DISSERTATION POLICY INNOVATION AND CHANGE: THE DIFFUSION AND MODIFICATION OF THE RENEWABLE PORTFOLIO STANDARD, 1994 – 2014 Submitted by Katherine Anne Heriot Hoffer Department of Political Science In partial fulfillment of the requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Colorado State University Fort Collins, Colorado Summer 2018 Doctoral Committee: Advisor: Charles E. Davis Antony Cheng Scott T. Moore Kyle L. Saunders Copyright by Katherine Anne Heriot Hoffer 2018 All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT POLICY INNOVATION AND CHANGE: THE DIFFUSION AND MODIFICATION OF THE RENEWABLE PORTFOLIO STANDARD, 1994 – 2014 To date, the U.S. federal government has not enacted a national renewable energy policy. Inertia at this level of government creates a policy space that allows American states to take the lead. State policy drives clean energy development. By the fall of 2014, every state in the nation had adopted at least one policy supportive of increased market penetration of renewable energy, and 38 states had adopted either a mandatory renewable portfolio standard (RPS) or a voluntary renewable energy goal. Between January 1, 1995 and the end of 2014, over 207 legislative changes amended existing RPSs and voluntary goals. Of these, most made small modifications or increased renewable energy requirements. Far fewer made significant changes to weaken state policy. This dissertation contributes to our understanding of energy policy innovation and change, where the adoption of an innovation is defined as a policy that is new to the state adopting it. It does so using a mixed methods approach that answers two major research questions: Why do states adopt different types of renewable portfolio standards (RPSs), while others fail to adopt any type of RPS? And, after states adopt an RPS, why do they amend the policy in the manner that they do over time? Using case studies and event history analysis based on a unified model of policy innovation suggested by existing literature, this study finds that both the size and direction of the effects of explanatory variables as well as the individual variables themselves vary across decision types, time, and space. More specifically, while the results ii confirm that household incomes, citizen and government ideology, and educational attainment are important internal state characteristics for explaining decisions to adopt and amend RPSs, the effect of these variables varies across different types of decisions. In addition, renewable energy interests and resources, fossil fuel resources and related interest groups, policy entrepreneurs, collaboration, and coalition building are important for explaining policy adoption and change. While this study found little to suggest that renewable energy potential is an important predictor of the decision to adopt an RPS, it did find that other state and federal policies are significant factors influencing the decision to adopt a certain type of RPS or amend an RPS in a certain manner. While the results of the case studies suggest that policy diffusion also plays an important role in explaining policy innovation and change, the results of the quantitative models must be interpreted with some caution. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This dissertation has been an exercise in punctuated equilibrium – periods of non- incremental change, followed by longer periods of incremental changes. I have been blessed to have had the support of an incredible group of people who made sure that I enjoyed the punctuations, got through the downs, and maintained my motivation through the periods of small, incremental changes. Words will never fully express the gratitude that I have for all of you. Thank you to Dr. Antonio Chu, my mentor at Metropolitan State University of Denver. Dr. Robert Duffy, your support, guidance, and mentorship has meant the world to me. To the rest of the Department of Political Science at Colorado State University, the resources, support, and friendship that you all offered was beyond measure. A thank you is especially due to Drs. Sandra Davis, Matthew Hitt, Bradley Macdonald, Michele Betsill, Courtney Daum, Marcela Velasco, Stephen Mumme, Susan Opp, and Pamela Duncan. The advice that you gave me and the lessons that you taught me will not be forgotten. For all of my friends and colleagues from the department, I don’t think I’ll ever forget our time together. Theresa Jedd and Amy Lewis, thank you for your support and friendship. I have also had the support of the incredible people at the Center for the New Energy Economy. Tom Plant, thank you for your mentorship and for entrusting me with your brain children. Jeff Lyng, thank you for your willingness to give me feedback on the ideas contained in this dissertation. You have been an incredible mentor. Maury Dobbie, you have inspired me and helped shape the person that I am today. Thank you. Wendy Hartzell and Patrick Cummins, thank you for your constant support. Thank you Governor Bill Ritter. I don’t think I’ll ever be iv able to explain how much your support, and Jeannie’s, has meant to me. Thank you also to Francisca Pretorius, Alison Anson, Seth Crew, Jane Culkin, Jeff Cook, and Katie Jordan. I appreciate your feedback, all of the work that you took on, and your willingness to put up with me while I completed this. My committee members each advised, challenged, and taught me. I will always appreciate your willingness to share ideas, and just sit down and chat. Thank you so very much Drs. Tony Cheng, Scott Moore, and Kyle Saunders for guiding and staying with me through this long transition. Thank you Chuck. Your guidance, patience, and willingness to keep me motivated, review several drafts of chapters, and discuss my ideas and findings over the years has meant more to me than I can ever tell you. Thank you to my large and incredibly supportive family. Mom, thank you for all that you have done for me and for being the incredibly strong woman that you are, I wouldn’t be who I am without you. Dad and Susanne, thank you for reminding me to take time to take care of myself and for all of your love and support. Joyce, Barry, and Alan, thank you. You have always believed in me and that has meant so very much to me. Thank you also to my siblings and cousins. Tom, Briant, and Katie, I am so thankful to be your sister and for your love, support, and willingness to listen to me vent. Jenni, I hope that you know how much I appreciate you and your calming influence. Thank you Jud for your support and for sharing your own experience with me. Grandma, thank you for the love that you have always shown to me. Brian, of all of the people in my life, you are the one who has travelled most closely with me on this journey. Over these last several years, you celebrated the punctuations with me, boosted my spirits during the downs, and put up with the long periods of incremental change. Thank you for walking beside me, and for being my best friend and most trusted companion. v TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................... ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................... iv LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................................................... viii LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................................... ix CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................1 U.S. Renewable Energy Policy and the Role of the States ........................................................5 The History of the Renewable Portfolio Standard ......................................................................9 Organization of the Dissertation ...............................................................................................15 CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW – THE ADOPTION OF U.S. STATE POLICY INNOVATIONS ............................................................................................................................18 Internal Determinants ...............................................................................................................19 Policy Diffusion ........................................................................................................................21 Unified Models .........................................................................................................................29 State Environmental and Energy Policy Innovation .................................................................34 The Adoption of State Renewable Portfolio Standards ............................................................36 Summary and Contributions .....................................................................................................38 CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODS ...........................................................................43 Research Questions ..................................................................................................................44 The Unified Model and Event History Analysis ......................................................................46 Unit of Analysis and Study Time-Frame ..................................................................................50 Dependent Variables .................................................................................................................52