Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Two renewable energy support schemes have spread across Europe: green certificate schemes ( GCSs ) and feed‐in tariffs ( FITs ). After a decade‐long policy‐making process, N orwegian decision makers decided in 2011 to adopt a GCS compatible with the already existing one in S weden and thereby establish a joint N orwegian‐Swedish GCS . The article explores this process of policy transfer, and asks to what extent competition and policy learning contributed to N orway's choice of a GCS . It finds that competition was a barrier to a joint N orwegian‐Swedish GCS rather than (as predicted by some scholars) a driver of policy transfer. In terms of policy learning, it finds that N orwegian bureaucrats systematically were searching for information about renewable energy policy instruments in a process characterised by rational learning. However, this information was not taken into account by elected policy makers, whose learning was unsystematic and almost exclusively influenced by S weden – making it a process of bounded learning. Finally, domestic factors that facilitated and constrained the policy transfer process are identified in the article. A reluctant bureaucracy defending the status quo policies constrained the policy transfer process. GCS as a market‐based instrument independent of yearly allocations over the annual national budgets facilitated the process by securing strong support in a broad coalition of stakeholder groups and thereby cross‐partisan support. The latter finding may contribute to the literature by underscoring the importance of domestic political factors.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gullberg et al. (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: