私人利益贡献对能源政策制定的影响

Steffen Jenner, L. Ovaere, S. Schindele
{"title":"私人利益贡献对能源政策制定的影响","authors":"Steffen Jenner, L. Ovaere, S. Schindele","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2109374","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the last two decades, many U.S. states introduced support policies to promote electricity generation from renewable energy sources. Renewable portfolio standards are their most popular policy choices to date. This paper tackles the question why some state legislators were front-running the trend of RPS implementation while others adopted policies just recently, and again others have not incentivized investment so far. In short, what drives states to support renewable energy? We base our empirical analysis on theoretical reasoning. First, we present an application of the common agency model developed by Dixit et al. (1997) to better understand the impact of special industrial interests on policy decision-making. Second, we compile data on financial contributions of conventional energy interests (CEI) and renewable energy interests (REI) to state-level policymakers between 1998 and 2006. Third, in a series of panel, hazard and tobit regressions, we test the impact of these financial contributions on (i) the probability of a state to adopt a RPS policy and (ii) on the stringency of the RPS. We also control for state effects, time trends, and a set of socio-economic and political covariates. Combining our empirical framework with the theoretical model produces key insights into U.S. state level energy policy making. First, CEI have donated over-proportionally to state-level legislators affiliated with the Republican party while contributions from REI went largely to Democrats. Second, we reveal statistically significant links between the likelihood of RPS adoption and private interest contributions. Financial contributions from CEI have a negative impact on the likelihood of RPS adoption while REI contributions have a positive impact. Third, the estimates show a similar – albeit less significant – pattern on RPS stringency.","PeriodicalId":132360,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Other Political Economy: National","volume":"36 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Impact of Private Interest Contributions on Energy Policy Making\",\"authors\":\"Steffen Jenner, L. Ovaere, S. Schindele\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2109374\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In the last two decades, many U.S. states introduced support policies to promote electricity generation from renewable energy sources. Renewable portfolio standards are their most popular policy choices to date. This paper tackles the question why some state legislators were front-running the trend of RPS implementation while others adopted policies just recently, and again others have not incentivized investment so far. In short, what drives states to support renewable energy? We base our empirical analysis on theoretical reasoning. First, we present an application of the common agency model developed by Dixit et al. (1997) to better understand the impact of special industrial interests on policy decision-making. Second, we compile data on financial contributions of conventional energy interests (CEI) and renewable energy interests (REI) to state-level policymakers between 1998 and 2006. Third, in a series of panel, hazard and tobit regressions, we test the impact of these financial contributions on (i) the probability of a state to adopt a RPS policy and (ii) on the stringency of the RPS. We also control for state effects, time trends, and a set of socio-economic and political covariates. Combining our empirical framework with the theoretical model produces key insights into U.S. state level energy policy making. First, CEI have donated over-proportionally to state-level legislators affiliated with the Republican party while contributions from REI went largely to Democrats. Second, we reveal statistically significant links between the likelihood of RPS adoption and private interest contributions. Financial contributions from CEI have a negative impact on the likelihood of RPS adoption while REI contributions have a positive impact. Third, the estimates show a similar – albeit less significant – pattern on RPS stringency.\",\"PeriodicalId\":132360,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ERN: Other Political Economy: National\",\"volume\":\"36 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ERN: Other Political Economy: National\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2109374\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERN: Other Political Economy: National","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2109374","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

在过去的二十年里,美国许多州都出台了支持政策,以促进可再生能源发电。可再生能源投资组合标准是他们迄今为止最受欢迎的政策选择。本文解决了为什么一些州的立法者在RPS实施的趋势中走在前面,而另一些州最近才采取政策,而另一些州到目前为止还没有激励投资的问题。简而言之,是什么促使各州支持可再生能源?我们的实证分析建立在理论推理的基础上。首先,我们提出了Dixit等人(1997)开发的共同代理模型的应用,以更好地理解特殊产业利益对政策决策的影响。其次,我们收集了1998年至2006年间传统能源利益(CEI)和可再生能源利益(REI)对国家级决策者的财政贡献数据。第三,在一系列的面板、风险和tobit回归中,我们测试了这些财政贡献对(i)国家采用RPS政策的概率和(ii) RPS的严格程度的影响。我们还控制了国家影响、时间趋势和一系列社会经济和政治协变量。将我们的经验框架与理论模型相结合,可以产生对美国州一级能源政策制定的关键见解。首先,CEI向隶属于共和党的州级议员的捐款比例过高,而REI的捐款主要流向了民主党人。其次,我们揭示了采用RPS的可能性与私人利益贡献之间的统计显著联系。来自CEI的财务捐款对采用RPS的可能性有负面影响,而来自REI的捐款则有积极影响。第三,在RPS的严格程度上,这些估计也显示出类似的模式——尽管不那么显著。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Impact of Private Interest Contributions on Energy Policy Making
In the last two decades, many U.S. states introduced support policies to promote electricity generation from renewable energy sources. Renewable portfolio standards are their most popular policy choices to date. This paper tackles the question why some state legislators were front-running the trend of RPS implementation while others adopted policies just recently, and again others have not incentivized investment so far. In short, what drives states to support renewable energy? We base our empirical analysis on theoretical reasoning. First, we present an application of the common agency model developed by Dixit et al. (1997) to better understand the impact of special industrial interests on policy decision-making. Second, we compile data on financial contributions of conventional energy interests (CEI) and renewable energy interests (REI) to state-level policymakers between 1998 and 2006. Third, in a series of panel, hazard and tobit regressions, we test the impact of these financial contributions on (i) the probability of a state to adopt a RPS policy and (ii) on the stringency of the RPS. We also control for state effects, time trends, and a set of socio-economic and political covariates. Combining our empirical framework with the theoretical model produces key insights into U.S. state level energy policy making. First, CEI have donated over-proportionally to state-level legislators affiliated with the Republican party while contributions from REI went largely to Democrats. Second, we reveal statistically significant links between the likelihood of RPS adoption and private interest contributions. Financial contributions from CEI have a negative impact on the likelihood of RPS adoption while REI contributions have a positive impact. Third, the estimates show a similar – albeit less significant – pattern on RPS stringency.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信