Ideas, coalitions and compromise: reinterpreting EU-ETS lobbying through discursive institutionalism

Abstract

Collective political action among divergent interest groups is not always easy. It requires coordination, compromise and, often, the persuasive action of a policy entrepreneur. Coalition strategies are often shaped by participants' skill in mobilising ideas. Business-environmental coalitionsoften considered 'strange bedfellows'have proved to be important in emissions trading policy-making. In 2013, chronically low emissions prices meant that the EU's climate policy flagship, the EU-ETS, was holed beneath the waterline. But, within two years and against the odds, ambitious reforms were agreed to steady the ship. Crucial to the rescue were the actions of a pro-ETS business lobby, orchestrated by environmentalists. We draw on thirty-two in-depth interviews to construct a discursive institutionalist account of collective interest representation in relation to the reforms. We highlight the ability of policy entrepreneurs to fashion a 'change-but-no-change' pro-reform narrative attractive to businesses, despite the fact that such discursive strategies risked marginalising alternative and more disruptive ideas.

Accelerating low carbon transitions via budgetary processes? EU climate governance in times of crisis

“…The acute crises were highly relevant for the climate mainstreaming approach to emerge in the 2014-2020 MFF, which was a direct response to these acute crises and designed to maintain momentum on climate action despite the crowding out of political support for more ambitious climate action. By 2018/ 19, the acute crises had subsided and the EU was presented with the opportunity to increase climate ambition through the revised 2030 targets (50-55 per cent/ >55 per cent up from 40 per cent), the Emission Trading Scheme reform (Fitch-Roy et al, 2020) and the overall international pressure to implement the Paris Agreement. Longer-term crises trends resulted in the 2019/20 deadlocked trilogues, especially capacity constraints as well as societal and regional divisions between the Visegrád Countries and the Western European member states (Burns et al, 2019;Rios & Plevak, 2019;Verovšek, 2021).…”

“…The approaches discussed above could be loosely summarized under the concept of policy stabilization with the elements of path-dependency, policy feedback and transition pathways (Rosenbloom et al, 2019), while recognizing their distinct features and areas for empirical application. Their focus on factors based in or related to historical institutionalism offers scope for broadening the analysis towards constructivist elements of institutionalism, in particular the role of policy entrepreneurs as agents of change (Fitch-Roy et al, 2020) and agents of learning (Rietig & Perkins, 2018). Addressing this gap in the literature advances our understanding of the relevance of causal factors such as policy entrepreneurs and learning that can facilitate policy stabilization especially during times of external crises when political attention is focused elsewhere.…”

“…This would challenge the EU's ability to deliver on the long-term international commitments under the Paris Agreement, which requires increasing ambitions towards carbon neutrality by 2050 and thus going beyond the 2050 Roadmap target (EC, 2011) of reducing GHG emissions by 85-90 per cent compared to 1990 levels. The EU's climate policy of the 2000s and 2010s was in particular based on the European Emission Trading Scheme (Fitch-Roy et al, 2020) and the 2009 Climate Package with its 20-20-20 by 2020 objective. The 2009 Climate Package aimed at reducing overall greenhouse gas emissions by 20 per cent from 1990 levels by 2020, improving energy efficiency by 20 per cent and increasing the share of renewable energies to 20 per cent.…”

“…(1) Policy entrepreneurs as dedicated individuals going above and beyond their job description to influence the policymaking process (Fitch-Roy et al, 2020;Mintrom, 2013) and (2) Learning through reflection on previous experiences, new knowledge and adapting beliefs by individual policymakers and/ or organizations involved in policymaking (Rietig & Perkins, 2018). Policy stabilization is crucial for addressing climate change as long-term policy objective that is being threatened by competing short-term political interests, lack of leadership and in some cases active obstruction.…”

Energy Policy and European Union Politics

“…Another example is energy efficiency, where the persistent attempts of the Commission to frame and reframe the issue in terms of competitiveness, sustainability and security, have been considered a key factor to explain why despite the high concern with subsidiarity and costs, this area finally made it into a main pillar of the Energy Union (Dupont, 2018). Similarly, the adoption of ambitious reforms in the EU ETS system leading to the introduction of a Market Stability Reserve in 2015 have been attributed to successful framing strategies by Non-State Actors (Fitch-Roy, Fairbrass, & Benson, 2019). Interestingly, contrary to the internal market account, where success of gradual liberalization is attributed to a depoliticization strategy by delegating powers to regulators and private actors, vertical integration in other areas such as energy security and sustainability has been facilitated by some actors' efforts to politicize energy matters.…”