Policy by Doing: Formulation and Adoption of Policy through Government Leadership

Abstract

Do government choices, rather than legislative policies (i.e., mandatory regulations or incentives), influence the choices private actors make? In this article we develop a concept of "policy by doing," which examines the power of government actions as hortatory tools to encourage other community members to act. "Policy by doing" can be an attempt to shape outcomes by providing symbolic leadership, reducing uncertainty, creating market, and telegraphing actions. Empirical analysis of privately held green buildings in 591 U.S. cities from 2004 to 2010 suggests that when governments increase their own commitment to green building for their facilities; private actors will be more likely to build green. We find that the actions of local governments, rather than those of state or federal, exert the strongest substantive influence on private decision making. Our findings contribute to understanding how governments can augment existing policy regimes by modeling the behavior they hope to inspire in other actors.

Determinants and Evaluation of Local Energy‐Efficiency Initiatives from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act

“…Following other local environmental policy research (Koski & Lee, ; Krause, , ; Sharp et al, ; Lyon & Yin, ), a greater presence of manufacturing firms is likely to have the effect of depressing environmental policy actions as a result of their tendency to avoid extra costs for energy efficiency or energy saving. For example, low‐carbon technologies or advanced technologies for clean energy or energy efficiency, which tend to be more expensive than standard technologies, may not be popular, especially for older, established manufacturing groups, even though these technologies may contribute to a reduction of CO 2 emissions.…”

“…Second, as a rule, the invention, commercialization, and adoption of energy‐efficiency practices and energy‐saving technology require a significant investment (Koski & Lee, ; Lyon & Yin, ; Sharp et al, ). Previous studies have thus examined whether per capita income is associated with variation in levels of energy efficiency initiative.…”

Holding Back the Storm: Target Populations and State Climate Adaptation Planning in America

“…Like other kinds of climate action plans, adaptation plans grant little coercive authority for governments to motivate targets other than, perhaps, themselves—indeed, this is the case in other areas of local climate policy (Barbour & Deakin, ; Bassett & Shandas, ; Koski & Lee, ). As we state earlier, Schneider and Ingram () refer to tools that order, require, or allow action as “authority tools.” Broadly, governments that issue plans are likely to create more particular goals for themselves than for other targets over which they have less direct authority.…”

“…As we state earlier, Schneider and Ingram () refer to tools that order, require, or allow action as “authority tools.” Broadly, governments that issue plans are likely to create more particular goals for themselves than for other targets over which they have less direct authority. Governments may be willing to be the first movers in a policy area to show other actors that a course of action is possible (Koski & Lee, ). Additionally, Shroff et al () find that governments choose instruments based on the implementation apparatus they have at their disposal.…”

Reassessing “City Limits” in Urban Public Policy

“…And as prior research suggests, these findings are not uniform. Still, Koski and Lee () find evidence that when local governments increase their commitments to “green buildings,” private actors are more likely to follow suit. This so‐called “policy by doing” influence is stronger for local government actors than state or federal actions, and suggests even climate‐protection actions deemed “symbolic” can have positive externalities within a community.…”