THE BLACK BOX BETWEEN CLIMATE CHANGE AND CLIMATE CHANGE POLICY

Although scientific consensus on climate change and the threat of the potentially lifechanging effects it brings with have gotten stronger with time, the American public remains conflicted in its beliefs. The fiercely divisive, partisan issue is contested in many ways, even as the country endures more severe storms more frequently than in memorable history. Policy indices explore differences in risk and beliefs between states, counties, and cities, but the questions of why the differences exist and how the policies rose on the agenda have yet to be thoroughly examined or explained. This dissertation unpacks the idea that public policy in the environmental arena is shaped by things beyond the simple explanation of political partisanship and offers ideas for the development of an empirical framework to consistently study environmental policy within Public Administration. Specifically, three essays examine: the impact of disasters and perceptions on resilience within counties of the United States, the take-up of energy efficiency at the state level and the role of resource dependence within that variation, and the idea of adapting John Kingdon’s Multiple Streams Approach of policy agenda-setting into a more precise, falsifiable framework to better study climate change adaptation policy, both in its formation and implementation. By investigating the way in which policy is formed and changed, along with introducing a comprehensive method through which policy on climate change adaptation and related issues can become a focus of public administration as a field, the dissertation focuses on the overarching theme of environmental policy change at different levels of governance within the United States.