As climate change creates significant challenges for both the environment and society, potential mitigation and adaptation solutions are widely discussed. Yet, neither challenges nor their potential solutions automatically reach the political agenda or lead to a policy decision. The Multiple Streams Framework (MSF) examines dynamics at the level of problems, solutions, and political context to understand why a given issue reaches the political agenda. This article applies the MSF to the issue of water reuse-a promising solution to addressing increasing water scarcity and droughts-which has not been taken up by the political agenda systematically. The analysis compares Swiss substates and examines how configurations of four key conditions-drought experiences, agenda influence from neighboring countries, technical capacities, and political strategies-affect the emergence of water reuse on the political agenda. Results of the Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) suggest that configurations of these conditions indeed matter more than any single condition. While political context shows little influence, problem and (potential) solution dynamics are crucial for understanding the prominence of water reuse on the political agenda. The article emphasizes the importance of a holistic and non-linear understanding of agenda-setting dynamics as a configuration of several conditions, especially given that agenda-setting precedes policy action on pressing climate change-related challenges.
Nature-based solutions (NbS) have gained prominence as an integrated approach to addressing climate change and biodiversity loss while supporting sustainable development. Yet, their implementation across Southeast Asia remains fragmented and often contested. This paper uses qualitative documentary analysis of regional and national policy documents, complemented by five comparative case studies spanning forests, peatlands and coastal ecosystems. It investigates how carbon-dense ecosystems in Southeast Asia are being positioned within evolving global frameworks for NbS and carbon market mechanisms. Our analysis is guided by two questions: (1) How do international definitions and discourses shape regional and national NbS policies? (2) How are governance arrangements structured across scales? The findings from these questions inform our broader discussion of the extent to which these emerging governance regimes aimed at conserving, restoring, or sustainably developing carbon-dense ecosystems consider issues of equity and justice. We find that NbS framings are increasingly visible in Southeast Asian policy discourses, but operationalisation remains uneven. Whereas some projects align closely with national climate goals (e.g., Vietnam's REDD+ programme), others remain detached from the relevant Nationally Determined Contribution to emissions reduction (project case studies from Indonesia, Lao PDR, Malaysia, and Thailand). In such cases, nested governance structures are weakly institutionalised, and Indigenous and local communities are often excluded from benefit-sharing mechanisms, undermining both legitimacy and equity. These findings underscore the need for more integrated, transparent and inclusive approaches to scaling NbS within the region.
This paper investigates emerging soil carbon markets and seeks to identify the groups of actors and power relations that constitute their structure and function. Voluntary soil carbon markets (VSCMs) are emerging globally as a key mechanism for generating carbon removals as part of climate mitigation efforts. Developments are characterised by both carbon offsetting and supply chain insetting for Scope 3 emissions reductions. Despite their increasing prominence, VSCMs remain poorly understood as socio-technical and political arrangements. This paper examines how UK VSCMs are being implemented, governed, and contested, and how they are shaped by power relations. Drawing on economic sociology and political ecology, we conceptualise VSCMs as 'markets-in-the-making', and extend Callon's notion of markets as in vivo experiments by explicitly incorporating power relations. To investigate different groups' influence on market development, we apply an adapted Net-Map methodology via 17 semi-structured interviews and a validation workshop with stakeholders involved in UK VSCMs. Our findings reveal a fragmented and experimental governance landscape and identify key matters of concern, including pricing asymmetries, knowledge gaps, opacity in insetting arrangements and reduced agency for tenant farmers. While regulation is widely viewed as necessary to improve market integrity, current frameworks insufficiently address insetting. We argue that without deliberate efforts to 'civilise' VSCMs by embedding transparency, procedural justice, and inclusive governance, these arrangements risk reproducing existing inequities within agri-food systems. The paper contributes methodologically and theoretically by advancing tools for analysing emerging market governance, and highlighting power relations underlying VSCMs.
Water governance is increasingly influenced by a paradox at the nexus of environmental scarcity and food security. Escalating water scarcity crises coincide with geopolitical disruptions that have exposed the fragility of global food supply chains, prompting states to expand domestic food production at the expense of water conservation. Despite scholarly efforts to analyze water governance, this policy paradox has not been sufficiently investigated. The paper aims to fill this gap by tracing a shift in water policymaking in the case of Iran, a country under international pressure, which intensifies the food security challenge. Drawing from content analysis of numerous Farsi documents, the paper employs the Narrative Policy Framework to explain this transformation. The analysis reveals two competing narratives on water policymaking in Iran: one narrative emphasizes water consumption reduction as a part of sustainable development practices. The other emphasizes self-sufficiency in agricultural products to protect the nation against external threats-a goal that necessitates increased water consumption. However, a significant shift happened in the latter discourse, acknowledging the imperative to conserve water. The analysis indicates that international pressure catalyzed this unprecedented shift within the resistance narrative. In this transformation, water scarcity poses a security challenge for the long-term survival against external threats. This reframing led the conservative ruling elite to endorse the water consumption reduction, paving the way to overcome the other legal and bureaucratic barriers to formulate water-saving policies. The paper contributes to the field by demonstrating the important role of international forces and narrative in shaping environmental policymaking.
ABSTRACT Unlocking synergies while avoiding trade‐offs between climate and air pollution mitigation is key to policy effectiveness and cost‐efficiency. For maximum effect, these policies must be integrated not only horizontally within a governance level but also vertically across them. Yet, while integration is central to attaining environmental objectives, institutions implementing them often work in silos, limiting coordination across policy sectors and governance levels. Furthermore, interactions between horizontal and vertical processes of policy integration (PI) remain under‐researched. Using Löther & Yamineva's framework, I evaluate and trace developments in climate‐air pollution PI in the EU across three governance levels since 2016. Beside the EU‐level, case jurisdictions include two Member States, Italy and Finland, plus two cities, Milan and Helsinki. I analyse two rounds of climate and air pollution strategy documents for each to capture a progression over time, supplemented by key informant interviews. This lets me gauge where horizontal and/or vertical integration occurred, where it lacks, and what shapes these patterns. Findings show that, rather than a coherent cross‐level PI strategy, each jurisdiction follows its own approach to climate‐air pollution integration, varying widely in ambition but with shortcomings in all cases. Furthermore, PI has notably declined over time in most jurisdictions. Both horizontal and vertical integration thus remain insufficient. PI‐barriers include a general shift in priorities away from environmental goals but also specific flaws in European climate and pollution laws, whose revision offers opportunities to further integration. Lessons learned apply to other environmental policies, too, and demonstrate the importance of a multidimensional approach to PI research.
