Why are there so many policies?Jani Lukkarinen, Mikael Hildén, Eeva Primmer

Finnish Environment Institute

SET annual seminar15.2.2017

2

The number of reportedpolicies and measuresvaries hugely

e.g., France reported 200, Lithuania reported 10

Schoenefeld et al (2016): Climate Policy,DOI: 10.1080/14693062.2016.1248887

The impact of policies on GHG emissions is highly skewed

3

Hildén et al (2014) Environmental Politics, 23:5, 884-905,DOI: 10.1080/09644016.2014.924205

Questions

• Why do we have so many policies?

• Can we make sense, trace the coherence and form sensible groups out of climate policy mix?

• Are there blank areas and what do they tell us about climate and energy policies?

►Policy intensity & transition potential

4

Policies involve multiple sectors

5Schoenefeld et al (2016): Climate Policy,DOI: 10.1080/14693062.2016.1248887

Ave

rage

nu

mb

ero

f se

cto

rsas

sign

edp

er p

olic

y

So what is going on?

• A few strong policies + lots of decoration?• Institutional and organizational factors (March & Olsen, 1983)

• Groups of policies that have transformative force?• Innovation policy mixes for sustainability transitions (Kivimaa and

Kern, 2016)

• Ritualistic policy making?

• Symbolic commitment (Baker, 2007)

6

Analytical framework

7

Policies and Measures

Index for Climate PolicyActivity (CPA)

Transition analysis: ’creative destruction’

Clustering the policies

Policy logic and functionsPolicy gapsInspiration:

Schaffrin et al. (2015)Kivimaa & Kern (2016)

8

Intensity (CPA)IntegrationScopeObjectiveBudgetImplementationMonitoring

Transition analysis

6 constructive components4 disruptive components

Cluster analysis

0 2 4 6 8 10

Other policy instruments

Renewable energy

Energy efficiency

Transport

Buildings

Land-use planning

Waste management

Agriculture & forestry

Analysis of 39 policies

Coding by2 independentresearchers + iteration

5 clusters

9

Low intensity

High intensity

Renewable energy

Energy efficiency

C5 ’status quo’

C4 Soft measures

C3 Control policies

C2 Regulatory-fiscal policies

C1 Economic incentives

5 clusters

10

Low intensity

High intensity

Transport

Buildings

C5 ’status quo’

C4 Soft measures

C3 Control policies

C2 Regulatory-fiscal policies

C1 Economic incentives

Cluster 1:Economic incentives

11

Choosing the winners, boosting the newcomers?

• Renewable energy subsidies and investmentsupport schemes

• Very high intensity

• Stated emmission reduction objectives

• High and diverse constructive score; very littledisruptiveness

Cluster 2:Regulatory-fiscal policies

A balanced group of transition policies?

• No dominant policy sector

• Framework policies in waste and energyefficiency

• High intensity

• Emphasis on market formation

• Creative-destructive policies

12

Cluster 3:Control policiesA seldom seen son of the climate policy family?

• Includes only buildings and waste regulation

• Medium-strong intensity

• Strong disruptiveness, lackingconstructiveness

Note: the planned ban on the use of coal is an example of a potentially very disruptive policy

13

Cluster 4:soft measuresThe power of knowledge and voluntary action?

• The largest group

• Consists of energy efficiency, transport, building and agricultural policies

• Low average intensity score, but large variation

• Constructive emphasis on knowledgedevelopment, legitimation and resourcemobilisation

14

Cluster 5:’Status quo’Laissez-faire or weak signals of change?

• Mainly agriculture and land-use planningpolicies

• Relatively high intensity due to well-definedimplementation and monitoring schemes

• No real constructive or disruptive effect

15

Distribution of sectorpolicies across clusters

Economicincentives

Regulatory-fiscal

Control policies

Soft measures

’Status quo’

Renewable energy 3 1

Energy efficiency 1 3

Transport 2 2

Buildings 1 4 3 1

Land-use 2

Waste 1 2 1

Agriculture & forestry

2 4

Other 3 2 1

16

Lessons• Policies have a range of different roles and functional

logics based on their intensity and other characteristicsrevealed by coding.

• It is possible to identify policies that have particularstrenghts either as pushing for new or removingsupport from existing solutions.

• More renewal than destruction – a need for rethinkingpolicymaking?

• The ’non-effective’ policies may act as glue – orbridges, connecting old symbolic policies and preparing for new untackled issues?

17

Thank you!

jani.lukkarinen@ymparisto.fi

18Thanks also to Visa Kivisaari who participated in the analysis

Extra material

• List of policies

• CPA values

• ’Creative-destructive’ figures

19

20

TEM energy policies (6)

Decisions-in-principle for nuclear power

Renewal of electricity taxation

Support for LNG terminals

Electricity market liberalisation

Energy subsidies to companies and communities for energy efficiency and renewabes

Investment subsidy for main energy plans

Renewable energy (4)

Promoting wind power

Promoting wood chips

Promoting biogas in electricity and heat production

Promoting biogas in road transportation

Energy efficiency (4)

Act on Ecodesign and Energy Labelling (1005/2008, amendment 1009/2010)

Energy Audit Programme

Energy Efficiency Agreements 2008-2016 and the expected extension until 2035 (Voluntary energy efficiency agreements)Consumer energy advice

Transport (4)

Promoting the use of biofuels in the transport sector

Renewing of the vehicle fleet

Energy efficiency in the transport sector

Influencing modal splits and curbing the growth in vehicle kilometers

21

Buildings (9)Act on energy certificates for buildings Building regulations (2003,2008, 2010)Renewed Building regulations (2012)Information dissemination and campaigns targeted to residents and other users of buildings Subsidies for energy efficiency in buildings (single houses, residential apartment houses and row houses)Towards zero-energy buildingsEnergy extension, "energy expert"-activityRevision of the Land Use and Building Act (EV 123/2012 vp - HE 81/2012 vp) Ministry of the Environment Decree (4/13) on improving the energy performance of buildings undergoing renovation or alteration. Land-use planning (2)Land-use planningImproved regulation of the development of major retail centresWaste management (4)Government decision on packaging and packaging waste 962/1997, 1025/2000, 987/2004, 817/2005, 2014/518

Government decree on landfills (861/1997, revised 2006), Biowaste strategy (2004)General reform of waste legislation; Act on Waste (646/2011); Decree on Waste (179/2012); Waste Tax Act (1126/2010) New Decree on Landfills(331/2013) Energy-efficiency in agriculture (5)Biomass boiler houses in farmsFresh grain silosEnergy efficiency of unheated cattle buildings and heat recovery in pig farmsFarm reparcellingFarm Energy Programme and energy advice to the farmsLand-use, land-use change and forestry (1)National Forest Strategy 2025

Policy intensity values

22

IntensityMeasure

Mean

Integration 0,6

Scope 0,3

Objective 0,06

Budget 0,08

Implementation 0,67

Monitoring 0,57

CPA Index 0,380

0,1

0,2

0,3

0,4

0,5

0,6

0,7

All policies arranged by the index value

23

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

Others (6)

Agriculture & forestry (6)

Waste management (4)

Land-use planning (2)

Buildings (9)

Transport (4)

Energy efficiency (4)

Renewable energy (4)

Creative & disruptive functions