Search

Why has Europe implemented a quite-proactive climate policy while the US has adopted a far less ambitious climate strategy? Does variation in security concerns or other factors better explain this difference in policy? Using a multi-method case study approach, the authors find that in the US, constructions of climate change as a security threat play an important role in developing public support. In Europe, leadership and opportunity discourses predominate. Other factors including centralization of governance, trust in the technocratic elite, and cultural norms contribute to the variation in policy construction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the signs of civic, private, local and state public sector activities for climate protection in the U.S. These activities aimed at restricting greenhouse gas emissions as well as assess whether they amount to a social movement for climate protection. It is suggested that momentum is building federal inaction on mandatory emission reductions. There is a renowned increase in opposition activity over several years. However, it is unclear whether the movement reached the take off point of the American society's closeness to the tipping point. This could be attributed to the fact that the movement has not yet found a bridging frame in bringing sub-movements together. The Movement Action Plan (MAP) model is a useful tool in locating where a movement is in its evolution.