Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS:
Title: Advancing comparative policy evaluation techniques : a case study of British climate change policies
Author: Davies, Nia
ISNI:       0000 0004 2672 6547
Awarding Body: Imperial College London
Current Institution: Imperial College London
Date of Award: 2009
Availability of Full Text:
Access from EThOS:
Access from Institution:
The notion of ‘better regulation’ indicates a desire on the part of policy makers to pursue improved policy design. The aim is to minimise the burden on both the regulated and the regulator whilst maximising the positive outcomes. The intensive evaluation of policy instruments forms an essential part of the cycle of improvement of policy design and implementation. However, existing evaluation techniques are often applied in an ad hoc and inconsistent manner. This reduces the opportunities to compare different policy instruments with a view to informing future instrument design. This research has led to the identification of six critical evaluation criteria which can be applied to policy instruments ex post in order to facilitate a robust and systematic comparative analysis of instruments. The purpose of this unique approach is to identify the instrument-specific lessons and the generic lessons regarding instrument design. The outcome of this research will be to improve future climate change policy design and hence to ameliorate the results that these policies deliver. The evaluation criteria were applied to four case studies that feature in the UK Climate Change Programme: the Pollution Prevention and Control (England and Wales) Regulations 2000; the Climate Change Agreements; United Kingdom Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading Scheme; and, the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme. This innovative approach to comparative analysis of case studies led to the identification of several critical recommendations for future design of policies targeted at industrial emissions control. These recommendations include: • More caution in the setting and measurement against performance baselines due to the inevitable risk of information asymmetries; • Improving the transparency of the negotiation of targets and performance reporting; • Greater emphasis and effort on the analysis of the costs and cost effectiveness of policies to Government (and by association, the tax payer); • Greater awareness among policy makers of the impact of industry lobbying on instrument design and performance targets.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID:  DOI: Not available