European Energy Policy Reconfiguration Through Policymakers' Eyes

The 2022 energy crisis marked a turning point in European energy policy, accelerating changes that were already underway. Early analyses anticipated that these developments could indicate a policy paradigm shift (Kuzemko et al., 2022; Osička & Černoch, 2022), particularly through the growing prominence of security considerations (Goldthau & Youngs, 2023; Sivonen & Kivimaa, 2023, 2024). More recent studies confirm this shift, pointing to a reconfigured European energy policy paradigm characterised by stronger security rationales and more coercive instruments, as evidenced by changes in hydrogen policy strategies (Kneebone et al., under review). However, how European policymakers themselves interpret these changes remains unclear. Do they understand recent changes as deliberate strategic reorientation or crisis-induced adaptation? As the outcome of institutional pressures or the reframing of existing solutions? Are interpretations aligned across Member States and EU governance levels? Without understanding policymakers’ perceptions, key questions remain unanswered. Interpretations that frame change as a strategic reorientation suggest a more stable emerging paradigm, whereas crisis-driven interpretations imply a weaker political commitment to implementation. This paper addresses this gap by combining policy paradigm theory (Hall, 1993; Schmidt et al., 2019) with discursive institutionalism (Schmidt, 2008, 2010). Policy paradigms are understood as both embedded in strategic documents and actively interpreted and reproduced through policymakers’ discourse. Hydrogen policy serves as a revealing case, sitting at the intersection of climate ambition, energy security, and green industrial policy, with a strong international dimension (Quitzow et al., 2024; Weko & Quitzow, 2025). Empirically, the study draws on 25 interviews, supplemented by structured elements enabling quantitative comparison. The paper contributes to debates on whether energy crises serve as critical junctures that produce lasting paradigm shifts or as triggers for temporary adaptation. By examining how policymakers recognise and articulate paradigm-level change, it contextualises existing document-based findings and informs assessments of the political durability of the EU’s current energy policy trajectory. References - Goldthau & Youngs (2023). The EU Energy Crisis and a New Geopolitics of Climate Transition. - Hall (1993). Policy Paradigms, Social Learning, and the State. - Kivimaa & Sivonen (2023). How will renewables expansion and hydrocarbon decline impact security? Analysis from a socio-technical transitions perspective. - Kneebone, et al. (under review, second round). A new European energy policy paradigm revealed by changes in hydrogen strategies. - Kuzemko et al. (2022). Russia’s war on Ukraine, European energy policy responses and implications for sustainable transformations. - Osička & Černoch (2022). European energy politics after Ukraine: The road ahead. - Schmidt et al. (2019). Policy goals, partisanship and paradigmatic change in energy policy – analyzing parliamentary discourse in Germany over 30 years. - Sivonen & Kivimaa, P. (2024). Politics in the energy-security nexus: an epistemic governance approach to the zero-carbon energy transition in Finland, Estonia, and Norway. - Schmidt (2010). Analyzing Ideas and Tracing Discursive Interactions in Institutional Change. - Schmidt (2008). Discursive Institutionalism. - Quitzow et al. (2024). Positioning Germany in an international hydrogen economy. - Weko & Quitzow (2025). From External Governance to Energy Diplomacy: The European Pursuit of Green Hydrogen.