Joshua A. Basseches

Shows how a two-dimensional framework attentive to the economically motivated preferences of business actors explains policy design. Finds that business preferences were fragmented, but that a single type of private actor, investor-owned utilities, ultimately prevailed in achieving their preferences in every case.

Discusses the United States and Canada's commitment to reduce their climate-changing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Mentions the importance of both countries adopting the same grand strategy to do so: "electrify" everything.

Reviews the political structures and interest groups that slow action, and we examine emerging tensions between climate justice and the technocratic and/or market-oriented approaches traditionally taken by many mainstream environmental groups. Suggests strategies for overcoming opposition to climate action that may advance more effective and inclusive state policy, focusing on political strategies, media framing, collaboration, and leveraging the efforts of ambitious local governments.

Draws on legislative and regulatory texts, archival material, and interviews with relevant political actors to compare the policymaking influence of each of these coalitions, and argues that the composition of the two coalitions is the key to understanding why one was more successful than the other. Points out the justice-oriented coalition’s growing power, as market-oriented SMOs while seeking to point out the justice-oriented coalition’s growing power, as market-oriented SMOs seek to preserve their legitimacy.

Compares the efforts of social movement organizations to shape two state bills addressing climate change. Examines differences in political context that can create additional obstacles to movement success.