Top-down or bottom-up? Norwegian climate mitigation policy as a contested hybrid of policy approaches

Abstract

It is widely accepted that the Paris Agreement implies a shift in global climate mitigation policy from a top-down approach focused on global distribution of emission cuts and international cost-effectiveness to a bottom-up approach based on national efforts. Less is known about how this shift at the global level trickles down and manifests in national climate mitigation policy. Norway is in this respect an interesting example, since it has long been portrayed as an important driver of an international top-down approach. In this paper, we demonstrate that Norwegian policy cannot be characterised as a ‘pure’ top-down regime; policy instruments and measures directed at specific technology investments and deployment to complement cost-effective (international) policy instruments have been an explicit government ambition for a long time. Second, by using the case of biofuels, we analyse how the two approaches have been combined in practice over the past decade. Using the notion of ‘hybrid management’, we demonstrate that the top-down approach has left a lasting imprint on Norwegian mitigation policy, but also that this approach has increasingly been challenged by bottom-up thinking, leaving Norwegian climate mitigation policy as a contested hybrid of policy approaches. We conclude that inadequate institutional arrangements for productively managing the tensions between the two approaches have hampered progress in Norwegian policy in curbing domestic emissions. We expect that Norwegian climate mitigation will become increasingly hybridised in the coming decades, and suggest that cultivating hybridisation can be a productive approach for policy progress.

Socio-political dynamics in clean energy transition

“…Our results support the general understanding that a top-down climate policy may not be sufficient for effective and long-lasting emission cuts [100,101]. While the 2015 Paris Agreement [102] operates more as a framework for global cooperation rather than a strict regulatory mechanism, it already suggests a shift in global climate mitigation policy from top-down to bottom-up [103,104].…”

Norway’s Battery Electric Vehicles and Public Health- Findings From the Literature

“…While Norway officially supports flexible methods such as those stated in the Paris Agreement, academic arguments continue concerning the most effective economic instruments and the balance between top-down and bottom-up approaches. 14 In Norway, the adoption and implementation of zero greenhouse gas emission vehicles have been motivated by several incentives, and the government has actively endorsed the move since the 1990s. They made battery electric vehicles competitive with conventional ones by exempting all BEVs from the 25% value-added tax on the purchase, the re-registration tax on reselling, the graduated vehicle registration tax, the annual circulation tax, road tolls, public parking fees, and considerably lower rates of income tax on private use of company cars and ferry fares.…”

The Legal Nature of the Climate Change Regime: Fluctuation between Lex Lata and Lex Ferenda

“…60 What made the Protocol unique from a legal point of view is its top-down adherence architecture. 61 It established the most prescribed and potentially costly penalties for non-compliance with multilateral environmental agreements. 62 The Compliance Committee of the Protocol will "facilitate, promote and implement commitments under the Protocol".…”