Prof. Dr. Karin Ingold

Chair of Policy Analysis and Environmental Governance (PEGO)

Institute of Political Science

+41 31 684 53 60
+41 31 684 83 31
A 162
Postal Address
University Bern
Institute Political Science
Fabrikstrasse 8
3012 Bern

About Karin Ingold

Karin Ingold is professor at the Institute of Political Science at the University of Bern since August 2011. She is the Vice-President of the Oeschger Centre for Climate Change Research (OCCR) and leads the research group of Policy Analysis and Environmental Governance (PEGO) affiliated to the Institute of Political Science at the University of Bern and the Department of Environmental Social Sciences at EAWAG.
Karin Ingold is Associate Editor for Continental Europe for the Journal of Policy & Politics and in the editorial board of the Policy Studies Journal, Swiss Political Science Review, European Policy Analysis Journal, Journal of Public Policy, and Connections. In her research, she is interested in the analysis and design of policy processes and instruments. Through her PhD and recent research, she became a scholar of the Advocacy Coalition Framework and other policy process theories. Methodologically, she mainly developed her skills in the conceptual development and application of social network analysis. Since 2008, she has been a co-organizer of the International Conference on the Application of Social Network Analysis (EUSN), and since 2013 she is in the Scientific Board of the European Conference on Social Network Analysis.


  • Duygan, M.; Kachi, A.; Oeri, F.; Oliveira, T. D.; Rinscheid, A. (2022). A Survey of Stakeholders’ Views and Practices: Energy Policymaking in Switzerland. In P. Hettich & A. Kachi (Eds.), Swiss Energy Governance: Political, Economic and Legal Challenges and Opportunities in the Energy Transition (pp. 369-394). Springer International Publishing. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-80787-0_15.
  • Manny, L.; Duygan, M.; Fischer, M.; Rieckermann, J. (2021) Barriers to the digital transformation of infrastructure sectors. Policy Sciences. DOI: 10.1007/s11077-021-09438-y.
  • Fesenfeld, L. P. (2021). Glimmers of hope: a global Green New Deal is feasible. GAIA-Ecological Perspectives for Science and Society, 30(3), 150-155. DOI: 10.14512/gaia.30.3.4.
  • Byskov Lindberg, M.; Kammermann, L. (2021). Advocacy coalitions in the acceleration phase of the European energy transition. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 40. DOI: 10.1016/j.eist.2021.07.006.
  • Stutzer, R.; Rinscheid, A.; Oliveira, T. D.; Loureiro, P. M.; Kachi, A.; Duygan, M (2021). Black coal, thin ice: the discursive legitimisation of Australian coal in the age of climate change. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 8(1), 178. DOI: 10.1057/s41599-021-00827-5.
  • Kammerer, M; Ingold, K. (2021). Actors and issues in climate change policy: The maturation of a policy discourse in the national and international context. Social Networks. DOI: 10.1016/j.socnet.2021.08.005.
  • Glaus, A.; Wiedemann, R.; Brandenberger, L. (2021). Toward sustainable policy instruments: assessing instrument selection among policy actors. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management. DOI: 10.1080/09640568.2021.1944847.
  • Herzog, L.; Ingold, K.; Schlager, E. (2021). Prescribed by law and therefore realized? Analyzing rules and their implied actor interactions as networks. Policy Studies Journal. DOI: 10.1111/psj.12448.
  • Wiedemann, R.; Ingold, K. (2021). Solving cross-sectoral policy problems: adding a cross-sectoral dimension to assess policy performance. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 1-14. DOI: 10.1080/1523908X.2021.1960809.
  • Trencher, G.; Truong, N.; Temocin, P.; Duygan, M. (2021). Top-down sustainability transitions in action: How do incumbent actors drive electric mobility diffusion in China, Japan, and California?. Energy Research & Social Science, 79, 102184. DOI: 10.1016/j.erss.2021.102184.
  • Hileman, J. D.; Angst, M.; Scott, T. A.; Sundström, E. (2021). Recycled text and risk communication in natural gas pipeline environmental impact assessments. Energy Policy, 156, 112379. DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112379.
  • Castro, P.; Kammerer, M. (2021). The Institutionalization of a Cleavage: How Differential Treatment Affects State Behavior in the Climate Negotiations. International Studies Quarterly, online. DOI: 10.1093/isq/sqab045.
  • Angst, M.; Brandenberger, L. (2021). Information exchange in governance networks—Who brokers across political divides? Governance, online. DOI: 10.1111/gove.12601.
  • Glaus, A. (2021). Politics of flood risk management in Switzerland: Political feasibility of instrument mixes. Environmental Policy and Governance. DOI: 10.1002/eet.1940.
  • Ingold, K.; Fischer, M.; Christopoulos, D. (2021). The roles actors play in policy networks: Central positions in strongly institutionalized fields. Network Science, online. DOI: 10.1017/nws.2021.1.
  • Fesenfeld, L. P.; Sun, Y.; Wicki, M.; Bernauer, T. (2021). The Role and Limits of Strategic Framing for Promoting Sustainable Consumption and Policy. Global Environmental Change, 68, 102266. DOI: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2021.102266.
  • Fesenfeld, L. P.; Rinscheid, A. (2021). Emphasizing Urgency of Climate Change Is Insufficient to Increase Policy Support. One Earth, 4(3), 411-424. DOI: 10.1016/j.oneear.2021.02.010.
  • Duygan, M.; Kachi, A.; Oliveira, T. D.; Rinscheid, A. (2021). Introducing the Endowment-Practice-Institutions (EPI) framework for studying agency in the institutional contestation of socio-technical regimes. Journal of Cleaner Production, 296, 126396. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126396.
  • Kammerer, M.; Wagner, P.; Gronow, A.; Ylä-Anttila, T.; Fisher, D. R.; Sun-Jin, Y. (2021). What Explains Collaboration in High and Low Conflict Contexts? Comparing Climate Change Policy Networks in Four Countries. Policy Studies Journal, online. DOI: 10.1111/psj.12422.
  • Kammerer, M.; Ingold, K.; Dupois, J. (2021). “Switzerland: International Commitments and Domestic Drawbacks.” In: Climate Governance Across the Globe: Pioneers, Leaders, and Followers, ed. R. Wurzel, M. Andersen and P. Tobin. London/New York: Routledge, 235-256.


  • Duygan, M.; Stauffacher, M.; Meylan, G. (2020). What constitutes agency? Determinants of actors’ influence on formal institutions in Swiss waste management. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 162, 120413. DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120413.
  • Glaus, A.; Mosimann, M.; Röthlisberger, V.; Ingold, K. (2020). How flood risks shape policies: flood exposure and risk perception in Swiss municipalities. Regional Environmental Change, 20(4), 120 (17p.). DOI: 10.1007/s10113-020-01705-7.
  • Trencher, G.; Rinscheid, A.; Duygan, M.; Truong, N.; Asuka, J. (2020). Revisiting carbon lock-in in energy systems: Explaining the perpetuation of coal power in Japan. Energy Research and Social Science, 69, 101770. DOI: 10.1016/j.erss.2020.101770.
  • Möhring, N.; Ingold, K.; Kudsk, P.; Martin-Laurent, F.; Niggli, U.; Siegrist, M.; Studer, B.; Walter, A.; Finger, R. (2020). Pathways for advancing pesticide policies. Nature Food, 1, 535-540. DOI: 10.1038/s43016-020-00141-4.
  • Ingold, K. (2020). "Unbeantwortete Fragen im Advocacy Coalition Framework". In: Politische Komplexität, Governance von Innovationen und Policy-Netzwerke: Festschrift für Volker Schneider, eds. M. Nagel, P. Kenis, P. Leifeld und H. Schmedes. Wiesbaden: Springer, 91-98.
  • Ingold, K.; Tosun, J. (2020). Special Issue “Public Policy Analysis of Integrated Water Resource Management”. Water, 12(9), 2321. DOI: 10.3390/w12092321.
  • Angst, M.; Fischer, M. (2020). “Identifying Subsystems and Crucial Actors in Water Governance: Analysis of Bipartite Actor-Issue Networks.” In: Networks in Water Governance, ed. M. Fischer and K. Ingold. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 115-144.
  • Herzog, L; Ingold, K. (2020). “Collaboration in Water Quality Management: Differences in Micro-Pollutant Management Along the River Rhine.” In: Networks in Water Governance, ed. M. Fischer and K. Ingold. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 203-238.
  • Fischer, M.; Ingold, K. (Eds.). (2020). Networks in Water Governance. Palgrave Studies in Water Governance: Policy and Practice. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-46769-2.
  • Brandenberger, L.; Ingold, K.; Fischer, M.; Schläpfer, I.; Leifeld, P. (2020). Boundary Spanning Through Engagement of Policy Actors in Multiple Issues. Policy Studies Journal, online. DOI: 10.1111/psj.12404.
  • Blake, K.; Nahrath, S.; Ingold, K. (2020). Combining the Institutional Resource Regime (IRR) framework with the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) for a better understanding of environmental governance processes: The case of Swiss wind power policy. Environmental Science and Policy, 112, 141-154. DOI: 10.1016/j.envsci.2020.06.010.
  • Berardo, R.; Fischer, M.; Hamilton, M. (2020). Collaborative Governance and the Challenges of Network-Based Research. The American Review of Public Administration, online. DOI: 10.1177/0275074020927792.
  • Pham-Truffert, M.; Metz, F.; Fischer, M.; Rueff, H.; Messerli, P. (2020). Interactions among Sustainable Development Goals: Knowledge for Identifying multipliers and virtuous cycles. Sustainable Development, online. DOI: 10.1002/sd.2073.
  • Nohrstedt, D.; Weible, Ch.; Ingold, K.; Henry, A. (2020). “Comparing Policy Processes: Insights and Lessons from the Advocacy Coalition Framework Research Program.” In: Handbook of Research Methods and Applications in Comparative Policy Analysis, ed. G. Peters and G. Fontaine. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.
  • Kammermann, L.; Angst, M. (2020). The Effect of Beliefs on Policy Instrument Preferences: The Case of Swiss Renewable Energy Policy. Policy Studies Journal, online. DOI: 10.1111/psj.12393.
  • Weible, C.M.; Nohrstedt, D.; Cairney, P.; Carter, P.D.; Crow, D.A.; Durnová, A.P.; Heikkila, T.; Ingold, K.; McConnell, A.; Stone, D. (2020). COVID 19 and the policy sciences: initial reactions and perspectives. Policy Sciences, online. DOI: 10.1007/s11077-020-09381-4.
  • Kammerer, M.; Crameri, F.; Ingold, K. (2020). Das Klima und die EU: Eine Diskursperspektive auf die deutsche und schweizerische Klimapolitik. In: The European Social Model under Pressure – Liber Amicorum in Honour of Klaus Armingeon, ed. R. Careja, P. Emmenegger and N. Giger. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-658-27043-8_34.
  • Ingold, K.; Gavilano, A. (2020). “Under What Conditions Does an Extreme Event Deploy Its Power: Towards Collaborative Management in Swiss Flood Risk Management”. In: Collaborative Crisis Management – Inter-Organizational Approaches to Extreme Events, ed. F. Byander and D. Nohrstedt. New York/London: Routledge, 132-147. (PDF, 112KB)
  • Fischer, M.; Jager, N. (2020). How Policy-Specific Factors Influence Horizontal Cooperation among Subnational Governments: Evidence from the Swiss Water Sector. Publius – The Journal of Federalism, online. DOI: 10.1093/publius/pjaa002.
  • Pärli, R.; Fischer, M. (2020). Policy integration: Implementing the Agenda 2030 – what is the role of forums? International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, online. DOI: 10.1080/13504509.2020.1719546.
  • Metz, F.; Angst, M.; Fischer, M. (2020). Do laws or actors integrate issues relevant to flood risk management in Switzerland? Global Environmental Change, 61. DOI: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2019.101945.
  • Dermont, C.; Kammermann, L. (2020). Political Candidates and the Energy Issue: Nuclear Power Position and Electoral Success. Review of Policy Research, online. DOI: 10.1111/ropr.12374.
  • Pakizer, K.; Fischer, M.; Lieberherr, E. (2020). Policy instrument mixes for operating modular technology within hybrid water systems. Environmental Science and Policy, 105, 120-133. DOI: 10.1016/j.envsci.2019.12.009.
  • Narayan, A. S.; Fischer, M.; Lüthi, C. (2020). Social Network Analysis for Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene (WASH): Application in Governance of Decentralized Wastewater Treatment in India Using a Novel Validation Methodology. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 7(198). DOI: 10.3389/fenvs.2019.00198.


  • Widmer, A.; Herzog, L.; Moser, A.; Ingold, K. (2019). Multilevel water quality management in the international Rhine catchment area: how to establish social-ecological fit through collaborative governance. Ecology and Society, 24(3), 27. DOI: 10.5751/ES-11087-240327.
  • Sciarini, P.; Fischer, M.; Gava, R.; Varone, F. (2019). The influence of co-sponsorship on MPs’ agenda-setting success. West European Politics, online. DOI: 10.1080/01402382.2019.1697097.
  • Kammermann, L.; Freiburghaus, R. (2019). ). Konsensdemokratie und die Transformation der schweizerischen Energiepolitik. dms – der moderne staat – Zeitschrift für Public Policy, Recht und Management, 12(2-2019), 329-346.
  • Ingold, K.; Varone, F.; Kammerer, M.; Metz, F.; Kammermann, L.; Strotz, C. (2019). Are responses to official consultations and stakeholder surveys reliable guides to policy actors’ positions? Policy & Politics, online. DOI: 10.1332/030557319X15613699478503. Accepted and pre-copy edited version.
  • Fischer, M.; Nguyen, M.; Strande, L. (2019). Context matters: horizontal and hierarchical network governance structures in Vietnam’s sanitation sector. Ecology & Society, 24(3), 17. DOI: 10.5751/ES-11036-240317.
  • Mewhirter, J.; McLaughlin, D. M.; Fischer, M. (2019). The Role of Forum Membership Diversity on Institutional Externalities in Resource Governance Systems. Society & Natural Resources, 32(11), 1239-1257. DOI: 10.1080/08941920.2019.1646366.
  • Sayles, J. S.; Mancilla Garcia, M.; Hamilton, M.; Alexander, S. M.; Baggio, J. A.; Fischer, A. P.; Ingold, K.; Meredith, G. R.; Pittman, J. (2019). Social-ecological network analysis for sustainability sciences: a systematic review and innovative research agenda for the future. Environmental Research Letters, 14(9). DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/ab2619.
  • Bodin, Ö.; Alexander, S. M.; Baggio, J.; Barnes, M. L.; Berardo, R.; Cumming, G. S.; Dee, L. E.; Fischer, A. P.; Fischer, M.; Mancilla Garcia, M.; Guerrero, A. M.; Hileman, J.; Ingold, K.; Matous, P.; Morrison, T. H.; Nohrstedt, D.; Pittman, J.; Robins, G.; Sayles, J. S. (2019). Improving network approaches to the study of complex social–ecological interdependencies. Nature Sustainability, 2, 551-559. DOI: 10.1038/s41893-019-0308-0.
  • Weible, C.; Ingold, K.; Nohrstedt, D.; Henry, A.; Jenkins-Smith, H. (2019). Sharpening Advocacy Coalitions. Policy Studies Journal, online. DOI: 10.1111/psj.12360.
  • Metz, F.; Glaus, A. (2019). Integrated Water Resources Management and Policy Integration: Lessons from 169 Years of Flood Policies in Switzerland. Water, 11(6), 1173. DOI: 10.3390/w11061173.
  • Lieberherr, E.; Fischer, M.; Tschannen, A. (2019). Taking stock of institutional resource regime research: A meta-analysis. Environmental Science and Policy, 97, 81-89. DOI: 10.1016/j.envsci.2019.04.003.
  • Lieberherr, E.; Ingold, K. (2019). Actors in Water Governance: Barriers and Bridges for Coordination. Water, 11(2), 326. DOI: 10.3390/w11020326 / DOI in book publication: DOI: 10.3390/books978-3-03921-151-7.
  • Andriamihaja, O. R.; Metz, F.; Zaehringer, J. G.; Fischer, M.; Messerli, P. (2019). Land Competition under Telecoupling: Distant Actors’ Environmental versus Economic Claims on Land in North-Eastern Madagascar. Sustainability, 11(3), p. 851. DOI: 10.3390/su11030851.
  • Herzog, L. M.; Ingold, K. (2019). Threat to Common-Pool Resources and the Importance of Forums: On the Emergence of Cooperation in CPR Problem Settings. Policy Studies Journal, online. DOI: 10.1111/psj.12308.
  • Fischer, M.; Maag, S. (2019). Why Are Cross-Sectoral Forums Important to Actors? Forum Contributions to Cooperation, Learning, and Resource Distribution. Policy Studies Journal, online. DOI: 10.1111/psj.12310.
  • Angst, M. (2019). Networks of Swiss Water Governance Issues. Studying Fit between Media Attention and Organizational Activity. Society & Natural Resources, online. DOI: 10.1080/08941920.2018.1535102.
  • Fischer, M.; Varone, F.; Gava, R.; Sciarini, P. (2019). How MPs ties to interest groups matter for legislative co-sponsorship. Social Networks, 57, p. 34-42. DOI: 10.1016/j.socnet.2018.12.001.


  • Jenkins-Smith, H. C.; Nohrstedt, D.; Weible, C. M.; Ingold, K. (2018). The advocacy coalition framework: An overview of the research program. In: Theories of the policy process, Fourth edition, eds. C. M. Weible and P. A. Sabatier. New York / Oxon: Westview Press, 135-171.
  • Ingold, K.; Driessen, P.P.J.; Runhaar, H.A.C.; Widmer, A. (2018). On the necessity of connectivity: linking key characteristics of environmental problems with governance modes. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, online. DOI: 10.1080/09640568.2018.1486700.
  • Kammermann, L.; Ingold, K. (2018). Going beyond technocratic and democratic principles: Stakeholder acceptance of instruments in Swiss energy policy. Policy Sciences, online. DOI: 10.1007/s11077-018-9341-5.
  • Angst, M. (2018). Bottom‐Up Identification of Subsystems in Complex Governance Systems. Policy Studies Journal, Early view. DOI: 10.1111/psj.12301.
  • Ingold, K.; Stadelmann-Steffen, I.; Kammermann, L. (2018). The acceptance of instruments in instrument mix situations: Citizens’ perspective on Swiss energy transition. Research Policy, online. DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2018.10.018. Accepted and pre-copy edited version.
  • Rapp, C.; Ingold, K.; Freitag, M. (2018). Personalized networks? How the Big Five personality traits influence the structure of egocentric networks. Social Science Research, online. DOI: 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2018.09.001.
  • Kammerer, M.; Namhata, C. (2018). What drives the adoption of climate change mitigation policy? A dynamic network approach to policy diffusion. Policy Sciences, online, 1–35. DOI: 10.1007/s11077-018-9332-6.
  • Metz, F.; Leifeld, P.; Ingold, K. (2018). Interdependent policy instrument preferences: A two-mode network approach. Journal of Public Policy, online, 1–28.
  • Maag, S.; Fischer, M. (2018). Why Government, Interest Groups, and Research Coordinate: The Different Purposes of Forums. Society & Natural Resources, online. DOI: 10.1080/08941920.2018.1484973.
  • Kammermann, L.; Dermont, C. (2018). How beliefs of the political elite and citizens on climate change influence support for Swiss energy transition policy. Energy Research & Social Science, 43, online. DOI: 10.1016/j.erss.2018.05.010.
  • Weible, C.; Ingold, K. (2018). Why Advocacy Coalitions Matter and Practical Insights about Them. Policy & Politics, 46(2), 325-343. DOI: 10.1332/030557318X15230061739399.
  • Angst, M.; Widmer, A.; Fischer, M.; Ingold, K. (2018). Connectors and coordinators in natural resource governance: insights from Swiss water supply. Ecology and Society, 23(2), 1. DOI: 10.5751/ES-10030-230201.
  • Brandenberger, L. (2018). Trading favors – Examining the temporal dynamics of reciprocity in congressional collaborations using relational event models. Social Networks, 54, 238-253. DOI: 10.1016/j.socnet.2018.02.001.
  • Cairney, P.; Ingold, K.; Fischer, M. (2018). Fracking in the UK and Switzerland: why differences in policymaking systems don't always produce different outputs and outcomes. Policy & Politics, 46(1), 125-147. DOI: 10.1332/030557316X14793989976783.
  • Widmer, A. (2018). Mainstreaming climate adaptation in Switzerland: How the national adaptation strategy is implemented differently across sectors. Environmental Science & Policy, 82, 71–78. DOI: 10.1016/j.envsci.2018.01.007.
  • Ingold, K.; Moser, A.; Metz, F.; Herzog, L.; Bader, H.P.; Scheidegger, R.; Stamm, Ch. (2018). Misfit between physical affectedness and regulatory embeddedness: The case of drinking water supply along the Rhine River. Global Environmental Change, 48, 136-150. DOI: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2017.11.006.


  • Malang, T.; Brandenberger, L.; Leifeld, P. (2017). Networks and Social Influence in European Legislative Politics. British Journal of Political Science, online. DOI: 10.1017/S0007123417000217.
  • Ingold, K.; Fischer, M.; Cairney, P. (2017). Drivers for Policy Agreement in Nascent Subsystems: An Application of the Advocacy Coalition Framework to Fracking Policy in Switzerland and the UK. Policy Studies Journal, 45(3), 442–463. DOI: 10.1111/psj.12173.
  • Kammermann, L. (2017). Factors Driving the Promotion of Hydroelectricity: A Qualitative Comparative Analysis. Review of Policy Research, online. DOI: 10.1111/ropr.12274.
  • Metz, F.; Leifeld, P. (2017). “Governing Water with Market-Based Instruments: Preferences and Skepticism in Switzerland”. In: A Critical Approach to International Water Management Trends. Policy and Practice, ed. C. Bréthaut and R. Schweizer. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 147-176.
  • Fischer, M.; Angst, M.; Maag, S. (2017). Co-participation in the Swiss water forum network. International Journal of Water Resources Development, online. DOI: 10.1080/07900627.2017.1374929.
  • Metz, F.; Ingold, K. (2017). Politics of the precautionary principle: assessing actors’ preferences in water protection policy. Policy Sciences, online. DOI: 10.1007/s11077-017-9295-z.
  • Fischer, M.; Ingold, K.; Ivanova, S. (2017). Information exchange under uncertainty: The case of unconventional gas development in the United Kingdom. Land Use Policy, online. DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.05.003.
  • Metz, F. (2017). From Network Structure to Policy Design in Water Protection: A Comparative Perspective on Micropollutants in the Rhine River Riparian Countries. Cham: Springer International Publishing.
  • Dermont, C.; Ingold, K.; Kammermann, L.; Stadelmann-Steffen, I. (2017). Bringing the policy making perspective in: A political science approach to social acceptance. Energy Policy, 108, 359–368.
  • Angst, M.; Hirschi, C. (2017). Network Dynamics in Natural Resource Governance: A Case Study of Swiss Landscape Management. Policy Studies Journal, 45(2), 315-336. DOI: 10.1111/psj.12145.
  • Jiang, D.; Fischer, M.; Huang, Z.; Kunz, N. (2017). Identifying Drivers of China's Provincial Wastewater Reuse Outcomes Using Qualitative Comparative Analysis. Journal of Industrial Ecology. Online. DOI: 10.1111/jiec.12584.
  • Leifeld, P.; Wankmüller, S.; Berger, V.; Ingold, K.; Steiner, C. (2017). Collaboration patterns in the German political science co-authorship network. Plos One, online. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0174671.
  • Sager, F.; Ingold, K.; Balthasar, A. (2017). Policy-Analyse in der Schweiz. Besonderheiten, Theorien, Beispiele. Zürich: NZZ Verlag.
  • Fischer, M.; Schläpfer, I. (2017). Metagovernance and Policy Forum Outputs in Swiss Environmental Policy. Environmental Politics, online. DOI: 10.1080/09644016.2017.1284981.
  • Varone, F.; Ingold, K.; Jourdain, Ch. (2017). Defending the status quo across venues and coalitions: evidence from California interest groups. Journal of Public Policy, 37(1), 1-26. DOI: 10.1017/S0143814X16000179.
  • Ingold, K. (2017). How to create and preserve social capital in climate adaptation policies: a network approach. Ecological Economics, 131 (January 2017), 414-424. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.08.033.


  • Weible, C.M.; Heikkila, T.; Ingold, K.; Fischer, M. (2016). Policy Debates on Hydraulic Fracturing. Comparing Coalition Politics in North America and Europe. Palgrave Macmillan. DOI: 10.1057/978-1-137-59574-4.
  • Weible, C.M.; Heikkila, T.; Ingold, K.; Fischer, M. (2016). “Introduction”. In: Policy Debates on Hydraulic Fracturing, ed. C.M. Wible, T. Heikkila, K. Ingold and M. Fischer. Palgrave Macmillan, 1-27. DOI: 10.1057/978-1-137-59574-4_1.
  • Cairney, P.; Fischer, M.; Ingold, K. (2016). “Hydraulic Fracturing Policy in the United Kingdom: Coalition, Cooperation, and Opposition in the Face of Uncertainty”. In: Policy Debates on Hydraulic Fracturing, ed. C.M. Weible, T. Heikkila, K. Ingold and M. Fischer. Palgrave Macmillan, 81-113. DOI: 10.1057/978-1-137-59574-4_4.
  • Ingold, K.; Fischer, M. (2016). “Belief Conflicts and Coalition Structures Driving Subnational Policy Responses: The Case of Swiss Regulation of Unconventional Gas Development”. In: Policy Debates on Hydraulic Fracturing, ed. C.M. Weible, T. Heikkila, K. Ingold and M. Fischer. Palgrave Macmillan, 201-237. DOI: 10.1057/978-1-137-59574-4_8.
  • Ingold, K.; Fischer, M.; Heikkila, T.; Weible, C.M. (2016). Assessments and Aspirations. In: Policy Debates on Hydraulic Fracturing, ed. C.M. Weible, T. Heikkila, K. Ingold and M. Fischer. Palgrave Macmillan, 239-264. DOI: 10.1057/978-1-137-59574-4_9.
  • Ingold, K.; Lieberherr, E.; Schläpfer, I.; Steinmann, K.; Zimmermann, W. (2016). Umweltpolitik der Schweiz – ein Lehrbuch. 337 Seiten. Zürich/St. Gallen: Dike Verlag. Webanhang (PDF, 790KB)
  • Fischer, M. (2016). Institutions and policy networks in Europe. In: Oxford Handbook of Political Networks, ed. J. N. Victor, M. Lubell and A. Montgomery. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Ingold, K.; Fischer, M., de Boer, C., Mollinga, P. (2016). Water Management Across Borders, Scales and Sectors: Recent developments and future challenges in water policy analysis. Environmental Policy and Governance, 26(4), 223-228. DOI: 10.1002/eet.1713.
  • Balsiger, J.; Ingold, K. (2016). In the Eye of the Beholder: Network location and sustainability perception in flood prevention. Environmental Policy and Governance, 26(4), 242-256. DOI: 10.1002/eet.1715.
  • Metz, F.; Fischer, M. (2016). Policy Diffusion in the Context of International River Basin Management. Environmental Policy and Governance, 26(4), 257-277. DOI: 10.1002/eet.1716.
  • Ingold, K.; Pflieger, G. (2016). Two Levels, Two Strategies: Explaining the Gap Between Swiss National and International Responses Toward Climate Change. European Policy Analysis Journal, 2(1), 20-38.
  • Leifeld, P.; Ingold, K. (2016). Co-authorship Networks in Swiss Political Research. Swiss Political Science Review, 22(2), 264-287. DOI:10.1111/spsr.12193.
  • Varone, F.; Ingold, K.; Jourdain, C. (2016). Studying policy advocacy through social network Analysis. European Political Science. Advance online publication, 27 May 2016. DOI:10.1057/eps.2016.16.
  • Cranmer, S. J.; Leifeld, P.; McClurg, S. D.; Rolfe, M. (2016). Navigating the Range of Statistical Tools for Inferential Network Analysis. American Journal of Political Science 61(1), 237-251. DOI: 10.1111/ajps.12263.
  • Towfigh, E.V.; Goerg, S.J.; Glöckner, A.; Leifeld, P.; Kurschilgen, C.; Llorente-Saguer, A.; Bade, S. (2016). Do Direct-Democratic Procedures Lead to Higher Acceptance than Political Representation? Experimental Survey Evidence from Germany. Public Choice 167(1): 47-65. DOI: 10.1007/s11127-016-0330-y.
  • Fischer, M.; Ingold, K.; Sciarini, P.; Varone, F. (2016). Dealing with bad guys: Actor- and process-level determinants of the “devil shift” in policy making. Journal of Public Policy, 26 (2), 309-334. DOI:10.1017/S0143814X15000021.
  • Varone, F.; Ingold, K.; Fischer, M. (2016). Administration et réseaux d'action publique. In: Giauque, D.; Emery, Y. L'acteur et la bureaucratie au 21e siècle. Québec: Presses de l'Université de Laval, 115-140.
  • Thomann, E.; Lieberherr, E.; Ingold, K. (2016). Torn between state and market: Private policy implementation and conflicting institutional logics. Policy and Society, 35(1), 57-69. DOI:10.1016/j.polsoc.2015.12.001.
  • Fischer, M.; Sciarini, P. (2016). Drivers of collaboration in political decision making: A cross-sector perspective. The Journal of Politics, 78(1), 63-74. DOI:10.1086/683061.
  • Kunz, N. C.; Fischer, M.; Ingold, K.; Hering, J. G. (2016). Drivers for and against municipal wastewater recycling: A review. Water Science and Technology, 73(2), 251-259. DOI:10.2166/wst.2015.496.
  • Markard, J.; Suter, M.; Ingold, K. (2016). Socio-technical transitions and policy change – Advocacy coalitions in Swiss energy policy. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 18, 215-237.  DOI:10.1016/j.eist.2015.05.003.
  • Ingold, K.; Leifeld, P. (2016). Structural and Institutional Determinants of Influence Reputation: A Comparison of Collaborative and Adversarial Policy Networks in Decision Making and Implementation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 26(1), 1-18. DOI:10.1093/jopart/muu043.
  • Fischer, M.; Maggetti, M. (2016). Qualitative Comparative Analysis and the Study of Policy Processes. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 17 pp. DOI:10.1080/13876988.2016.1149281.
  • Leifeld, P. (2016). Policy Debates as Dynamic Networks. German Pension Politics and Privatization Discourse. Frankfurt am Main: Campus Verlag, 354 pp.


  • Stadelmann-Steffen, I.; Ingold, K. (2015). Ist der Name schon Programm? Die GLP-Wählerschaft und ihre grünen und freisinnigen Wurzeln. In: Freitag; M.; Vatter, A.: Wahlen und Wählerschaft in der Schweiz. NZZ Libro Verlag,  217-244.
  • Fischer, M. (2015). Institutions and coalitions in policy processes: A cross-sectoral comparison. Journal of Public Policy, 35(2), 245-268. DOI:10.1017/S0143814X14000166.
  • Fischer, M. (2015). Collaboration patterns, external shocks and uncertainty: Swiss nuclear energy politics before and after Fukushima. Energy Policy, 86, 520-528. DOI:10.1016/j.enpol.2015.08.007.
  • Kunz, N. C.; Fischer, M.; Ingold, K.; Hering, J. G. (2015). Why do some water utilities recycle more than others? A qualitative comparative analysis in New South Wales, Australia. Environmental Science and Technology, 49(14), 8287-8296. DOI:10.1021/acs.est.5b01827.
  • Fischer, M.; Leifeld, P. (2015). Policy forums: Why do they exist and what are they used for? Policy Sciences, 48(3), 363-382. DOI:10.1007/s11077-015-9224-y.
  • Sciarini, P.; Fischer, M.; Traber, D. (2015). Political Decision-Making in Switzerland. The Consensus Model under Pressure, 304 pp. DOI:10.1057/9781137508607.
  • Ingold, K. (2015). Identifizierung von Koalitionen in Politikprozessen illustriert anhand der Schweizer Klimapolitik. Zwei strukturelle Ansätze. In: Gamper, M.; Reschke, L.; Düring, M.: Knoten und Kanten III – Soziale Netzwerkanalyse in Geschichts- und Politikforschung. Transkript Verlag, Bielefeld, 373-398.
  • Ingold, K.; Varone, F. (2015). Is the Swiss Constitution really constitutional? Testing the “veil of ignorance” hypothesis over time. In: Imbeau, L; Jacob, S: Behind a Veil of Ignorance? Power and Uncertainty in Constitutional Design. Springer, 187-202. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-14953-0.
  • Fischer, M.; Sciarini, P. (2015). Unpacking reputational power: Intended and unintendeddeterminants of the assessment of actors’ power. Social Networks, (42), 60-71. DOI:10.1016/j.socnet.2015.02.008.
  • Ingold, K.; Christopoulos, D. (2015). The networks of political entrepreneurs: A case study of Swiss climate policy. In: Narbutaité Aflaki, I.; Petridou, E.; Miles, L.; Entrepreneurship in the Polis - Understanding Political Entrepreneurship. Burlington: Ashgate, 17-30.
  • Tresch, A.; Fischer, M. (2015). In search of political influence: Outside lobbying behaviour and media coverage of social movements, interest groups and political parties in six Western European countries. International Political Science Review, 36, 355-372. DOI:10.1177/0192512113505627.
  • Christopoulos, D.; Ingold, K. (2015). Exceptional or just well connected? Political entrepreneurs and brokers in policy making. European Political Science Review, 7(3), 475-498. DOI:10.1017/S1755773914000277.


  • Sciarini, P.; Tresch, A.; Fischer, M. (2014). Europeanization in Parliament and in the Press. Swiss Political Science Review, 20(2), 232-238. DOI:10.1111/spsr.12101.
  • Fischer, M.; Sciarini, P. (2014). The Europeanization of Swiss Decision-Making Processes. Swiss Political Science Review, 20(2), 239-245. DOI:10.1111/spsr.12102.
  • Brönnimann, S.; Appenzeller, C.; Croci‐Maspoli, M.; Fuhrer, J.; Grosjean, M.; Hohmann, R.; Ingold, K.; Knutti, R.; Liniger, M. A.; Raible, C. C.; Röthlisberger, R.; Schär, C.; Scherrer, S. C.; Strassmann, K.; Thalmann, P. (2014). Climate change in Switzerland: A review of physical, institutional, and political aspects. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews - Climate Change, 5(4), 461-481. DOI:10.1002/wcc.280.
  • Ingold, K.; Gschwend. M. (2014). Science in policy-making: Neutral experts or strategic policy-makers? West European Politics, 37(5), 993-1018. DOI:10.1080/01402382.2014.920983.
  • Henry, A. D.; Ingold, K.; Nohrstedt, D.; Weible, C. M. (2014). Policy Change in Comparative Contexts. Applying the Advocacy Coalition Framework Outside of Western Europe and North America. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 16(4, SI), 299-312. DOI:10.1080/13876988.2014.941200.
  • Ingold, K., Fischer, M. (2014). Drivers of Collaboration to Mitigate Climate Change: An Illustration of Swiss Climate Policy over 15 Years. Global Environmental Change, 24(1), 88-98. DOI:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.11.021.
  • Metz, F.; Ingold, K. (2014). Sustainable Wastewater Management: Is it Possible to Regulate Micropollution in the Future by Learning from the Past? A Policy Analysis. Sustainability, 6(4), 1992-2012. DOI:10.3390/su6041992.
  • Ingold, K. (2014). How involved are they really? A comparative network analysis of the institutional drivers of local actor inclusion. Land Use Policy, 39, 376-387. DOI:10.1016/j.landusepol.2014.01.013.
  • Fischer, M. (2014). Coalition structures and policy change in a consensus democracy. Policy Studies Journal, 42(3), 344-366. DOI:10.1111/psj.12064.
  • Cappelletti, F.; Fischer, M.; Sciarini, P. (2014). ‘Let's talk cash’: Cantons' interests and the reform of Swiss federalism. Regional & Federal Studies, 24(1), 1-20. DOI:10.1080/13597566.2013.808627.


  • Ingold, K.; Balsiger, J. (2013). Sustainability Principles put into Practice: Case Studies of Network Analysis in Swiss Climate Change Adaptation. Regional Environmental Change, 529-598. DOI:10.​1007/​s10113-013-0575-7.
  • Fischer, M.; Sciarini, P. (2013). Europeanization and the inclusive strategies of executive actors. Journal of European Public Policy, 20(10), 1482-1498. DOI:10.1080/13501763.2013.781800.
  • Fisher, D. R.; Waggle, J.; Leifeld, P. (2013). Where does political polarization come from? Locating polarization within the U.S. climate change debate. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(1), 70-92. DOI:10.1177/0002764212463360.
  • Fisher, D. R.; Leifeld, P.; Iwaki, Y. (2013). Mapping the ideological networks of American climate politics. Climatic Change, 116(3-4), 523-545. DOI:10.1007/s10584-012-0512-7.
  • Ingold, K.; Varone, F.; Stokman, F. (2013). A social network-based approach to assess de facto independence of regulatory agencies. Journal of European Public Policy, 20(10), 1464-1481. DOI:10.1080/13501763.2013.804280.
  • Leifeld, P. (2013). Reconceptualizing major policy change in the advocacy coalition framework: A discourse network analysis of German pension politics. Policy Studies Journal, 41(1), 169-198. DOI:10.1111/psj.12007.
  • Leifeld,P. (2013). texreg: Conversion of Statistical Model Output in R to LaTeX and HTML Tables. Journal of Statistical Software, 55(8), 1-24. DOI:10.18637/jss.v055.i08.
  • Lieberherr, E. (2013). Organisationsformen im Vergleich. Leistungsfähigkeit der Siedlungswasserwirtschaft in Zürich, Berlin und Leeds. Aqua & Gas, 93(2), 48-52.
  • Lienert, J.; Schnetzer, F.; Ingold, K. (2013). Stakeholder analysis combined with social network analysis provides fine-grained insights into water infrastructure planning processes. Journal of Environmental Management, 125, 134-148. DOI:10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.03.052.
  • Maggetti, M.; Ingold, K.; Varone, F. (2013). Having your cake and eating it, too: Can regulatory agencies be both independent and accountable? Swiss Political Science Review, 19(1), 1-25. DOI:10.1111/spsr.12015.
  • Metz, F. (2013). Addressing micropollution by linking problem characteristics to policy instruments. Working Paper, 38 pp.
  • Schneider, V.; Leifeld, P.; Malang, T. (2013). Coping with creeping catastrophes: National political systems and the challenge of slow-moving policy problems. In: Siebenhüner, B.; Arnold, M.; Eisenack, K.; Jacob, K.: Long-Term Governance of Social-Ecological Change. Abingdon: Routledge, 221-238.
  • Towfigh, E. V.; Glöckner, A.; Goerg, S. J.; Leifeld, P.; Kurschilgen, C.; Llorente-Saguer, A.; Bade, S. (2013). Does Political Representation through Parties Decrease Voters' Acceptance of Decisions? Preprints of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2013/10.


  • Fischer, M. (2012). Entscheidungsstrukturen in der Schweizer Politik zu Beginn des 21. Jahrhunderts. Glarus: Somedia, 11, 379 pp.
  • Fischer, M. (2012). Dominance or challenge? An explanation of the power distribution among coalitions in Swiss decision-making processes. COMPASSS Working Paper 69, 39 pp.
  • Hering, J. G.; Ingold, K. M. (2012). Water resources management: What should be integrated? Science, 336(6086), 1234-1235. DOI:10.1126/science.1218230.
  • Ingold, K.; Varone, F. (2012). Treating policy brokers seriously: Evidence from the climate policy. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 22(2), 319-346. DOI:10.1093/jopart/mur035.
  • Leifeld, P.; Schneider, V. (2012). Information Exchange in Policy Networks. American Journal of Political Science, 56(3), 731-744. DOI:10.1111/j.1540-5907.2011.00580.x.
  • Leifeld, P.; Haunss, S. (2012). Political discourse networks and the conflict over software patents in Europe. European Journal of Political Research, 51(3), 382-409. DOI:10.1111/j.1475-6765.2011.02003.x.
  • Lieberherr, E.; Klinke, A.; Finger, M. (2012). Towards legitimate water governance? The partially privatized Berlin waterworks. Public Management Review, 14(7), 923-946. DOI:10.1080/14719037.2011.650056.
  • Fischer, M.; Ingold, K.; Sciarini, P.; Varone, F. (2012). Impacts of market liberalization on regulatory network: A longitudinal analysis of the Swiss telecommunications sector. Policy Studies Journal, 40(3), 435-457. DOI:10.1111/j.1541-0072.2012.00460.x.


  • In an interview with SRF Echo der Zeit, Karin Ingold explains why environmental issues in Switzerland have difficulties to be accepted at the ballot box and whether Corona has affected the “green wave” in Switzerland.
  • Karin Ingold published an outreach article with the title "Demokratie in Zeiten der Krise" [Democracy in times of crisis] in SAGW Bulletin No. 03/2020.
  • Manuel Fischer, Karin Ingold and Mert Duygan have published an outreach article in Aqua & Gas on "PlaNet", their innovative online planning tool for municipalities.
  • Karin Ingold and Jale Tosun published an open access special issue in the journal Water named "Public Policy Analysis of Integrated Water Resource Management". They wrote an editorial where they outline how principles of policy studies can be brought together with dimensions from integrated water resources management (IWRM).
  • With colleagues around the world, Manuel Fischer and Karin Ingold have published a new book on complex issues of global water governance at Palgrave Macmillan. In the 9 thematic chapters different case studies are presented, all of them using analytical network methods. The topics range from water management in Brazil, to conflicts in Swiss water policy, to water quality problems in Iranian rivers. Network analysis is applied descriptively, analytically or as modeling. The introduction and the conclusion show how network analysis can provide an appropriate specific perspective on complex environmental problems, but also how different challenges are involved in the analysis of water problems around the world.
  • Karin Ingold and nine other international policy scholars analyzed the COVID19 and lock down situation from a policy perspective (see Policy Sciences article). In co-authorship with Manuel Fischer, Karin Ingold translated this analysis to the Swiss situation (see DeFacto article).

Press Review

Welcome to the chair of Policy Analysis and Environmental Governance (PEGO)

In August 2011, the Institute of Political Science (IPW) at the University of Bern installed the Professorship of Policy Analysis and Environmental Governance (PEGO). This Chair was founded as a result of a fruitful collaboration between the IPW and the EAWAG (the Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology). Since the beginning, Karin Ingold took the lead in this new research group. She is a political scientist and focuses her research and lectures on the analysis of policy processes, and instrument design. Karin Ingold has a particular interest in issues relating to natural resource management, water, energy and climate policy. PEGO is also affiliated to the Oeschger Centre for Climate Change Research (OCCR) research.



PEGO Team Foto



Group leader Eawag


PhD Candidates

Student Assistants

Spring semester 2019

Students of the Master Seminar "Climate and Energy Policy" re-invented the term paper: they compiled an innovative podcast dedicated to energy efficiency and climate change in the era of electricity liberalization. More here (Podcast). Authors: Klopfstein, Zemp, Naço, Ota.

Open Topics for BA- and MA-Thesis:

  • Discoursive Echo-Chambers in Debates on the CO2 law. Established explanations suggest that the voting behaviour of parliamentarians is responsive to public pressure. The vote on the CO2 law on the 13th of June 2021 has, however, once more underscored how important public and parliamentary discourses are: powerful actors may dominate the discourse and influence if positive or negative arguments are taken up by others. Transcripts of the parliamentary debates allow investigating how arguments travel through the discourse. Of particular interest in this context is how positive or negative arguments on the debated measures in the sectors energy, buildings, transport und agriculture emerge. This thesis allows making a contribution to a better understanding of how positive and negative discourses emerge, which, against the current focus on costs, also emphasise benefits and thereby influence the voting behaviour of parliamentarians and the public. If there is interest, this thesis allows learning applied methods of automated text analysis with ‚Supervised Machine Learning’. This master thesis is going to be supervised by Simon Montfort and Prof. Dr. Karin Ingold.
  • Network analysis ‘Future of Food Switzerland’. The 'Sustainable Development Goals' as a part of the UN Agenda 2030 aim at, among other things, eliminating hunger and poverty by 2030, promoting sustainable land use, and to ensuring a healthy life for all people. These goals cannot be implemented without a fundamental transformation of our food system. For this reason, the Swiss Federal Council has decided to drive the transformation towards a sustainable Swiss food system. SDSN's goal with the project ‘Ernährungszukunft Schweiz’ is to strengthen the leadership role of all relevant stakeholders in order to jointly drive effective solutions for a more sustainable food system. What are ‘all relevant stakeholders’, which sectors do they come from, what (potentially counter-acting) interests do they represent, and how do they coordinate, and could improve their coordination, respectively? In order to develop systemically relevant solutions, it is necessary to know which actors, with which actions, have which impact with regard to a sustainable transformation of the Swiss food system. SDSN and the research group Pego (Eawag / Uni Bern) are looking for a student to develop a network analysis that analyzes the complex interactions of actors influencing what goes from farm to fork, in the context of a final thesis (Masters, or potentially also Bachelors). The analysis should identify clusters of actors pursuing common goals, as well as brokers for solutions. Based on the approach of social-ecological network analysis, the structure of the problem area of the food system will be analyzed, and the student will study which stakeholders might want to collaborate based on joint or interdependent issues, in order to improve the fit between the problem and stakeholder networks.
  • Biodiversity politics in Swiss Parliament. Preserving and promoting biodiversity is a politically anchored goal in Switzerland. It affects various policy fields such as water protection, forests and the environment, but also spatial planning and health. There are therefore countless parliamentary initiatives and acts dealing with biodiversity in a narrower or broader sense. We have collected documents around these initiatives and actors covering the period of the last 20 years. They are available in a text corpus for manual or automated content analysis. The following research questions could be interesting to follow: How has the political agenda with regard to biodiversity changed since 2000? Which actors are mainly concerned with the protection of species and landscapes, as well as the protection of genetic diversity? What kind of (changing) coalitions among actors are there? And which aspects do the actors and related documents emphasize or ignore?
  • Analysis of Swiss energy policy instruments: Actor coalitions over time. The decarbonization of the energy sector is a central issue in fighting climate change. Policy instruments can foster such a decarbonization. Such instruments should ideally persist over time in order to deploy their effects, but they also need to be capable of adapting to the inherent dynamics of technological change in this domain. We are looking for a Master student with a strong interest in Swiss climate and energy policy. The MA thesis is expected to cover the analysis of a given policy in the Swiss energy sector over time (several years to a decade). From a methodological point of view, the thesis should rely on Discourse Network Analysis (DNA) in order to reveal the positions and arguments of the most central political actors with respect to the design of such policy instruments. Potential topics are the feed-in tariffs or CO2 taxation, but other relevant and long-term policies can also be analyzed. A comparison with data from Germany is also possible. The thesis will be co-directed by Manuel Fischer (Policy Analysis and Environmental Governance group at Eawag and University of Bern) and the Energy Politics Group at ETH Zurich.
  • Governance of alluvial plains: The governance of alluvial plains is complex. Different organizations from the public sector, civil society and private firms with different responsibilites and preferences interact in and around alluvial plains. Further, the governance of alluvial plains involves a host of interdependent issues, which have to be balanced. Mostly, these issues revolves around questions of flood management, nature protection and agricultural production. In a project led by Manuel Fischer at Eawag we utilize social-ecological network models to understand the governance of alluvial plains and identify crucial factors for successful governance. To do so, we compare 10-12 alluvial plains throughout Switzerland. The master thesis will include working with us within the project and the responsibility for gathering data (mostly through stakeholder interviews) and a thorough analysis of one or more cases. We offer a nice and active working environment within our project team, the possibility to work in an exciting new research field, and close supervision of the thesis work. Depending on the interest of the master student, employment as a scientific assistant at Eawag in Dübendorf is possible. We specifically look for a French-speaking person who is interested in environmental topics. If beavers, federalism, residual flows, and policy do not sound completely foreign to you, we would be excited to hear from you.
  • Political decision-making process on CO2-Act: The CO2-Act is the centrepiece of Switzerland’s climate policy. Its development and content were massively debated among the opponents in the climate policy subsystem. In particular, the conflict arises between powerful economic groups, traffic organisations, the oil lobby, and conservative political parties, on the one side, and environmental organisations, NGOs, and progressive parties on the other side of the political spectrum. The main contestation is and was the introduction of a CO2 tax on combustibles and motor fuels. The tax on fuels has never been successful until today. Policy analysis research closely investigated the policy formulation process in the past two decades. Specifically, under the auspices of Karin Ingold, elite surveys were conducted on a regular basis to collect data on policy beliefs and policy networks of the involved actors. This Master thesis aims to implement a new survey focusing on the most recent revision of the CO2-Act and to analyse the gathered data with methods from the Social Network Analysis toolbox.
  • Biodiversity as a complex policy field: The prospective MA thesis deals with the complex actor constellation around biodiversity. Biodiversity concerns many different traditional policy sectors (water, forest, energy, land use planning, agriculture, etc.) and is influenced by policy processes (“Strategie Biodiversität”) on different levels of decision-making (from municipalities to international treaties). Theoretical approaches on policy processes and policy networks should guide the empirical analysis of the actor constellation in this field.
  • Competence shifts to municipality associations: Municipalities are the lowest level in the Swiss multi-level system of political decision-making. They are under increasing pressure, given the challenges provided by technical developments in – for example – the infrastructure domain. One solution for municipalities to deal with these challenges and related lack of resources and expertise is to delegate certain competencies to municipality associations. The prospective MA thesis deals with the question why such shifts of competences are accepted or not by municipalities, and under what context conditions they are successful or not. The thesis analyses this question for the domain of wastewater and drinking water.
  • Privatization of drinking water: The population of the canton of Zurich will soon vote on the revision of the integrated cantonal water law. The main reason for the high public interest and the conflictive discussions around the revision of this law is due to the fact that an element in the law explicitly provides the option for private firms to acquire parts of the drinking water supply system. The discussions in the canton of Zurich might very well influence related discussions in other cantons. The prospective MA thesis analyses the policy process and the actor network around the revision of the Zurich water law, as well as actors’ preferences and strategies around the question of privatisation of water supply against the background of policy process and network theories.
  • Protection of deep groundwater: Deep groundwater is increasingly concerned by different uses such as the extraction of mineral water, geo-thermical drillings, future CO2 storage as well as the agricultural use of water due to climate change. The protection and the related coordination of uses (as for example through prioritizing given types of uses) needs to be adapted to these new challenges in order to prevent future problems in regulation and uncertainties for users. The prospective MA thesis prepares basic parameters related to this issue and identifies and critically evaluates relevant actors, interests, conflicts, opportunities for coordination and policy instruments related to the protection of deep groundwater.
  • River restoration in Switzerland: Comparing cantonal strategies: In the next decades, Switzerland will restore (revitalize) an important part of its rivers. While the goals and basic criteria and financing mechanisms are defined at the national level, cantons are mainly responsible for identifying the river parts which should be restored. Swiss cantons thereby encounter different political and geographical challenges, and, as a consequence, organize their strategic planning of restoration measures in different ways, and rely on different criteria. Given the long-term task of restoring rivers, knowing how cantons plan their measures, and thus allowing for cross-cantonal learning over time, is crucial. The aim of the MA thesis is to compare cantonal planning processes, resources, approaches, and actor constellations related to restoration planning, and thus to identify why given types of cantons act in specific ways. Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) might be a good methodological approach for such a comparison. (German knowledge required)

The Chair's main research topics are Policy Analysis, Policy Process Theory, Instrument Design, Environmental Policy and the Application of Social Network Analysis.

Research projects

Completed Research Projects