IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v87y2015icp665-672.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public values for energy futures: Framing, indeterminacy and policy making

Author

Listed:
  • Butler, C.
  • Demski, C.
  • Parkhill, K.
  • Pidgeon, N.
  • Spence, A.

Abstract

In the UK there are strong policy imperatives to transition toward low carbon energy systems but how and in what ways such transitional processes might be realised remains highly uncertain. One key area of uncertainty pertains to public attitudes and acceptability. Though there is wide-ranging research relevant to public acceptability, very little work has unpacked the multiple questions concerning how policy-makers can grapple with and mitigate related uncertainties in efforts to enact energy systems change. In this paper, public acceptability is identified as an indeterminate form of uncertainty that presents particular challenges for policy making. We build on our existing research into public values for energy system change to explore how the outcomes of the project can be applied in thinking through the uncertainties associated with public acceptability. Notably, we illustrate how the public values identified through our research bring into view alternative and quite different problem and solution framings to those currently evident within UK policy. We argue that engagement with a wide range of different framings can offer a basis for better understanding and anticipating public responses to energy system change, ultimately aiding in managing the complex set of uncertainties associated with public acceptability.

Suggested Citation

  • Butler, C. & Demski, C. & Parkhill, K. & Pidgeon, N. & Spence, A., 2015. "Public values for energy futures: Framing, indeterminacy and policy making," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 665-672.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:87:y:2015:i:c:p:665-672
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2015.01.035
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421515000543
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2015.01.035?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. Stilgoe, Jack & Owen, Richard & Macnaghten, Phil, 2013. "Developing a framework for responsible innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1568-1580.
    2. Hallegatte, Stephane & Shah, Ankur & Lempert, Robert & Brown, Casey & Gill, Stuart, 2012. "Investment decision making under deep uncertainty -- application to climate change," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6193, The World Bank.
    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. Ernst, Anna & Biß, Klaus H. & Shamon, Hawal & Schumann, Diana & Heinrichs, Heidi U., 2018. "Benefits and challenges of participatory methods in qualitative energy scenario development," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 245-257.
    2. Phillips, Keri L. & Hine, Donald W. & Phillips, Wendy J., 2019. "How projected electricity price and personal values influence support for a 50% renewable energy target in Australia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 853-860.
    3. Robertson Munro, Fiona & Cairney, Paul, 2020. "A systematic review of energy systems: The role of policymaking in sustainable transitions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    4. Farhad Mukhtarov & Andrea Gerlak & Robin Pierce, 2017. "Away from fossil-fuels and toward a bioeconomy: Knowledge versatility for public policy?," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 35(6), pages 1010-1028, September.
    5. Peterson, Mark & Feldman, David, 2018. "Citizen preferences for possible energy policies at the national and state levels," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 80-91.
    6. Evensen, Darrick & Demski, Christina & Becker, Sarah & Pidgeon, Nick, 2018. "The relationship between justice and acceptance of energy transition costs in the UK," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 222(C), pages 451-459.
    7. Egusquiza, A. & Ginestet, S. & Espada, J.C. & Flores-Abascal, I. & Garcia-Gafaro, C. & Giraldo-Soto, C. & Claude, S. & Escadeillas, G., 2021. "Co-creation of local eco-rehabilitation strategies for energy improvement of historic urban areas," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    8. Hall, Lisa M.H. & Buckley, Alastair R., 2016. "A review of energy systems models in the UK: Prevalent usage and categorisation," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 607-628.
    9. Durwin H.J. Lynch & Pim Klaassen & Lan van Wassenaer & Jacqueline E.W. Broerse, 2020. "Constructing the Public in Roadmapping the Transition to a Bioeconomy: A Case Study from the Netherlands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-18, April.
    10. Child, Michael & Breyer, Christian, 2017. "Transition and transformation: A review of the concept of change in the progress towards future sustainable energy systems," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 11-26.
    11. Parkes, Gareth & Spataru, Catalina, 2017. "Integrating the views and perceptions of UK energy professionals in future energy scenarios to inform policymakers," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 155-170.
    12. Arcigni, Francesco & Friso, Riccardo & Collu, Maurizio & Venturini, Mauro, 2019. "Harmonized and systematic assessment of microalgae energy potential for biodiesel production," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 614-624.
    13. Felder, F.A. & Kumar, P., 2021. "A review of existing deep decarbonization models and their potential in policymaking," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    14. Leung, Abraham & Burke, Matthew & Perl, Anthony & Cui, Jianqiang, 2018. "The peak oil and oil vulnerability discourse in urban transport policy: A comparative discourse analysis of Hong Kong and Brisbane," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 5-18.
    15. Isoaho, Karoliina & Karhunmaa, Kamilla, 2019. "A critical review of discursive approaches in energy transitions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 930-942.
    16. Sonnsjö, Hannes, 2024. "What we talk about when we talk about electricity: A thematic analysis of recent political debates on Swedish electricity supply," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    17. Siddharth Sareen & Douglas Baillie & Jürgen Kleinwächter, 2018. "Transitions to Future Energy Systems: Learning from a Community Test Field," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-14, November.
    18. Goldschmidt, Rüdiger & Richter, Andreas & Pfeil, Raphael, 2019. "Active stakeholder involvement and organisational tasks as factors for an effective communication and governance strategy in the promotion of e-taxis. Results from a field research lab," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    19. Ruef, Franziska & Ejderyan, Olivier, 2021. "Rowing, steering or anchoring? Public values for geothermal energy governance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    20. Thomas, Gareth & Demski, Christina & Pidgeon, Nick, 2019. "Deliberating the social acceptability of energy storage in the UK," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    21. Yuzran Bustamar & Ian Lange & Elizabeth Van Wie Davis, 2017. "Characteristic of Successful Energy Policy from Politics, Economics, Social and Technological Perspective - a qualitative analysis," Working Papers 2017-10, Colorado School of Mines, Division of Economics and Business.
    22. Xu, Shengqing, 2021. "The paradox of the energy revolution in China: A socio-technical transition perspective," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 137(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. Paredes-Frigolett, Harold, 2016. "Modeling the effect of responsible research and innovation in quadruple helix innovation systems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 126-133.
    2. Lehoux, P. & Miller, F.A. & Williams-Jones, B., 2020. "Anticipatory governance and moral imagination: Methodological insights from a scenario-based public deliberation study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    3. Annika Styczynski & Jedamiah Wolf & Somdatta Tah & Arnab Bose, 2014. "When decision-making processes fail: an argument for robust climate adaptation planning in the face of uncertainty," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 478-491, December.
    4. Abdul Tariq & Robert Jay Lempert & John Riverson & Marla Schwartz & Neil Berg, 2017. "A climate stress test of Los Angeles’ water quality plans," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 144(4), pages 625-639, October.
    5. Reichelt, Nicole & Nettle, Ruth, 2023. "Practice insights for the responsible adoption of smart farming technologies using a participatory technology assessment approach: The case of virtual herding technology in Australia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    6. Hidalgo, Francisco & Quiñones-Ruiz, Xiomara F. & Birkenberg, Athena & Daum, Thomas & Bosch, Christine & Hirsch, Patrick & Birner, Regina, 2023. "Digitalization, sustainability, and coffee. Opportunities and challenges for agricultural development," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    7. Bethany Robinson & Jonathan D. Herman, 2019. "A framework for testing dynamic classification of vulnerable scenarios in ensemble water supply projections," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 152(3), pages 431-448, March.
    8. van Geenhuizen, Marina & Ye, Qing, 2014. "Responsible innovators: open networks on the way to sustainability transitions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 28-40.
    9. Jesse M. Keenan, 2018. "Regional resilience trust funds: an exploratory analysis for leveraging insurance surcharges," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 118-139, March.
    10. Dethier, Jean-Jacques & Morrill, Curtis, 2012. "The great recession and the future of cities," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6256, The World Bank.
    11. Pfotenhauer, Sebastian M. & Juhl, Joakim & Aarden, Erik, 2019. "Challenging the “deficit model” of innovation: Framing policy issues under the innovation imperative," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 895-904.
    12. Kok, Kristiaan P.W. & Klerkx, Laurens, 2023. "Addressing the politics of mission-oriented agricultural innovation systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    13. Glover, Dominic & Poole, Nigel, 2019. "Principles of innovation to build nutrition-sensitive food systems in South Asia," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 63-73.
    14. Kim, Dongwook & Kim, Sungbum, 2022. "How do standards committees affect the success of a standard? Comparative analysis of RCS and VoLTE and proposed hybrid standards development model of open and bandwagon approaches," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(8).
    15. Carbajo, Ruth & Cabeza, Luisa F., 2018. "Renewable energy research and technologies through responsible research and innovation looking glass: Reflexions, theoretical approaches and contemporary discourses," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 792-808.
    16. Jin Zhu & Fei Huang, 2023. "Transformational Leadership, Organizational Innovation, and ESG Performance: Evidence from SMEs in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-23, March.
    17. Rödl, Malte B. & Boons, Frank & Spekkink, Wouter, 2022. "From responsible to responsive innovation: A systemic and historically sensitive approach to innovation processes," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    18. Sophie Pellé & Bernard Reber, 2015. "Responsible Innovation in the Light of Moral Responsibility," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-01418017, HAL.
    19. Umbrello, Steven & Bernstein, Michael J. & Vermaas, Pieter E. & Resseguier, Anaïs & Gonzalez, Gustavo & Porcari, Andrea & Grinbaum, Alexei & Adomaitis, Laurynas, 2023. "From speculation to reality: Enhancing anticipatory ethics for emerging technologies (ATE) in practice," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    20. Vera Eory & Cairistiona F. E. Topp & Adam Butler & Dominic Moran, 2018. "Addressing Uncertainty in Efficient Mitigation of Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Emissions," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 69(3), pages 627-645, September.

    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:87:y:2015:i:c:p:665-672. 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.