Search

This paper considers key drivers to climate policy development with an emphasis on the role of a jurisdiction's underlying energy resource. The states of Hawaii in the United States and Victoria in Australia provide an insightful comparative case study given their differing energy resources: Hawaii has no native fossil fuel resources but abundant renewable energy options while Victoria has an economy traditionally reliant on cheap, plentiful coal. The Advocacy Coalition Framework is applied to analyze why the two states, despite the different incentives provided by their energy resources, developed similar climate policies in the earlier period of policy response to global warming. Analysis finds the stable parameter of energy resources is counterbalanced by other policy drivers including public opinion, leadership and, in particular, features of policy-making particular to the subnational level that provide a different context for climate policy development to that offered at the national level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]