Presidents and intermediaries: insights from clean energy policy processes in Mexico

References

• Abbott, K. W., D. Levi-Faur, and D. Snidal. 2017. “Introducing Regulatory Intermediaries.” The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 670 (1): 6–13. doi:10.1177/0002716217695519.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alba Vega, C. 2020. “Los empresarios mexicanos durante el gobierno de Peña Nieto.” Foro Internacional 60: 537–627. doi:10.24201/fi.v60i2.2733.
   Google Scholar
• Aranda Jan, A. C. 2018. Understanding the Nature of Presidential Policymaking in Mexico Through an Agenda-Setting Approach. Southampton: University of Southampton.
   Google Scholar
• Auer, M. 2001. “Energy and Environmental Politics in Post-Corporatist Mexico.” Policy Studies Journal 29 (3): 437–455. doi:10.1111/j.1541-0072.2001.tb02103.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bandelow, N. C., N. Herweg, J. Hornung, and R. Zohlnhöfer. 2022. “Public Policy Research – Born in the U.S.A., at Home in the World?” Politische Vierteljahresschrift/German Political Science Quarterly 63 (2): 165 –179. 10.1007/s11615-022-00396-5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bertelsmann Foundation. 2009. Sustainable Governance Indicators 2009: Mexico Report. Gütersloh: Bertelsmann Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Candel, J., K. Parsons, D. Barling, and S. Loudiyi. 2020. “The Relationship Between Europeanisation and Policy Styles: A Study of Agricultural and Public Health Policymaking in Three EU Member States.” Journal of European Public Policy 28 (11): 1748–1769. doi:10.1080/13501763.2020.1800064.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Capano, G., and M. T. Galanti. 2018. “Policy Dynamics and Types of Agency: From Individual to Collective Patterns of Action.” European Policy Analysis 4 (1): 23–47. 10.1002/epa2.1031.
   Google Scholar
• Collier, D. 2011. “Understanding Process Tracing.” PS: Political Science & Politics 44 (4): 823–830. doi:10.1017/S1049096511001429.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dussauge-Laguna, M. I. 2022. “The Promises and Perils of Populism for Democratic Policymaking: The Case of Mexico.” Policy Sciences 48 (3): 777–803. doi:10.1007/s11077-022-09469-z.
   Google Scholar
• Dussauge-Laguna, M. I., and M. Aguilar. 2021. “Populismo, retrocesos democráticos y administraciones públicas: la experiencia de México durante el gobierno de Andrés Manuel López Obrador.” Estado, Gobierno, Gestión Publica 36 (1): 135–186.
   Google Scholar
• Dyson, S. B. 2006. “Personality and Foreign Policy: Tony Blair’s Iraq Decisions.” Foreign Policy Analysis 2 (3): 289–306. doi:10.1111/j.1743-8594.2006.00031.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Easton, D. 1957. “An Approach to the Analysis of Political Systems.” World Politics 9 (3): 383–400. doi:10.2307/2008920.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eitan, A., and I. Fischhendler. 2022. “The Architecture of Inter-Community Partnerships in Renewable Energy: The Role of Climate Intermediaries.” Policy Studies 8 (3): 1–17. doi:10.1080/01442872.2022.2138307.
   Google Scholar
• Espinoza Toledo, R., and J. P. Navarrete Vela. 2016. “MORENA en la Reconfiguración del Sistema de Partidos en México.” Estudios Políticos (México) 37 (1): 81–109.
   Google Scholar
• Farstad, F. M., A. Tønnesen, I. Christensen, B. Sødal Grasbekk, and K. Brudevoll. 2022. “Metagoverning Through Intermediaries: The Role of the Norwegian “Klimasats” Fund in Translating National Climate Goals to Local Implementation.” Policy Studies 42: 1–20. doi:10.1080/01442872.2022.2142205.
   Google Scholar
• Fransen, L., and G. LeBaron. 2019. “Big Audit Firms as Regulatory Intermediaries in Transnational Labor Governance.” Regulation & Governance 13 (2): 260–279. doi:10.1111/rego.12224.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freeman, G. P. 1985. “National Styles and Policy Sectors: Explaining Structured Variation.” Journal of Public Policy 5 (4): 467–496. doi:10.1017/S0143814X00003287.
   Google Scholar
• Garrigues. 2022. “Resolution of the Supreme Court of Justice of Mexico on the Action of Unconstitutionality of the Amendments to the Electricity Industry Law: Where are We, and Where are We Going To?” https://www.garrigues.com/en_GB/new/resolution-supreme-court-justice-mexico-action-unconstitutionality-amendments-electricity.
   Google Scholar
• Godoy, E. 2022. “Explainer: Why is Mexico Reforming its Energy Sector – Again?” https://dialogochino.net/en/climate-energy/explained-why-is-amlo-mexico-energy-reform-electricity/.
   Google Scholar
• Golder, M., and J. Stramski. 2010. “Ideological Congruence and Electoral Institutions.” American Journal of Political Science 54 (1): 90–106. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5907.2009.00420.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guzmán, S. 2020. “Mainstreaming Climate Change in the Public Budgets of Developing Countries: A Mixed Method Analysis Applied to Latin America and the Caribbean Countries.” PhD thesis, University of York, York.
   Google Scholar
• Hague, A., and E. Bomberg. 2022. “Faith-based Actors as Climate Intermediaries in Scottish Climate Policy.” Policy Studies 1 (1): 1–19. doi:10.1080/01442872.2022.2137122.
   Google Scholar
• Hochstetler, K. 2017. “Tracking Presidents and Policies: Environmental Politics from Lula to Dilma.” Policy Studies 38 (3): 262–276. doi:10.1080/01442872.2017.1290229.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hogenboom, B. 2014. “The Changing Politics of Lobbying: Private Sector Organizations in Mexico.” Journal of Public Affairs 14 (3-4): 296–309. doi:10.1002/pa.1456.
   Google Scholar
• Huckfeldt, R., and P. A. Beck. 2018. “Contexts, Intermediaries, and Political Behavior.” In The Dynamics of American Politics, edited by L. C. Dodd, and C. Jillson, 252–276. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kivimaa, P., W. Boon, S. Hyysalo, and L. Klerkx. 2019. “Towards a Typology of Intermediaries in Sustainability Transitions: A Systematic Review and a Research Agenda.” Research Policy 48 (4): 1062–1075. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2018.10.006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Llano, R., F. de Rosenzweig, J. C. Hamilton, and M. Coulet-Diaz. 2022. ‘Energy Investors Face Mexico Risks in the Electricity and Lithium Sectors.” https://www.whitecase.com/insight-alert/energy-investors-face-mexico-risks-electricity-and-lithium-sectors.
   Google Scholar
• Lowi, T. J. 1985. The Personal President: Power Invested, Promise Unfulfilled. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Maggetti, M., C. Ewert, and P. Trein. 2017. “Not Quite the Same: Regulatory Intermediaries in the Governance of Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices.” The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 670 (1): 152–169. doi:10.1177/0002716217691240.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Melgar, L. 2010. “Energy Transition: A Path Toward Sustainable Development for Mexico.” Latin American Policy 1 (1): 98–113. doi:10.1111/j.2041-7373.2010.00006.x.
   Google Scholar
• Mendez, J.-L. 2018. “Presidents’ Strategic Action and Policy Change in Mexico: A Comparison of the Hydrocarbon Policy Reforms of Enrique Peña and Felipe Calderon.” Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice 20 (2): 209–222. doi:10.1080/13876988.2017.1301086.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muno, W., J. Faust, and M. Thunert. 2020. Sustainable Governance Indicators 2020: Mexico Report. Gütersloh: Bertelsmann Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Neustadt, R. E. 1960. Presidential Power: The Politics of Leadership. New York: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Pacheco-Vega, R. 2019. “Policy Styles in Mexico.” In Policy Styles and Policy-Making: Exploring the Linkages, edited by M. Howlett, and J. Tosun, 89–112. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Pardo, M. D. C. 2015. “La Modernización Administrativa Del Gobierno de Felipe Calderón: Entre La Austeridad y La Reforma.” Foro Internacional 55 (1): 83–115.
   Google Scholar
• Peci, A., C. I. González, and M. I. Dussauge-Laguna. 2022. “Presidential Policy Narratives and the (mis)use of Scientific Expertise: Covid-19 Policy Responses in Brazil, Colombia, and Mexico.” Policy Studies, 1–22. doi:10.1080/01442872.2022.2044021.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richardson, J., ed. 1982. Policy Styles in Western Europe. London: Allen & Unwin.
   Google Scholar
• Richardson, J. 2018. “The Changing British Policy Style: From Governance to Government?” British Politics 13 (2): 215–233. doi:10.1057/s41293-017-0051-y.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richardson, J., G. Gustafsson, and G. Jordan. 1982. “The Concept of Policy Style.” In Policy Styles in Western Europe, edited by J. Richardson, 1–16. London: Allen & Unwin.
   Google Scholar
• Rubio Campos, J. 2017. “Proposal for a Model for Analyzing Strategies for Cross-Border Trade Union Collaboration.” Estudios fronterizos 18 (37): 103–130.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Samples, T. R. 2015. “A New Era for Energy in Mexico? The 2013-14 Energy Reform.” SSRN Electronic Journal 50 (1): 603–644. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2549329.
   Google Scholar
• Samples, T. R., and J. L. Vittor. 2011. “Energy Reform and the Future of Mexico’s Oil Industry: The Pemex Bidding Rounds and Integrated Service Contracts.” Texas Journal of Oil, Gas & Energy Law 7 (2): 215–240.
   Google Scholar
• Simmons, R. H., B. W. Davis, R. J. K. Chapman, and D. D. Sager. 1974. “Policy Flow Analysis: A Conceptual Model for Comparative Public Policy Research.” Western Political Quarterly 27 (3): 457–468. doi:10.1177/106591297402700305 .
   Google Scholar
• Solorio, I. 2021. “Leader on Paper, Laggard in Practice: Policy Fragmentation and the Multi-Level Paralysis in Implementation of the Mexican Climate Act.” Climate Policy 21 (9): 1175–1189. doi:10.1080/14693062.2021.1894084.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Solorio, I., J. Ortega, R. Romero, and J. Guzmán. 2021. “AMLO’s Populism in Mexico and the Framing of the Extractivist Agenda: The Construction of the Hegemony of the People Without the Indigenous Voices.” Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft 15 (2): 249–273. doi:10.1007/s12286-021-00486-5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Somuano, M. F. 2018. “Aprobar al Presidente. Una comparación entre Felipe Calderón y Enrique Peña Nieto.” Foro Internacional LVIII (4): 629–670. doi:10.24201/fi.v58i4.2548.
   Google Scholar
• Tobin, P., F. Farstadt, and J. Tosun. forthcoming. “Intermediating Climate Change: The Evolving Strategies, Interactions and Impacts of Neglected ‘Climate Intermediaries’ in Climate Policy.” Policy Studies forthcoming.
   Google Scholar
• Tosun, J., M. T. Galanti, and M. Howlett. 2022. “The Significance of Leadership in the Evolution of Policy Styles: Reconciling Policy-Making in the Short and Long Term.” Politische Vierteljahresschrift 63 (63): 337–358. doi:10.1007/s11615-022-00395-6.
   Google Scholar
• Tosun, J., and M. Howlett. 2022. “Analyzing National Policy Styles Empirically Using the Sustainable Governance Indicators (SGI): Insights Into Long-Term Patterns of Policy-Making.” European Policy Analysis 8 (2): 160–177. doi:10.1002/epa2.1142.
   Google Scholar
• Vargas, R. 2015. “La reforma energética: a 20 años del TLCAN.” Problemas del desarrollo 46 (180): 103–127.
   Google Scholar
• Velasco-Herrejón, P., T. Bauwens, and M. C. Friant. 2022. “Challenging Dominant Sustainability Worldviews on the Energy Transition: Lessons from Indigenous Communities in Mexico and a Plea for Pluriversal Technologies.” World Development 150: 1–17. doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2021.105725.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Viscidi, L., N. Graham, and S. Phillips. 2020. “Power Grab. What Mexico’s Stata-Centered Electricity Policy Means for Trade, Climate, and the Economy.” https://www.thedialogue.org/analysis/power-grab-what-mexicos-state-centered-electricity-policy-means-for-trade-climate-and-the-economy/.
   Google Scholar
• von Lüpke, H., and M. Well. 2020. “Analyzing Climate and Energy Policy Integration: The Case of the Mexican Energy Transition.” Climate Policy 20 (7): 832–845. doi:10.1080/14693062.2019.1648236.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar