IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v175y2023ics0301421523000691.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Institutions for effective climate policymaking: Lessons from the case of the United Kingdom

Author

Listed:
  • Gransaull, Gareth
  • Rhodes, Ekaterina
  • Fairbrother, Malcolm

Abstract

The United Kingdom (UK) is home to one of the most ambitious climate policy regimes in the world, centred around the 2008 Climate Change Act (CCA), the first strategic climate legislation of its kind. Building on prior studies of the CCA while highlighting Germany as a counterfactual case study, we demonstrate the significant positive role that strategic framework legislation can play in improving climate policy integration and coherence. We further show that important new institutions can be established under the right historical conditions. Specifically, we argue that the political weakening of the UK coal sector was a necessary precursor to the adoption of strong climate policy and the emergence of a structural consensus towards accelerating climate ambition, as compared with Germany where consolidation of the coal regime has been a major factor in the country's failure to meet its emissions targets. We show how business associations and labour groups in the UK were a key supportive coalition for early climate action, while in Germany industry and organized labour have been key actors obstructing and delaying the passage of pro-climate reforms. Our study raises questions about the prospects for energy transitions that are both just and rapid, particularly by discussing the trade-offs between cost-effectiveness, speed, and distributional concerns.

Suggested Citation

  • Gransaull, Gareth & Rhodes, Ekaterina & Fairbrother, Malcolm, 2023. "Institutions for effective climate policymaking: Lessons from the case of the United Kingdom," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:175:y:2023:i:c:s0301421523000691
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2023.113484
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421523000691
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2023.113484?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brauers, Hanna & Oei, Pao-Yu & Walk, Paula, 2020. "Comparing coal phase-out pathways: The United Kingdom’s and Germany’s diverging transitions," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 37, pages 238-253.
    2. Jenkins, Jesse D., 2014. "Political economy constraints on carbon pricing policies: What are the implications for economic efficiency, environmental efficacy, and climate policy design?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 467-477.
    3. Alina Averchenkova & Sam Fankhauser & Jared J. Finnegan, 2021. "The influence of climate change advisory bodies on political debates: evidence from the UK Committee on Climate Change," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(9), pages 1218-1233, October.
    4. Rentier, Gerrit & Lelieveldt, Herman & Kramer, Gert Jan, 2019. "Varieties of coal-fired power phase-out across Europe," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 620-632.
    5. Stern,Nicholas, 2007. "The Economics of Climate Change," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521700801.
    6. Tvinnereim, Endre & Mehling, Michael, 2018. "Carbon pricing and deep decarbonisation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 185-189.
    7. Geels, Frank W. & Kern, Florian & Fuchs, Gerhard & Hinderer, Nele & Kungl, Gregor & Mylan, Josephine & Neukirch, Mario & Wassermann, Sandra, 2016. "The enactment of socio-technical transition pathways: A reformulated typology and a comparative multi-level analysis of the German and UK low-carbon electricity transitions (1990–2014)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 896-913.
    8. Green, R. & Staffell, I., 2021. "The Contribution of Taxes, Subsidies and Regulations to British Electricity Decarbonisation," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 2125, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    9. David F. Hendry, 2020. "First in, First out: Econometric Modelling of UK Annual CO_2 Emissions, 1860–2017," Economics Papers 2020-W02, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
    10. David M. Newbery & Michael G. Pollitt, 1997. "The Restructuring and Privatisation of Britain's CEGB—Was It Worth It?," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(3), pages 269-303, September.
    11. Renn, Ortwin & Marshall, Jonathan Paul, 2016. "Coal, nuclear and renewable energy policies in Germany: From the 1950s to the “Energiewende”," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 224-232.
    12. Preetum Domah & Michael G. Pollitt, 2001. "The restructuring and privatisation of the electricity distribution and supply businesses in England," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 22(1), pages 107-146, March.
    13. Neil Carter, 2014. "The politics of climate change in the UK," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(3), pages 423-433, May.
    14. Fergus Green & Ajay Gambhir, 2020. "Transitional assistance policies for just, equitable and smooth low-carbon transitions: who, what and how?," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(8), pages 902-921, September.
    15. Alina Averchenkova & Sam Fankhauser & Jared J. Finnegan, 2021. "The impact of strategic climate legislation: evidence from expert interviews on the UK Climate Change Act," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(2), pages 251-263, February.
    16. Guri Bang & Knut Einar Rosendahl & Christoph Böhringer, 2022. "Balancing cost and justice concerns in the energy transition: comparing coal phase-out policies in Germany and the UK," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(8), pages 1000-1015, September.
    17. Sarah Louise Nash & Reinhard Steurer, 2019. "Taking stock of Climate Change Acts in Europe: living policy processes or symbolic gestures?," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(8), pages 1052-1065, September.
    18. Pahle, Michael, 2010. "Germany's dash for coal: Exploring drivers and factors," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(7), pages 3431-3442, July.
    19. Morton, Tom & Müller, Katja, 2016. "Lusatia and the coal conundrum: The lived experience of the German Energiewende," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 277-287.
    20. I. A. Grant Wilson & Iain Staffell, 2018. "Rapid fuel switching from coal to natural gas through effective carbon pricing," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 3(5), pages 365-372, May.
    21. Turnheim, Bruno & Geels, Frank W., 2012. "Regime destabilisation as the flipside of energy transitions: Lessons from the history of the British coal industry (1913–1997)," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 35-49.
    22. Rhodes, Ekaterina & Scott, William A. & Jaccard, Mark, 2021. "Designing flexible regulations to mitigate climate change: A cross-country comparative policy analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    23. Zhongju Liao, 2018. "Corporate culture, environmental innovation and financial performance," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(8), pages 1368-1375, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Shengqing Xu, 2023. "China’s climate governance for carbon neutrality: regulatory gaps and the ways forward," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-10, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rentier, Gerrit & Lelieveldt, Herman & Kramer, Gert Jan, 2019. "Varieties of coal-fired power phase-out across Europe," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 620-632.
    2. Karoliina Isoaho & Jochen Markard, 2020. "The Politics of Technology Decline: Discursive Struggles over Coal Phase‐Out in the UK," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 37(3), pages 342-368, May.
    3. Turnheim, Bruno & Nykvist, Björn, 2019. "Opening up the feasibility of sustainability transitions pathways (STPs): Representations, potentials, and conditions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 775-788.
    4. Finon, Dominique, 2019. "Carbon policy in developing countries: Giving priority to non-price instruments," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 38-43.
    5. Tan, Xiujie & Sun, Qian & Wang, Meiji & Se Cheong, Tsun & Yan Shum, Wai & Huang, Jinpeng, 2022. "Assessing the effects of emissions trading systems on energy consumption and energy mix," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 310(C).
    6. Geels, Frank W. & Ayoub, Martina, 2023. "A socio-technical transition perspective on positive tipping points in climate change mitigation: Analysing seven interacting feedback loops in offshore wind and electric vehicles acceleration," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    7. Govorukha, Kristina & Mayer, Philip & Rübbelke, Dirk & Vögele, Stefan, 2020. "Economic disruptions in long-term energy scenarios – Implications for designing energy policy," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    8. Lola Nacke & Vadim Vinichenko & Aleh Cherp & Avi Jakhmola & Jessica Jewell, 2024. "Compensating affected parties necessary for rapid coal phase-out but expensive if extended to major emitters," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-16, December.
    9. Kriechbaum, Michael & Posch, Alfred & Hauswiesner, Angelika, 2021. "Hype cycles during socio-technical transitions: The dynamics of collective expectations about renewable energy in Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    10. Oei, Pao-Yu & Hermann, Hauke & Herpich, Philipp & Holtemöller, Oliver & Lünenbürger, Benjamin & Schult, Christoph, 2020. "Coal phase-out in Germany – Implications and policies for affected regions," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    11. Steffen, Bjarne & Karplus, Valerie & Schmidt, Tobias S., 2022. "State ownership and technology adoption: The case of electric utilities and renewable energy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(6).
    12. Jesse D. Jenkins & Valerie J. Karplus, 2016. "Carbon pricing under binding political constraints," WIDER Working Paper Series 044, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    13. Michael Pollitt, 2021. "Measuring the Impact of Electricity Market Reform in a Chinese Context," Working Papers EPRG2111, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    14. Erdogdu, Erkan, 2010. "Electricity Market Reform: Lessons for developing countries," MPRA Paper 27317, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Jamil, Muhammad Hamza & Ullah, Kafait & Saleem, Noor & Abbas, Faisal & Khalid, Hassan Abdullah, 2022. "Did the restructuring of the electricity generation sector increase social welfare in Pakistan?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    16. Christian Wolf & Michael G. Pollitt, 2009. "The Welfare Implications of Oil Privatisation: A Cost-Benefit Analysis of Norway's Statoil," Working Papers EPRG 0905, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    17. Jarosław Kaczmarek, 2022. "The Balance of Outlays and Effects of Restructuring Hard Coal Mining Companies in Terms of Energy Policy of Poland PEP 2040," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-30, March.
    18. Rosenbloom, Daniel & Berton, Harris & Meadowcroft, James, 2016. "Framing the sun: A discursive approach to understanding multi-dimensional interactions within socio-technical transitions through the case of solar electricity in Ontario, Canada," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 1275-1290.
    19. Cherp, Aleh & Vinichenko, Vadim & Jewell, Jessica & Suzuki, Masahiro & Antal, Miklós, 2017. "Comparing electricity transitions: A historical analysis of nuclear, wind and solar power in Germany and Japan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 612-628.
    20. Vergés, Joaquim, 2014. "RESULTADOS y consecuencias DE LAS PRIVATIZACIONES de Empresas Públicas: Una perspectiva internacional [THE PRIVATISATION OF STATE OWNED ENTERPRISES. RESULTS AND CONSEQUENCES:An international empiri," MPRA Paper 62655, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 05 Mar 2015.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:175:y:2023:i:c:s0301421523000691. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.