Tag: comparative research

Does policy design matter for the effectiveness of local content requirements? A qualitative comparative analysis of renewable energy value chains

Governments around the world use local content requirements (LCR) to boost domestic industries by requiring renewable energy projects to use a certain share of locally-made components. The idea is simple: create jobs and build local supply chains. But the results have been mixed—some countries became major exporters of wind and solar technology, while others struggled. This article asks: Does the way these rules are designed explain why they succeed in some places and fail in others? To find out, the author uses Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) to look for patterns in how different policy features and economic conditions combine to produce success.

Hypotheses

The author tests three hypotheses:

  1. Policies work best when countries already have strong technological capabilities.
  2. Combining LCR with other tools (e.g., financial incentives, renewable energy targets) helps in tougher economic environments.
  3. No single factor guarantees success; it’s about the right mix of design and context.

Methodology

The author analyze 27 LCR policies in wind and solar energy across 19 countries from 1995 to 2017, using fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) to uncover patterns. The research examines how policy design elements (e.g., restrictiveness, policy mixes, and targets) interact with the political economy (e.g., investment conditions, economic complexity). Success was measured by whether a country’s exports of wind and solar components grew four years after introducing LCR. The analysis looks for combinations of conditions that consistently led to positive outcomes rather than a one-size-fits-all solution.

Key Findings

Flexibility or Strong Capabilities Are Essential

Figure 1 shows that either a flexible LCR design or a country’s high economic complexity must be present for a policy to be successful. While countries with advanced technology sectors can handle stricter rules without harming investment, those with limited capabilities need more lenient requirements to attract investment. This finding supports Hypothesis 1, demonstrating that there is no universal approach—what works in China or Spain may fail in India or Argentina. The author therefore argues that successful policies must be tailored to local conditions and political-economic contexts.

Image Description

Figure 1. XY-Plot of the necessity relation between (C1 or C5) and LCR Effectiveness.

Policy Bundles Make a Difference

In countries with weaker investment conditions or limited technological capacity, LCR only worked when paired with financial incentives or renewable energy targets (Table 1). These extra measures help attract investors and signal future demand, giving local industries time to grow. This finding supports Hypothesis 2, underscoring the role of strategic policy bundling for green industrial success. Furthermore, the author explains, while simple rules can work in supportive environments, complex policy mixes are essential in challenging one.

Image Description

Table 1. Sufficient conjunctural patterns of policy design elements and contextual factors for LCR policy effectiveness.

Why It Matters

This article reveals that smart policy design matters. LCR effectiveness depends on tailoring rules to local conditions and, when needed, combining them with other supportive policies. This research challenges the idea of universal design principles and shows that success comes from the right mix of tools and context. Future studies should explore how these patterns apply in other sectors and dig deeper into why some policies fail. Scholars could also improve data on granular design features like technology transfer requirements. For policymakers, the message is clear: design green industrial policies with flexibility, consider context, and do not rely on a single instrument.

Read the original article in Policy Studies Journal:

Eicke, Laima. 2025. “Does Policy Design Matter For the Effectiveness of Local Content Requirements? A Qualitative Comparative Analysis of Renewable Energy Value Chains.” Policy Studies Journal 53(3): 604–617. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12590.

About the Article’s Author

Laima Eicke is a Research Associate at the Research Institute for Sustainability in Potsdam. Her research focuses on the international political economy of the energy transition, value chains of renewable energy technologies and hydrogen in particular as well as on green industrial policies. She is a former Associate and Research Fellow at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at the Harvard Kennedy School and worked at the German Corporation for International Cooperation (GIZ), the Germany Ministry for International Affairs, NGOs and in consultancy.

, , , , ,

The Power of Political Will in Driving Policy Innovation

by Shiran Victoria Shen

In a world facing climate crises, pandemics, and geopolitical shifts, governments must embrace bold policy innovation.  Scholars have long examined the drivers of policy change—ranging from economic conditions to policy diffusion and entrepreneurial leadership. Yet, one critical but underexplored factor is political will.

In my recent Policy Studies Journal article, I argue that political will is a key driver of drastic policy innovation—policy changes so bold that they redefine governmental priorities and novel policy instruments that any jurisdiction has rarely tested in the country. Using China’s low-carbon city experimentation as a case study, I show that strong political will among local leaders significantly increased the likelihood of drastically innovative climate policy measures being adopted and implemented.

What Is Political Will?

Political will is the commitment of key decision-makers (i.e., elected politicians in democracies or political leaders in autocracies) to enact and implement policies, even at political or financial risk. It consists of three key components:

  1. Authority – The power to enact and enforce policies
  2. Capacity – The fiscal, human, and administrative resources to implement them effectively
  3. Legitimacy – Stakeholder acceptance, which is crucial for garnering support and reducing resistance

Political will is distinct from political power.  While power provides the means, political will determines whether leaders use that power to drive bold policy change.

How Political Will Shapes Drastic Policy Innovation

China’s low-carbon city pilot provides a suitable setting to study political will. Unlike many centrally led pilots, this initiative required cities to voluntarily apply and commit their own resources. My research examines the second batch of pilot cities, which were selected based on leadership engagement, demonstrability, and locally driven decarbonization strategies.

Political will is gauged by the Leader of the Low-Carbon City Construction Leading Group (LCCLG). I found that cities where the prefectural party secretary—the highest-ranking local official—steered the LCCLG were significantly more likely to introduce and implement drastically innovative climate policies. These leaders not only set ambitious goals but also effectively mobilized resources and overcame bureaucratic resistance. In contrast, cities where their low-carbon city pilots were led by lower-ranking officials demonstrated a weaker commitment, resulting in fewer innovative policies proposed or implemented.

Why Institutionalizing Political Will Matters

A critical insight from my study is that when political will is institutionalized, policy innovation persists despite leadership turnover. In China, this was achieved through LCCLGs, which maintained policy continuity even when key officials changed.

This challenges the conventional wisdom that leadership changes disrupt policy innovation.  Instead, embedding political will within the leadership structure sustains transformative policy efforts over time.

Lessons for Policymakers Worldwide

Although my case study focuses on China, the implications extend beyond authoritarian regimes. In democracies, political will is shaped by electoral incentives, coalition-building, and public advocacy, requiring a different approach to measurement. In authoritarian states, political will aligns closely with leader rank and authority, whereas in democracies, multiple veto points necessitate a broader set of variables.

Yet the core principle remains: bold policy innovation depends on committed leadership willing to take risks and overcome resistance.

For policymakers and scholars, political will should be explicitly considered as a critical driver of policy innovation. Whether tackling climate change, public health, or economic shock, fostering and institutionalizing political will enables governments to implement transformative policies that endure.

You can read the original article in Policy Studies Journal at

Shen, Shiran Victoria. 2025. “ Political Will As a Source of Policy Innovation.” Policy Studies Journal 53(1): 185–200. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12571.

About the Author

Shiran Victoria Shen is a senior research scholar and the lead for the China Energy Program at the Stanford Doerr School of Sustainability.  Her research examines how incentives and institutions shape climate and environmental actions.  More broadly, she is interested in key issues in public policy and governance.

, , , ,

Global Diffusion of COVID-19 Policies: The Role of Geographic, Institutional, and Cultural Cues

by Brian Y. An, Simon Porcher, & Shui-Yan Tang

Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, governments worldwide have grappled with the adoption of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs), offering a unique opportunity to study policy diffusion dynamics. As the pandemic unfolded globally, leaders were faced with the dual challenges of responding to the pace of disease development while navigating socio-economic circumstances unique to their countries. With limited international coordination, each nation independently established its policy approaches, making the study of horizontal diffusion within global governance feasible. 

This study seeks to address critical questions regarding the diffusion of COVID-19 policies:

  1. Do government leaders draw cues from other countries’ policy behaviors?
  2. If so, which countries do they benchmark their policymaking against in terms of geographic, cultural, and institutional similarities?
  3. How do these diffusion dynamics evolve over time, and do certain cues become more prominent as policy learning progresses?

By analyzing worldwide government responses from January 1, 2020, to June 1, 2021, this study employs event history and time fixed-effects ordered logistic regression models. The analysis focuses on nine universal NPIs, including domestic lockdowns, travel bans, and mask mandates. The findings suggest that leaders indeed draw policy cues from geographic, cultural, and institutional peers, with significant temporal nuances. While geographic and institutional influences wane over time, cultural cues become increasingly prominent in shaping policy adoptions.

These empirical findings offer novel insights into policy diffusion dynamics during crises. The study reaffirms the relevance of geographic clustering in policy adoption, although its influence diminishes over time as more information becomes available. Similarly, the declining role of institutional proximity highlights the evolving nature of policy learning. Notably, the growing influence of cultural cues underscores the significance of cultural considerations in crisis management policymaking. This finding emphasizes the importance of policy-culture fit, where successful interventions are closely linked to public cooperation and compliance.

In conclusion, the study sheds light on the dynamic processes of global policy diffusion during the COVID-19 pandemic. By unraveling the evolving role of geographic, cultural, and institutional similarities, it offers valuable insights for policymakers and practitioners. Understanding these dynamics is essential for effective crisis management and policy design in an interconnected world.

You can read the original article in Policy Studies Journal at 

An, Brian Y., Simon Porcher and Shui-Yan Tang. 2024. “ Global Diffusion of COVID-19 Policies: The Role of Geographic, Institutional, and Cultural Cues.” Policy Studies Journal 52(1): 169–198. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12514.

About the Authors

Brian An is an assistant professor, Director of Master of Science in Public Policy (MSPP) program, and Co-Director of Center for Urban Research in the School of Public Policy at Georgia Institute of Technology.



Dr. Simon Porcher is a full professor of Strategy and Public Management at Université Paris Panthéon-Assas. He studies how cross-sector partnerships create value and respond to grand challenges.

Check out his personal website here: https://sites.google.com/site/simporcher/?pli=1

Shui-Yan Tang is Frances R. and John J. Duggan Professor of Public Administration and Chair of the Department of Public Policy and Management in Sol Price School of Public Policy at the University of Southern California.


, , , ,