Business in Climate Policy Networks: Comparing Germany and Japan Volker Schneider* and Keiichi Satoh# University of Konstanz Presentation at the 24th World Congress of Political Science Panel Business in Old and New Policy Fields: National and International Engagement On July 26, 2016. Room PCC7/1.J (15:30-17:15) At Poznań Congress Center, Poland *Email: Volker SCHNEIDER Volker.schneider@uni-konstanz.de; #Keiichi SATOH k.s.vogel1234@gmail.com
Business in Climate Policy Networks: Comparing Germany and Japan Volker Schneider and Keiichi Satoh University of Konstanz Presentation at the 24th World Congress of Political Science Session Business in Old and New Policy Fields: National and International Engagement On July 26, 2016. Room PCC7/1.J (15:30-17:15) At Poznań Congress Center, Poland Contents Introduction Conceptual Background Politics of Climate Change Research Questions and Hypotheses Empirical Findings Influence Reputation of Business in the German and Japanese Policy Network Interest Heterogeneity and Policy Preferences The Position of Business in Network Structures Conclusions 2 21.07.2016 1
Policy Networks: A decentralized and relational perspective on policy-making Conceptual Level Decentralized Perspective Variety of societal sectors are involved in interest articulation, Policy-formulation and implementation Actors exhibit are variety of organizational forms Relational Perspective Policy-actors are involved in an myrade of links and relations, such as information exchange, cooperation, etc. Relational position generate influence on policy-making Methodological Level Systematic boundary specification of policy system Identification and ranking of actors on the basis of mutual relevance 3 21.07.2016 Climate Policy and Politics 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 2 5 42 43 CCPI Index 7 7 6 8 DEU 35 39 43 47 JPN Highest 19 22 22 Avg 50 53 58 Climate Change Performance Index (CCPI Index) Index Composition Emission level (30%) Development of Emission (30%) Renewable Energies (10%) Efficiency (10%) Climate Policy (20%) Evaluation based on Indicators of emission (80%) Rating from 300 Experts (20%) 20 10 0 * The number on the line indicates the rank of the country in each year Lowest 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Published by GermanWatch 4 21.07.2016 2
Research Questions and Hypotheses Overall Structure Post-Democracy Hypothesis versus Consensus Democracy Hypothesis Structure of Business Representation Interest homogeneity versus heterogeneity/diversity»national versus global«cleavage growing corporate activity/lobbying versus associational lobbying Varying energy orientation black, yellow and green energy ecological modernization-hypothesis Diversity of business positions and organizational forms of interest representation 5 21.07.2016 Firms and Business Associations in Policy Networks Analysis C Policy Domain N N F % A % corr. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Lauman/ Knoke 1987 US Energy I 198 182 66 33 48 24 US Health I 135 115 6 4 11 8 Schneider 1988 DE Chemicals 26 26 0 0 3 12 Schneider 1989 DE Videotext 43 43 14 33 12 28 Schneider/ Werle 1991 DE Telecoms 36 36 7 19 11 31 Heinz et. al. 1993 US Agriculture 80 105 16 15 41 39 US Energy II 76 102 41 40 17 17 US Health II 81 105 12 11 13 12 US Labour II 74 99 6 6 19 19 Pappi et. al. 1995 DE Labour 126 112 3 3 21 19 Knoke et al. 1996 US Labour 117 117 4 3 22 19 JP Labour 122 122 0 0 36 30 Sciarini 1996 CH Agriculture 28 28 3 11 10 36 Mattila 1994 FI Health & Social 45 45 0 0 2 4 Howlett 2002 1 CA Aviation 55 55 22 40 13 24 CA Trade 46 46 1 2 14 30 CA Education 102 102 5 5 18 18 CA Banking 137 137 51 37 33 24 Raab 2002 2 DE Shipyard Industry 23 2 23 4 17 1 4 DE Steel Industry 182 18 3 17 1 6 Abreviations: C = Country internet code N = Total Number F = Firms A = Associations 1 Evaluation of secondary literature, no quantitative network analysis in a narrow sense. Data refer to the year 2000 2 Without the organisational entities of the company being privatized 6 21.07.2016 3
Context of the discussion Germany Japan 2008-2012 % by 1990 2008-2012 % by 1990 Context of the country Population (millions) 1 81.9 3.2 127.9 3.4 Real GDP, Index 2000=100 2 110.6 34.5 107.4 20.1 CO2 emission (Mt of CO2) 1 746.2-20.6 1146.9 9.3 Energy Source (Total Energy Primary Supply) 318.2-9.4 476.1 8.4 Coal & Oils 1 182.4-27.0 316.6-3.2 Natural Gas 1 73.0 32.9 91.2 106.4 Nuclear 1 32.9-17.4 49.2-6.7 Renewables 1 29.9 367.9 19.1 24.6 Business Capacity and Market Context in Climate Change Production-based CO2 productivity, GDP per unit of energy-related 4.4 69.6 3.8 10.0 CO2 emissions (US$2010/kg) 2 Energy Intensity, TPES per capita (toe) 2 3.9-11.6 3.7 4.9 Development of environment-related technologies, inventions per unit 1.8 190.8 1.0 111.6 of government R&D Development of environment-related technologies, % all technologies 2 13.5 66.2 9.8 79.8 Environmentally related taxes, % GDP 2 2.2 1.6 Petrol tax, USD per liter 2 0.8-0.5 Fossil fuel consumption support, % energy related tax revenue 2 5.0 0.0 - Market size of Low Carbon Environmental Goods and Services (Sales in m) 3 145,267 213,295 Source: 1=IEA, 2=OECD Green Growth Index, 3=UK Department for Business Innovation & Skills 7 21.07.2016 Organizational forms of business representation 8 21.07.2016 4
Germany Red: Globally-oriented Companies 9 21.07.2016 Japan Red: Globallyoriented Companies 10 21.07.2016 5
Data Composition Survey Period Response/Sample (Response rate) DEU Aug.2011- Oct.2012 51 / 70 (72.9%) JPN Feb.2012- July 2013 72 / 125 (57.6%) Government (GOV) 3 5 Political Party (POL) 5 5 Scientific Organization (SCI) 14 11 Business Association (BIZ) 6 16 Corporation (COR) 12 13 Business Initiative 3 0 Civil Society Organization (CSO) 8 14 Other (OTH) 0 8 11 21.07.2016 Influence Reputation in Policy-Making Survey question: Which Organization does your organization think especially influential for the domestic climate change policy making? 12 21.07.2016 6
A closer look on the organizational forms of business representation 13 21.07.2016 Interpretation Overall influence configuration Germany as a pluralist and consensus democratic system Business is influential, but these are also civil society organizations Japan appears rather as a statist systems Power-law (pareto) distribution of influence Business Positions In both countries have some business actors as much reputations as political parties Business associations are still more influential than individual corporations 14 21.07.2016 7
Scoring the policy preferences Y axis: Degree of commitment (5: ecomodernization, vs. 1: Business as usual) Other issues are more important (-) German/Japan should take internatilnal leading role (-) German/Japanse Government does too much effort for Climate change (-) Climate change policy has negative impact on economy (-) German/Japanese reduction goal is too much (-) X axis (5: Renewables vs. 1: Nuclear) Expansion of nuclear energy make sensible contribution for climate change policy (-) Subvention of renwables makes sensible contribution for climate change policy Renewables are too costly(-) In the long-term energy supply will be secured by the renewables Nuclear is the realistic solution (-) In the long-term Germany/Japan can gain economic profit by renewables German/Japanese Renewable target is too much (-) Should include nuclear into CDM (-) 15 21.07.2016 Mapping the business sector preferences Conflict structure: Do more renewable vs. don t do more nuclear energy Analytical results: More business actors in Germany support renewable energy 16 21.07.2016 8
Empirical categorization of policy preferences G1: Nuke group Y=1.0***x-0.27 (R 2=.73) G3: Renewables group ( 0.5σ, 0.5σ) 17 21.07.2016 G2:Neutral group ( 0.5σ, 0.5σ) Business actors and their policy preference Germany Japan Interpretation: G3: Renewables 10 OOOOOO G2: Neutral G1: Nuclear 6 4 OOOO O 3 11 O OOOOOOO 13 OOOO DE has many business supporters for renewable energy, JP for nuclear energy Preference difference among the BIAs and COR in both countries = Business Association (BIA) O = Corporation (COR) =Business Initiative (BIN) How do they form coalitions for policy making? 18 21.07.2016 9
Network relations and positions (collaboration & information exchange) and business preference Germany Japan Comparison: Graphs produced by Visone ver.2.16 Size : Number of actors Ties shown more than overall density in each country Lack of the coalition between B.Ntrl-CSO in JP Lack of B- Renew-Pol coalition in JP Strong coalition between B.Nuke-POL- GOV in JP 19 21.07.2016 Network relations by organization type Germany Japan Comparison JP: BIZ uses POL for secure the status quo. DE: CSO more embedded, making coalition with POL and BIN BIN makes new kind of ties. COR as more active player in DE Graphs produced by Visone ver.2.16 20 21.07.2016 Size : Number of actors Ties shown more than overall density in each country 10
Network position and influence reputation (In/out-Degree) DE JP Comparison: The more ties an actor has, the more reputation it gains Germany: B.Renewables- COR have more active ties Making additional ties requires an additional effort. In Germany, more efficient for the return? 21 21.07.2016 Influence reputation by business sector s preferences in Germany and Japan Interpretation Nukes oriented business actors have still considerable influence reputation even in Germany 22 21.07.2016 11
References Burck, Jan, Franziska Marten, and Christoph Bals, 2015, Climate Change Performance Index: Results 2016, Germanwatch (https://germanwatch.org/en/ccpi, accessed on Apr.23, 2016) Kenis, Patrick, and Volker Schneider. 1991. "Policy Networks and Policy Analysis: Scrutinizing a New Analytical Toolbox." In Policy Networks. Empirical Evidence and Theoretical Considerations, eds. Bernd Marin and Renate Mayntz, Schriften Des Max-Planck-Instituts Für Gesellschaftsforschung Köln. Frankfurt/Main: Campus. 25-59. Lijphart, Arend. 1999. Patterns of democracy: Government forms and performance in thirty-six countries. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT. Ronit, Karsten. 2013. Business and Climate Policy: The Potentials and Pitfalls of Private Voluntary Programs, UNU. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18356/493a187c-en Satoh, Keiichi. 2016. Who makes the policy: The mechanism producing the Japanese climate change policy, in Koichi Hasegawa and Tomomi Shinada (Hrsg.): Sociology on Climate Change Policy: Can Japan Change? Kyoto: Showado, 27-53. (in Japanese) 23 21.07.2016 Schneider, Volker. 2006. "Business in Policy Networks: Estimating the Relative Importance of Corporate Direct Lobbying and Representation by Trade Associations." In Business and Government: Methods and Practice. International Political Science Association 2000 Series., eds. David Coen and Wyn Grant. Opladen: Barbara Budrich Publishers. 109-27. Schneider, Volker. 2015. "Towards Post-Democracy or Complex Power Sharing? Environmental Policy Networks in Germany." In Complex Democracy Varieties, Crises, and Transformations, eds. V. Schneider and B. Eberlein. Berlin: Springer. 263-79. Schneider, Volker. 2015, Relationalism in Political Theory and Research: The Challenge of Networked Politics and Policy-Making. Przeglad Politologiczny (Polnish Political Science Review), Nr. 4/2015, 191-206. Schneider, Volker, Thomas Malang, and Heike Brugger. 2016. "Consensual Attention: The German Climate Change Discourse between Economy and Ecology. Conference Paper Submitted to the MPSA Conference, Chicago. 24 21.07.2016 12
Acknowledgements This work was supported by the following funds Germany: American National Science Foundation via University of Minnesota Japan: Grant-in-Aid for JSPS Fellows (11J07459 and 15J03089, PI: Keiichi Satoh) JSPS Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (A: 22243036; B: 15H03406, PI: Koichi Hasegawa). 25 21.07.2016 Additional Materials 26 21.07.2016 13
Normalization of influence reputation Data problem Large variation in influence reputation Raw Reputation Score DEU JPN N of Respondents 51 72 Checked organization n 92 199 Mean 21.5 6.0 Standard Deviation 12.8 8.6 Max 49 51 Min 2 0 Solution: Normalization of thematrix RowΣ = 1 Normalized Reputation Score DEU JPN Mean 0.54 0.30 Standard Deviation 0.37 0.71 Max 1.55 5.77 Min 0.04 0.00 a b c d e a 1,00 - - - - 1,00 b 1,00-1,00 1,00 1,00 4,00 c 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 1,00 5,00 d 1,00 1,00 - - 1,00 3,00 e - - 1,00 1,00-2,00 a b c d e a 1,00 - - - - 1,00 b 0,25-0,25 0,25 0,25 1,00 c 0,20 0,20 0,20 0,20 0,20 1,00 d 0,33 0,33 - - 0,33 1,00 e - - 0,50 0,50-1,00 In Percent of the Maximum form DEU JPN Mean 0.54 0.05 Standard Deviation 0.35 0.12 Max 1 1 Min 0.3 0 27 21.07.2016 14