Self-reinforcing and self-undermining feedbacks in subnational climate policy implementation

This study demonstrates how interpretive feedback functions as an intervening mechanism during policy implementation that helps explain variation in subnational climate policy entrenchment. We examine three interrelated climate policy processes in Ontario, Canada from 2001-2018: a coal phase-out (2001-2014), the feed-in-tarriff (FIT) program for renewable energy (2006-2013) and a cap-and-trade program (2008-2018). Successful framing of the coal phase-out in terms of gains for both public health and climate change helped generate a broad-based coalition of support during implementation. Conversely, we find that the FIT and the cap-and-trade programs were vulnerable to framing around losses, especially regarding electricity rates and household costs, which counter-coalitions used to weaken public support during implementation. Our analysis demonstrates that building supportive coalitions for climate policy goes beyond the material gains and losses generated by initial policy designs. Framing strategies interact with policy designs over time to support or undermine policy durability.

Automated summary

This study examines the role of interpretive feedback as an intervening mechanism in policy implementation and highlights the importance of framing strategies in building supportive coalitions for climate policy. It demonstrates that successful framing of policies can generate broad-based support, while negative framing may weaken public support. The durability of climate policy is influenced by the interaction between policy designs and framing strategies.