These considerations clearly apply to the example of renewable energy raised
above. Most countries have some kind of support policies for renewable energy,
yet in some countries these have not gone very far, whereas in others they have
taken off. It might be argued that contrasts are simply due to the extent or generosity
of subsidy, but this in itself begs the question of how higher levels of subsidy (which
are clearly seen in countries like Denmark and Germany) are politically sustained.
One factor which might be expected to have an influence on the knock-on
effects of policies is policy design (Pierson, 1993; Patashnik and Zelizer, 2009).
Apparently small differences in policy design may lead to quite big differences in
who can access the benefits from the policy, how those benefits are distributed,
what the cost is and who bears that cost. Different policy approaches can also have
varying interpretive effects, resonating strongly or falling flat with existing or new
constituencies, and leading to large divergences in political sustainability. In the
case of renewable energy policy design, a key issue is how different designs affect
the political dynamics of the energy sector discussed above, and in particular the
balance between producers and users.
Germany and the UK
Germany and the UK provide contrasting examples of how policy feedback has
produced different pathways in the growth of renewable energy. At the start of
the 1990s, neither Germany nor the UK generated significant amounts of electricity
from renewable sources. In Germany, policies adopted from 1990 onwards led to
rapid sustained growth in renewable electricity capacity, which actually accelerated
after 2000. In the UK, renewable electricity was also eligible for support from around
the same time, but growth has been much slower. By 2012, total renewable
generation in the UK was around 11 per cent of total demand, less than half
the share in Germany. The growth of renewables has generated negative feedback
effects in both countries, especially opposition on grounds of cost. However, a key
difference is that Germany’s policy approach created considerable positive feedback
effects which are largely absent in the UK, leaving the policy there far more
politically exposed and currently in some trouble.
The growth of renewables in Germany has undoubtedly benefited from higher
levels of environmental awareness and stronger opposition to nuclear power than
in the UK. However, the nature of the policies adopted in the two countries has
also been distinctively different. Germany’s policies have offered stable, technologyspecific prices to renewable generators (fixed prices from 2000) and a guaranteed
market. By providing attractive returns with low risk and ensuring grid connection
(Mitchell et al., 2006), a key aspect of the feed-in tariff was that its benefits could
be accessed by a range of groups, including farmers, households, cooperatives,
schools, small businesses and municipalities, rather than large energy companies,
which were, in fact, excluded from the policy. The policy supported a range of
technologies, not only wind but also solar photovoltaics (PV), biomass and
anaerobic digestion. The fact that conservative farmers in areas such as Bavaria
Political dynamics of green transformations 91
above. Most countries have some kind of support policies for renewable energy,
yet in some countries these have not gone very far, whereas in others they have
taken off. It might be argued that contrasts are simply due to the extent or generosity
of subsidy, but this in itself begs the question of how higher levels of subsidy (which
are clearly seen in countries like Denmark and Germany) are politically sustained.
One factor which might be expected to have an influence on the knock-on
effects of policies is policy design (Pierson, 1993; Patashnik and Zelizer, 2009).
Apparently small differences in policy design may lead to quite big differences in
who can access the benefits from the policy, how those benefits are distributed,
what the cost is and who bears that cost. Different policy approaches can also have
varying interpretive effects, resonating strongly or falling flat with existing or new
constituencies, and leading to large divergences in political sustainability. In the
case of renewable energy policy design, a key issue is how different designs affect
the political dynamics of the energy sector discussed above, and in particular the
balance between producers and users.
Germany and the UK
Germany and the UK provide contrasting examples of how policy feedback has
produced different pathways in the growth of renewable energy. At the start of
the 1990s, neither Germany nor the UK generated significant amounts of electricity
from renewable sources. In Germany, policies adopted from 1990 onwards led to
rapid sustained growth in renewable electricity capacity, which actually accelerated
after 2000. In the UK, renewable electricity was also eligible for support from around
the same time, but growth has been much slower. By 2012, total renewable
generation in the UK was around 11 per cent of total demand, less than half
the share in Germany. The growth of renewables has generated negative feedback
effects in both countries, especially opposition on grounds of cost. However, a key
difference is that Germany’s policy approach created considerable positive feedback
effects which are largely absent in the UK, leaving the policy there far more
politically exposed and currently in some trouble.
The growth of renewables in Germany has undoubtedly benefited from higher
levels of environmental awareness and stronger opposition to nuclear power than
in the UK. However, the nature of the policies adopted in the two countries has
also been distinctively different. Germany’s policies have offered stable, technologyspecific prices to renewable generators (fixed prices from 2000) and a guaranteed
market. By providing attractive returns with low risk and ensuring grid connection
(Mitchell et al., 2006), a key aspect of the feed-in tariff was that its benefits could
be accessed by a range of groups, including farmers, households, cooperatives,
schools, small businesses and municipalities, rather than large energy companies,
which were, in fact, excluded from the policy. The policy supported a range of
technologies, not only wind but also solar photovoltaics (PV), biomass and
anaerobic digestion. The fact that conservative farmers in areas such as Bavaria
Political dynamics of green transformations 91