The Potential of Collaborative Institutions for Major Policy Change – Lessons from the German ‘Coal Commission’

Agency, power and politics are integral parts of socio-technical transitions and become in particular relevant when it comes to value laden and highly contested sustainability transitions (Markard, Suter, and Ingold 2016). In many cases, there is a societal consensus that sustainability transitions should be pursued whereas there is great disagreement about the path and the exact destination of these transitions (Leach, Scoones, and Stirling 2010). The task of policy making is to overcome these conflicts, agree on a common destination, and to steer the transformation process in the agreed on direction with the help of concrete policies. Despite the importance of such transition policies, the required underlying political process has received limited attention in transition studies so far (Kern and Rogge 2018). The Advocacy Coalition Framework, first developed by Sabatier and Jenkins-Smith, explains how changes (caused by external effects and disruption) within the belief system of advocacy coalitions form the ground for policy change (Sabatier and Jenkins-Smith 1988). In a supplementary article, Sabatier and Weible (2007, 205–7) developed “alternative pathways to major political change” that exist when no external disruption and change in the belief system of the actors took place. One of these pathways is the negotiated agreement between stakeholder groups in collaborative institutions. To achieve major policy change via negotiated agreements these collaborative institutions need to fulfill nine prescriptions (Sabatier and Weible 2007, 206–7). The future of coal production and consumption in the energy sector are a good example for such conflictive issues in sustainability transitions. To stay in line with the 1,5°C (or even 2°C) target a substantial decline in coal consumption by 2030 is needed (Jewell et al. 2019). However, social and economic challenges hinder a coal phase-out on national level. In addition to conflictive material interests, oftentimes actors involved in processes around energy transitions have diametrical opposed belief systems (Ocelík et al. 2019; Markard, Suter, and Ingold 2016). In Germany, the commission on Growth, Structural Change and Employment, also known as ‘Coal Commission’, was established in 2018 to find a consensus on the German coal phase-out pathway. In this paper, we analyze whether the institution of the ‘Coal Commission’ fulfilled Sabatier and Weible’s (2007, 206–7) nine prescriptions, and if the related political process led to major policy change. We compare the results of the Commission as well as the final draft of the coal phase-out law with the expectations of the stakeholders communicated at the beginning of the process and thereby examine to what extent individual stakeholders were able to fulfill their demands or not. Additionally, we aim to shed light on the more general question of the legitimacy of commissions to reach a societal consensus for energy transitions. We use a combination of semi-structured interviews as well as literature and press reviews as data basis for the analysis. The evaluation period stretches over the preparation and the working period of the commission to the following legislative process lasting from 2018 until spring 2019. Interview partners are members of the commission.