Transnational Coalitions in International Negotiations: The Case of the EU 2030-Targets and ACF

A framework claimed to have large explanatory potential for EU policies in general, and climate and energy policy in particular, is the advocacy coalition framework (ACF). Still, few studies have tested out its explanatory potential relative to rival frameworks in terms of the actors and processes they emphasize, such as liberal intergovernmentalism (LI) and historical institutionalism (HI). Using the EUs new 2030 headline climate and energy policy targets as a case of EU climate and energy policy, this study asks: which actors have been more influential in the political processes leading to the final outcome: the single member states, the central EU institutions, or coalitions of interest groups and others? The 2030-case is relevant for several reasons. First, there were very high stakes and high levels of politicization for all actors involved. Second, EU aims to be a leader in international climate negotiations and thus strives to lead by example. Third, the targets will potentially influence EU and the member states’ future energy systems substantially, as they set the minimum thresholds for greenhouse gas mitigation, renewable energy growth and energy efficiency. Based on 27 interviews of representatives of key actors conducted before and after the final outcome and extensive document studies, this paper argues that the explanatory frameworks complement each other in shedding light on the various actors and processes. The headline targets appear to be a genuine compromise for all actors involved. HI explains well the Commission’s importance as an agenda setter, LI the crucial role of large member states such as Germany, France, the UK and Poland, while ACF discerns and explains the various grand coalitions forged in the interest group community.