Roadblocks of polarization: Interpretive mechanisms of opposition to a speed limit policy on German highways

Abstract

Social polarization can generate opposition to climate policy action but how exactly this occurs is often assumed rather than explicated. Unpacking this influence is important for understanding why oppositional responses to climate policy arise among mass publics. We analyze interpretive mechanisms by which social polarization leads to policy opposition in response to a proposed speed limit on highways in Germany. We employ an abductive process-tracing approach to posit and empirically scrutinize possible interpretive mechanisms of opposition, drawing on secondary data from multiple arenas of public discourse: news media (newspapers), online debate (internet forum posts), and political representation (plenary minutes, party programs, resolutions, public statements by representatives). We find evidence of three interpretive mechanisms by which policy opposition arises, each of which can occur through more than one pathway: 1) skepticism over policy intentions, 2) defense of values, and 3) unrecognized needs and dependencies. This demonstrates how multiple interpretive mechanisms can operate simultaneously, and the need to disentangle them when explaining policy opposition. Moreover, it suggests an opportunity to proactively address interpretive aspects in policy making (e.g., by giving greater attention to how meanings become attached to policies), while also underscoring the deep socio-cultural embeddedness of climate policy action.