Decarbonising residential heat is essential for achieving net zero targets. The Netherlands and the UK are embarking on heat transitions from similar starting points, with a heavy dependence on natural gas. However, their governance approaches differ, with local municipal visions and plans playing a lead role in the Netherlands compared with a market-led approach in England and Wales. Scotland occupies an intermediate position. This article focuses on why these differences have arisen through the development of a comparative institutionalist framework. We show that heat transition governance approaches are rooted in institutional arrangements for politics, political economy and the degree of centralisation. Our framework can be applied to heat transition governance approaches more widely, but it is not aimed at evaluating different approaches and an agenda for further research would be to link governance effectiveness to institutional context.

中文翻译：

---

制度背景和热转变的治理：荷兰和英国的案例

住宅供热脱碳对于实现净零目标至关重要。荷兰和英国正从类似的起点开始热力转型，严重依赖天然气。然而，它们的治理方法有所不同，与英格兰和威尔士的市场主导方法相比，荷兰当地市政愿景和计划发挥着主导作用。苏格兰处于中间位置。本文重点探讨为什么这些差异是通过比较制度主义框架的发展而出现的。我们表明，热转型治理方法植根于政治、政治经济和集权程度的制度安排。我们的框架可以更广泛地应用于热转换治理方法，但其目的并不是评估不同的方法，进一步研究的议程是将治理有效性与制度环境联系起来。