To tackle the manifold crises of our times, most notably the environmental crises we face, ambitious policy change is urgently needed to achieve the necessary radical transformation of our industrialised societies. Yet, while there is increasing demand for public policy scholarship to provide guidance on how policy should be designed to achieve such change, existing scholarship struggles to provide ‘forward-looking’ recommendations. Within this context, our article takes a step back to reconsider the underlying logics of policy change. We argue that focusing on policy, its effect and the subsequent politics it triggers is best achieved by combining insights from the policy design, policy mix and policy feedback literatures. This combination allows us to re-evaluate which potential pathways towards policy change exist.
The main contribution of our article is its proposition of two distinct pathways towards policy change, building on a systematic understanding of policy design elements. These pathways place greater emphasis on policy change happening (1) ‘bottom-up’ through initial low-level design changes rather than ‘top-down’ through high-level ideational change, as argued in earlier scholarship, (2) through the interplay of several policies in a complex mix. In this way, these pathways provide a useful framework for systematically analysing how policy should be designed to achieve ambitious policy change and thus enable transformative societal change.
Baumgartner, F.R. and Jones, B.D. (1993) Agendas and Instability in American Politics, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Béland, D. (2007) Ideas and institutional change in social security: conversion, layering, and policy drift, Social Science Quarterly, 88(1): 20–38.
Béland, D. and Cox, R.H. (2011) Ideas and politics in social science research, ideas and politics in social science research, doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199736430.001.0001.
Béland, D. and Schlager, E. (2019) Varieties of policy feedback research: looking backward, moving forward, Policy Studies Journal, 47(2): 184–205, doi: 10.1111/psj.12340.
Béland, D., Howlett, M., Rocco, P. and Waddan, A. (2020) Designing policy resilience: lessons from the affordable care act, Policy Sciences, doi: 10.1007/s11077-019-09368-w.
Burns, C., Tobin, P. and Sewerin, S. (2019) Measuring the impact of the crisis on European environmental policy, in C. Burns, P. Tobin and S. Sewerin (eds) The Impact of the Economic Crisis on European Environmental Policy, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp 1–18, doi: 10.1093/oso/9780198826958.003.0001.
Cairney, P. and Weible, C.M. (2015) Comparing and contrasting Peter Hall’s paradigms and ideas with the advocacy coalition framework, in J. Hogan and M. Howlett (eds) Policy Paradigms in Theory and Practice, doi: 10.1057/9781137434043_5.
California Energy Commission (2022) New ZEV sales in California, https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-insights/zero-emission-vehicle-and-infrastructure-statistics/new-zev-sales/.
Capano, G. and Howlett, M. (2020) The knowns and unknowns of policy instrument analysis: policy tools and the current research Agenda on policy mixes, SAGE Open, doi: 10.1177/2158244019900568.
Capano, G. and Howlett, M. (2021) Causal logics and mechanisms in policy design: how and why adopting a mechanistic perspective can improve policy design, Public Policy and Administration, 36(2): 141–62, doi: 10.1177/0952076719827068.
Cashore, B. and Howlett, M. (2007) Punctuating which equilibrium? Understanding thermostatic policy dynamics in pacific northwest forestry, American Journal of Political Science, 51(3): 532–51, doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5907.2007.00266.x.
Daugbjerg, C. and Kay, A. (2019) Policy feedback and pathways: when change leads to endurance and continuity to change, Policy Sciences, 53: 253–68, doi: 10.1007/s11077-019-09366-y.
Daugbjerg, C. and Swinbank, A. (2015) Three decades of policy layering and politically sustainable reform in the European union’s agricultural policy, Governance, 29(2): 265–80. doi: 10.1111/gove.12171
Derwort, P., Jager, N. and Newig, J. (2021) How to explain major policy change towards sustainability? Bringing together the multiple streams framework and the multilevel perspective on socio-technical transitions to explore the German ‘Energiewende’, Policy Studies Journal, doi: 10.1111/psj.12428.
Fernández-i-Marín, X., Hurka, S., Knill, C., and Steinebach, Y. (2019) Systemic dynamics of policy change: overcoming some blind spots of punctuated equilibrium theory, Policy Studies Journal, doi: 10.1111/psj.12379.
Fernández-i-Marín, X., Knill, C. and Steinebach, Y. (2021) Studying policy design quality in comparative perspective, American Political Science Review, doi: 10.1017/S0003055421000186.
Grin, J., Rotmans, J. and Schot, J. (2010) Transitions to Sustainable Development: New Directions in the Study of Long Term Transformative Change, Transitions to Sustainable Development: New Directions in the Study of Long Term Transformative Change, New York: Routledge, doi: 10.4324/9780203856598.
Haelg, L., Sewerin, S. and Schmidt, T.S. (2020) The role of actors in the policy design process: introducing design coalitions to explain policy output, Policy Sciences, 53: 309–47, doi: 10.1007/s11077-019-09365-z.
Hall, P.A. (1993) Policy paradigms, social learning, and the state: the case of economic policymaking in Britain, Comparative Politics, 25(3): 275, doi: 10.2307/422246.
Howlett, M. and Cashore, B. (2009) The dependent variable problem in the study of policy change: understanding policy change as a methodological problem, Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis, 11(1): 33–46, doi: 10.1080/13876980802648144.
Howlett, M. and del Rio, P. (2015) The parameters of policy portfolios: verticality and horizontality in design spaces and their consequences for policy mix formulation, Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 33(5): 1233–45, doi: 10.1177/0263774X15610059.
Howlett, M. and Rayner, J. (2013) Patching vs packaging in policy formulation: assessing policy portfolio design, Politics and Governance, 1(2): 170–82, doi: 10.12924/pag2013.01020170.
Howlett, M., Mukherjee, I. and Rayner, J. (2018) Understanding policy designs over time: layering, stretching, patching and packaging, in M. Howlett and I. Mukherjee (eds) Routledge Handbook of Policy Design, Abingdon: Routledge, pp 136–44.
IEA (International Energy Agency) (2021) Global EV Outlook 2021 – Accelerating Ambitions Despite the Pandemic, Paris: IEA, https://www.iea.org/reports/global-ev-outlook-2021.
IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) (2022) Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Working Group III Contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Geneva: World Meteorological Organization/UN Environment.
Jacobs, A.M. and Weaver, R.K. (2015) When policies undo themselves: self-undermining feedback as a source of policy change, Governance, 28(4): 441–57, doi: 10.1111/gove.12101.
Jordan, A. and Matt, E. (2014) Designing policies that intentionally stick: policy feedback in a changing climate, Policy Sciences, 47(3): 227–47, doi: 10.1007/s11077-014-9201-x.
Jordan, A.J. and Moore, B. (2020) Durable by Design? Policy Feedback in a Changing Climate, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Judge-Lord, D., McDermott, C.L. and Cashore, B. (2020) Do private regulations ratchet up? How to distinguish types of regulatory stringency and patterns of change, Organization and Environment, 33(1), doi: 10.1177/1086026619858874.
Kamkhaji, J.C. and Radaelli, C.M. (2021) Don’t think it’s a good idea! Four building sites of the ‘ideas school’, West European Politics, doi: 10.1080/01402382.2021.1959751.
Kingdon, J.W. (1995) Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies, Boston, MA: Little Brown, doi: 10.3886/ICPSR28024.v1.
Knill, C., Schulze, K. and Tosun, J. (2012) Regulatory policy outputs and impacts: exploring a complex relationship, Regulation and Governance, 6(4): 427–44, doi: 10.1111/j.1748-5991.2012.01150.x.
Lascoumes, P. and Le Gales, P. (2007) Introduction : understanding public policy through its instruments – from the nature of instruments to the sociology of public policy instrumentation, Governance, 20(1): 1–21, doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0491.2007.00342.x.
Lauber, V. and Jacobsson, S. (2016) The politics and economics of constructing, contesting and restricting socio-political space for renewables – the German Renewable Energy Act, Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 18: 147–63, doi: 10.1016/j.eist.2015.06.005.
Leiren, M.D. and Reimer, I. (2018) Historical institutionalist perspective on the shift from feed-in tariffs towards auctioning in German renewable energy policy, Energy Research and Social Science, doi: 10.1016/j.erss.2018.05.022.
Lesnikowski, A., Ford, J. D., Biesbroek, R., and Berrang-Ford, L. (2019) A policy mixes approach to conceptualizing and measuring climate change adaptation policy, Climatic Change, 156: 447–69, doi: 10.1007/s10584-019-02533-3.
Levin, K., Cashore, B., Bernstein, S., and Auld, G. (2012) Overcoming the tragedy of super wicked problems: constraining our future selves to ameliorate global climate change, Policy Sciences, 45: 123–52, doi: 10.1007/s11077-012-9151-0.
Mahoney, J. and Thelen, K. (2009) A theory of gradual institutional change, in J. Mahoney and K. Thelen (eds) Explaining Institutional Change: Ambiguity, Agency, and Power, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp 1–37, doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511806414.003.
Markard, J., Raven, R. and Truffer, B. (2012) Sustainability transitions: an emerging field of research and its prospects, Research Policy, 41(6): 955–67, doi: 10.1016/J.RESPOL.2012.02.013.
Meckling, J. and Nahm, J. (2019) The politics of technology bans: industrial policy competition and green goals for the auto industry, Energy Policy, 126: 470–79, doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2018.11.031.
Nohrstedt, D. (2005) External shocks and policy change: Three Mile Island and Swedish nuclear energy policy, Journal of European Public Policy, 12(6): 1041–59, doi: 10.1080/13501760500270729.
O’Sullivan, M., Edler, D. and Lehr, U. (2019) Ökonomische Indikatoren der Energiebereitstellung: Methode, Abgrenzung und Ergebnisse für den Zeitraum 2000–2017, Berlin: Deutsches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung.
Oliver, M.J. and Pemberton, H. (2004) Learning and change in 20th-century British economic policy, Governance, 17(3): 415–41, doi: 10.1111/j.0952-1895.2004.00252.x.
Peters, B.G., Capano, G., Howlett, M., Mukherjee, I., Chou, M. H., and Ravinet, P. (2018) Designing for Policy Effectiveness: Defining and Understanding a Concept, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, doi: 10.1017/9781108555081.
Pierson, P. (1993) When effect becomes cause: policy feedback and political change reviewed work(s): the three worlds of welfare capitalism by Gosta Esping-Andersen; the political power of economic ideas: keynesianism across countries by Peter Hall, World Politics, 45(4): 595–628, doi: 10.2307/2950710.
Pierson, P. (2000) Increasing returns, path dependence, and the study of politics, American Political Science Review, 94(2): 251–67, doi: 10.2307/2586011.
Purdon, M., Witcover, J., Murphy, C., Ziaja, S., Winfield, M., Giuliano, G., Séguin, C., Kaiser, C., Papy, J., and Fulton, L. (2021) Climate and transportation policy sequencing in California and Quebec, Review of Policy Research, 38(5): doi: 10.1111/ropr.12440.
Renn, O. and Marshall, J.P. (2016) Coal, nuclear and renewable energy policies in Germany: from the 1950s to the Energiewende, Energy Policy, 99: 224–32, doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2016.05.004.
Rosenbloom, D., Meadowcroft, J. and Cashore, B. (2019) Stability and climate policy? Harnessing insights on path dependence, policy feedback, and transition pathways, Energy Research and Social Science, 50(December 2018): 168–78, doi: 10.1016/j.erss.2018.12.009.
Schaffrin, A., Sewerin, S. and Seubert, S. (2015) Toward a comparative measure of climate policy output, Policy Studies Journal, 43(2): 257–82, doi: 10.1111/psj.12095.
Schmid, N., Sewerin, S. and Schmidt, T.S. (2020a) Explaining avocacy coalition change with policy feedback, Policy Studies Journal, 48(4): 1109–34, doi: 10.1111/psj.12365.
Schmid, N., Schmidt, T.S. and Sewerin, S. (2020b) Technological change, agency and the politics of policy redesigning: the case of the German feed-in tariff, 2000 -2018. Paper presented at the 11th International Sustainability Transitions Conference.
Schmidt, T.S. and Sewerin, S. (2017) Technology as a driver of climate and energy politics, Nature Energy, 2(6): 17084, doi: 10.1038/nenergy.2017.84.
Schmidt, T.S. and Sewerin, S. (2019) Measuring the temporal dynamics of policy mixes – an empirical analysis of renewable energy policy mixes’ balance and design features in nine countries, Research Policy, 48(10): 103557, doi: 10.1016/J.RESPOL.2018.03.012.
Schmidt, T.S., Sewerin, S. and Bateson, B. (2018) Does policy design predict a policy mix’s future? A new empirical approach to analysing path-dependency, Paper presented to the IWPP Workshop on ‘Policy feedback and policy dynamics: Methodological and theoretical challenges, Pittsburgh, June 2018.
Schmidt, T.S., Schmid, N. and Sewerin, S. (2019) Policy goals, partisanship and paradigmatic change in energy policy – analyzing parliamentary discourse in Germany over 30 years, Climate Policy, 19(6): 771–86, doi: 10.1080/14693062.2019.1594667.
Schumpeter, J. (1942) Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy, London: Routledge.
Sewerin, S. (2020) Understanding complex policy mixes: conceptual and empirical challenges, in G. Capano and M. Howlett (eds) A Modern Guide to Public Policy, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp 191–201.
Sewerin, S., Béland, D. and Cashore, B. (2020) Designing policy for the long term: agency, policy feedback and policy change, Policy Sciences, doi: 10.1007/s11077-020-09391-2.
Skogstad, G. (2017) Policy feedback and self-reinforcing and self-undermining processes in EU biofuels policy, Journal of European Public Policy, 24(1): 21–41, doi: 10.1080/13501763.2015.1132752.
Steffen, W., Richardson, K., Rockström, J., Cornell, S. E., Fetzer, I., Bennett, E. M., ... and Sörlin, S. (2015) Planetary boundaries: guiding human development on a changing planet, Science, 347(6223), doi: 10.1126/science.1259855.
Steinebach, Y. (2019) Instrument choice, implementation structures, and the effectiveness of environmental policies: a cross-national analysis, Regulation & Governance, 16(1): 225–42, doi: 10.1111/REGO.12297.
Sterner, T., Barbier, E.B., Bateman, I. et al. (2019) Policy design for the Anthropocene, Nature Sustainability, 2(1): 14–21, doi: 10.1038/s41893-018-0194-x.
Streeck, W. and Thelen, K. (2005) Introduction: institutional change in advanced political economies, in W. Streeck and K. Thelen (eds) Beyond Continuity: Institutional Change in Advanced Political Economies, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp 1–39.
Thiery, W. et al. (2021) Intergenerational inequities in exposure to climate extremes, Science, doi: 10.1126/science.abi7339.
Tosun, J. and Schnepf, J. (2020) Measuring change in comparative policy analysis: concepts and empirical approaches, in B. Guy Peters and G. Fontaine (eds) Handbook of Research Methods and Applications in Comparative Policy Analysis, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, pp 167–85, doi: 10.4337/9781788111195.00017.
van der Heijden, J. and Kuhlmann, J. (2017) Studying incremental institutional change: a systematic and critical meta-review of the literature from 2005 to 2015, Policy Studies Journal, 45(3), doi: 10.1111/psj.12191.
Wee, S., Coffman, M. and La Croix, S. (2019) Data on US state-level electric vehicle policies, 2010–2015, Data in Brief, 23, doi: 10.1016/j.dib.2019.01.006.
Weible, C.M., Ingold, K., Nohrstedt, D., Henry, A. D., and Jenkins‐Smith, H. C. (2020) Sharpening advocacy coalitions, Policy Studies Journal, 48(4), doi: 10.1111/psj.12360.
Weible, C., Sabatier, P. and Jenkins-Smith, H. (2011) A quarter century of the advocacy coalition framework: an introduction to the special issue, Policy Studies Journal, 39(3): 349–60, doi: 10.1111/j.1541-0072.2011.00412.x.
Weible, C., Sabatier, P. and McQueen, K. (2009) Themes and variations: taking stock of the advocacy coalition framework, Policy Studies Journal, 37(1): 121–40, doi: 10.1111/j.1541-0072.2008.00299.x.
Zohlnhöfer, R., Herweg, N. and Rüb, F. (2015) Theoretically refining the multiple streams framework: an introduction, European Journal of Political Research, 54(3), doi: 10.1111/1475–6765.12102.
May 2022 onwards | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 733 | 733 | 109 |
Full Text Views | 343 | 343 | 311 |
PDF Downloads | 412 | 412 | 360 |