Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

How and Why Do Policy Paradigms Change; and Does It Matter? The Case of UK Energy Policy

  • Chapter
Policy Paradigms in Theory and Practice

Part of the book series: Studies in the Political Economy of Public Policy ((PEPP))

Abstract

It has long been argued that materialist explanations (i.e. focusing exclusively on interests) of policy-making and institutional change are limited and that concepts developed within the ‘new’ institutionalism may provide some extra explanatory depth (Blyth, 2002; Fischer, 2003; Widmaier, Blyth, & Seabrooke, 2007). The ‘new’ institutionalism, formed in the 1980s and 1990s as a response to rational choice and behaviouralism, sought to ‘bring the state back in’ to the explanation of political action (Hall & Taylor, 1996; Peters, 2005). Sociological and constructivist variants of new institutionalism have built upon Hall’s (1993) seminal work on policy paradigms in order to provide explanations of the role ideas play in policy and institutional change (e.g. see Béland & Cox, 2013; Carson, Burns, & Calvo, 2009; Daigneault, 2013; Kern, 2011; Kuzemko, 2013; Menahem, 2008; Murphy, 2012; Niemelä & Saarinen, 2012). These analyses proceed from the observation that frameworks of ideas colour not only how a policy problem is understood, but also policy choices and institutional structures. Likewise, frameworks of ideas can also impact heavily upon processes of institutional change, often understood as happening in response to crises. Ideas and their expression in the form of narratives are understood as being capable of convincing groups within society that there is a crisis, that existing policy is failing to solve the crisis, and that alternative solutions should be pursued.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Barton, B., Redgwell, C., Ronne, A., & Zilman, D. N. (2004). Energy Security: Managing Risk in a Dynamic Legal and Regulatory Environment. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Béland, D., & Cox, R. H. (2013). The Politics of Policy Paradigms. Governance, 26(2), 193–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bird, J. (2007). Energy Security in the UK. London: Institute for Public Policy Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • BIS and DECC. (2009). The UK Low Carbon Industrial Strategy. Department for Business Innovation and Skills and Department of Energy and Climate Change.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blyth, M. (2002). Great Transformations: Economic Ideas and Institutional Change in the Twentieth Century. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Carbon Trust. (2006). Policy Frameworks for Renewables: An Analysis of Policy Frameworks to Drive Future Investment in Near or Long Term Power in the UK. London: The Carbon Trust.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carson, M., Burns, T. R., & Calvo, D. (Eds.) (2009). Paradigms in Public Policy: Theory and Practice of Paradigm Shifts in the EU. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daigneault, P.-M. (2013). Reassessing the Concept of Policy Paradigm: Aligning Ontology and Methodology in Policy Studies. Journal of European Public Policy, 21(3), 453–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DECC. (2009a). The Low Carbon Transition Plan: National Strategy for Climate and Energy. London: TSO.

    Google Scholar 

  • DECC. (2009b). The UK Renewable Energy Strategy. London: HMSO.

    Google Scholar 

  • DECC. (2009c). Government Response to Malcolm Wicks’s Review of International Energy Security, ‘Energy Security: A National Challenge in a Changing World’. London: Department of Energy and Climate Change.

    Google Scholar 

  • DECC. (2010). The Green Deal. A Summary of the Government’s Proposals. London: Department of Energy and Climate Change.

    Google Scholar 

  • DECC. (2011a). About Us. DECC. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-of-energy-climate-change/about.

  • DECC. (2011b). Annual Report on Fuel Poverty Statistics 2011. London: TSO.

    Google Scholar 

  • DECC. (2012). Draft Energy Bill. London: TSO.

    Google Scholar 

  • DTI. (2000). The Energy Report (Vol. 4). London: Department of Trade and Industry.

    Google Scholar 

  • DTI. (2003). Energy White Paper: Our Energy Future — Creating a Low Carbon Economy. London: HMSO.

    Google Scholar 

  • DTI. (2006a). The Energy Challenge Energy Review Report 2006. London: TSO.

    Google Scholar 

  • DTI. (2006b). Secretary of State’s Second Report to Parliament on Security of Gas and Electricity Supply in Great Britain. London: TSO.

    Google Scholar 

  • DTI. (2006c). The Effectiveness of Current Gas Security of Supply Arrangements: A Consultation. London: The National Archives.

    Google Scholar 

  • DTI. (2007). Meeting the Energy Challenge: An Energy White Paper. London: TSO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, F. (2003). Reframing Public Policy. Discursive Politics and Deliberative Practices. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fox, L. (2006). Over a Barrel: The Challenge of Defense and Energy Security. The Westminster Energy Forum. Retrieved from http://www.westminsterenergy.org7Over_a_Barrel_-_the_Challenge_of_Defense_and_Energy_Security.pdf.

  • Foxon, T. J. (2012). Transition Pathways for a UK Low Carbon Electricity Future. Energy Policy, 52(1), 10–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foxon, T., Pearson, P., Makuch, Z., & Mata, M. (2005). Transforming Policy Processes to Promote Sustainable Innovation: Some Guiding Principles. A Report for Policy Makers. London: Imperial College.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geels, F. W. (2002). Technological Transitions as Evolutionary Reconfiguration Processes: A Multi-level Perspective and a Case-Study. Research Policy, 31(8–9), 1257–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giddens, A. (2009). The Politics of Climate Change. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldthau, A. (2012). From the State to the Market and Back: Policy Implications of Changing Energy Paradigms. Global Policy, 3(2), 198–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenpeace. (2006). Oil and Peace Don’t Mix. London: GreenPeace.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, P. A. (1993). Policy Paradigms, Social Learning, and the State: The Case of Economic Policymaking in Britain. Comparative Politics, 25(3), 275–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, P. A., & Taylor, R. C. R. (1996). Political Science and the Three New Institutionalisms. Political Studies, 44(5), 936–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hay, C. (1996). Narrating Crisis: The Discursive Construction of the Winter of Discontent. Sociology, 30(2), 253–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hay, C. (2001). The ‘Crisis’ of Keynesianism and the Rise of Neoliberalism in Britain: An Ideational Institutionalist Approach. In J. L. Campbell & O. K. Pedersen (Eds.), The Rise of Neoliberalism and Institutional Analysis (pp. 193–218). Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hay, C., & Wincott, D. (1998). Structure, Agency and Historical Institutionalism. Political Studies, 46(5), 951–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helm, D. (2005). The Assessment: The New Energy Paradigm. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 21(1), 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • HM Government. (2004). Energy Act 2004. London: The National Archives.

    Google Scholar 

  • HM Government. (2008a). The 2008 Climate Change Act. London: HMSO.

    Google Scholar 

  • HM Government. (2008b). The Energy Act. London: HMSO.

    Google Scholar 

  • House of Commons. (2007a). Beyond Stern: From the Climate Change Programme Review to the Draft Climate Change Bill, a Report by the House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee. London: TSO.

    Google Scholar 

  • House of Commons. (2007b). Energy Security: Research Paper 07/42. London: House of Commons Library.

    Google Scholar 

  • IEA. (2007). Energy Policies of IEA Countries. The United Kingdom 2006 Review. Paris: International Energy Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • JESS (Joint Energy Security of Supply Working Group). (2006). Long-Term Security of Energy Supply: A DTI Report. London: DTI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keay, M. (2012). Death by a Thousand Regulations: The New Energy Bill. Paper presented at the Oxford Energy Comment, The Oxford Institute for Energy Studies, Oxford, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kern, F. (2011). Ideas, Institutions, and Interests: Explaining Policy Divergence in Fostering ‘System Innovations’ towards Sustainability. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 29(6), 1117–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kern, F. (2012). Using the Multi-level Perspective on Socio-technical Transitions to Assess Innovation Policy. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 79(2), 298–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuzemko, C. (2013). The Energy Security-Climate Nexus: Institutional Change in the UK and Beyond. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kuzemko, C. (2014). Politicising UK energy: What Speaking Energy Security Can Do. Policy & Politics, 42(2), 259–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawson, N. (1982). Speech delivered at the Fourth Annual International Conference, International Association of Energy Economists, Churchill College, Cambridge, June 28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Light, M. (2006). Russia’s Political Engagement with the EU. In R. Allison, M. Light, & A. White (Eds.), Putin’s Russia and the Enlarged Europe (pp. 77–88). Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lockwood, M. (2013). The Political Sustainability of Climate Policy: The Case of the UK Climate Change Act. Global Environmental Change, 23(5), 1339–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loorbach, D. (2007). Transition Management. New Mode of Governance for Sustainable Development. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahoney, J., & Thelen, K. (2010). Explaining Institutional Change: Ambiguity, Agency, and Power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, D. (1999). Introduction: Explaining Change in the Postwar Period. In D. Marsh, J. Butler, C. Hay, J. Johnston, P. Kerr, S. McAnulla, & M. Watson (Eds.), Postwar British Politics in Perspective. Cambridge: Policy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Menahem, G. (2008). The Transformation of Higher Education in Israel since the 1990s: The Role of Ideas and Policy Paradigms. Governance, 21(4), 499–526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miliband, E. (2008). The Rise and Fall and Rise Again of a Department of Energy. Speech given at Imperial College, London, UK, December 9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, C. (2008). The Political Economy of Sustainable Energy. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, C., & Connor, P. (2004). Renewable Energy Policy in the UK 1990–2003. Energy Policy, 32(17), 1935–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, M. (2012). Interests, Institutions and Ideas: Explaining Irish Social Security Policy. Policy & Politics, 40(3), 347–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niemelä, M., & Saarinen, A. (2012). The Role of Ideas and Institutional Change in Finnish Public Sector Reform. Policy and Politics, 40(2), 171–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, M., & Pemberton, H. (2004). Learning and Change in 20th-Century British Economic Policy. Governance, 17(3), 415–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ostrovsky, A. (2006, April 21). Oil and Gas Bring Influence. Financial Times, p. 5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, P., & Watson, J. (2012). UK Energy Policy 1980–2010. A History and Lessons to Be Learnt. London: The Institution of Engineering and Technology and Parliamentary Group for Energy Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, B. G. (2005). Institutional Theory in Political Science: The ‘New Institutionalism’. London and New York: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • PIU (Performance and Innovation Unit). (2002). The Energy Review. A Performance and Innovation Unit Report. London: Cabinet Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • RCEP. (2000). Energy — The Changing Climate. 22nd Report. London: Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, A. (2006, July 22). Russia’s Pipeline Politics. Prospect.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rotmans, J., Kemp, R., & Van Asselt, M. (2001). More Evolution Than Revolution: Transition Management in Public Policy. Foresight, 3(1), 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rotmans, J., & Loorbach, D. (2008). Transition Management: Reflexive Governance of Societal Complexity through Searching, Learning and Experimenting. In J. Van den Bergh & F. R. Bruinsma (Eds.), The Transition to Renewable Energy: Theory and Practice (pp. 15–46). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rutledge, I. (2010). UK Energy Policy and Market Fundamentalism: A Historical Overview. In I. Rutledge & P. Wright (Eds.), UK Energy Policy and the End of Market Fundamentalism (pp. 1–38). Oxford: Oxford Institute for Energy Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rutledge, I. (2007). New Labour, Energy Policy and ‘Competitive Markets’. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 31(6), 901–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sauter, R., & Watson, J. (2007). Strategies for the Deployment of Micro-generation: Implications for Social Acceptance. Energy Policy, 35(5), 2770–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, V. A., & Radaelli, C. M. (2004). Policy Change and Discourse in Europe: Conceptual and Methodological Issues. West European Politics, 27(2), 183–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scrase, I., & MacKerron, G. (2009). Energy for the Future. A New Agenda. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Scrase, I., Wang, T., MacKerron, G., McGowan, F., & Sorrell, S. (2009). Introduction: Climate Policy. In I. Scrase & G. MacKerron (Eds.), Energy for the Future: A New Agenda (pp. 3–19). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Stern, N. (2006). The Economics of Climate Change. London: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stone, D. A. (1989). Causal Stories and the Formation of Policy Agendas. Political Science Quarterly, 104(2), 281–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watson, J. (2009). Technology Assessment and Innovation Policy. In I. Scrase & G. MacKerron (Eds.), Energy for the Future: A New Agenda (pp. 123–46). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wicks, M. (2009). Energy Security: A National Challenge in a Changing World. London: Department of Energy and Climate Change.

    Google Scholar 

  • Widmaier, W., Blyth, M., & Seabrooke, L. (2007). Exogenous Shocks or Endogenous Constructions? The Meanings of Wars and Crises. International Studies Quarterly, 51(4), 747–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, C. A. (2001). Policy Regimes and Policy Change. Journal of Public Policy, 20(03), 247–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Wildlife Fund. (2006). WWF-UK Response to the Energy Review. Retreived from http://www.wwf.org.uk/research_centre/research_centre_results.cfm? uNewsID=2445

  • Yee, A. S. (1996). The Causal Effects of Ideas on Policy. International Organisation, 50(1), 69–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Florian Kern
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Caroline Kuzemko
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Catherine Mitchell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Dublin Institute of Technology, Ireland

    John Hogan (Lecturer) (Lecturer)

  2. Simon Fraser University, Canada

    Michael Howlett (Professor) (Professor)

Copyright information

© 2015 Florian Kern, Caroline Kuzemko and Catherine Mitchell

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Kern, F., Kuzemko, C., Mitchell, C. (2015). How and Why Do Policy Paradigms Change; and Does It Matter? The Case of UK Energy Policy. In: Hogan, J., Howlett, M. (eds) Policy Paradigms in Theory and Practice. Studies in the Political Economy of Public Policy. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137434043_13

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation