IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v140y2020ics0301421520300896.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public views of Scotland's path to decarbonization: Evidence from citizens' juries and focus groups

Author

Listed:
  • Ostfeld, Rosemary
  • Reiner, David M.

Abstract

Scotland offers a case study of a country with significant fossil energy resources that has seen rapid decarbonization and deployment of renewable energy. We review the key policies that facilitated a 47% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from 1990 baseline levels and almost 75% of Scottish electricity being produced from renewable sources. Public views on climate policy, renewable energy, and low-carbon technologies are explored using focus groups we conducted in Aberdeen, Peterhead, and Edinburgh and citizens' juries in Aberdeen and Edinburgh. The deliberative processes reveal strong public support for continued diversification of Scotland's energy portfolio to include more renewable energy sources, particularly at the local level. We also found support for increased state involvement in the energy sector. Pro-renewables sentiments and skepticism of industry pervade even in Aberdeen, the main oil and gas hub, alongside support for further exploration of low-carbon emission technologies such as carbon capture and storage (CCS) that retain the ability to continue to use fossil fuels. Although Peterhead stood to benefit from a major CCS project, there was remarkably little awareness of the proposed project among residents. Finally, we argue deliberative processes can help both policy-makers and developers gauge where they can (and cannot) expect support.

Suggested Citation

  • Ostfeld, Rosemary & Reiner, David M., 2020. "Public views of Scotland's path to decarbonization: Evidence from citizens' juries and focus groups," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:140:y:2020:i:c:s0301421520300896
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2020.111332
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421520300896
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2020.111332?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. Angus Armstrong & Monique Ebell, 2014. "Assets and liabilities and Scottish independence," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 30(2), pages 297-309.
    2. Ragnar Lofstedt, 2015. "Effective risk communication and CCS: the road to success in Europe," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(6), pages 675-691, June.
    3. David M. Newbery, 2005. "Electricity liberalization in Britain: The quest for a satisfactory wholesale market design," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I), pages 43-70.
    4. Bowen, Frances, 2011. "Carbon capture and storage as a corporate technology strategy challenge," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 2256-2264, May.
    5. David M. Reiner, 2016. "Learning through a portfolio of carbon capture and storage demonstration projects," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 1(1), pages 1-7, January.
    6. Mabon, Leslie & Shackley, Simon & Bower-Bir, Nathan, 2014. "Perceptions of sub-seabed carbon dioxide storage in Scotland and implications for policy: A qualitative study," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 9-15.
    7. Angus Armstrong & Monique Ebell, 2014. "Assets and liabilities and Scottish independence," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(2), pages 297-309.
    8. Howell, Rhys & Shackley, Simon & Mabon, Leslie & Ashworth, Peta & Jeanneret, Talia, 2014. "Engaging the public with low-carbon energy technologies: Results from a Scottish large group process," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 496-506.
    9. Graham Smith & Corinne Wales, 2000. "Citizens' Juries and Deliberative Democracy," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 48(1), pages 51-65, March.
    10. Laurel Besco, 2018. "Responses to the Clean Power Plan: Factors Influencing State Decision‐Making," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 35(5), pages 670-690, September.
    11. Barry G. Rabe, 2008. "States on Steroids: The Intergovernmental Odyssey of American Climate Policy," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 25(2), pages 105-128, March.
    12. Lock, Simon J. & Smallman, Melanie & Lee, Maria & Rydin, Yvonne, 2014. "“Nuclear energy sounded wonderful 40 years ago”: UK citizen views on CCS," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 428-435.
    13. Kern, Florian & Smith, Adrian & Shaw, Chris & Raven, Rob & Verhees, Bram, 2014. "From laggard to leader: Explaining offshore wind developments in the UK," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 635-646.
    14. Alex Bowen & James Rydge, 2011. "Climate-Change Policy in the United Kingdom," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 886, OECD Publishing.
    15. Florian Kern & Adrian Smith & Chris Shaw & Rob Raven & Bram Verhees, 2014. "From laggard to leader: Explaining offshore wind developments in the UK," SPRU Working Paper Series 2014-02, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    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. Sabrina Bresciani & Francesca Rizzo & Alessandro Deserti, 2022. "Toward a Comprehensive Framework of Social Innovation for Climate Neutrality: A Systematic Literature Review from Business/Production, Public Policy, Environmental Sciences, Energy, Sustainability and," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-21, October.
    2. Dumbrell, Nikki P. & Wheeler, Sarah Ann & Zuo, Alec & Adamson, David, 2022. "Public willingness to make trade-offs in the development of a hydrogen industry in Australia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 165(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. Rosemary Ostfeld & David M Reiner, 2019. "Exploring public support for climate action and renewables in resource-rich economies: The case of Scotland," Working Papers EPRG1934, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    2. Peter Viebahn & Emile J. L. Chappin, 2018. "Scrutinising the Gap between the Expected and Actual Deployment of Carbon Capture and Storage—A Bibliometric Analysis," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-45, September.
    3. McMeekin, Andrew & Geels, Frank W. & Hodson, Mike, 2019. "Mapping the winds of whole system reconfiguration: Analysing low-carbon transformations across production, distribution and consumption in the UK electricity system (1990–2016)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(5), pages 1216-1231.
    4. Geels, Frank W. & Kern, Florian & Fuchs, Gerhard & Hinderer, Nele & Kungl, Gregor & Mylan, Josephine & Neukirch, Mario & Wassermann, Sandra, 2016. "The enactment of socio-technical transition pathways: A reformulated typology and a comparative multi-level analysis of the German and UK low-carbon electricity transitions (1990–2014)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 896-913.
    5. Geels, Frank W. & Ayoub, Martina, 2023. "A socio-technical transition perspective on positive tipping points in climate change mitigation: Analysing seven interacting feedback loops in offshore wind and electric vehicles acceleration," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    6. Stefan Ćetković & Aron Buzogány & Miranda Schreurs, 2016. "Varieties of clean energy transitions in Europe: Political-economic foundations of onshore and offshore wind development," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2016-18, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    7. van der Loos, Adriaan & Langeveld, Rowan & Hekkert, Marko & Negro, Simona & Truffer, Bernhard, 2022. "Developing local industries and global value chains: The case of offshore wind," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    8. 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.
    9. Yu, H. & Reiner, D. & Chen, H. & Mi, Z., 2018. "A comparison of public preferences for different low-carbon energy technologies: Support for CCS, nuclear and wind energy in the United Kingdom," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1826, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    10. Jasminka Young & Aleksandar Macura, 2023. "Forging Local Energy Transition in the Most Carbon-Intensive European Region of the Western Balkans," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-29, February.
    11. Phil Johnstone & Andy Stirling, 2015. "Comparing Nuclear Power Trajectories inGermany And the UK: From ‘Regimes’ to ‘Democracies’ in Sociotechnical Transitions and Discontinuities," SPRU Working Paper Series 2015-18, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    12. Piirainen, Kalle A. & Tanner, Anne Nygaard & Alkærsig, Lars, 2017. "Regional foresight and dynamics of smart specialization: A typology of regional diversification patterns," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 289-300.
    13. Monk, Alexander & Perkins, Richard, 2020. "What explains the emergence and diffusion of green bonds?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    14. Stefan Cetkovic & Aron Buzogány & Miranda Schreurs, 2016. "Varieties of clean energy transitions in Europe Political-economic foundations of onshore and offshore wind development," WIDER Working Paper Series 018, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    15. Danny MacKinnon & Stuart Dawley & Markus Steen & Max-Peter Menzel & Asbjørn Karlsen & Pascal Sommer & Gard Hopsdal Hansen & Håkon Endresen Normann, 2018. "Path creation, global production networks and regional development: a comparative international analysis of the offshore wind sector," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1810, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Feb 2018.
    16. Matthew Lockwood & Caroline Kuzemko & Catherine Mitchell & Richard Hoggett, 2017. "Historical institutionalism and the politics of sustainable energy transitions: A research agenda," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 35(2), pages 312-333, March.
    17. Hsin-Hua Tsai & Huan-Sheng Tseng & Chun-Kai Huang & Su-Chun Yu, 2022. "Review on the Conflicts between Offshore Wind Power and Fishery Rights: Marine Spatial Planning in Taiwan," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(22), pages 1-15, November.
    18. Fatimah, Yuti Ariani & Raven, Rob P.J.M. & Arora, Saurabh, 2015. "Scripts in transition: Protective spaces of Indonesian biofuel villages," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 1-13.
    19. Maria Tsouri & Jens Hanson & Håkon Endresen Normann, 2020. "Does participation in knowledge networks facilitate international market access? The case of offshore wind," Working Papers on Innovation Studies 20200303, Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo.
    20. Mohammad Arzaghi & Andrew Balthrop, 2018. "No taxation, no representation: An investigation of the relationship between natural resources and fiscal decentralization," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 36(7), pages 1234-1255, November.

    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:140:y:2020:i:c:s0301421520300896. 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.