Actor relations in climate policymaking: Governing decarbonisation in a corporatist green state

Abstract

This article focuses on the role of actor relations in advancing climate policymaking and argues that attempts to understand decisions to decarbonise in a green state should explore the institutional conditions for policymaking. The article explores the climate policy model in Sweden in terms of the societal actors included in the policy process, the nature of this inclusion, and its relevance for the prospects of decarbonisation. It uses three perspectives in the analysis: corporatism, sustainable transition studies, and ecological democracy. The findings largely support existing research that states characterised by corporatist policymaking are suited for environmental governance and for climate policymaking. However, as a model of governance of actor relations, the Swedish climate policymaking model has both its merits and demerits. Although it has potential to reach decarbonisation objectives, it does this in the context of including mainly established economic interests, that is, incumbents. This stands in contrast with what is argued in sustainable transition studies that incumbents obstruct change, in the Swedish case they are viewed as potential change agents. Finally, although the character of the actor relations is deliberative, it is a top-down exclusive kind of deliberation that remains far from ideals of ecological democracy.

Trust in the Process: Renewable Energy Governance in Malaysia and Indonesia

“…MLG's conceptual vocabulary, however, of flattening hierarchies, power sharing, and complementary competencies arguably obscures the nuances of power relations. Though more recent scholarship increasingly asks which levels or actors are most influential in tipping the scales of policy making, it mostly probes these power asymmetries in European and Western liberal democratic polities (Alcantara and Morden 2019; Kronsell, Khan, and Hildingsson 2019; Ongaro et al . 2010)—raising questions on how power differentials within MLG arrangements present themselves in nondemocratic, non‐Western and/or Global South countries (but see Di Gregorio et al .…”

Studying Industrial Decarbonisation: Developing an Interdisciplinary Understanding of the Conditions for Transformation in Energy-Intensive Natural Resource-Based Industry

“…Relating to theories developed by Levin et al [17], Hildingsson and Khan [70] found support for a gradually more progressive approach to policy change in the case of the Swedish energy transition. Taking a wider governance perspective, and with Sweden as an example, Hildingsson, Kronsell and Khan [71] analysed the role of the state in governing the decarbonisation of ENRIs, while Kronsell, Khan and Hildingsson [72] studied actor relations in climate policy making. They find that the tension between the state's economic imperative and ecological concerns in greening industry are shown to persist.…”

Transformability as a Wicked Problem: A Cautionary Tale?

“…One major example is the urgent need for global transformation to keep the earth system under the 1.5 • C scenario. The decarbonization of energy systems is promoted as a solution but is still widely resisted by different actors [108,109]. Nevertheless, the international agreement on the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the "Kyoto Protocol", adopted in 1997 and entering into force in 2005, has not yet produced the desired cut-off effects as some nations claim their right to emit CO 2 without restriction, thus creating tensions with those who try to abide by the protocol.…”