Are the positions that protesters take—in favor or against change—consequential for their ability to affect policy? While previous research suggests that protests can inform legislative priorities and facilitate policy introduction, this paper emphasizes policy inaction and stasis as goals of some protest actions. Analysis uses novel and detailed data on energy-related protest and policy actions in Sweden covering a forty-year period and considers protest frequency and size in relation to proposal introduction. The research design uniquely distinguishes between protests in favor or against a specific energy source and proposal activity in line with those demands and also controls for public opinion on each energy source. Findings suggest that pro-renewable energy protests do not yield pro-renewable policies but prevent undesired policies that support non-renewable energy sources. In contrast to pro-renewable protests, protests against renewable energy sources are somewhat more influential. They likewise prevent the introduction of their undesired proposals and also influence the introduction of proposals supporting non-renewable energy sources. Overall, the paper examines policy inaction as a desired protest outcome and argues protest—as a tactic—may be more effective when pushing against rather than for policy change.

中文翻译：

---

现状的捍卫者：瑞典的能源抗议和政策（不）行动


抗议者所采取的立场——支持或反对变革——是否对他们影响政策的能力产生影响？虽然以前的研究表明，抗议活动可以为立法优先事项提供信息并促进政策出台，但本文强调政策不作为和停滞是一些抗议行动的目标。分析使用了瑞典 40 年期间与能源相关的抗议和政策行动的新颖而详细的数据，并考虑了与提案介绍相关的抗议频率和规模。研究设计独特地区分了支持或反对特定能源的抗议和符合这些要求的提案活动，并控制了对每种能源的公众舆论。研究结果表明，支持可再生能源的抗议活动不会产生支持可再生能源的政策，但会阻止支持不可再生能源的不受欢迎的政策。与支持可再生能源的抗议活动相比，反对可再生能源的抗议活动在某种程度上更具影响力。它们同样阻止引入他们不受欢迎的提案，并影响支持不可再生能源的提案的引入。总体而言，本文将政策不作为视为理想的抗议结果进行了研究，并认为抗议作为一种策略在推动而不是推动政策变化时可能更有效。