Sustainability concerns have been placing public policy in the power sector under pressure to realize a radical change. However, energy policy is often subject to strong path dependency and inertia that make such change difficult. This study contributes to the theoretical understanding of the conditions under which radical policy changes happen in the power sector, based on the Multiple Streams Approach. Through a case study of the Feed-in Tariff program for increasing renewable energy deployment in Japan, it is elucidated that the elevation of the generous program, which is fundamentally incompatible to previous policy processes, was a result of the intersection of problem, policy, and politics streams. The findings provide strong evidence to support our claim that political parties embrace a policy proposal that is not necessarily “softened” within the policy network when an existing policy community itself is perceived as a problem. Related Articles: Brant, Hanna K., Nathan Myers, and Katherine L. Runge. 2017. “Promotion, Protection, and Entrepreneurship: Stakeholder Participation and Policy Change in the 21st Century Cures Initiative.” Politics & Policy 45 (3): 372-404. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12201. Morris, Mary Hallock. 2007. “The Political Strategies of Winning and Losing Coalitions: Agricultural and Environmental Groups in the Debate over Hypoxia.” Politics & Policy 35 (4): 836-871. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1346.2007.00086.x. Rawat, Pragati, and John Charles Morris. 2016. “Kingdon's ‘Streams’ Model at Thirty: Still Relevant in the 21st Century?” Politics & Policy 44 (4): 608-638. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12168.
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Sociology and Political Science
- Political Science and International Relations