Going Beyond Instrument Interactions: Towards a More Comprehensive Policy Mix Conceptualization for Environmental Technological Change

Abstract

The works available here are the responsibility of the individual author(s) and do not necessarily represent the views of other SPRU researchers. As matters of policy and practice, SPRU does not endorse individual research contributions. Guidelines for authorsPapers shall be submitted in pdf or Word format. They should contain a title, an abstract, and keywords. Papers should be submitted to one of the Editors, who will process them and send them to the appropriate Associate Editor. Two members of SPRU will be asked to provide a short written review within three weeks. The revised versions of the paper, together with a reply to the reviewers, should be sent to the Associate Editor, who will propose to the Editors its publication on the series. When submitting the authors should indicate if the paper has already undergone peer-reviewing, in which case the Associate Editors may decide to skip internal review process. Abstract:Reaching a better understanding of the policies and politics of transitions presents a main agenda item in the emerging field of sustainability transitions. One important requirement for these transitions, such as the move towards a decarbonized energy system, is the redirection and acceleration of technological change, for which policies play a key role. Several studies of policies supporting environmental technological change have argued for the need to combine different policy instruments in so-called policy mixes. However, existing policy mix studies often fall short of reflecting the complexity and dynamics of actual policy mixes and the underlying politics of (re)designing them. In this paper we take a first step towards a more comprehensive, interdisciplinary policy mix concept for environmental technological change based on a review of the bodies of literature on innovation studies, environmental economics and policy analysis. The concept introduces a clear terminology and consists of the three building blocks elements, processes and characteristics, which can be delineated by several dimensions. Throughout the paper, we illustrate the concept using the example of the policy mix for fostering the transition of the German energy system to renewable power generation technologies. We argue that the proposed concept provides an integrating analytical framework for empirical studies analyzing the impact of the policy mix on environmental technological change and sustainability transitions more broadly. Finally, we derive policy implications and suggest avenues for future research.

The need for comprehensive and well targeted instrument mixes to stimulate energy transitions: The case of energy efficiency policy

“…Here, we contribute to this literature by proposing a novel way of operationalising the comprehensiveness of instrument mixes, specifically in the context of energy transitions. More specifically, and following earlier suggestions by Rogge and Reichardt [15], we argue that comprehensiveness of instrument mixes within specific policy sub-domains should also be assessed regarding technology/technological specificity, instrument types covered, and sector(s) addressed. We argue that especially understanding the technological specificity of instruments in the mix is a precondition for designing effective instrument mixes that support the full range of low-carbon solutions needed to achieve an ambitious energy transition, including low-cost and simple energy efficiency measures as well as high-cost and complex options.…”

“…Yet, as point out by these authors, different literatures have used various, often conflicting definitions of such characteristics, particularly when it comes to consistency and coherence (see wide range of definitions in the Annex of Rogge and Reichardt [15]. Such ambiguity in terminology renders a comparison of different studies and interdisciplinary dialogue difficult.…”

“…Research on policy mixes is also increasingly paying attention to the characteristics of policy mixes, although following different literatures with differences in terminology [15]. For example, policy design scholars have been using consistency, coherence and congruence as criteria to assess policy mixes in terms of the alignment of instruments and goals [9].…”

From Waste Management to Resource Efficiency—The Need for Policy Mixes

“…Within the scope of waste management, three types of instruments were identified and linked to three pathways [12]: The harvest of low hanging fruits (i.e., an easily implemented instrument with prospective low barriers), the introduction of severe market interventions (i.e., with influences on the market systems), and a systemic transformation of production and consumption patterns. (b) For the purpose to design a policy mix, the single instruments were examined regarding their essential characteristics based on the policy mix concept developed by Rogge and Reichardt [13] characterizing instruments by their goals, types and design features.…”

Comparing Nuclear Power Trajectories in Germany and the UK: From 'Regimes' to 'Democracies' in Sociotechnical Transitions and Discontinuities

“…On similar lines, recent work has focussed on the lack of attention in transitions literature towards these broader contextual conditions which extend beyond a particular (notionally singular) technological regime and can be seen in approaches using 'policy paradigms' as a focal point of analysis (Hall, 1993;Kern, Kuzemko, & Mitchell, 2014;Kern & Mitchell, 2010), as well as 'policy mixes' (Rogge & Reichardt, 2013). Relating paradigms to what they hold to be the under-conceptualised 'landscape' level of the Multi-Level Perspective, Kern and Mitchell (2010: 14), discuss prior political commitments towards market liberalisation which runs across various regimes in the UK.…”