Search

The widely held view is that effective action on climate change requires commitment by national governments to international agreements. Developed nations like Canada and Australia continue to fall short in their commitments to emissions reduction targets established under the 1997 Kyoto Protocol. Australia refused to ratify its Kyoto commitments until 2008 and Canada withdrew its commitment in 2011. Subnational governments in both countries have been active in developing policy responses to climate change yet remain largely excluded as serious policy partners in national mitigation and adaptation initiatives. This paper utilizes Kingdon’s Multiple Streams Framework to consider why subnational governments address climate change and the main factors shaping their policy choices. The experiences of the Australian state of Victoria and the Canadian province of Ontario provide examples through which to explore the factors contributing to climate policy opportunities and constraints faced by subnational governments in these countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Australia and Canada have been active participants in international climate change negotiations since the early 1990s and have often shared negotiating positions. This paper discusses why, in spite of considerable similarities in national circumstances, the Canadian government chose to ratify the Kyoto Protocol in 2002, while the Australian government decided against doing so. It is argued that a range of factors led to a narrower conception of the national interest in the case of Australia, which encouraged a focus on the short-term, economic costs of implementing the Protocol. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]