by Jonas Meckling & Nicholas Goedeking
Recent scholarship on policy change has devoted increased attention to change across subsystems – the passage of new healthcare legislation, for example, will change not only health policy, but will also impact labor policy and tax policy (among other domains). The means by which trans-subsystem policy change occurs, however, are not clearly defined.
We look at the role of policy feedback in bringing about trans-subsystem policy change. Specifically, we argue that trans-subsystem policy feedback can result in what we call “coalition cascades”. Coalition cascades represent a kind of domino effect, whereby a policy change that happens within one subsystem can alter coalitions across subsystems, by bringing together actors already inside a subsystem, introducing new actors into a subsystem, and/or moving actors into other subsystems. If policy feedback is positive, these coalition cascades can bring about trans-subsystem policy change by solving coordination challenges that are often part and parcel of making policy change that cuts across policy subsystems. Conversely, negative policy feedback may only partially fix these coordination challenges, if at all.
Figure 1. Coalition cascades
We apply our model to California’s clean energy transition. In 2002, California adopted a renewable portfolio standard (RPS) that required investor-owned utilities (IOUs) to derive a specific percentage of their energy from renewable sources. The next decade and a half saw positive policy feedback as the RPS was expanded upon and gained greater popular support. Even IOUs, which had initially opposed an RPS, gradually turned in favor, resulting in a coalition that was able to repel efforts to roll back California’s renewable energy initiatives, such as Proposition 23 in 2010.
The adoption and subsequent expansion of the RPS, however, also challenged the capacity of the state’s energy grid. Energy storage eventually crystallized as the solution. New storage startups emerged to meet this demand, and a coalition of storage companies formed the California Energy Storage Alliance in 2009 to advocate on behalf of energy storage interests. Storage companies, in league with environmental groups, lobbied state lawmakers for rules requiring energy companies to store a percentage of their load. This effort initially met with opposition from utilities, but by 2013 the state had adopted a storage mandate.
Figure 2. Storage mandate
In addition to transforming the state’s energy grid, California’s renewables initiatives also had implications for passenger vehicles. In 2009, state legislators and regulators began exploring how to roll out charging infrastructure to support widespread electric vehicle ownership. One issue that emerged was whether utilities would be involved in setting up this infrastructure. A coalition of utilities and environmental groups were in favor, while charging companies and ratepayers organizations were opposed, fearing the market power of utilities. Eventually, however, it became clear that utilities were essential for a state-wide build-out of charging infrastructure, and as a result both ratepayer groups and charging companies shifted their stance. Beginning in 2014-15, utilities became major players in the electric vehicle subsystem.
Figure 3. Utility charging programs.
The evolution of California’s renewable energy policies offers an excellent illustration of the relationship between policy feedback and trans-subsystem policy change. First, we see how policy feedback surrounding the adoption of an RPS changed the coalition supporting renewables by bringing utilities on board. Then we identify spillover effects as more ambitious renewables policies triggered changes in both grid policy (through the adoption of storage technology to manage load intermittency) and transportation policy (through the creation of a charging infrastructure to encourage electric vehicles). In both cases, changes in policy – and the ways those changes were received – shifted coalitional makeups.
We studied coalition cascades in the context of California’s energy policies, but expect that the dynamics we observed are present across a wide array of policy domains. Our model offers greater insight into how policy change can have ripple effects across multiple domains. Specifically, it shows that how a policy change is received – whether positively or negatively, and by whom – can shift the coalitions for or against specific sets of policies, thus either encouraging or inhibiting additional policy change. In our case study, policy feedback was largely positive, resulting in policy change across multiple subsystems. Additional work is needed to look at examples of negative feedback.
You can read the original article in Policy Studies Journal at
Meckling, Jonas and Nicholas Goedeking. 2023. “ Coalition Cascades: The Politics of Tipping Points in Clean Energy Transitions.” Policy Studies Journal 51(4): 715–739. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12507.
About the Authors
Jonas Meckling is Associate Professor of Energy and Environmental Policy at the University of California, Berkeley, and Climate Fellow at Harvard Business School. He studies the politics of climate policy and the energy transition. He received multiple awards for his research, including the American Political Science Association’s Emerging Young Scholar Award in the field of science, technology, and environmental politics. At Berkeley, he leads the Energy and Environment Policy Lab and the Climate Program of the Berkeley Economy and Society Initiative. Previously, he was a visiting professor at Yale University, served as Senior Advisor to the German Minister for the Environment and Renewable Energy, was a Research Fellow at Harvard University, and worked at the European Commission.
Nicholas Goedeking is Senior Researcher at the German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS) and Visiting Fellow at the University of Sussex Business School. His work examines the political economy of climate policy and sustainability transitions. He is particularly interested in urban climate governance and the politics of low-carbon infrastructure systems. Before his doctorate, Nicholas worked on energy efficiency policy in Berlin and Brussels, including for the European Commission. He holds a Ph.D. in Environmental Science, Policy, and Management from the University of California, Berkeley.
Policy Studies Journal Blog 