Lessons learned from the case of the Californian ZEV Mandate: From a 'technology-forcing' to a 'market-driven' regulation

In this paper, we investigate how Californian regulatory authorities and the principal stakeholders that have contributed to the design of the ZEV Mandate have dealt with this complex task. In the first three sections we present, in three stages, the evolution of the ZEV Mandate from its inception to the most recent developments, trying to reconstruct the debate that surrounded this evolution. We present some conclusions in the final section. Given the constructivist approach we adopt in this paper, our contribution can only be modest. No definitive, consensual and ready-to-apply lessons can be drawn from such a controversial case. However, the Californian example, particularly because of its excesses in various regards, offers valuable inputs to draw a line around technology-forcing regulations, stressing the major pitfalls of the regulatory design process. Moreover, this case has proved especially powerful in raising lively debates among the various communities of stakeholders involved to a greater or lesser extent in alternative vehicles and more generally in environmental regulations. We claim that these types of debate are nothing less than the very first stage of the design and evaluation of an “effective” regulation.