Coalition Formation in Parliament and during the Policy Process

In modern democratic systems, usually no single collective actor is able to decisively influence political decision-making. Instead, actors with similar preferences form coalitions in order to gain more influence in the policy process. In the Swiss political system in particular, institutional veto points and the consensual culture of policy-making provide strong incentives for actors to form large coalitions. Coalitions are thus especially important in political decision-making in Switzerland, and are accordingly a central focus of this book. According to one of our core claims - to understand the actual functioning of Swiss consensus democracy - one needs to extend the analysis beyond formal institutions to also include informal procedures and practices. Coalitions of actors play a crucial role in this respect. They are a cornerstone of decision-making structures, and they inform us about patterns of conflict, collaboration and power among actors. Looking at coalitions is all the more interesting in the Swiss political system, since the coalition structure is supposed to vary across policy processes. Given the absence of a fixed government coalition, actors need to form new coalitions in each policy process.

Exceptional or just well connected? Political entrepreneurs and brokers in policy making

Policy brokers and policy entrepreneurs are assumed to have a decisive impact on policy outcomes. Their access to social and political resources is contingent on their influence on other agents. In social network analysis (SNA), entrepreneurs are often closely associated with brokers, because both are agents presumed to benefit from bridging structural holes; for example, gaining advantage through occupying a strategic position in relational space. Our aim here is twofold. First, to conceptually and operationally differentiate policy brokers from policy entrepreneurs premised on assumptions in the policy-process literature; and second, via SNA, to use the output of core algorithms in a cross-sectional analysis of political brokerage and political entrepreneurship. We attempt to simplify the use of graph algebra in answering questions relevant to policy analysis by placing each algorithm within its theoretical context. In the methodology employed, we first identify actors and graph their relations of influence within a specific policy event; then we select the most central actors; and compare their rank in a series of statistics that capture different aspects of their network advantage. We examine betweenness centrality, positive and negative Bonacich power, Burt’s effective size and constraint and honest brokerage as paradigmatic. We employ two case studies to demonstrate the advantages and limitations of each algorithm for differentiating between brokers and entrepreneurs: one on Swiss climate policy and one on EU competition and transport policy.

Policy Change in Comparative Contexts: Applying the Advocacy Coalition Framework Outside of Western Europe and North America

The advocacy coalition framework (ACF) is one of the most frequently applied theories of the policy process. Most applications have been in Western Europe and North America. This article provides an overview of the ACF, summarizes existing applications outside of Western Europe and North America, and introduces the special issue that features applications of the ACF in the Philippines, China, India, and Kenya. This article concludes with an argument for the continued application of the ACF outside of Western Europe and North America and a research agenda for overcoming challenges in using the ACF in comparative public policy research.

The global carbon budget 1959–2011

Accurate assessments of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and their redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere is important to better understand the global carbon cycle, support the climate policy process, and project future climate change. Present-day analysis requires the combination of a range of data, algorithms, statistics and model estimates and their interpretation by a broad scientific community. Here we describe datasets and a methodology developed by the global carbon cycle science community to quantify all major components of the global carbon budget, including their uncertainties. We discuss changes compared to previous estimates, consistency within and among components, and methodology and data limitations. CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production (EFF) are based on energy statistics, while emissions from Land-Use Change (ELUC), including deforestation, are based on combined evidence from land cover change data, fire activity in regions undergoing deforestation, and models. The global atmospheric CO2 concentration is measured directly and its rate of growth (GATM) is computed from the concentration. The mean ocean CO2 sink (SOCEAN) is based on observations from the 1990s, while the annual anomalies and trends are estimated with ocean models. Finally, the global residual terrestrial CO2 sink (SLAND) is estimated by the difference of the other terms. For the last decade available (2002–2011), EFF was 8.3 ± 0.4 PgC yr−1, ELUC 1.0 ± 0.5 PgC yr−1, GATM 4.3 ± 0.1 PgC yr−1, SOCEAN 2.5 ± 0.5 PgC yr−1, and SLAND 2.6 ± 0.8 PgC yr−1. For year 2011 alone, EFF was 9.5 ± 0.5 PgC yr−1, 3.0 percent above 2010, reflecting a continued trend in these emissions; ELUC was 0.9 ± 0.5 PgC yr−1, approximately constant throughout the decade; GATM was 3.6 ± 0.2 PgC yr−1, SOCEAN was 2.7 ± 0.5 PgC yr−1, and SLAND was 4.1 ± 0.9 PgC yr−1. GATM was low in 2011 compared to the 2002–2011 average because of a high uptake by the land probably in response to natural climate variability associated to La Niña conditions in the Pacific Ocean. The global atmospheric CO2 concentration reached 391.31 ± 0.13 ppm at the end of year 2011. We estimate that EFF will have increased by 2.6% (1.9–3.5%) in 2012 based on projections of gross world product and recent changes in the carbon intensity of the economy. All uncertainties are reported as ±1 sigma (68% confidence assuming Gaussian error distributions that the real value lies within the given interval), reflecting the current capacity to characterise the annual estimates of each component of the global carbon budget. This paper is intended to provide a baseline to keep track of annual carbon budgets in the future.

The global carbon budget 1959–2011

Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and their redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere is important to better understand the global carbon cycle, support the climate policy process, and project future climate change. Present-day analysis requires the combination of a range of data, algorithms, statistics and model estimates and their interpretation by a broad scientific community. Here we describe datasets and a methodology developed by the global carbon cycle science community to quantify all major components of the global carbon budget, including their uncertainties. We discuss changes compared to previous estimates, consistency within and among components, and methodology and data limitations. Based on energy statistics, we estimate that the global emissions of CO2 from fossil fuel combustion and cement production were 9.5 ± 0.5 PgC yr−1 in 2011, 3.0 percent above 2010 levels. We project these emissions will increase by 2.6% (1.9–3.5%) in 2012 based on projections of Gross World Product and recent changes in the carbon intensity of the economy. Global net CO2 emissions from Land-Use Change, including deforestation, are more difficult to update annually because of data availability, but combined evidence from land cover change data, fire activity in regions undergoing deforestation and models suggests those net emissions were 0.9 ± 0.5 PgC yr−1 in 2011. The global atmospheric CO2 concentration is measured directly and reached 391.38 ± 0.13 ppm at the end of year 2011, increasing 1.70 ± 0.09 ppm yr−1 or 3.6 ± 0.2 PgC yr−1 in 2011. Estimates from four ocean models suggest that the ocean CO2 sink was 2.6 ± 0.5 PgC yr−1 in 2011, implying a global residual terrestrial CO2 sink of 4.1 ± 0.9 PgC yr−1. All uncertainties are reported as ±1 sigma (68% confidence assuming Gaussian error distributions that the real value lies within the given interval), reflecting the current capacity to characterise the annual estimates of each component of the global carbon budget. This paper is intended to provide a baseline to keep track of annual carbon budgets in the future.

Europeanization, Institutional Changes and Differential Empowerment

The issue of European integration is of utmost importance for contemporary Swiss politics, as underscored by the presence of three decision-making processes relating to bilateral agreements with the EU, and two additional processes with a strong European dimension (the telecommunication act and the immigration law), among the 11 most important processes of the early 2000s. Previous chapters have highlighted substantial differences between domestic and Europeanized decision-making processes in terms of institutional design and decision-making structures. Chapters 2 and 3 suggest that the peculiarities of the three decision-making processes relating to bilateral agreements go along with specific power configurations among political actors. Chapter 5 draws our attention to the impact of Europeanization on the specific decision-making structure at work in a given policy process.

Dealing with bad guys: actor- and process-level determinants of the “devil shift” in policy making

Policy actors tend to misinterpret and distrust opponents in policy processes. This phenomenon, known as the “devil shift”, consists of the following two dimensions: actors perceive opponents as more powerful and as more evil than they really are. Analysing nine policy processes in Switzerland, this article highlights the drivers of the devil shift at two levels. On the actor level, interest groups, political parties and powerful actors suffer more from the devil shift than state actors and powerless actors. On the process level, the devil shift is stronger in policy processes dealing with socio-economic issues as compared with other issues. Finally, and in line with previous studies, there is less empirical evidence of the power dimension of the devil shift phenomenon than of its evilness dimension.

Switzerland: Think Tanks and Vested Interests in Swiss Policy Making

This paper analyses the role of think tanks in Swiss policy making. Starting from the relationship between interest groups and the state, which has been shaping Swiss policy making for a long time, we hypothesize that these structures offer good possibilities for scientific arguments and ideas to influence the process of policy making. Our observations from a recent example indeed illustrates that think tanks can use the same channels as vested interests to bring in their know-how. Furthermore, we conclude that the characteristics of the political system, e.g. direct democracy and the consensual alignment particularly influence the chances of think tanks to intervene. In this exchange vested interests and think tanks do not really interfere with each other, but rather they complement each other both having.

Research on Alpine Landscape Development: From Research to Policy

Swiss National Research Programs (NRPs) are usually geared to addressing issues of major societal concern. In so doing these programs produce different kinds of knowledge: analytical knowledge necessary for revealing the driving forces, conflicting interests and institutional settings that govern the processes under scrutiny; target knowledge oriented towards revealing the directions in which the processes should be guided; and action knowledge that informs about the means by which this can best be achieved. Analytical knowledge answers the questions “what is the problem?” and “what causes it?” while target knowledge helps to define “what is our vision for the future?” and action knowledge deals with “how can we solve the problem?” Production of these 3 different types of knowledge is usually linked in an iterative process in the course of the research supported in an NRP.

Swiss Air Traffic Policy: Noise Between Berne and Berlin

This article looks at the negotiations between Switzerland and Germany on air traffic regulation with the help of negotiation analysis tools. A number of factors pre-eminent in the literature on negotiation processes and outcomes are presented and critically assessed. In particular arguments of “power”, which are often insufficiently explored in analysing interstate cooperation, are brought back into the picture. The article argues that structural power best explains the negotiation results while domestic politics and information asymmetries both account for non-ratification of the treaty. Institutionalist arguments on the constraining effects of international norms and institutions as well as explanations focusing on negotiation skills are of minor importance. Moreover, the nature of the Swiss intra-governmental setting at the federal level did not encourage the Swiss negotiators to exploit all means during the different stages of the bargaining process. The article concludes by illuminating a number of policy observations in the broader context of Swiss foreign relations and indicating avenues for further research

Policy Instrument Selection under Uncertainty: The Case of Micropollution Regulation

The paper addresses the question of which factors drive the formation of policy preferences when there are remaining uncertainties about the causes and effects of the problem at stake. To answer this question we examine policy preferences reducing aquatic micropollutants, a specific case of water protection policy and different actor groups (e.g. state, science, target groups). Here, we contrast two types of policy preferences: a) preventive or source-directed policies, which mitigate pollution in order to avoid contact with water; and b) reactive or end-of-pipe policies, which filter water already contaminated by pollutants. In a second step, we analyze the drivers for actors’ policy preferences by focusing on three sets of explanations, i.e. participation, affectedness and international collaborations. The analysis of our survey data, qualitative interviews and regression analysis of the Swiss political elite show that participation in the policy-making process leads to knowledge exchange and reduces uncertainties about the policy problem, which promotes preferences for preventive policies. Likewise, actors who are affected by the consequences of micropollutants, such as consumer or environmental associations, opt for anticipatory policies. Interestingly, we find that uncertainties about the effectiveness of preventive policies can promote preferences for end-of-pipe policies. While preventive measures often rely on (uncertain) behavioral changes of target groups, reactive policies are more reliable when it comes to fulfilling defined policy goals. Finally, we find that in a transboundary water management context, actors with international collaborations prefer policies that produce immediate and reliable outcomes.

Institutions and coalitions in policy processes: a cross-sectoral comparison

Actors with joint beliefs in a decision-making process form coalitions in order to translate their goals into policy. Yet, coalitions are not formed in an institutional void, but rather institutions confer opportunities and constraints to actors. This paper studies the institutional conditions under which either coalition structures with a dominant coalition or with competing coalitions emerge. It takes into account three conditions, i.e. the degree of federalism of a project, its degree of Europeanisation and the openness of the pre-parliamentary phase of the decision-making process. The cross-sectoral comparison includes the 11 most important decision-making processes in Switzerland between 2001 and 2006 with a fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis. Results suggest that Europeanisation or an open pre-parliamentary phase lead to a dominant coalition, whereas only a specific combination of all three conditions is able to explain a structure with competing coalitions.

Large-scale land acquisitions: Focus on South-East Asia: International Development Policy

Large-scale land acquisition, or "land grabbing", has become a key research topic among scholars interested in agrarian change, development, and the environment. The term "land acquisitions" refers to a highly contested process in terms of governance and impacts on livelihoods and human rights. This book focuses on South-East Asia. A series of thematic and in-depth case studies put "land grabbing" into specific historical and institutional contexts. The volume also offers a human rights analysis of the phenomenon, examining the potential and limits of human rights mechanisms aimed at preventing and mitigating land grabs' negative consequences.