2019
A contested transition toward a coal-free future : Advocacy coalitions and coal policy in the Czech Republic
OCELÍK, Petr; Kamila SVOBODOVÁ; Markéta HENDRYCHOVÁ; Lukáš LEHOTSKÝ; Jo-Anne EVERINGHAM et al.Základní údaje
Originální název
A contested transition toward a coal-free future : Advocacy coalitions and coal policy in the Czech Republic
Autoři
OCELÍK, Petr ORCID; Kamila SVOBODOVÁ; Markéta HENDRYCHOVÁ; Lukáš LEHOTSKÝ ORCID; Jo-Anne EVERINGHAM; Saleem ALI; Jaroslaw BADERA a Alex LECHNER
Vydání
Energy Research & Social Science, Amsterdam, Elsevier, 2019, 2214-6296
Další údaje
Jazyk
angličtina
Typ výsledku
Článek v odborném periodiku
Obor
50601 Political science
Stát vydavatele
Nizozemské království
Utajení
není předmětem státního či obchodního tajemství
Odkazy
Impakt faktor
Impact factor: 4.771
Kód RIV
RIV/00216224:14230/19:00112210
Organizační jednotka
Fakulta sociálních studií
UT WoS
000498882200001
EID Scopus
2-s2.0-85072763458
Klíčová slova anglicky
Energy policy; Energy transition; Coal phase-out; Policy networks
Štítky
Příznaky
Mezinárodní význam, Recenzováno
Změněno: 24. 3. 2020 16:06, Mgr. Blanka Farkašová
Anotace
V originále
Coal phase-out is an integral part of the ongoing energy transition to a decarbonized economy. Any such process involves diverse actors that compete over the nature and pace of such transition. This research uses the Advocacy Coalition Framework to analyze the conditions of policy change within an adversarial subsystem. It focuses on the coal subsystem in the Czech Republic, a post-communist coal-dependent country with comparatively large economically recoverable reserves. Using data from an organizational survey, exploratory social network analysis techniques are applied to identify advocacy coalitions and deductive block-modeling is used to test hypotheses on the subsystem’s functioning. The focus is on: (1) fragmentation of decision-makers, (2) targeting of decision-makers, and (3) use of expert information. Two competing and ideologically distant coalitions were identified: the Industry Coalition and Environmental Coalition. The results further show high fragmentation among decision-makers, as indicated by their cross-coalition membership and the heterogeneity of their beliefs. The targeting of decision-makers is practiced by principal members of both coalitions, i.e. environmental non-governmental organizations and industry, but also by research organizations. Lastly, expert information exchange strongly overlaps with the identified coalitions and thus increases their cohesiveness. It is argued that such subsystem configuration limits the potential for policy change through negotiated agreement or policy learning. Policy brokers and policy venues are suggested as remedies to moderate the adversarial nature of the subsystem.