Prominent actors in committees.

According to the literature on Environmental Policy Integration (EPI), decisionmaking in complex domains of environmental policy—of which climate change is a prime example—tend to fragment and silo into individual dimensions of a problem. Scientific Advisory Committees (SACs) have been widely used to promote more integrated decisionmaking. SACs are intended to integrate the varied, and often fragmented, dimensions of policy problems, and this integration is widely believed to enable more effective use of science in climate change policy. This paper empirically evaluates the degree of integration achieved through SACs in two national climate policy contexts: Germany and Japan. Network analysis is used to examine the myriad scientific advisory committees focused on climate change policy in these nations (N = 218), and quantify the degree of vertical integration (integration among different sectors) and horizontal integration (integration among different governmental bodies). Results show greater vertical integration among German SACs than Japanese SACs, and similar levels of horizontal integration between the two nations despite having very different structures. Such efforts to empirically connect the conceptual discussion of integration in EPI with empirical observations of integration in actual climate policy processes is an important step towards understanding the strategies that may be used to promote more integrated decisionmaking in climate change policy.根据环境政策整合（Environmental Policy Integration, EPI）领域的研究文献，在以气候变化为典型代表的复杂环境政策领域中，决策往往会出现碎片化与孤岛化现象，割裂为问题的各个独立维度。科学咨询委员会（Scientific Advisory Committees, SACs）已被广泛用于推动更具整合性的决策流程。这类委员会旨在整合政策问题中纷繁复杂且常呈碎片化的各个维度，而学界普遍认为，该整合机制能够推动科学成果更有效地应用于气候变化政策制定。本研究针对德国与日本两个国家的气候变化政策场景，实证评估了其科学咨询委员会所实现的整合程度。研究采用网络分析方法，对上述两国共计218个聚焦气候变化政策的科学咨询委员会进行分析，并量化其纵向整合（不同部门间的整合）与横向整合（不同政府机构间的整合）程度。研究结果显示，德国科学咨询委员会的纵向整合程度高于日本，尽管两国的委员会结构差异显著，但横向整合水平却较为相近。这类将环境政策整合领域的概念探讨与实际气候变化政策流程中的整合实践观测进行实证关联的尝试，为理解可用于推动气候变化政策制定更具整合性的策略迈出了重要一步。