The politics of niche-regime conflicts: Distributed solar energy in the United States

By D. Hess. 2016

159 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Abstract In the U.S. utilities have attempted to slow the growth of distributed generation (DG) solar by reversing policy support, and they have greater financial and political resources than the solar industry. Empirical analysis of all major cases of niche-regime conflict over net metering policies in the U.S. shows that utilities are testing a range of strategies to slow the growth of DG solar, and outcomes vary by strategy type. An additional analysis of four case studies of DG solar conflicts shows that niche organizations can partially overcome the political power of regime organizations via three mechanisms: form coalitions with political parties that support the niche technologies, gain support from countervailing industrial organizations, and form coalitions with social movements to mobilize political protests and petitions. The political opportunity structure (in this case the party in control of the state government) affects the pattern of niche-regime strategies and interactions.

Subfields: Global and Planetary Change, Pollution, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/3d259ca4fc781c2e01261898edf566e43fd3b066

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Global and Planetary Change

In Pollution

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Disruption and low-carbon system transformation: Progress and new challenges in socio-technical transitions research and the Multi-Level Perspective (2017, background): “developing niche-innovations, possibly followed by strategic reorientation [23–25], c) niche-involvement of incumbent actors from different sectors [26], e.”
Guides or gatekeepers? Incumbent-oriented transition intermediaries in a low-carbon era (2020, background): “co-opting, buy-out, dilution or weakening of standards) [72].”
The co-evolution of policy mixes and socio-technical systems: Towards a conceptual framework of policy mix feedback in sustainability transitions (2019, background): “Studies have for example focused on the way in which ideas are presented (Kern, 2011; Scrase and Smith, 2009), the role of coalitions (Hess, 2014, 2015; Markard et al., 2015), power relations (Avelino and Rotmans, 2009; Avelino, 2011; Geels, 2014), and policy networks (Normann, 2017).”
Policy mixes for incumbency: Exploring the destructive recreation of renewable energy, shale gas ‘fracking,’ and nuclear power in the United Kingdom (2017, unknown): “In this, more general issues of power and politics around sustainability transitions have grown in focus (Hess 2015; Avelino 2011; Kuzemko et al. 2016; Geels 2014).”
Reducing energy demand through low carbon innovation: A sociotechnical transitions perspective and thirteen research debates (2018, background): “Sabatier’s advocacy coalition framework [167], Kingdon’s multiple streams framework [168], political economy [105,169], and political coalition theories [170], with the aim of better understanding the conflicts and power struggles associated with the emergence and diffusion of low carbon innovations”
Rage against the regime: Niche-regime interactions in the societal embedding of plant-based milk (2019, background): “…engaging particularly with the Multi-Level Perspective (Geels, 2004; 2011) and the debate on niche-regime interactions, which is gaining momentum in this journal and beyond (Bui et al., 2016; Diaz et al., 2013; Ingram, 2015, 2018; Smith and Raven, 2012; Hess, 2016; Raven et al., 2016).”