Building winning climate coalitions: Evidence from U.S. states

IF 9.3 2区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Samuel Trachtman , Irem Inal , Jonas Meckling
{"title":"Building winning climate coalitions: Evidence from U.S. states","authors":"Samuel Trachtman ,&nbsp;Irem Inal ,&nbsp;Jonas Meckling","doi":"10.1016/j.enpol.2025.114628","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Liberal-leaning U.S. states have been at the forefront of climate policy action, despite continued political power of fossil fuel interests. We argue that two shifts have fundamentally changed the interest group politics of decarbonization in the U.S., and enabled more ambitious state-level climate policy. First, the pro-climate organizational landscape has broadened due to clean energy deployment, greater philanthropic support, the emergence of mass mobilization, and rise of environmental justice groups. Second, falling clean energy costs enhance opportunities to fracture fossil fuel coalitions, as some carbon-intensive interests make investments towards a low-carbon future. We argue that these developments highlight the importance of building and maintaining broad pro-climate coalitions, and fracturing fossil fuel opposition through policy designs that garner support from carbon-intensive interests with decarbonization options. We leverage stakeholder interviews to study climate policymaking in Colorado, Illinois, and New York in the aftermath of Democrats taking unified control of these state governments in 2018. Generally, policy enactment also depended on the formation of broad pro-climate coalitions that included both professionalized and grassroots environmental groups. In addition, designing bills that brought industrial labor unions and electric utilities to positions of support or neutrality was critical to reducing the ability of fossil fuel coalitions to block new policies. Overall, our analysis indicates the emergence of greater opportunities to pass ambitious decarbonization policies, as the interest group politics of climate move from fossil fuel dominance to a more contested landscape.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11672,"journal":{"name":"Energy Policy","volume":"203 ","pages":"Article 114628"},"PeriodicalIF":9.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Energy Policy","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421525001351","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Liberal-leaning U.S. states have been at the forefront of climate policy action, despite continued political power of fossil fuel interests. We argue that two shifts have fundamentally changed the interest group politics of decarbonization in the U.S., and enabled more ambitious state-level climate policy. First, the pro-climate organizational landscape has broadened due to clean energy deployment, greater philanthropic support, the emergence of mass mobilization, and rise of environmental justice groups. Second, falling clean energy costs enhance opportunities to fracture fossil fuel coalitions, as some carbon-intensive interests make investments towards a low-carbon future. We argue that these developments highlight the importance of building and maintaining broad pro-climate coalitions, and fracturing fossil fuel opposition through policy designs that garner support from carbon-intensive interests with decarbonization options. We leverage stakeholder interviews to study climate policymaking in Colorado, Illinois, and New York in the aftermath of Democrats taking unified control of these state governments in 2018. Generally, policy enactment also depended on the formation of broad pro-climate coalitions that included both professionalized and grassroots environmental groups. In addition, designing bills that brought industrial labor unions and electric utilities to positions of support or neutrality was critical to reducing the ability of fossil fuel coalitions to block new policies. Overall, our analysis indicates the emergence of greater opportunities to pass ambitious decarbonization policies, as the interest group politics of climate move from fossil fuel dominance to a more contested landscape.
建立胜利的气候联盟:来自美国各州的证据
尽管化石燃料利益集团的政治力量持续存在,但倾向自由主义的美国各州一直处于气候政策行动的前沿。我们认为,两种转变从根本上改变了美国脱碳的利益集团政治,并使更雄心勃勃的州一级气候政策成为可能。首先,由于清洁能源的使用、更多的慈善支持、大规模动员的出现以及环境正义团体的兴起,支持气候变化的组织格局已经扩大。其次,清洁能源成本的下降增加了打破化石燃料联盟的机会,因为一些碳密集型利益集团正在向低碳未来投资。我们认为,这些发展凸显了建立和维持广泛的亲气候联盟的重要性,并通过政策设计来打破化石燃料的反对,以脱碳方案获得碳密集型利益集团的支持。我们利用利益相关者访谈来研究2018年民主党统一控制科罗拉多州、伊利诺伊州和纽约州政府后,这些州的气候政策制定。一般来说,政策的制定也依赖于广泛的支持气候变化的联盟的形成,这些联盟包括专业的和基层的环境团体。此外,制定法案,使工业工会和电力公司处于支持或中立的地位,这对于削弱化石燃料联盟阻碍新政策的能力至关重要。总体而言,我们的分析表明,随着气候利益集团政治从化石燃料主导转向更具竞争性的格局,通过雄心勃勃的脱碳政策的机会越来越大。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Energy Policy
Energy Policy 管理科学-环境科学
CiteScore
17.30
自引率
5.60%
发文量
540
审稿时长
7.9 months
期刊介绍: Energy policy is the manner in which a given entity (often governmental) has decided to address issues of energy development including energy conversion, distribution and use as well as reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in order to contribute to climate change mitigation. The attributes of energy policy may include legislation, international treaties, incentives to investment, guidelines for energy conservation, taxation and other public policy techniques. Energy policy is closely related to climate change policy because totalled worldwide the energy sector emits more greenhouse gas than other sectors.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信