Author
Abstract
While there is growing agreement that government-affiliated intermediaries can be an asset in advancing climate policy, perspectives diverge on the precise governance arrangements and conditions under which they excel. Some view government-affiliated intermediaries as instruments that states can exert control over to achieve their centrally determined objectives. Others contend that such bodies work best when they have the autonomy to experiment and shape policy formulation. This article seeks to clarify these debates by demonstrating that there is value in adopting governance arrangements that keep these two approaches (instrumental/experimental) in tension. The argument here is that a governance approach, which balances instrumental and experimental logics, can generate “productive tensions” to manage trade-offs between flexibility and control. Using a process-tracing analysis, the article explores this argument through a case study of a government-affiliated intermediary in Quebec—Propulsion Québec—deliberately created by the state to intermediate between the public and private sectors in the electric transportation sector. Findings reveal productive tensions between the state and a government-affiliated intermediary, as well as between different government-affiliated intermediaries, but show that these tensions can be difficult to sustain over time. Overall, attending to these tensions allows for a deeper understanding of the governance arrangements and conditions under which government-affiliated intermediaries can advance climate policy.
Suggested Citation
Bruno Arcand, 2025.
"Government-affiliated intermediaries in climate policy: managing “productive tensions” between flexibility and control,"
Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 44(4), pages 535-548.
Handle:
RePEc:oup:polsoc:v:44:y:2025:i:4:p:535-548.
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to
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:oup:polsoc:v:44:y:2025:i:4:p:535-548.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/policyandsociety .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.