IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v129y2019icp307-318.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Should BIPV technologies be empowered by innovation policy mix to facilitate energy transitions? - Revealing stakeholders' different perspectives using Q methodology

Author

Listed:
  • Chang, Ruidong
  • Cao, Yuan
  • Lu, Yujie
  • Shabunko, Veronika

Abstract

As new renewable energy applications, building-integrated photovoltaics (BIPV) systems have significant potential to facilitate energy transitions towards renewable energy in highly urbanized countries, where large areas of land for developing large-scale solar or wind farms are limited. Government policy plays a significant role in nurturing and protecting energy innovations at the early development stage, such as BIPV. However, various actors could have divergent views on the policies for energy innovations, and policymakers need to consider these views in policymaking to avoid potential failures in policy implementation. By taking BIPV as an example, this study aims to reveal stakeholders' different perspectives on the required innovation policies for new energy technologies based on Q methodology. The results indicate even though stakeholders share similar views on some aspects of BIPV policies, four significantly distinct policy perspectives on BIPV exist in stakeholders' mindsets, including supervisory support, intensively investigate, cautiously stimulate and proactively promote. These policy perspectives require significantly different approaches to promote BIPV, which indicates the complexity in formulating one set of policy mix catering for the various mindsets of stakeholders. This study has both theoretical contributions to innovation policy mix for energy transitions, and policy implications for promoting energy innovations, especially BIPV worldwide.

Suggested Citation

  • Chang, Ruidong & Cao, Yuan & Lu, Yujie & Shabunko, Veronika, 2019. "Should BIPV technologies be empowered by innovation policy mix to facilitate energy transitions? - Revealing stakeholders' different perspectives using Q methodology," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 307-318.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:129:y:2019:i:c:p:307-318
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2019.02.047
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421519301302
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2019.02.047?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. Jaung, Wanggi & Putzel, Louis & Bull, Gary Q. & Kozak, Robert & Markum,, 2016. "Certification of forest watershed services: A Q methodology analysis of opportunities and challenges in Lombok, Indonesia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 51-59.
    2. Magro, Edurne & Wilson, James R., 2013. "Complex innovation policy systems: Towards an evaluation mix," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1647-1656.
    3. Weber, K. Matthias & Rohracher, Harald, 2012. "Legitimizing research, technology and innovation policies for transformative change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 1037-1047.
    4. Quitzow, Rainer, 2015. "Assessing policy strategies for the promotion of environmental technologies: A review of India's National Solar Mission," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 233-243.
    5. Aristizábal, A.J. & Gordillo, G., 2008. "Performance monitoring results of the first grid-connected BIPV system in Colombia," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 33(11), pages 2475-2484.
    6. Zhao, Zhen-Yu & Chang, Rui-Dong & Chen, Yu-Long, 2016. "What hinder the further development of wind power in China?—A socio-technical barrier study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 465-476.
    7. Osseweijer, Floor J.W. & van den Hurk, Linda B.P. & Teunissen, Erik J.H.M. & van Sark, Wilfried G.J.H.M., 2018. "A comparative review of building integrated photovoltaics ecosystems in selected European countries," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 1027-1040.
    8. Guangdong Wu & Guofeng Qiang & Jian Zuo & Xianbo Zhao & Ruidong Chang, 2018. "What are the Key Indicators of Mega Sustainable Construction Projects? —A Stakeholder-Network Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-18, August.
    9. Chen, Weidong & Wei, Pengbang, 2018. "Socially optimal deployment strategy and incentive policy for solar photovoltaic community microgrid: A case of China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 86-94.
    10. Cumming, Douglas J. & Leboeuf, Gael & Schwienbacher, Armin, 2017. "Crowdfunding cleantech," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 292-303.
    11. Lanahan, Lauren & Feldman, Maryann P., 2015. "Multilevel innovation policy mix: A closer look at state policies that augment the federal SBIR program," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(7), pages 1387-1402.
    12. Barry, John & Proops, John, 1999. "Seeking sustainability discourses with Q methodology," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 337-345, March.
    13. Hammond, Geoffrey P. & Harajli, Hassan A. & Jones, Craig I. & Winnett, Adrian B., 2012. "Whole systems appraisal of a UK Building Integrated Photovoltaic (BIPV) system: Energy, environmental, and economic evaluations," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 219-230.
    14. Borrás, Susana & Edquist, Charles, 2013. "The choice of innovation policy instruments," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(8), pages 1513-1522.
    15. Howard, Rebecca J. & Tallontire, Anne M. & Stringer, Lindsay C. & Marchant, Rob A., 2016. "Which “fairness”, for whom, and why? An empirical analysis of plural notions of fairness in Fairtrade Carbon Projects, using Q methodology," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 100-109.
    16. Cuppen, Eefje & Breukers, Sylvia & Hisschemöller, Matthijs & Bergsma, Emmy, 2010. "Q methodology to select participants for a stakeholder dialogue on energy options from biomass in the Netherlands," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 579-591, January.
    17. Kwon, Tae-hyeong, 2012. "Strategic niche management of alternative fuel vehicles: A system dynamics model of the policy effect," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 79(9), pages 1672-1680.
    18. Lu, Yujie & Chang, Ruidong & Shabunko, Veronika & Lay Yee, Amy Tan, 2019. "The implementation of building-integrated photovoltaics in Singapore: drivers versus barriers," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 400-408.
    19. Azadian, Farshad & Radzi, M.A.M., 2013. "A general approach toward building integrated photovoltaic systems and its implementation barriers: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 527-538.
    20. Rui‐dong Chang & Jian Zuo & Zhen‐yu Zhao & Veronica Soebarto & George Zillante & Xiao‐long Gan, 2017. "Approaches for Transitions Towards Sustainable Development: Status Quo and Challenges," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(5), pages 359-371, September.
    21. Lachman, Daniël A., 2013. "A survey and review of approaches to study transitions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 269-276.
    22. Markard, Jochen & Raven, Rob & Truffer, Bernhard, 2012. "Sustainability transitions: An emerging field of research and its prospects," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 955-967.
    23. Rogge, Karoline S. & Reichardt, Kristin, 2016. "Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: An extended concept and framework for analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 1620-1635.
    24. Kim, Ki Youn & Lee, Bong Gyou, 2015. "Marketing insights for mobile advertising and consumer segmentation in the cloud era: A Q–R hybrid methodology and practices," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 78-92.
    25. Zhao, Zhen-Yu & Chen, Yu-Long & Chang, Rui-Dong, 2016. "How to stimulate renewable energy power generation effectively? – China's incentive approaches and lessons," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 147-156.
    26. Geels, Frank W., 2002. "Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1257-1274, December.
    27. Dryzek, John S. & Niemeyer, Simon, 2008. "Discursive Representation," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 102(4), pages 481-493, November.
    28. Jean Huge & Katherine Vande Velde & Francisco Javier Benitez Capistros & Jan Harold Japay & Behara Satyanarayana & Mohammad Nazrin Ishak & Melissa Quispe Zuniga & Bin Husain Mohd Lokman & Sulong Ibrah, 2016. "Mapping discourses using Q methodology in Matang Mangrove Forest, Malaysia," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/246478, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    29. Kivimaa, Paula & Kern, Florian, 2016. "Creative destruction or mere niche support? Innovation policy mixes for sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 205-217.
    30. Yuan, Xueliang & Wang, Xujiang & Zuo, Jian, 2013. "Renewable energy in buildings in China—A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 1-8.
    31. Yixi Xue & Jianxin You & Xingkun Liang & Hu-Chen Liu, 2016. "Adopting Strategic Niche Management to Evaluate EV Demonstration Projects in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-20, February.
    32. ., 1998. "Technological Change," Chapters, in: Heinz D. Kurz & Neri Salvadori (ed.), The Elgar Companion to Classical Economics, volume 0, chapter 127, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    33. van Eijck, Janske & Romijn, Henny, 2008. "Prospects for Jatropha biofuels in Tanzania: An analysis with Strategic Niche Management," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 311-325, January.
    34. Geels, Frank W., 2004. "From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems: Insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6-7), pages 897-920, September.
    35. Lu, Yujie & Chang, Ruidong & Lim, Suxann, 2018. "Crowdfunding for solar photovoltaics development: A review and forecast," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 439-450.
    36. Lilliestam, Johan & Barradi, Touria & Caldés, Natalia & Gomez, Marta & Hanger, Susanne & Kern, Jürgen & Komendantova, Nadejda & Mehos, Mark & Hong, Wai Mun & Wang, Zhifeng & Patt, Anthony, 2018. "Policies to keep and expand the option of concentrating solar power for dispatchable renewable electricity," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 193-197.
    37. Geraint Ellis & John Barry & Clive Robinson, 2007. "Many ways to say 'no', different ways to say 'yes': Applying Q-Methodology to understand public acceptance of wind farm proposals," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(4), pages 517-551.
    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. Fu, Shaoling & Huang, Yatao, 2024. "Exploring farmers' perceptions of the technological characteristics of traceability systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 215(C).
    2. Mohammed Albattah & Daniel Efurosibina Attoye, 2021. "A Quantitative Investigation on Awareness of Renewable Energy Building Technology in the United Arab Emirates," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-20, June.
    3. Lucchi, Elena, 2022. "Integration between photovoltaic systems and cultural heritage: A socio-technical comparison of international policies, design criteria, applications, and innovation developments," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    4. Tianyi Chen & Yaning An & Chye Kiang Heng, 2022. "A Review of Building-Integrated Photovoltaics in Singapore: Status, Barriers, and Prospects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-25, August.
    5. Mohammad Esmailzadeh & Siamak Noori & Alireza Aliahmadi & Hamidreza Nouralizadeh & Marcel Bogers, 2020. "A Functional Analysis of Technological Innovation Systems in Developing Countries: An Evaluation of Iran’s Photovoltaic Innovation System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-20, March.
    6. Liu, Zhengguang & Guo, Zhiling & Chen, Qi & Song, Chenchen & Shang, Wenlong & Yuan, Meng & Zhang, Haoran, 2023. "A review of data-driven smart building-integrated photovoltaic systems: Challenges and objectives," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 263(PE).
    7. Andrés Lorente de las Casas & Ivelina Mirkova & Francisco J. Ramos-Real, 2021. "Stakeholders’ Perceptions of the Possible Energy Sustainability Solutions in the Hotels of the Canary Islands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-26, June.
    8. Siu-Kit Lau & Vesna Kosorić & Monika Bieri & André.M. Nobre, 2021. "Identification of Factors Influencing Development of Photovoltaic (PV) Implementation in Singapore," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-30, March.
    9. Ding, Liping & Zhu, Yuxuan & Zheng, Longwei & Dai, Qiyao & Zhang, Zumeng, 2023. "What is the path of photovoltaic building (BIPV or BAPV) promotion? --The perspective of evolutionary games," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 340(C).
    10. Ali, Muhammad Rizwan & Shafiq, Muhammad, 2021. "Revealing expert perspectives on challenges to electricity Demand-Side Management in Pakistan: An application of Q-Methodology," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    11. Martina Pelle & Elena Lucchi & Laura Maturi & Alexander Astigarraga & Francesco Causone, 2020. "Coloured BIPV Technologies: Methodological and Experimental Assessment for Architecturally Sensitive Areas," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-21, September.
    12. Vesna Kosorić & Siu-Kit Lau & Abel Tablada & Monika Bieri & André M. Nobre, 2021. "A Holistic Strategy for Successful Photovoltaic (PV) Implementation into Singapore’s Built Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-35, June.
    13. Janusz Marchwiński & Vuk Milošević & Anna Stefańska & Elena Lucchi, 2023. "Irradiation Analysis of Tensile Membrane Structures for Building-Integrated Photovoltaics," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(16), pages 1-26, August.
    14. Cláudio Albuquerque Frate & Christian Brannstrom, 2019. "How Do Stakeholders Perceive Barriers to Large-Scale Wind Power Diffusion? A Q-Method Case Study from Ceará State, Brazil," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-14, May.
    15. Kanger, Laur & Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Noorkõiv, Martin, 2020. "Six policy intervention points for sustainability transitions: A conceptual framework and a systematic literature review," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(7).
    16. Cheng, Yuanyuan & Yao, Xin, 2021. "Carbon intensity reduction assessment of renewable energy technology innovation in China: A panel data model with cross-section dependence and slope heterogeneity," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    17. Che, Xiao-Jing & Zhou, P. & Chai, Kah-Hin, 2022. "Regional policy effect on photovoltaic (PV) technology innovation: Findings from 260 cities in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 162(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. Hilde Nykamp, 2020. "Policy Mix for a Transition to Sustainability: Green Buildings in Norway," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-17, January.
    2. Edmondson, Duncan L. & Kern, Florian & Rogge, Karoline S., 2019. "The co-evolution of policy mixes and socio-technical systems: Towards a conceptual framework of policy mix feedback in sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    3. Kivimaa, Paula & Kern, Florian, 2016. "Creative destruction or mere niche support? Innovation policy mixes for sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 205-217.
    4. Falcone, Pasquale Marcello & Lopolito, Antonio & Sica, Edgardo, 2019. "Instrument mix for energy transition: A method for policy formulation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    5. Heiberg, Jonas & Truffer, Bernhard & Binz, Christian, 2022. "Assessing transitions through socio-technical configuration analysis – a methodological framework and a case study in the water sector," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    6. Rogge, Karoline S. & Pfluger, Benjamin & Geels, Frank W., 2020. "Transformative policy mixes in socio-technical scenarios: The case of the low-carbon transition of the German electricity system (2010–2050)," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    7. Xu, Lei & Su, Jun, 2016. "From government to market and from producer to consumer: Transition of policy mix towards clean mobility in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 328-340.
    8. Befort, N., 2020. "Going beyond definitions to understand tensions within the bioeconomy: The contribution of sociotechnical regimes to contested fields," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    9. Jonas Heiberg & Christian Binz & Bernhard Truffer, 2020. "Assessing transitions through socio-technical network analysis – a methodological framework and a case study from the water sector," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2035, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Aug 2020.
    10. Raven, Rob & Walrave, Bob, 2020. "Overcoming transformational failures through policy mixes in the dynamics of technological innovation systems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    11. Haddad, Carolina R. & Bergek, Anna, 2023. "Towards an integrated framework for evaluating transformative innovation policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(2).
    12. Haley, Brendan, 2018. "Integrating structural tensions into technological innovation systems analysis: Application to the case of transmission interconnections and renewable electricity in Nova Scotia, Canada," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(6), pages 1147-1160.
    13. Matos, Stelvia & Viardot, Eric & Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Geels, Frank W. & Xiong, Yu, 2022. "Innovation and climate change: A review and introduction to the special issue," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    14. Kern, Florian & Rogge, Karoline S. & Howlett, Michael, 2019. "Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: New approaches and insights through bridging innovation and policy studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    15. Diercks, Gijs & Larsen, Henrik & Steward, Fred, 2019. "Transformative innovation policy: Addressing variety in an emerging policy paradigm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 880-894.
    16. Cheng Wang & Tao Lv & Rongjiang Cai & Jianfeng Xu & Liya Wang, 2022. "Bibliometric Analysis of Multi-Level Perspective on Sustainability Transition Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-31, March.
    17. Jordi Molas-Gallart & Alejandra Boni & Sandro Giachi & Johan Schot, 2021. "A formative approach to the evaluation of Transformative Innovation Policies [The Need for Reflexive Evaluation Approaches in Development Cooperation]," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(4), pages 431-442.
    18. Barbanente, Angela & Grassini, Laura, 2022. "Fostering transitions in landscape policies: A multi-level perspective," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    19. Nuñez-Jimenez, Alejandro & Knoeri, Christof & Hoppmann, Joern & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2022. "Beyond innovation and deployment: Modeling the impact of technology-push and demand-pull policies in Germany's solar policy mix," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    20. Imbert, Enrica & Ladu, Luana & Morone, Piergiuseppe & Quitzow, Rainer, 2017. "Policy strategies for a transition to a bioeconomy in Europe: the case of Italy and Germany," MPRA Paper 78143, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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:129:y:2019:i:c:p:307-318. 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.