IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/climat/v155y2019i4d10.1007_s10584-019-02481-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The polycentricity of climate policy blockage

Author

Listed:
  • Dana R. Fisher

    (University of Maryland)

  • Philip Leifeld

    (University of Essex, Department of Government)

Abstract

This paper builds on recent research on polycentric governance and the Ecology of Games to understand climate politics in the USA. Complementing previous work from 2005 to 2009, we map out the ideological networks of political actors engaged in the climate policy network using data from the US Congress as an arena of symbolic interaction. Our analysis identifies polycentric sites of ideological congruence and conflict in the discourse network on climate change. Political actors from different levels and including several actor types formed multiple centers that became bipolarized between the 112th and 114th sessions of the US Congress. This process took place in tandem with the increased participation of subnational actors in the polycentric system. By the 114th session of the Congress—during which the 2016 election took place—subnational policy actors, along with a diversity of other actors, contributed to an extremely polarized discussion of one of the central policies in the Obama Administration’s Climate Action Plan: the Clean Power Plan. This finding is remarkable as the concept of polycentricity tends to be normatively associated with policy innovation, rather than stagnation. Our longitudinal analysis demonstrates, using Discourse Network Analysis, how increased multi-level participation can be associated with policy blockage of progressive climate policies rather than enabling policy innovation.

Suggested Citation

  • Dana R. Fisher & Philip Leifeld, 2019. "The polycentricity of climate policy blockage," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 155(4), pages 469-487, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:155:y:2019:i:4:d:10.1007_s10584-019-02481-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s10584-019-02481-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10584-019-02481-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10584-019-02481-y?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lorien Jasny & Joseph Waggle & Dana R. Fisher, 2015. "An empirical examination of echo chambers in US climate policy networks," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 5(8), pages 782-786, August.
    2. Dana Fisher & Philip Leifeld & Yoko Iwaki, 2013. "Mapping the ideological networks of American climate politics," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 116(3), pages 523-545, February.
    3. Elinor Ostrom, 2014. "A Polycentric Approach For Coping With Climate Change," Annals of Economics and Finance, Society for AEF, vol. 15(1), pages 97-134, May.
    4. Daniel H. Cole, 2015. "Advantages of a polycentric approach to climate change policy," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 5(2), pages 114-118, February.
    5. Daniel H. Cole, 2011. "From Global to Polycentric Climate Governance," EUI-RSCAS Working Papers 30, European University Institute (EUI), Robert Schuman Centre of Advanced Studies (RSCAS).
    6. Barry G. Rabe & Christopher Borick, 2013. "Conventional Politics for Unconventional Drilling? Lessons from Pennsylvania's Early Move into Fracking Policy Development," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 30(3), pages 321-340, May.
    7. Manuel Fischer & Philip Leifeld, 2015. "Policy forums: Why do they exist and what are they used for?," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 48(3), pages 363-382, September.
    8. Connor P. Spreng & Benjamin K. Sovacool & Daniel Spreng, 2016. "All hands on deck: polycentric governance for climate change insurance," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 139(2), pages 129-140, November.
    9. Barry Rabe, 2007. "Environmental Policy and the Bush Era: The Collision Between the Administrative Presidency and State Experimentation," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 37(3), pages 413-431, Summer.
    10. Elinor Ostrom, 2016. "Nested Externalities and Polycentric Institutions: Must We Wait for Global Solutions to Climate Change Before Taking Actions at Other Scales?," Studies in Economic Theory, in: Graciela Chichilnisky & Armon Rezai (ed.), The Economics of the Global Environment, pages 259-276, Springer.
    11. Mark Lubell & Adam Douglas Henry & Mike McCoy, 2010. "Collaborative Institutions in an Ecology of Games," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(2), pages 287-300, April.
    12. Dale Krane, 2007. "The Middle Tier in American Federalism: State Government Policy Activism During the Bush Presidency," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 37(3), pages 453-477, Summer.
    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. Petrovich, Beatrice & Carattini, Stefano & Wüstenhagen, Rolf, 2021. "The price of risk in residential solar investments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    2. Matthew C. Nowlin, 2022. "Who should “do more” about climate change? Cultural theory, polycentricity, and public support for climate change actions across actors and governments," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(4), pages 468-485, July.
    3. Anna Kukkonen & Tuomas Ylä-Anttila, 2020. "The Science–Policy Interface as a Discourse Network: Finland’s Climate Change Policy 2002–2015," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 200-214.

    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. Jordan K. Lofthouse & Roberta Q. Herzberg, 2023. "The Continuing Case for a Polycentric Approach for Coping with Climate Change," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-24, February.
    2. Matthew C. Nowlin, 2022. "Who should “do more” about climate change? Cultural theory, polycentricity, and public support for climate change actions across actors and governments," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(4), pages 468-485, July.
    3. Tiffany H. Morrison & W. Neil Adger & Katrina Brown & Maria Carmen Lemos & Dave Huitema & Terry P. Hughes, 2017. "Mitigation and adaptation in polycentric systems: sources of power in the pursuit of collective goals," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(5), September.
    4. Marcel J. Dorsch & Christian Flachsland, 2017. "A Polycentric Approach to Global Climate Governance," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 17(2), pages 45-64, May.
    5. Wang, Qiang & Chen, Xi, 2013. "Rethinking and reshaping the climate policy: Literature review and proposed guidelines," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 469-477.
    6. Manfred Milinski & Jochem Marotzke, 2022. "Economic experiments support Ostrom’s polycentric approach to mitigating climate change," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-9, December.
    7. Daniel Fitzpatrick & Rebecca Monson, 2022. "Property rights and climate migration: Adaptive governance in the South Pacific," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(2), pages 519-535, April.
    8. Phillip M. Hannam & Vítor V. Vasconcelos & Simon A. Levin & Jorge M. Pacheco, 2017. "Incomplete cooperation and co-benefits: deepening climate cooperation with a proliferation of small agreements," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 144(1), pages 65-79, September.
    9. Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Martiskainen, Mari, 2020. "Hot transformations: Governing rapid and deep household heating transitions in China, Denmark, Finland and the United Kingdom," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    10. Jayme Walenta, 2020. "Climate risk assessments and science‐based targets: A review of emerging private sector climate action tools," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(2), March.
    11. Chad M. Baum & Christian Gross, 2017. "Sustainability policy as if people mattered: developing a framework for environmentally significant behavioral change," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 53-95, April.
    12. Balta-Ozkan, Nazmiye & Watson, Tom & Mocca, Elisabetta, 2015. "Spatially uneven development and low carbon transitions: Insights from urban and regional planning," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 500-510.
    13. Thomas Kalinowski, 2020. "Institutional Innovations and Their Challenges in the Green Climate Fund: Country Ownership, Civil Society Participation and Private Sector Engagement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-13, October.
    14. Jordan K. Lofthouse, 2023. "Jonathan H. Adler (ed.), Climate Liberalism: Perspectives on Liberty, Property and Pollution. Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan, 2023. 373 pages. USD 139.99 (hardcover)," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 197(1), pages 311-315, October.
    15. Charles F. Sabel & David G. Victor, 2017. "Governing global problems under uncertainty: making bottom-up climate policy work," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 144(1), pages 15-27, September.
    16. Ilia Murtazashvili & Veeshan Rayamajhee & Keith Taylor, 2023. "The Tragedy of the Nurdles: Governing Global Externalities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-15, April.
    17. Federico Holm & Ramiro Berardo, 2020. "Coalitional Architecture of Climate Change Litigation Networks in the United States," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 37(6), pages 797-822, November.
    18. Marta G. Rivera-Ferre & Miguel Ortega-Cerdà & Johann Baumgärtner, 2013. "Rethinking Study and Management of Agricultural Systems for Policy Design," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(9), pages 1-18, September.
    19. Klaus Eisenack, 2023. "Why local governments set climate targets: Effects of city size and political costs," Berlin School of Economics Discussion Papers 0029, Berlin School of Economics.
    20. Christenson, Dino P. & Goldfarb, Jillian L. & Kriner, Douglas L., 2017. "Costs, benefits, and the malleability of public support for “Fracking”," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 407-417.

    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:spr:climat:v:155:y:2019:i:4:d:10.1007_s10584-019-02481-y. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.