Climate change policy globally, particularly in carbon export economies like Australia and the US, is hindered by politics of uncertainty. In Australia, Climate policy paralysis is caused by a range of factors, including the countervailing arguments around energy security, rural employment, and international energy poverty.

According to the study, Australian policy is more responsive to public discourse and narratives than evidence-based policy or international commitments. The paper argues that Australian policy is often more driven by public discourse and narratives than evidence-based policy or international obligations. This is exemplified by the Abbott government’s repeal of the carbon tax in 2014, which was in response to public opposition, despite evidence of its efficacy in reducing emissions. The approval of the Adani Carmichael coal mine project despite environmental concerns and its contribution to climate change also demonstrates the political power of rural constituencies and the fossil fuel industry.

Here are some more details from the paper:

Research Rationale: This paper explores the impact of policy paralysis on climate change policy in Australia and the United States, with a focus on the unique situation of a carbon export economy.

Methodology: The authors conducted a structured qualitative analysis of narratives to support their argument, which included a media analysis to reflect citizen perceptions and how discourse can shape those perceptions. The study draws on evidence from previous reports and inquiries on climate change and bush-fire prevention and management.

Findings: The research reveals that policy paralysis in Australian climate change policy can be traced back to the countervailing arguments that have been pervasive around domestic energy security, rural employment, and international energy poverty. The study recommends a coordinated energy and climate strategy that acknowledges these linkages, with diversification of the economy in rural Australia being key to realizing policy options for both energy security and jobs. Direct engagement on energy poverty at the international level should involve Australia’s further involvement in organizations such as the International Renewable Energy Agency and the Global Green Growth Institute.

The following section discusses each case examples provided by the researchers towards their argument and definition of climate policy paralysis in Australia.

“Adani, Fossil Fuel Exports and Energy Poverty”

• The continued production and export of fossil fuels in Queensland is justified to contribute to accessibility and affordability of electricity overseas and domestically, hence improving equity.
• The argument of energy poverty has been noted by the United Nations Climate Change Convention secretariat and has been supported by the views of former Prime Minister Tony Abbott and successive Liberal-National Coalition governments.
• According to the Four Corners documentary, coal brings in more than $40 billion a year from exports, making it a priority for the current policy.

“Liddell Power Station, National Energy Self-Reliance and Reliability or Energy Security”

• besides the association of export revenues and low energy prices with coal, energy self-reliance, reliability, and energy security are other policy objectives.
• The third objective of ensuring base load that can handle fluctuations in demand is related to reliability of supply, which is essential for energy security.
• The reliability of supply is not receiving enough policy attention, as evident in a statement by Angus Taylor, who said that ‘the obsession with emissions at the expense of reliability and affordability has been a massive mistake’.

“Tesla Battery, Power Storage and Renewables Liability or a ‘New’ Economy in the Regions?”

• There is ambivalence in Australia about increasing the role of renewables in the energy mix.
• The federal government is trying to prioritize reliability and allow for the development of new high-efficiency, low-emissions coal-fired plants.
• Some policy actors caution against overreliance on renewables and believe that carbon capture cannot be excluded from policy settings because of ideological prejudices towards fossil fuels.
• Despite strong incentives from state governments to increase renewable energy generation, there is a counter-narrative that doubts the potential of renewable energies and technological innovation to provide equity, security, jobs, and business sustainably.
• The South Australian government’s embrace of wind power and investment in the Tesla battery power storage facility was strongly criticized by some who believe the state should focus on coal and natural gas reserves instead.
• In Queensland, the solar power industry is bringing hundreds of jobs, but there are conflicting claims about job creation in the renewable power industry.
• Rooftop solar flooding the market has resulted in downward pressure on electricity prices, which ironically deter investment in solar and renewables.
• Battery storage functionality in South Australia has cut demand and returns for frequency response services.

“Policy Influencers and Inertia”

• There are special interest groups with financial power that influence energy policy.
• Former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull’s son Alex Turnbull criticized the Liberal Party’s energy policy, saying that people who own a lot of coal in the Galilee Basin are exercising undue influence on the policy.
• The mining lobby spent nearly $5 million on political campaigning, while the lobbyists for the coal industry spent $3.6 million on advertising campaigns in the 12 months after the last federal election.
• Industry spokespersons and politicians frequently publish commentary columns in the media, providing them with a privileged voice.
• The media, particularly strongly opinionated commentators like radio broadcaster Alan Jones, can also be influential in shaping energy policy.
• These causal linkages between special interest groups, media, and energy policy are speculative and not directly linked to the evidence presented in the analysis, but they suggest that further study is needed to explore the linkages through rigorous social science.

Conclusion: The paper suggests that the 2019-2020 wildfires provide an example of a “focusing event” that may break the impasse on climate change policy in Australia, but this will only be possible if energy security at home, energy poverty abroad, and employment imperatives are clearly delineated, measured, and prioritized. The authors note that the COVID pandemic and its economic impact, as well as the decline in fossil fuel demand and fall in prices, may also be another focusing event to consider changes. However, the ultimate policy impact of such events will only be realized if concerted effort is made to integrate and coordinate national and international energy and climate change policy.

Paper Title: Climate Policy Paralysis in Australia: Energy Security, Energy Poverty and Jobs

Authors: Saleem H. Ali ^1,2,, Kamila Svobodova ², Jo-Anne Everingham ² and Mehmet Altingoz ¹

¹Department of Geography and Spatial Sciences, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19716, USA

²Sustainable Minerals Institute, University of Queensland, St Lucia 4072, Australia

The full paper is under the Creative Commons License and is available here.