Author
Listed:
- Trachtman, Samuel
- Inal, Irem
- Meckling, Jonas
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.
Suggested Citation
Trachtman, Samuel & Inal, Irem & Meckling, Jonas, 2025.
"Building winning climate coalitions: Evidence from U.S. states,"
Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
Handle:
RePEc:eee:enepol:v:203:y:2025:i:c:s0301421525001351
DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2025.114628
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:203:y:2025:i:c:s0301421525001351. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.