Presidential leadership styles and institutional capacity for climate policy integration in the European Commission

References

• Adelle, C., & Russel, D. (2013). Climate policy integration: A case of déjà vu? Environmental Policy and Governance, 23(1), 1–12.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alons, G. (2017). Environmental policy integration in the EU’s common agricultural policy: Greening or greenwashing? Journal of European Public Policy, 24(11), 1604–1622.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bäckstrand, K., & Elgström, O. (2013). The EU’s role in climate change negotiations: From leader to ‘leadiator’. Journal of European Public Policy, 20(10), 1369–1386.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bloomfield, J., & Steward, F. (2020). The politics of the green new deal. The Political Quarterly, 91(4), 770–779.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braun, M. (2009). The evolution of emissions trading in the European Union: The role of policy networks, knowledge and policy entrepreneurs. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 34(3–4), 469–487.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bürgin, A. (2018). Intra- and inter-institutional leadership of the European Commission President: An assessment of Juncker’s organizational reforms. Journal of Common Market Studies, 56(4), 837–853.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bürgin, A. (2020). The impact of Juncker’s reorganization of the European Commission on the internal policy-making process: Evidence from the Energy Union project. Public Administration, 98(2), 378–391.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burns, C., & Tobin, P. (2020). Crisis, climate change and comitology: Policy dismantling via the backdoor? JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 58(3), 527–544.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Candel, J. J. L., & Biesbroek, R. (2018). Policy integration in the EU governance of global food security. Food Security, 10(1), 195–209.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dawson, M. (2019). Juncker’s political Commission: Did it work? (Report 8EPA). SIEPS: Swedish Institute for European Policy Studies.
   Google Scholar
• Domorenok, E., Graziano, P., & Polverari, L. (2021). Introduction: Policy integration and institutional capacity: Theoretical, conceptual and empirical challenges. Policy and Society, 1–18. doi:10.1080/14494035.2021.1902058
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dupont, C. (2016). Climate policy integration into EU energy policy: Progress and prospects. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Dupont, C., Oberthür, S., & Biedenkopf, K. (2018). Climate change: Adapting to evolving internal and external dynamics. In C. Adelle, K. Biedenkopf, & D. Torney (Eds.), European Union external environmental policy: Rules, regulations and governance beyond borders (pp. 105–124). Houndmills: Palgrave MacMillan.
   Google Scholar
• Dupont, C., & Jordan, A. (2021). Policy integration. In A. Jordan & V. Gravey (Eds.), Environmental policy in the EU: Actors, institutions and processes (4th ed., pp. 203–219). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Dupont, C., Oberthür, S., & von Homeyer, I. (2020). The Covid-19 crisis: A critical juncture for EU climate policy development? Journal of European Integration, 42(8), 1095–1110.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Egeberg, M. (2010). The European Commission. In M. Cini & N. Pérez-Solórzano Borragán (Eds.), European Union politics (3rd ed., pp. 125–140). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Euractiv. (2014, October 2). Cañete’s hearing spells trouble for Juncker. Retrieved from https://www.euractiv.com/section/eu-priorities-2020/news/canete-s-hearing-spells-trouble-for-juncker
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. (2015). Energy Union package: A framework strategy for a resilient Energy Union with forward-looking climate change policy (COM(2015) 80).
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. (2018). A clean planet for all: A European strategic long-term vision for a prosperous, modern, competitive and climate neutral economy (COM(2018) 773).
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. (2019). The European green deal (COM(2019) 640).
   Google Scholar
• European Council. (2014, October). Conclusions (EUCO169/14).
   Google Scholar
• Gravey, V., & Jordan, A. (2019). Policy dismantling at EU level: Reaching the limits of ‘an ever‐closer ecological union’? Public Administration, 98(2), 349–362.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hartlapp, M., Metz, J., & Rauh, C. (2013). Linking agenda setting to coordination structures: Bureaucratic politics inside the European Commission. Journal of European Integration, 35(4), 425–441.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jochim, A. E., & May, P. J. (2010). Beyond subsystems: Policy regimes and governance. Policy Studies Journal, 38(2), 303–327.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jordan, A., & Lenschow, A. (Eds.). (2008). Innovation in environmental policy? Integrating the environment for sustainability. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Jordan, A., & Lenschow, A. (2010). Environmental policy integration: A state of the art review. Environmental Policy and Governance, 20(3), 147–158.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Juncker, J. C. (2015). State of the Union 2015. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/info/priorities/state-union-speeches/state-union-2015_en
   Google Scholar
• Juncker, J. C. (2016). State of the Union 2016. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/info/priorities/state-union-speeches/state-union-2016_en
   Google Scholar
• Juncker, J. C. (2017). State of the Union 2017. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/info/priorities/state-union-speeches/state-union-2017_en
   Google Scholar
• Juncker, J. C. (2018). State of the Union 2018. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/info/priorities/state-union-speeches/state-union-2018_en
   Google Scholar
• Kassim, H. (2017). What’s new? A first appraisal of the Juncker Commission. European Political Science, 16(1), 14–33.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kassim, H., & Bocquillon, P. (2019). ‘The Commission Presidency’, The European Commission: Where now? Where next? Research Briefing 4.
   Google Scholar
• Kassim, H., Connolly, S., Dehousse, R., Rozenberg, O., & Bendjaballah, S. (2017). Managing the house: The Presidency, agenda control and policy activism in the European Commission. Journal of European Public Policy, 24(5), 653–674.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kassim, H., & Laffan, B. (2019). The Juncker Presidency: The ‘Political Commission’ in practice. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 57(S1), 49–61.
   Google Scholar
• Koch, M., & Lindenthal, A. (2011). Learning within the European Commission: The case of environmental integration. Journal of European Public Policy, 18(7), 980–998.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kulovesi, K., & Oberthür, S. (2020). Assessing the EU’s 2030 climate and energy policy framework: Incremental change toward radical transformation? Review of European, Comparative & International Environmental Law, 29(2), 151–166.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Locke, E. A. (2003). Leadership: Starting at the top. In C. L. Pearce & J. A. Conger (Eds.), Shared leadership: Reframing the hows and whys of leadership (pp. 271–284). London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Mintrom, M. (2013). Policy entrepreneurs and controversial science: Governing human embryonic stem cell research. Journal of European Public Policy, 20(3), 442–457.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Müller, H. (2020). Political leadership and the European Commission Presidency. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nugent, N., & Rhinard, M. (2015). The European Commission (2nd ed.). Houndmills: Palgrave MacMillan.
   Google Scholar
• Oberthür, S., & Roche Kelly, C. (2008). EU leadership in international climate policy: Achievements and challenges. The International Spectator, 43(3), 35–50.
   Google Scholar
• Pirzio-Biroli, C. (2008). An inside perspective on the political economy of the Fischler reforms. In J. Swinnen (Ed.), The perfect storm(pp. 102–114). Brussels: Center for European Policy Studies.
   Google Scholar
• Rietig, K. (2018). The link between contested knowledge, beliefs and learning in European climate governance: From consensus to conflict in reforming biofuels policy. Policy Studies Journal, 46(1), 137–159.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rietig, K. (2019). The importance of compatible beliefs for effective climate policy integration. Environmental Politics, 28(2), 228–247.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Runhaar, H. (2016). Tools for integrating environmental objectives into policy and practice: What works where? Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 59(2015), 1–9.
   Google Scholar
• Selianko, I., & Lenschow, A. (2015). Energy policy coherence from an intra-institutional perspective: Energy security and environmental policy coordination within the European Commission. European Integration Online Papers, 19(SI 1), Article 2.
   Google Scholar
• Sharman, A., & Holmes, J. (2010). Evidence-based policy or policy-based evidence gathering? Biofuels, the EU and the 10% Target. Environmental Policy and Governance, 20(5), 309–321.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skovgaard, J. (2014). EU climate policy after the crisis. Environmental Politics, 23(1), 1–17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Svensson, P. (2019). Formalized policy entrepreneurship as a governance tool for policy integration. International Journal of Public Administration, 42(14), 1212–1221.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tömmel, I. (2020). Political leadership in times of crisis: The Commission presidency of Jean-Claude Juncker. West European Politics, 43(5), 1141–1162.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wurzel, R. K. W., Liefferink, D., & Torney, D. (2019). Pioneers, leaders and followers in multilevel and polycentric climate governance. Environmental Politics, 28(1), 1–21.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar