IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/engenv/v33y2022i8p1545-1561.html

After the adoption of Renewable Portfolio Standards: Go greener or back to grey?

Author

Listed:
  • Sojin Jang

Abstract

Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) is a state-level policy that mandates renewable energy supply or sales goals in the U.S. In some states like California, Hawaii, and Oregon, renewable energy production goals have become more stringent since adoption and 50% or more electricity is projected to come from renewable energy sources in these states. In contrast, Ohio, Kansas, and West Virginia retracted or even repealed their RPS policies. Less is known, however, about the determinants of post-RPS adoption decisions relative to the amount of empirical and theoretical knowledge accumulated on the drivers of RPS policy adoption. Accordingly, this study conducted a cross-case analysis in order to explore the drivers of RPS repeal in West Virginia and RPS expansion in Oregon through semi-structured interviews of state legislators, secondary data, and literature review. Findings indicate that state government ideology frames views about environmental and economic issues and the effectiveness of RPS, and ultimately guide the directions of policy revisions. More specifically, West Virginia’s RPS repeal effort was initiated by Republican state legislators who were determined to terminate RPS since the beginning of the new legislative session. On the other hand, RPS expansion in Oregon was the output of strategic negotiation between two parties and largely driven by a bottom-up effort from cities and counties, citizens, and environmental organizations.

Suggested Citation

  • Sojin Jang, 2022. "After the adoption of Renewable Portfolio Standards: Go greener or back to grey?," Energy & Environment, , vol. 33(8), pages 1545-1561, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:engenv:v:33:y:2022:i:8:p:1545-1561
    DOI: 10.1177/0958305X211048176
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0958305X211048176
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0958305X211048176?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Huang, Ming-Yuan & Alavalapati, Janaki R.R. & Carter, Douglas R. & Langholtz, Matthew H., 2007. "Is the choice of renewable portfolio standards random?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(11), pages 5571-5575, November.
    2. Carley, Sanya & Nicholson-Crotty, Sean & Miller, Chris J., 2017. "Adoption, reinvention and amendment of renewable portfolio standards in the American states," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 37(4), pages 431-458, December.
    3. repec:aen:journl:2010v31-03-a07 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Berry, Michael J. & Laird, Frank N. & Stefes, Christoph H., 2015. "Driving energy: the enactment and ambitiousness of state renewable energy policy," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 35(2), pages 297-328, August.
    5. Thomas P. Lyon & Haitao Yin, 2010. "Why Do States Adopt Renewable Portfolio Standards?: An Empirical Investigation," The Energy Journal, , vol. 31(3), pages 133-158, July.
    6. Hongtao Yi & Richard C. Feiock, 2012. "Policy Tool Interactions and the Adoption of State Renewable Portfolio Standards," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 29(2), pages 193-206, March.
    7. Upton, Gregory B. & Snyder, Brian F., 2015. "Renewable energy potential and adoption of renewable portfolio standards," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 67-70.
    8. Daniel C. Matisoff, 2008. "The Adoption of State Climate Change Policies and Renewable Portfolio Standards: Regional Diffusion or Internal Determinants?," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 25(6), pages 527-546, December.
    9. Chandler, Jess, 2009. "Trendy solutions: Why do states adopt Sustainable Energy Portfolio Standards?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 3274-3281, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. James Patterson & Ksenia Anisimova & Jasmin Logg-Scarvell & Cille Kaiser, 2025. "Reactions to policy action: socio-political conditions of backlash to climate change policy," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 58(2), pages 287-320, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sojin Jang & Hongtao Yi, 2022. "Organized elite power and clean energy: A study of negative policy experimentations with renewable portfolio standards," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(1), pages 8-31, January.
    2. Pritchard, Zachary D. & Mills, Sarah, 2021. "Renewable energy requirements on the ballot: An analysis of county-level voting results," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 148(PA).
    3. Trachtman, Samuel, 2020. "What drives climate policy adoption in the U.S. states?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    4. Daniel J Pastor, 2020. "The effects of renewables portfolio standards on renewable energy generation," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 40(3), pages 2121-2133.
    5. Rountree, Valerie, 2019. "Nevada's experience with the Renewable Portfolio Standard," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 279-291.
    6. Derek Glasgow & Shuang Zhao & Saatvika Rai, 2021. "Rethinking Climate Change Leadership: An Analysis of the Ambitiousness of State GHG Targets," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 38(4), pages 398-426, July.
    7. Upton, Gregory B. & Snyder, Brian F., 2015. "Renewable energy potential and adoption of renewable portfolio standards," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 67-70.
    8. Michael Lerner, 2022. "Local power: Understanding the adoption and design of county wind energy regulation," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(2), pages 120-142, March.
    9. Upton, Gregory B. & Snyder, Brian F., 2017. "Funding renewable energy: An analysis of renewable portfolio standards," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 205-216.
    10. Lerner, Michael, 2022. "Local power: understanding the adoption and design of county wind energy regulation," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 112757, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    11. Yi, Hongtao, 2015. "Clean-energy policies and electricity sector carbon emissions in the U.S. states," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 19-29.
    12. Armstrong, John H., 2019. "Modeling effective local government climate policies that exceed state targets," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 15-26.
    13. Don Fullerton & Chi L. Ta, 2025. "What Determines Effectiveness of Renewable Energy Standards? General Equilibrium Analytical Model and Empirical Analysis," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 12(1), pages 65-103.
    14. Saatvika Rai, 2020. "Policy Adoption and Policy Intensity: Emergence of Climate Adaptation Planning in U.S. States," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 37(4), pages 444-463, July.
    15. Haupt, Wolfgang & Eckersley, Peter & Kern, Kristine, 2021. "Transfer und Skalierung von lokaler Klimapolitik: Konzeptionelle Ansätze, Voraussetzungen und Potenziale," IRS Dialog 1/2021, Leibniz Institute for Research on Society and Space (IRS).
    16. Cheng, Quan & Yi, Hongtao, 2017. "Complementarity and substitutability: A review of state level renewable energy policy instrument interactions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 683-691.
    17. Côme Billard & Anna Creti & Antoine Mandel, 2020. "How Environmental Policies Spread? A Network Approach to Diffusion in the U.S," Working Papers 2020.12, FAERE - French Association of Environmental and Resource Economists.
    18. Baldwin, Elizabeth & Carley, Sanya & Nicholson-Crotty, Sean, 2019. "Why do countries emulate each others’ policies? A global study of renewable energy policy diffusion," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 29-45.
    19. Evan M. Mistur & John Wagner Givens & Daniel C. Matisoff, 2023. "Contagious COVID‐19 policies: Policy diffusion during times of crisis," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 40(1), pages 36-62, January.
    20. Bae, Hyunhoe & Yu, Sanguk, 2018. "Information and coercive regulation: The impact of fuel mix information disclosure on states’ adoption of renewable energy policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 151-159.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:sae:engenv:v:33:y:2022:i:8:p:1545-1561. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.