Karin Ingold

Prof. Karin Ingold

Oeschger Center for Climate Change Research University of Bern
+2

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

15Years (2012-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
28 June 2019 in Policy Studies Journal
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
CWChristopher M. Weible
Christopher M. Weible
Karin IngoldKarin Ingold
Karin Ingold
DNDaniel Nohrstedt
Daniel Nohrstedt
AHAdam Douglas Henry
Adam Douglas Henry
HJHank C. Jenkins‐Smith
Hank C. Jenkins‐Smith

11 July 2014 in West European Politics
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
Karin IngoldKarin Ingold
Karin Ingold
MGMuriel Gschwend
Muriel Gschwend
Although many policy process and diffusion theories follow the premise that scientific and technological knowledge plays a crucial role in a wide variety of policy fields, very few empirically assess the impact that institutional and process-relevant factors may have on the position of science within a process. The present study addresses the question of what role science plays in policy processes. To answer this, we apply the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) and investigate three complementary assumptions using a qualitative comparison of four cases: the ACF claims that scientific experts can take very different positions in the policy process, depending on how conflictive or consensus-oriented the relations among actors and coalitions are within a so-called policy subsystem. Put differently, the type of subsystem impacts on the position of science within the process. The results show that subsystem-specific factors impact upon whether scientific representatives act at the periphery of a process or as policy brokers seeking feasible policy solutions.

20 December 2018 in Journal of Environmental Planning and Management
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
Karin IngoldKarin Ingold
Karin Ingold
Peter DriessenPeter Driessen
Peter Driessen
HRHens A.C. Runhaar
Hens A.C. Runhaar
AWAlexander Widmer
Alexander Widmer
Environmental problems are often multi-faceted and complex by nature, consisting of diverse, intertwined dimensions. In this article, we argue that environmental problem characteristics have consequences for the selection of appropriate governance modes, and finally on policy effectiveness. We rely on an in-depth literature review to proceed in two steps. First, we outline three key environmental problem characteristics: uncertainties, cause–effect mismatches and norm plurality. We then outline six different governance modes capable of producing policies and solutions to tackle challenges arising from the three problem characteristics. Next, through empirical illustrations, we demonstrate the relevance of linking governance modes to these characteristics via the introduction and articulation of the concept of ‘connectivity’, i.e., linking actors, issues, sectors and scale levels towards realizing effective policy solutions for complex environmental problems.

1 December 2019 in Research Policy
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
Karin IngoldKarin Ingold
Karin Ingold
ISIsabelle Stadelmann-Steffen
Isabelle Stadelmann-Steffen
LKLorenz Kammermann
Lorenz Kammermann

1 January 2018 in Ecology and Society
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MAMario Angst
Mario Angst
AWAlexander Widmer
Alexander Widmer
MFManuel Fischer
Manuel Fischer
Karin IngoldKarin Ingold
Karin Ingold
Angst, M., A. Widmer, M. Fischer, and K. Ingold. 2018. Connectors and coordinators in natural resource governance: insights from Swiss water supply. Ecology and Society 23(2):1. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-10030-230201

10 April 2014 in Sustainability
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
FMFlorence Metz
Florence Metz
Karin IngoldKarin Ingold
Karin Ingold
This paper applies a policy analysis approach to the question of how to effectively regulate micropollution in a sustainable manner. Micropollution is a complex policy problem characterized by a huge number and diversity of chemical substances, as well as various entry paths into the aquatic environment. It challenges traditional water quality management by calling for new technologies in wastewater treatment and behavioral changes in industry, agriculture and civil society. In light of such challenges, the question arises as to how to regulate such a complex phenomenon to ensure water quality is maintained in the future? What can we learn from past experiences in water quality regulation? To answer these questions, policy analysis strongly focuses on the design and choice of policy instruments and the mix of such measures. In this paper, we review instruments commonly used in past water quality regulation. We evaluate their ability to respond to the characteristics of a more recent water quality problem, i.e., micropollution, in a sustainable way. This way, we develop a new framework that integrates both the problem dimension (i.e., causes and effects of a problem) as well as the sustainability dimension (e.g., long-term, cross-sectoral and multi-level) to assess which policy instruments are best suited to regulate micropollution. We thus conclude that sustainability criteria help to identify an appropriate instrument mix of end-of-pipe and source-directed measures to reduce aquatic micropollution.