental and physical interdependencies generated by the forces of globalization can create universal values and which functional type of the key international regimes they produce – cooperation or coordination. The results indicated the primacy of a multipolar power system balanced between civilizational blocs, which proved to be a natural consequence of the verified systemic trends as well as to display a sufficient potential for stability.
Evgenia Gordeeva. A transforming international system and the three approaches to the security dilemma. European Journal of Futures Research 2016, 4, 6 .
AMA StyleEvgenia Gordeeva. A transforming international system and the three approaches to the security dilemma. European Journal of Futures Research. 2016; 4 (1):6.
Chicago/Turabian StyleEvgenia Gordeeva. 2016. "A transforming international system and the three approaches to the security dilemma." European Journal of Futures Research 4, no. 1: 6.