Advocacy coalitions and paths to policy change for promoting energy efficiency in European industry.

This paper applied the advocacy coalition framework to explore and explain the political processes creating policies to enhance energy efficiency of European Union (EU) industry. The paper used legislation on energy audits and energy management systems as a proxy for EU policy on energy efficiency in industry. Based on qualitative text analysis of EU policy documents, including a proposal to recast the energy efficiency directive, amendments to the proposal suggested by Member States, the Council and the European Parliament, and reports from negotiations, the paper identified four advocacy coalitions with different core beliefs, spanning from those that want few companies to implement energy audits or energy management systems, and that recommendations from audits should not be mandatory to implement, to those that advocate that many companies implement energy audits and management systems and that it should be mandatory to implement measures recommended in audits. It was further found that policy change followed an external shock, deliberative negotiations, and policy-oriented learning. The identification of core beliefs and advocacy coalitions will help policymakers and other stakeholders become more aware of their own and others' values on energy efficiency and how these could be changed. As important was the differentiation of deep core beliefs, policy core beliefs and secondary beliefs. Which beliefs can be easily changed, which cannot

Advocacy coalitions and policy change for decarbonisation of international maritime transport: The case of FuelEU maritime

The legislators of the European Union (EU) have agreed on the FuelEU Maritime regulation, so far, the world's most ambitious pathway to maritime decarbonisation. FuelEU Maritime establishes a common EU regulatory framework to stimulate an increased share of renewable and low-carbon fuels in the fuel mix of international maritime transport. This article analyses, through the lens of the Advocacy Coalition Framework, the policy process leading to the political agreement on the FuelEU Maritime regulation. Core beliefs of two different advocacy coalitions including the European Commission, the Council of Ministers, EU Member States, the European Parliament and different IGs are identified like Transport & Environment and the European Community Shipping Association, as are the paths to policy change. The agreement on the FuelEU Maritime regulation follows the Paris Agreement and the following international discussions on how to curb the climate impact from shipping, the presentation of the ‘European Green Deal’ with a European Climate Law and the presentation of a broad package of EU climate, energy and transport legislation. In addition, it is a result of problem-solving bargaining between the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament

Combining the advocacy coalition framework and argumentative discourse analysis: The case of the "energy efficiency first" principle in EU energy and climate policy

This article combines, in a complementary way, the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) with argumentative discourse analysis to analyze the politics of the "energy efficiency first" (EE1) principle as a new legal institute in European Union energy and climate policy. Two different discourses and storylines were identified. The first is where the meaning of energy efficiency policy is to fulfill multiple benefits. It is associated with a strong regulation of EE1. The second is where the purpose of energy efficiency policy is primarily to contribute to mitigating climate change. It is associated with weak regulation of EE1. Four advocacy coalitions with different secondary beliefs regarding the EE1 principle were identified. Analyzing the inter-discursive communication between different coalitions provides insights to the policy-oriented learning taking place. It is concluded that studies using the ACF could merit from focusing more on narratives and communication between belief systems. Related ArticlesKanol, Direnc. 2022. "Narrative Strategies for Emerging Disruptive Technologies: A Case Study of Blockchain for Europe." Politics & Policy 50(5): 952-66. .Nowlin, Matthew C., Maren Trochmann, and Thomas M. Rabovsky. 2022. "Advocacy Coalitions and Political Control." Politics & Policy 50(2): 201-24. .ODonovan, Kristin T. 2018. "Does the Narrative Policy Framework Apply to Local Policy Issues?" Politics & Policy 46(4): 532-70.

Theorising member state lobbying on European Union policy on energy efficiency

This paper explores and explains Member State (MS) lobbying on European Union (EU) policy on energy efficiency, with particular focus on legislation on individual metering and billing of heating, cooling and domestic hot water (IMB) in multi-apartment buildings. This legislation has been heavily debated and was amended in 2018 following successful lobbying by the opponents of IMB. The lobbying strategy of Sweden, a small MS of the EU, and its allies in the lobbying coalition opposing IMB is examined, as are different factors explaining the success of their lobbying. A pro-active approach was taken and a broad normative coalition for lobbying was formed, including MSs and interest groups representing building owners and tenants at national and EU level. Lobbying was successful and the IMB provisions were amended. The success of the lobbying was influenced by several factors, i.a. favourable resources, high salience and high complexity of the issue

Theorising small state lobbying in the EU : The case of EU policy on energy efficiency

This paper sets out to explore and explain lobbying on EU policy on energy efficiency, with particular focus on legislation on individual metering and billing of heating, cooling and domestic hot water (IMB) in multi-family and multi-purpose buildings. EU legislation on IMB have been heavily debated for a decade. The lobbying strategy of Sweden, a small Member State, and its allies in the the lobbying coalition opposing IMB was examined, as were different factors explaining the success of lobbying. As for the lobbying strategy, a pro-active approach was taken and a broad normative coalition for lobbying was formed, including MSs and interest groups representing building owners and tenants at national and EU level. Lobbying was addressed towards all key institutional actors of EU policy making. Different channels was used in the lobbying, i.e. non-papers, meetings and the organisation of a ground-breaking seminar in the EP. Lobbying was successful and the IMB provisions were amended in accordance with the position of the lobbying coalition opposing IMB. The success of the lobbying was influenced by several factors, such as (i) a concentrated actor, (ii) a relatively large coalition, favourable (iii) resources and (iv) transaction costs of lobbying, (v) high salience of the issue, (vi) high complexity of the issue, (vii) clear reasoning of the lobbying coalition opposing IMB, and (viii) low degree of conflict

Tales of creation: advocacy coalitions, beliefs and paths to policy change on the energy efficiency first principle in EU

The co-legislators of the EU adopted in July 2023 a revised version of the Energy Efficiency Directive, implying that the energy efficiency first (EE1) principle is made legally binding for member states, to apply in policy, planning and investment decisions exceeding euro 100 million each and euro 175 million for transport infrastructure projects. The EE1 principle complements two other guiding principles of EU energy and climate policy: cost-effectiveness and consumer protection. This article analyses the policy process and politics leading to the adoption of the EE1 principle as a legal institute in EU energy and climate policy. Policy core and secondary beliefs of four different advocacy coalitions are identified, and explained what are the paths to policy change. Lines of dispute among the coalitions related to (i) the purpose and meaning of energy efficiency policy, (ii) the size of projects covered (all projects or only very large projects) and (iii) which sectors to be covered (the public sector or both the public and private sectors). The adoption of the EE1 principle as a binding provision follows an external shock to the political subsystem of energy efficiency, namely the Paris Agreement and the subsequent adoption of an EU climate law strengthening the EU climate targets for 2030 and 2050. In addition, it is a negotiated agreement between the Council and the Parliament, undertaken as a deliberative problem-solving exercise rather than bargaining. The deliberative nature of the negotiations opened for policy-oriented learning across belief systems in the subsystem.Funding Agencies|The author is grateful to valuable comments of three anonymous reviewers, which helped improve the paper. The author is also grateful to comments from participants of the international ACF seminar series at University of Colorado, Denver. This work was fin [P2021-00238]; Swedish Energy Agency</p

Exploring advocacy coalitions for change of EU policy on energy efficiency

This empirical study analyses policy change in the area of EU energy efficiency policy by applying the advocacy coalition framework (ACF). The energy efficiency directive (EED) and its provisions on individual metering and billing (IMB) is used as a case study. IMB provisions have rendered substantial debate for almost a decade and the provisions were amended following successful advocacy work of the coalition opposing IMB. The study confirms recent developments of the ACF theory that internal shocks are important for policy change. Policy change have also been influenced by other factors, such as internal events in the political subsystem, policy-oriented learning and negotiated agreements. As for policy-oriented learning, it was manifested in different ways, e.g. the acceptance of the core beliefs and proposals for amending the IMB provisions put forward by the coalition opposing IMB by a majority of MSs in the Council, the EP and the proponents of IMB. The paper also provides critical perspectives on the ACF, that policy change can happen without changes of external dynamic factors and in shorter time perspectives than the ACF theory proposes. Besides contributing to development of scientific theory, the knowledge provided in the paper can inform various stakeholders to better shape their future strategies in advocacy work in EU policy making and national policy implementation

First and last and always: Politics of the energy efficiency first principle in EU energy and climate policy

The EU legislators have agreed that the energy efficiency first (EE1) principle is made legally binding for Member States, to apply in policy, planning and major investment decisions. Through the EE1 principle, energy efficiency is to be made a priority in European Union (EU) energy and climate policy, providing what has been a missing link in fully implementing two other guiding principles of EU energy and climate policy: costeffectiveness and consumer protection. In this article, I conduct an argumentative discourse analysis to better understand the politics of the EE1 principle in EU energy and climate policy. Two different discourses with a set of storylines were identified in the negotiations on the EE1 principle. The first focuses on multiple benefits of energy efficiency and a stronger role for the EE1 principle. The other focuses on climate change mitigation and a weaker role for the EE1 principle. The Council Presidency and the European Commission used discursive techniques such as frame polarisation, frame disconnection and frame incorporation to overcome these dualities. The description of storylines, discourse coalitions and discursive interaction strategies can help policymakers and other stakeholders become more aware of their own and others argumentation on energy efficiency and how these could be changed, thus help policymakers and stakeholders better shape their strategies in future advocacy and policymaking.Funding Agencies|Swedish Energy Agency [P2021-00238]</p