@article{OllierMetzNunezJimenezetal.2022,
  author    = {Ollier, Lana and Metz, Florence and Nu{\~n}ez-Jimenez, Alejandro and Sp{\"a}th, Leonhard and Lilliestam, Johan},
  title     = {The European 2030 climate and energy package},
  series = {Policy sciences},
  volume    = {55},
  journal   = {Policy sciences},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {Springer Science+Business Media LLC},
  address   = {New York},
  issn      = {0032-2687},
  doi       = {10.1007/s11077-022-09447-5},
  pages     = {161 -- 184},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {The European Union's 2030 climate and energy package introduced fundamental changes compared to its 2020 predecessor. These changes included a stronger focus on the internal market and an increased emphasis on technology-neutral decarbonization while simultaneously de-emphasizing the renewables target. This article investigates whether changes in domestic policy strategies of leading member states in European climate policy preceded the observed changes in EU policy. Disaggregating strategic change into changes in different elements (goals, objectives, instrumental logic), allows us to go beyond analyzing the relative prioritization of different goals, and to analyze how policy requirements for reaching those goals were dynamically redefined over time. To this end, we introduce a new method, which based on insights from social network analysis, enables us to systematically trace those strategic chances. We find that shifts in national strategies of the investigated member states preceded the shift in EU policy. In particular, countries reframed their understanding of supply security, and pushed for the internal electricity market also as a security measure to balance fluctuating renewables. Hence, the increasing focus on markets and market integration in the European 2030 package echoed the increasingly central role of the internal market for electricity supply security in national strategies. These findings also highlight that countries dynamically redefined their goals relative to the different phases of the energy transition.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{OllierMelligerLilliestam2020,
  author    = {Ollier, Lana and Melliger, Marc Andr{\´e} and Lilliestam, Johan},
  title     = {Friends or foes?},
  series = {Energies : open-access journal of related scientific research, technology development and studies in policy and management},
  volume    = {13},
  journal   = {Energies : open-access journal of related scientific research, technology development and studies in policy and management},
  number    = {23},
  publisher = {MDPI},
  address   = {Basel},
  issn      = {1996-1073},
  doi       = {10.3390/en13236339},
  pages     = {23},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {Energy efficiency measures and the deployment of renewable energy are commonly presented as two sides of the same coin-as necessary and synergistic measures to decarbonize energy systems and reach the temperature goals of the Paris Agreement. Here, we quantitatively investigate the policies and performances of the EU Member States to see whether renewables and energy efficiency policies are politically synergistic or if they rather compete for political attention and resources. We find that Member States, especially the ones perceived as climate leaders, tend to prioritize renewables over energy efficiency in target setting. Further, almost every country performs well in either renewable energy or energy efficiency, but rarely performs well in both. We find no support for the assertion that the policies are synergistic, but some evidence that they compete. However, multi-linear regression models for performance show that performance, especially in energy efficiency, is also strongly associated with general economic growth cycles, and not only efficiency policy as such. We conclude that renewable energy and energy efficiency are not synergistic policies, and that there is some competition between them.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{ThonigDelRioKieferetal.2020,
  author    = {Thonig, Richard and Del Rio, Pablo and Kiefer, Christoph and Lazaro Touza, Lara and Escribano, Gonzalo and Lechon, Yolanda and Spaeth, Leonhard and Wolf, Ingo and Lilliestam, Johan},
  title     = {Does ideology influence the ambition level of climate and renewable energy policy?},
  series = {Energy sources, part B: economics, planning, and policy},
  volume    = {16},
  journal   = {Energy sources, part B: economics, planning, and policy},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {Taylor \& Francis Group},
  address   = {Philadelphia},
  issn      = {1556-7249},
  doi       = {10.1080/15567249.2020.1811806},
  pages     = {4 -- 22},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {We investigate whether political ideology has an observable effect on decarbonization ambition, renewable power aims, and preferences for power system balancing technologies in four European countries. Based on the Energy Logics framework, we identify ideologically different transition strategies (state-centered, market-centered, grassroots-centered) contained in government policies and opposition party programs valid in 2019. We compare these policies and programs with citizen poll data. We find that ideology has a small effect: governments and political parties across the spectrum have similar, and relatively ambitious, decarbonization and renewables targets. This mirrors citizens' strong support for ambitious action regardless of their ideological self-description. However, whereas political positions on phasing out fossil fuel power are clear across the policy space, positions on phasing in new flexibility options to balance intermittent renewables are vague or non-existent. As parties and citizens agree on strong climate and renewable power aims, the policy ambition is likely to remain high, even if governments change.},
  language  = {en}
}