Rethinking Policy Coherence of Climate Policy-Making: Actors, Issues and Democracy

This paper explores policymakers’ perceptions of what constitutes a “coherent” policy mix in climate policy. The idea of policy coherence, a concept often used but rarely defined, is critically assessed and framed as a constructed and context-dependent notion. A narrative analysis based on interviews with EU policy-makers is used to test our conceptual assumptions on policy coherence. We argue that perceptions of coherence are actor-dependent and vary significantly depending on governance levels and the interests of involved actors. Actors who are part of fragmented policy-making systems (silos) and differing organizational logics will develop different notions of coherence. In consequence, coherence for one actor might constitute incoherence for another. Furthermore, as configurations of actors and their resources shift, so too do definitions of what is deemed coherent. We continue with an issue-centered perspective on policy coherence, discussing coherent policies for complex and ‘wicked’ problems, particularly climate change. Disruptions and incoherence are often necessary to address systemic complexities, raising questions about the normative assumption that coherence should always be pursued. This tension is particularly pronounced in democratic systems, where policymaking involves inherent goal conflicts and trade-offs. The study explores whether coherence can—or even should—be achieved in the context of (democratic) policy-making, suggesting that it may be an inherently contested and process-dependent dimension of policy-making. Our study addresses the dynamic and context-dependent nature of coherence, challenging its presumed desirability and underscoring the importance of embracing pluralism in climate policy design. This study offers a critical contribution to the literature on policy coherence, policy mixes and governance in climate policy, advocating for a nuanced approach to policy coherence that recognizes its inherent trade-offs.