This article examines the paradigm shifts in the European Union's (EU's) climate policy from 2009 to 2022 looking closer at the main policy instrument of EU's climate policy, the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS). The paradigm shifts of the EU ETS are linked to the climate policy paradigms prometheanism/growth unlimited (PGU), ecological modernization (EM), and sufficiency. The question of how ideas have shaped EU climate policy and the EU ETS in the past decade is answered, with the establishment of the EM paradigm and moving toward the sufficiency paradigm. There is a need for more research looking closer at how this paradigm shift impacts legislation for climate policy going forward.
{"title":"How ideas shape the EU's climate policy: Moving toward the sufficiency paradigm for the EU ETS","authors":"Daniel Wennick","doi":"10.1002/epa2.1186","DOIUrl":"10.1002/epa2.1186","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This article examines the paradigm shifts in the European Union's (EU's) climate policy from 2009 to 2022 looking closer at the main policy instrument of EU's climate policy, the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS). The paradigm shifts of the EU ETS are linked to the climate policy paradigms prometheanism/growth unlimited (PGU), ecological modernization (EM), and sufficiency. The question of how ideas have shaped EU climate policy and the EU ETS in the past decade is answered, with the establishment of the EM paradigm and moving toward the sufficiency paradigm. There is a need for more research looking closer at how this paradigm shift impacts legislation for climate policy going forward.</p>","PeriodicalId":52190,"journal":{"name":"European Policy Analysis","volume":"10 2","pages":"206-224"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/epa2.1186","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135969318","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The Council of Ministers is still the European Union's decision-making center in migration policy. However, we know little about the determinants of member state's policy positions. This article tests three hypotheses: member state positions might be influenced by socioeconomic conditions, by public opinion, or by partisan preferences. We conduct a quantitative analysis of two legislative proposals at the intersection of migration and welfare policy (the returns directive, COD/2005/167 and the social security regulation, 2016/0397/COD) using member state positions as the dependent variable. The result is that different factors are important for positioning on the two proposals: member state positions on the returns directive are correlated with public opinion, while their positions on the social security regulation are correlated with party positions, especially the position of the economically rightmost coalition partner. Thus, our study takes issue with the argument that migration politics in the Council are disconnected from the domestic arena.
{"title":"Party politics and the shaping of migration policy in the Council of Ministers","authors":"Simon Fink","doi":"10.1002/epa2.1193","DOIUrl":"10.1002/epa2.1193","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The Council of Ministers is still the European Union's decision-making center in migration policy. However, we know little about the determinants of member state's policy positions. This article tests three hypotheses: member state positions might be influenced by socioeconomic conditions, by public opinion, or by partisan preferences. We conduct a quantitative analysis of two legislative proposals at the intersection of migration and welfare policy (the returns directive, COD/2005/167 and the social security regulation, 2016/0397/COD) using member state positions as the dependent variable. The result is that different factors are important for positioning on the two proposals: member state positions on the returns directive are correlated with public opinion, while their positions on the social security regulation are correlated with party positions, especially the position of the economically rightmost coalition partner. Thus, our study takes issue with the argument that migration politics in the Council are disconnected from the domestic arena.</p>","PeriodicalId":52190,"journal":{"name":"European Policy Analysis","volume":"10 1","pages":"128-151"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/epa2.1193","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136212509","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract Who makes policy change happen, and how? Public policy scholars now take more seriously the role of agency in the policy process, and in particular the role of policy entrepreneurship, a contested term built mostly from classical, economic conceptions of entrepreneurship from the mid‐20th century. In this study, we introduce policy scholars to modern theories of entrepreneurship from sociology and management scholarship, including cultural entrepreneurship, effectuation, bricolage, and entrepreneurial assembly. We show that theories connect more easily with major theories of the policy process more easily than classical theories do and argue policy scholars should make room for multiple policy entrepreneurship archetypes. We also give three examples—organizational imprinting, the small firm effect, and survivorship bias—of the readymade research agenda modern entrepreneurship theories offer to policy entrepreneurship scholars. Finally, we show how these theories help policy scholars build bridges to other political science subfields.
{"title":"Bricolage and beyond: Bringing modern entrepreneurship theories to bear on policy entrepreneurship","authors":"Mark C. Hand, Colin Birkhead","doi":"10.1002/epa2.1189","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/epa2.1189","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Who makes policy change happen, and how? Public policy scholars now take more seriously the role of agency in the policy process, and in particular the role of policy entrepreneurship, a contested term built mostly from classical, economic conceptions of entrepreneurship from the mid‐20th century. In this study, we introduce policy scholars to modern theories of entrepreneurship from sociology and management scholarship, including cultural entrepreneurship, effectuation, bricolage, and entrepreneurial assembly. We show that theories connect more easily with major theories of the policy process more easily than classical theories do and argue policy scholars should make room for multiple policy entrepreneurship archetypes. We also give three examples—organizational imprinting, the small firm effect, and survivorship bias—of the readymade research agenda modern entrepreneurship theories offer to policy entrepreneurship scholars. Finally, we show how these theories help policy scholars build bridges to other political science subfields.","PeriodicalId":52190,"journal":{"name":"European Policy Analysis","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135645603","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
How do external macrolevel factors encourage bureaucrats to become policy entrepreneurs? And what are their organizational goals in pursuing entrepreneurship? Contrary to traditional public choice literature on bureaucracy that sees the latter as change-resistant, this study stresses that bureaucracies can and do change; they are not as insulated from reformist pressure. In this study, we lay the conditions under which change occurs, making bureaucrats—policy entrepreneurs. We argue that: (1) bureaucratic inefficiency, leading to (2) societal pressure as expressed by public opinion, and consequently to (3) pressure from potential new providers offering bottom-up competition, will encourage bureaucrats to turn to policy entrepreneurship strategies. In addition, we assert that their goals in doing so are to modify and design efficient services, while protecting their monopoly on service provision. We test these claims by analyzing the state-religion dynamics in Israel, and specifically the case of the 2021 kosher food inspection reform.
{"title":"Macrolevel factors encouraging bureaucratic policy entrepreneurship: The case of religion and state in Israel","authors":"Niva Golan-Nadir","doi":"10.1002/epa2.1191","DOIUrl":"10.1002/epa2.1191","url":null,"abstract":"<p>How do external macrolevel factors encourage bureaucrats to become policy entrepreneurs? And what are their organizational goals in pursuing entrepreneurship? Contrary to traditional public choice literature on bureaucracy that sees the latter as change-resistant, this study stresses that bureaucracies can and do change; they are not as insulated from reformist pressure. In this study, we lay the conditions under which change occurs, making bureaucrats—policy entrepreneurs. We argue that: (1) bureaucratic inefficiency, leading to (2) societal pressure as expressed by public opinion, and consequently to (3) pressure from potential new providers offering bottom-up competition, will encourage bureaucrats to turn to policy entrepreneurship strategies. In addition, we assert that their goals in doing so are to modify and design efficient services, while protecting their monopoly on service provision. We test these claims by analyzing the state-religion dynamics in Israel, and specifically the case of the 2021 kosher food inspection reform.</p>","PeriodicalId":52190,"journal":{"name":"European Policy Analysis","volume":"10 2","pages":"253-278"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/epa2.1191","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136152326","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
What are the differences between policy entrepreneurship and street-level policy entrepreneurship? The research on street-level policy entrepreneurship is still in its infancy, yet in the past few years, it has received greater research attention. This article systematically reviews the current research published on this topic and compares it to previous findings on policy entrepreneurs. Our findings provide an analysis of street-level policy entrepreneurs' characteristics, motivations, traits, and strategies, differentiating types of street-level bureaucrats (SLBs). We also find three new strategies unique to SLBs: consistency over time, learning from others, and seeking legitimacy. We conclude by identifying the main differences between traditional entrepreneurs and street-level entrepreneurs and providing suggestions for further research.
{"title":"Policy entrepreneurship on the street-level: A systematic literature review","authors":"Ofek Edri-Peer, Mariana Costa Silveira, Maayan Davidovitz, Neomi Frisch-Aviram, Jamal Shehade, Hadeel Diab, Niva Golan-Nadir, Nissim Cohen","doi":"10.1002/epa2.1187","DOIUrl":"10.1002/epa2.1187","url":null,"abstract":"<p>What are the differences between policy entrepreneurship and street-level policy entrepreneurship? The research on street-level policy entrepreneurship is still in its infancy, yet in the past few years, it has received greater research attention. This article systematically reviews the current research published on this topic and compares it to previous findings on policy entrepreneurs. Our findings provide an analysis of street-level policy entrepreneurs' characteristics, motivations, traits, and strategies, differentiating types of street-level bureaucrats (SLBs). We also find three new strategies unique to SLBs: consistency over time, learning from others, and seeking legitimacy. We conclude by identifying the main differences between traditional entrepreneurs and street-level entrepreneurs and providing suggestions for further research.</p>","PeriodicalId":52190,"journal":{"name":"European Policy Analysis","volume":"9 4","pages":"356-378"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/epa2.1187","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136153843","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The article discusses the role of parliamentary oversight of emergency measures and policies in increasing democratic resilience and recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic. The study on the Finnish Parliament is conducted by analyzing the statements of the Constitutional Law Committee, whose role is to conduct a parliamentary constitutional review of governmental bills. The main focus of the analysis is on the Committee's reviews of the constitutionality of the emergency measures and the procedures of law drafting. The research indicates that the committee considered the restrictions and exceptions of fundamental rights as proportional and necessary to prevent the overburdening of the healthcare system in most cases. However, the justifications for the emergency measures were often lacking, and the parliament's right to receive information was compromised. These deficits undermined the Parliament's capacity to oversee emergency measures and policies. The parliamentary constitutional review during the pandemic could still serve a critical complementary function by protecting fundamental rights and democratic values.
{"title":"Parliamentary oversight of emergency measures and policies: A safeguard of democracy during a crisis?","authors":"Mikko Värttö","doi":"10.1002/epa2.1190","DOIUrl":"10.1002/epa2.1190","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The article discusses the role of parliamentary oversight of emergency measures and policies in increasing democratic resilience and recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic. The study on the Finnish Parliament is conducted by analyzing the statements of the Constitutional Law Committee, whose role is to conduct a parliamentary constitutional review of governmental bills. The main focus of the analysis is on the Committee's reviews of the constitutionality of the emergency measures and the procedures of law drafting. The research indicates that the committee considered the restrictions and exceptions of fundamental rights as proportional and necessary to prevent the overburdening of the healthcare system in most cases. However, the justifications for the emergency measures were often lacking, and the parliament's right to receive information was compromised. These deficits undermined the Parliament's capacity to oversee emergency measures and policies. The parliamentary constitutional review during the pandemic could still serve a critical complementary function by protecting fundamental rights and democratic values.</p>","PeriodicalId":52190,"journal":{"name":"European Policy Analysis","volume":"10 1","pages":"84-100"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/epa2.1190","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135063741","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The understanding of resilience, and how the ability to respond or adjust to new situations can be implemented and evaluated, gained prominence in public policy. This study examines how European Union (EU) member states plan to support cultural and creative sectors (CCSs) within the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) of the NextGenerationEU Program and how they plan the CCSs to contribute to the grand challenges of our time. Using mixed methods, it is found that the understanding of how structural deficiencies in CCSs can be addressed is not systematic and not all countries invest to make the cultural infrastructure more future-proof. Neither the budgets nor the mode of resilience (absorption, adaptation, and transformation) exposed in the plans consistently correlates with how countries intend to address key impact pillars. Countries with larger CCSs are more prone to transformation. The theoretical contribution lies in the elaboration of the concept of “ex ante resilience.”
{"title":"Arts and culture in transformation: A critical analysis of the national plans for the European Recovery and Resilience Facility","authors":"Diana Betzler, Ellen Loots, Marek Prokůpek","doi":"10.1002/epa2.1188","DOIUrl":"10.1002/epa2.1188","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The understanding of resilience, and how the ability to respond or adjust to new situations can be implemented and evaluated, gained prominence in public policy. This study examines how European Union (EU) member states plan to support cultural and creative sectors (CCSs) within the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) of the NextGenerationEU Program and how they plan the CCSs to contribute to the grand challenges of our time. Using mixed methods, it is found that the understanding of how structural deficiencies in CCSs can be addressed is not systematic and not all countries invest to make the cultural infrastructure more future-proof. Neither the budgets nor the mode of resilience (absorption, adaptation, and transformation) exposed in the plans consistently correlates with how countries intend to address key impact pillars. Countries with larger CCSs are more prone to transformation. The theoretical contribution lies in the elaboration of the concept of “ex ante resilience.”</p>","PeriodicalId":52190,"journal":{"name":"European Policy Analysis","volume":"10 1","pages":"101-127"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/epa2.1188","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136128701","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Nils C. Bandelow, Johanna Hornung, Fritz Sager, Ilana Schröder
<p>Summer is always an exciting period of the year for journal editors because citation indices publish the latest journal-specific performance indicators. For our <i>European Policy Analysis (EPA)</i> journal, this year has brought amazing news. Not only has our SCOPUS CiteScore risen from 5.3 to 7.8, which is an increase by almost 50%.<sup>1</sup> It is also the first year that Clarivate Analytics, which publishes the Journal Citation Reports within the Web of Science, has issued an Impact Factor (IF) for EPA. The inclusion in the Web of Science and the IF are indicative of the high-quality articles that we publish, as well as the quick, responsible, and reliable processes of peer review. We sincerely thank our authors, reviewers, and all people who have contributed to EPA's success. Proudly, we present EPA's first IF of 5.0, which ranks it second in the Political Science category of the Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI) and fourth in the Public Administration category of the ESCI. Considering the journals listed in the Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), this makes EPA one of the top 15 journals in Political Science, and one of the top 10 journals in Public Administration. Words cannot describe how happy we are about this result. Our thanks to the great authors and reviewers who made this possible. We are aware that keeping this still young journal in the upper quartiles of the indexes for an extended period of time will be even more challenging.</p><p>In our view, the most recent publications of our journal can contribute to a continuation of EPA's success story. At the ravages of time, which are shaped by new questions regarding sustainability and digitalization but also seemingly old debates on democracy and governance, the past year has bundled a few of these questions in a special issue on Sustainable Governance Indicators (SGIs) and their explanatory power in the realm of public policy research. Back then, the visionary article by Tosun and Howlett (<span>2022</span>) has provided an empirical operationalization of policy styles by means of the SGIs. The long-lasting impact of this article is already visible. In this EPA issue Zahariadis et al. (<span>2023</span>) build on this operationalization, but use different SGI concepts as indicators for mode of problem-solving and inclusiveness. This allows them to comparatively assess administrative, managerial, accommodative, and adversarial policy styles. While these present to distinct ways of empirically capturing policy styles, they are at the same time representative of the growing interest in policy styles (Casula & Malandrino, <span>2023</span>; Howlett & Tosun, <span>2021</span>; Newman et al., <span>2022</span>; Schillemans et al., <span>2022</span>).</p><p>At a less theoretical and more empirical level, the EPA contributions in this issue focus on topics of current importance in energy, housing, and economic policy. These sectors even entail relevant intersections, as
考虑到被列入社会科学引文索引(SSCI)的期刊,这使EPA成为政治学排名前15的期刊之一,公共管理排名前10的期刊之一。言语无法形容我们对这个结果有多高兴。感谢伟大的作者和评论家,是他们使这一切成为可能。我们知道,在很长一段时间内保持该杂志在前四分之一指数中的年轻地位将更加具有挑战性。在我们看来,我们杂志的最新出版物可能有助于延续EPA的成功故事。面对天气的破坏,他们组合可持续性和数字化的新问题,同时也因为讨论显然前关于民主和治理,去年这些问题包括在一个特刊可持续治理指标()及其解释。公共政策研究领域的权力。当时,Tosun和Howlett(2022)富有远见的论文通过SGI提供了政策风格的实证操作化。这篇文章的持久影响已经显而易见。在本期EPA中,Zahariadis等人(2023)基于这种操作化,但使用不同的SGI概念作为解决问题和包容方式的指标。这使他们能够比较评估行政、管理、调和和矛盾的政策风格。虽然它们呈现了从经验上捕捉政策风格的不同方式,但它们也代表了对政策风格日益增长的兴趣(Casula和Malandrino 2023;Howlett & Tosun, 2021年;Newman等人,2022年;Schillemans等人,2022)。在较少的理论和更多的经验层面上,EPA在这个问题上的贡献集中在当前的能源、住房和经济政策问题上。这些部门甚至涉及相关的交叉,如下文所示(von Malmborg et al., 2023)。以节能建筑为例,涵盖能源、住房和经济政策(甚至可持续性),作者描述了1970年至2022年间欧盟在这一主题上的框架是如何变化的。周围日益强调利益在政治领域改变了框架能解释外部事件都已发表声明:事实上,显示政策和框架可以帮助提高面对欧盟各国政府的能力。除了欧盟和其他超国家和国家组织,还有其他类型的参与者可能与能源和环境政策高度相关。其中之一是所谓的变革推动者,他们可以被概念化为不同类型的个人政治行动者。除了政策企业家的概念,这在公共政策研究中经常被提及(Arnold, 2022;Harvey-Scholes等人,2022年;Petridou等人,2021年;唐&我,2023;Taylor et al., 2023), Liefferink和Wurzel(2017)引入了领导者和先行者的概念。在本期EPA中,Watanabe(2023)对德国能源转型背景下的风能政策制定进行了深入分析。具体而言,本文分析一个国家特殊的作用(石勒苏益格-荷尔斯泰因)的联邦政策进程,而这已是一个球员禁令与盟军先锋和经验有助于解释概念区分不同类型的变革的推动者。在本例中。这些变革推动者成功地获得了影响力,并抵制了利益集团的抵制。与此相反,德国的住房政策问题仍然是不同利益集团之间冲突的问题,其中工业是主要参与者。尽管在为残疾人和老年人提供住房方面存在严重挑战,但正如Slavici(2023)所显示的那样,由于残疾人游说者的政治影响力薄弱,这些问题仍然存在。本期的最后两篇文章是关于不列颠群岛的经济政策。在英国退欧的过程中,北爱尔兰和爱尔兰之间的冲突再次变得更加明显。这两个地区之间的和平进程就更加重要了。欧盟和平方案是旨在帮助减少冲突的核心政策方案之一,但执行是每项政策影响的核心因素。正是在这个项目中,Knox等人。
{"title":"Energy efficiency, housing, and economic policy","authors":"Nils C. Bandelow, Johanna Hornung, Fritz Sager, Ilana Schröder","doi":"10.1002/epa2.1185","DOIUrl":"10.1002/epa2.1185","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Summer is always an exciting period of the year for journal editors because citation indices publish the latest journal-specific performance indicators. For our <i>European Policy Analysis (EPA)</i> journal, this year has brought amazing news. Not only has our SCOPUS CiteScore risen from 5.3 to 7.8, which is an increase by almost 50%.<sup>1</sup> It is also the first year that Clarivate Analytics, which publishes the Journal Citation Reports within the Web of Science, has issued an Impact Factor (IF) for EPA. The inclusion in the Web of Science and the IF are indicative of the high-quality articles that we publish, as well as the quick, responsible, and reliable processes of peer review. We sincerely thank our authors, reviewers, and all people who have contributed to EPA's success. Proudly, we present EPA's first IF of 5.0, which ranks it second in the Political Science category of the Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI) and fourth in the Public Administration category of the ESCI. Considering the journals listed in the Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), this makes EPA one of the top 15 journals in Political Science, and one of the top 10 journals in Public Administration. Words cannot describe how happy we are about this result. Our thanks to the great authors and reviewers who made this possible. We are aware that keeping this still young journal in the upper quartiles of the indexes for an extended period of time will be even more challenging.</p><p>In our view, the most recent publications of our journal can contribute to a continuation of EPA's success story. At the ravages of time, which are shaped by new questions regarding sustainability and digitalization but also seemingly old debates on democracy and governance, the past year has bundled a few of these questions in a special issue on Sustainable Governance Indicators (SGIs) and their explanatory power in the realm of public policy research. Back then, the visionary article by Tosun and Howlett (<span>2022</span>) has provided an empirical operationalization of policy styles by means of the SGIs. The long-lasting impact of this article is already visible. In this EPA issue Zahariadis et al. (<span>2023</span>) build on this operationalization, but use different SGI concepts as indicators for mode of problem-solving and inclusiveness. This allows them to comparatively assess administrative, managerial, accommodative, and adversarial policy styles. While these present to distinct ways of empirically capturing policy styles, they are at the same time representative of the growing interest in policy styles (Casula & Malandrino, <span>2023</span>; Howlett & Tosun, <span>2021</span>; Newman et al., <span>2022</span>; Schillemans et al., <span>2022</span>).</p><p>At a less theoretical and more empirical level, the EPA contributions in this issue focus on topics of current importance in energy, housing, and economic policy. These sectors even entail relevant intersections, as","PeriodicalId":52190,"journal":{"name":"European Policy Analysis","volume":"9 3","pages":"196-199"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0,"publicationDate":"2023-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/epa2.1185","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48999181","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Fredrik von Malmborg, Martin Björklund, Johan Nordensvärd
This paper analyzes through qualitative and quantitative analysis of European Union (EU) policy documents the framing of EU policy on energy-efficient buildings from the 1970s to 2022. We find that it has been framed in different ways over the decades and the framing has expanded to include more and more benefits. Through this expansion, energy efficiency has been linked to other policy areas, such as security, environmental, economic, and social policy. The shifts in framing can be seen as responses to external events. The expansion can also be explained using two metaphors to analyze how the framing differs depending on political positioning. One where policy is seen as a Swiss knife, able to solve multiple political problems, and one where policy is seen as a Trojan horse, where new policy domains are snuck in by policymakers disguising it as energy efficiency policy to increase EU competency in relation to national governments.
{"title":"Framing the benefits of European Union policy expansion on energy efficiency of buildings: A Swiss knife or a Trojan horse","authors":"Fredrik von Malmborg, Martin Björklund, Johan Nordensvärd","doi":"10.1002/epa2.1184","DOIUrl":"10.1002/epa2.1184","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This paper analyzes through qualitative and quantitative analysis of European Union (EU) policy documents the framing of EU policy on energy-efficient buildings from the 1970s to 2022. We find that it has been framed in different ways over the decades and the framing has expanded to include more and more benefits. Through this expansion, energy efficiency has been linked to other policy areas, such as security, environmental, economic, and social policy. The shifts in framing can be seen as responses to external events. The expansion can also be explained using two metaphors to analyze how the framing differs depending on political positioning. One where policy is seen as a Swiss knife, able to solve multiple political problems, and one where policy is seen as a Trojan horse, where new policy domains are snuck in by policymakers disguising it as energy efficiency policy to increase EU competency in relation to national governments.</p>","PeriodicalId":52190,"journal":{"name":"European Policy Analysis","volume":"9 3","pages":"219-243"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0,"publicationDate":"2023-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/epa2.1184","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45464205","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Energiewende (energy transition) has become a worldwide critical challenge. Unlike extensive literature that explains Germany's energy transition focusing on federal actors, this study analyzes the role of Schleswig-Holstein in federal wind energy policy-making. Schleswig-Holstein was an economically poor state governed by the Christian Democratic Union from 1950 to 1988 and supported nuclear energy in the late 1970s and early 1980s. By integrating the notions of “leaders,” “pioneers,” and “entrepreneurs,” and exploring the relationship between these change agents and “followers,” this study elucidates a nuanced classification of actors. An examination of proceedings of the federal assembly, the second chamber, and the Schleswig-Holstein state parliament revealed that Schleswig-Holstein changed its role from a potential veto-coalition player in the 1970s to a constructive pusher of repowering older windmills in the 2009 Renewable Energy Act revision. This study also highlights that leaders, pioneers, and entrepreneurs do not necessarily overlap and do capture different change agents.
{"title":"Change agents in Germany's energy transition: Role of the state of Schleswig-Holstein in wind electricity development from the 1970s to 2009","authors":"Rie Watanabe","doi":"10.1002/epa2.1179","DOIUrl":"10.1002/epa2.1179","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Energiewende (energy transition) has become a worldwide critical challenge. Unlike extensive literature that explains Germany's energy transition focusing on federal actors, this study analyzes the role of Schleswig-Holstein in federal wind energy policy-making. Schleswig-Holstein was an economically poor state governed by the Christian Democratic Union from 1950 to 1988 and supported nuclear energy in the late 1970s and early 1980s. By integrating the notions of “leaders,” “pioneers,” and “entrepreneurs,” and exploring the relationship between these change agents and “followers,” this study elucidates a nuanced classification of actors. An examination of proceedings of the federal assembly, the second chamber, and the Schleswig-Holstein state parliament revealed that Schleswig-Holstein changed its role from a potential veto-coalition player in the 1970s to a constructive pusher of repowering older windmills in the 2009 Renewable Energy Act revision. This study also highlights that leaders, pioneers, and entrepreneurs do not necessarily overlap and do capture different change agents.</p>","PeriodicalId":52190,"journal":{"name":"European Policy Analysis","volume":"9 3","pages":"244-270"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42909548","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}