IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v118y2018icp121-132.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Innovation in regulated electricity distribution networks: A review of the effectiveness of Great Britain's Low Carbon Networks Fund

Author

Listed:
  • Frame, Damien
  • Hannon, Matthew
  • Bell, Keith
  • McArthur, Stephen

Abstract

Introduced in 2010, the Low Carbon Networks Fund (LCNF) was a major development in the regulatory regime for electricity distribution networks in Great Britain, yet evaluation of its design and implementation has been limited. This paper examines the type and quality of innovation arising from the LCNF. Novel frameworks for assessing innovation project activity and learning are presented and results from their application to the LCNF are discussed. Reduction of uncertainty through the production of high quality evidence is argued to be the primary purpose of innovation project funding support. The analysis of LCNF project activity finds a step change in Research Development & Demonstration (RD&D) spend and stakeholder engagement by network licensees in Britain; however, the innovation observed was considered to be conservative and incremental in nature. It was found that the LCNF lacked a strategic approach to targeted learning and the reduction of uncertainty for innovation priority areas. Project learning outputs were contradictory and inconclusive for several innovations. Strategic learning should be a core part of policy makers’ design of innovation funding mechanisms for energy technology, and a framework for shaping, capturing and assessing the learning outputs of funded innovation projects is essential.

Suggested Citation

  • Frame, Damien & Hannon, Matthew & Bell, Keith & McArthur, Stephen, 2018. "Innovation in regulated electricity distribution networks: A review of the effectiveness of Great Britain's Low Carbon Networks Fund," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 121-132.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:118:y:2018:i:c:p:121-132
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2018.02.033
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421518301101
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2018.02.033?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jamasb, Tooraj & Pollitt, Michael G., 2011. "Electricity sector liberalisation and innovation: An analysis of the UK's patenting activities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 309-324, March.
    2. Shaw, Rita & Attree, Mike & Jackson, Tim, 2010. "Developing electricity distribution networks and their regulation to support sustainable energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 5927-5937, October.
    3. Nicholas Economides, 2006. "Competition Policy in Network Industries: An Introduction," Chapters, in: Dennis W. Jansen (ed.), The New Economy and Beyond, chapter 5, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Global Energy Assessment Writing Team,, 2012. "Global Energy Assessment," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521182935, September.
    5. Bell, Keith & Gill, Simon, 2018. "Delivering a highly distributed electricity system: Technical, regulatory and policy challenges," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 765-777.
    6. Jamasb, Tooraj & Pollitt, Michael G., 2015. "Why and how to subsidise energy R+D: Lessons from the collapse and recovery of electricity innovation in the UK," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 197-205.
    7. Pierson, Paul, 2000. "Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 94(2), pages 251-267, June.
    8. Global Energy Assessment Writing Team,, 2012. "Global Energy Assessment," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107005198, September.
    9. Dennis W. Jansen (ed.), 2006. "The New Economy and Beyond," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 3965.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dierk Bauknecht & Allan Dahl Andersen & Karoline Dunne, 2020. "Challenges for electricity network governance in Energy transitions: Insights from Norway," Working Papers on Innovation Studies 20200115, Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo.
    2. Biancardi, Andrea & Di Castelnuovo, Matteo & Staffell, Iain, 2021. "A framework to evaluate how European Transmission System Operators approach innovation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    3. Johansson, Petter & Vendel, Martin & Nuur, Cali, 2020. "Integrating distributed energy resources in electricity distribution systems: An explorative study of challenges facing DSOs in Sweden," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    4. Ford, Rebecca & Maidment, Chris & Vigurs, Carol & Fell, Michael J. & Morris, Madeleine, 2021. "Smart local energy systems (SLES): A framework for exploring transition, context, and impacts," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wang, Nan & Mogi, Gento, 2017. "Deregulation, market competition, and innovation of utilities: Evidence from Japanese electric sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 403-413.
    2. María Teresa Costa-Campi & Jose García-Quevedo, 2017. "Why do manufacturing industries invest in energy R&D?," Working Papers 2017/20, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).
    3. María Teresa Costa‐Campi & Néstor Duch‐Brown & José García‐Quevedo, 2019. "Innovation strategies of energy firms," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(5), pages 1073-1085, September.
    4. Tilmann Rave, 2013. "Innovationsindikatoren zum globalen Klimaschutz – FuE-Ausgaben und Patente," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 66(15), pages 34-41, August.
    5. Daniel Moran & Richard Wood, 2014. "Convergence Between The Eora, Wiod, Exiobase, And Openeu'S Consumption-Based Carbon Accounts," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(3), pages 245-261, September.
    6. Lykke E. Andersen & Luis Carlos Jemio, 2016. "Decentralization and poverty reduction in Bolivia: Challenges and opportunities," Development Research Working Paper Series 01/2016, Institute for Advanced Development Studies.
    7. Inglesi-Lotz, Roula, 2017. "Social rate of return to R&D on various energy technologies: Where should we invest more? A study of G7 countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 521-525.
    8. Tom Mikunda & Tom Kober & Heleen de Coninck & Morgan Bazilian & Hilke R�sler & Bob van der Zwaan, 2014. "Designing policy for deployment of CCS in industry," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(5), pages 665-676, September.
    9. Jun Nakatani & Tamon Maruyama & Kosuke Fukuchi & Yuichi Moriguchi, 2015. "A Practical Approach to Screening Potential Environmental Hotspots of Different Impact Categories in Supply Chains," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(9), pages 1-15, August.
    10. Fichter, Tobias & Soria, Rafael & Szklo, Alexandre & Schaeffer, Roberto & Lucena, Andre F.P., 2017. "Assessing the potential role of concentrated solar power (CSP) for the northeast power system of Brazil using a detailed power system model," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 695-715.
    11. Selosse, Sandrine & Ricci, Olivia & Maïzi, Nadia, 2013. "Fukushima's impact on the European power sector: The key role of CCS technologies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 305-312.
    12. Kamjoo, Azadeh & Maheri, Alireza & Putrus, Ghanim A., 2014. "Chance constrained programming using non-Gaussian joint distribution function in design of standalone hybrid renewable energy systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 677-688.
    13. Mokri, Alaeddine & Aal Ali, Mona & Emziane, Mahieddine, 2013. "Solar energy in the United Arab Emirates: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 340-375.
    14. Perrihan Al-Riffai & Julian Blohmke & Clemens Breisinger & Manfred Wiebelt, 2015. "Harnessing the Sun and Wind for Economic Development? An Economy-Wide Assessment for Egypt," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(6), pages 1-27, June.
    15. Kim, Yeong Jae & Wilson, Charlie, 2019. "Analysing energy innovation portfolios from a systemic perspective," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    16. Sofia Dahlgren & Jonas Ammenberg, 2021. "Sustainability Assessment of Public Transport, Part II—Applying a Multi-Criteria Assessment Method to Compare Different Bus Technologies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-30, January.
    17. Jan K. Kazak & Joanna A. Kamińska & Rafał Madej & Marta Bochenkiewicz, 2020. "Where Renewable Energy Sources Funds are Invested? Spatial Analysis of Energy Production Potential and Public Support," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-26, October.
    18. David Bryngelsson & Fredrik Hedenus & Daniel J. A. Johansson & Christian Azar & Stefan Wirsenius, 2017. "How Do Dietary Choices Influence the Energy-System Cost of Stabilizing the Climate?," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-13, February.
    19. Jin-Young Kim & Hyun-Goo Kim & Yong-Heack Kang, 2017. "Offshore Wind Speed Forecasting: The Correlation between Satellite-Observed Monthly Sea Surface Temperature and Wind Speed over the Seas around the Korean Peninsula," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-15, July.
    20. Silva Herran, Diego & Dai, Hancheng & Fujimori, Shinichiro & Masui, Toshihiko, 2016. "Global assessment of onshore wind power resources considering the distance to urban areas," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 75-86.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:118:y:2018:i:c:p:121-132. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.