The comparative politics of climate change mitigation measures: Who promotes carbon sinks and why?

Abstract

This article presents an analysis of twenty-six industrialized countries’ support for the carbon-sequestration-based mitigation measures carbon capture and storage (CCS) and reduced emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+) during the 2007–2014 period. The article explores whether these proposed solutions to climate change share characteristics that make them feasible for reasons that can be observed in cross-national patterns. Insights from political economy, public policy, and international relations form a “triply engaged” theoretical framework. Relationships are tested using bivariate statistics and multivariate regressions. The analysis reveals that the same states show stronger support for both CCS and REDD+, and mostly for the same reasons. Proponents of such measures are generally petroleum-producing, large, and affluent, and they do not take on more ambitious mitigation targets. This article is the first to suggest that the widely different carbon-sink-based mitigation measures CCS and REDD+ may share similar political functions in similar political contexts.