IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/rensus/v143y2021ics1364032121002288.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Researchers perception regarding socio-technical approaches implementation in their own research. Thermal energy storage researchers as example

Author

Listed:
  • Carbajo, Ruth
  • Cabeza, Luisa F.

Abstract

The enhancement and the understanding of the societal dynamics in the energy systems within transition entails the inclusion of innovative policy and research strategies. This inclusion raises several questions that change profoundly the nature of the research and innovation endeavour, questions that have not been sufficiently explored in the literature. These questions are, among others, the complexities an scope of socio-technical integration or the emergence of new roles and patterns such as user-inspired innovations or community innovations. Based on the assumptions of the responsible-based approaches advocating to energy system actors to collaborate sharing responsibility and the benefits that perspectives integration brings in the development of proactive and archivable energy and climate policies, this study analyses a group of researchers within the field of thermal energy storage (TES) for renewable energy applications, for the purpose of evaluating their perception regarding to the inclusion of alternative policy proposals and collaborative research strategies. The proposed methodology was based on the use of the common theoretical backgrounds of socio-technical transition for the construction of an responsibility-based approach and the proposal of a survey tool for gathering the empirical evidence from researchers opinions. The survey data was collected from a representative group of researchers (33 countries, 215 targeted researches completing the surveys at 31% with a final N = 72). Findings shows willingness to include citizens as beneficiaries but not as participants of research decisions, the prevalence of the use of social sciences to increase the acceptance of technology and remarkable unawareness regarding collaborative research strategies. This paper brings an important contribution for the selected researchers that can be extrapolate to other energy communities since illuminates the possibility of adapting and asses TES to include new patterns and new governance strategies based in RRI.

Suggested Citation

  • Carbajo, Ruth & Cabeza, Luisa F., 2021. "Researchers perception regarding socio-technical approaches implementation in their own research. Thermal energy storage researchers as example," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:143:y:2021:i:c:s1364032121002288
    DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2021.110936
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032121002288
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.rser.2021.110936?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. Yekini Suberu, Mohammed & Wazir Mustafa, Mohd & Bashir, Nouruddeen, 2014. "Energy storage systems for renewable energy power sector integration and mitigation of intermittency," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 499-514.
    2. Gallo, A.B. & Simões-Moreira, J.R. & Costa, H.K.M. & Santos, M.M. & Moutinho dos Santos, E., 2016. "Energy storage in the energy transition context: A technology review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 800-822.
    3. Fagerberg, Jan, 2018. "Mobilizing innovation for sustainability transitions: A comment on transformative innovation policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1568-1576.
    4. Grünewald, Philipp H. & Cockerill, Timothy T. & Contestabile, Marcello & Pearson, Peter J.G., 2012. "The socio-technical transition of distributed electricity storage into future networks—System value and stakeholder views," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 449-457.
    5. Prasad, Ravita D. & Bansal, R.C. & Raturi, Atul, 2014. "Multi-faceted energy planning: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 686-699.
    6. Carbajo, Ruth & Cabeza, Luisa F., 2019. "Sustainability and social justice dimension indicators for applied renewable energy research: A responsible approach proposal," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 252(C), pages 1-1.
    7. Rodríguez, Hannot & Fisher, Erik & Schuurbiers, Daan, 2013. "Integrating science and society in European Framework Programmes: Trends in project-level solicitations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(5), pages 1126-1137.
    8. Assefa, G. & Frostell, B., 2007. "Social sustainability and social acceptance in technology assessment: A case study of energy technologies," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 63-78.
    9. Foxon, Timothy J., 2011. "A coevolutionary framework for analysing a transition to a sustainable low carbon economy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2258-2267.
    10. Barbour, Edward & Parra, David & Awwad, Zeyad & González, Marta C., 2018. "Community energy storage: A smart choice for the smart grid?," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 489-497.
    11. Paul C. Stern & Benjamin K. Sovacool & Thomas Dietz, 2016. "Towards a science of climate and energy choices," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 6(6), pages 547-555, June.
    12. Koirala, Binod Prasad & van Oost, Ellen & van der Windt, Henny, 2018. "Community energy storage: A responsible innovation towards a sustainable energy system?," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 231(C), pages 570-585.
    13. Wustenhagen, Rolf & Wolsink, Maarten & Burer, Mary Jean, 2007. "Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2683-2691, May.
    14. Richard Owen & Phil Macnaghten & Jack Stilgoe, 2012. "Responsible research and innovation: From science in society to science for society, with society," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 39(6), pages 751-760, December.
    15. Devine-Wright, Patrick & Batel, Susana & Aas, Oystein & Sovacool, Benjamin & Labelle, Michael Carnegie & Ruud, Audun, 2017. "A conceptual framework for understanding the social acceptance of energy infrastructure: Insights from energy storage," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 27-31.
    16. Fabrizio, Kira R. & Poczter, Sharon & Zelner, Bennet A., 2017. "Does innovation policy attract international competition? Evidence from energy storage," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(6), pages 1106-1117.
    17. Li, C. & Wang, R.Z., 2012. "Building integrated energy storage opportunities in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 16(8), pages 6191-6211.
    18. Spyridaki, N.-A. & Flamos, A., 2014. "A paper trail of evaluation approaches to energy and climate policy interactions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 1090-1107.
    19. Stilgoe, Jack & Owen, Richard & Macnaghten, Phil, 2013. "Developing a framework for responsible innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1568-1580.
    20. Schot, Johan & Steinmueller, W. Edward, 2018. "Three frames for innovation policy: R&D, systems of innovation and transformative change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1554-1567.
    21. Taylor, Peter G. & Bolton, Ronan & Stone, Dave & Upham, Paul, 2013. "Developing pathways for energy storage in the UK using a coevolutionary framework," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 230-243.
    22. 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.
    23. Carlota Perez, 2009. "Technological revolutions and techno-economic paradigms," The Other Canon Foundation and Tallinn University of Technology Working Papers in Technology Governance and Economic Dynamics 20, TUT Ragnar Nurkse Department of Innovation and Governance.
    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. Carbajo, Ruth & Cabeza, Luisa F., 2022. "Researchers’ perspective within responsible implementation with socio-technical approaches. An example from solar energy research centre in Chile," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 158(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. Carbajo, Ruth & Cabeza, Luisa F., 2019. "Sustainability and social justice dimension indicators for applied renewable energy research: A responsible approach proposal," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 252(C), pages 1-1.
    2. Carbajo, Ruth & Cabeza, Luisa F., 2022. "Researchers’ perspective within responsible implementation with socio-technical approaches. An example from solar energy research centre in Chile," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    3. 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.
    4. Hugo Lucas & Ruth Carbajo & Tomoo Machiba & Evgeny Zhukov & Luisa F. Cabeza, 2021. "Improving Public Attitude towards Renewable Energy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-16, July.
    5. Steffen S. Bettin, 2020. "Electricity infrastructure and innovation in the next phase of energy transition—amendments to the technology innovation system framework," Review of Evolutionary Political Economy, Springer, vol. 1(3), pages 371-395, November.
    6. Koirala, Binod Prasad & van Oost, Ellen & van der Windt, Henny, 2018. "Community energy storage: A responsible innovation towards a sustainable energy system?," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 231(C), pages 570-585.
    7. Binod Prasad Koirala & Ellen van Oost & Henny van der Windt, 2020. "Innovation Dynamics of Socio-Technical Alignment in Community Energy Storage: The Cases of DrTen and Ecovat," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-22, June.
    8. Loewen, Bradley, 2022. "Revitalizing varieties of capitalism for sustainability transitions research: Review, critique and way forward," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    9. Schriever, Marlene & Halstrup, Dominik, 2018. "Exploring the adoption in transitioning markets: Empirical findings and implications on energy storage solutions-acceptance in the German manufacturing industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 460-468.
    10. Martin, Nigel & Rice, John, 2021. "Power outages, climate events and renewable energy: Reviewing energy storage policy and regulatory options for Australia," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    11. Ambrosio-Albala, P. & Upham, P. & Bale, C.S.E. & Taylor, P.G., 2020. "Exploring acceptance of decentralised energy storage at household and neighbourhood scales: A UK survey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    12. Fisher, Erik, 2019. "Governing with ambivalence: The tentative origins of socio-technical integration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(5), pages 1138-1149.
    13. Bhowmik, Chiranjib & Bhowmik, Sumit & Ray, Amitava, 2018. "Social acceptance of green energy determinants using principal component analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 1030-1046.
    14. Sanneke Kloppenburg & Robin Smale & Nick Verkade, 2019. "Technologies of Engagement: How Battery Storage Technologies Shape Householder Participation in Energy Transitions," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-15, November.
    15. Gährs, Swantje & Knoefel, Jan, 2020. "Stakeholder demands and regulatory framework for community energy storage with a focus on Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    16. Pepa Ambrosio-Albalá & Catherine S. E. Bale & Andrew J. Pimm & Peter G. Taylor, 2020. "What Makes Decentralised Energy Storage Schemes Successful? An Assessment Incorporating Stakeholder Perspectives," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-22, December.
    17. Wiarda, Martijn & Sobota, Vladimir C.M. & Janssen, Matthijs J. & van de Kaa, Geerten & Yaghmaei, Emad & Doorn, Neelke, 2023. "Public participation in mission-oriented innovation projects," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    18. 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.
    19. Flink, Tim & Kaldewey, David, 2018. "The new production of legitimacy: STI policy discourses beyond the contract metaphor," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 14-22.
    20. Baumann, Manuel & Weil, Marcel & Peters, Jens F. & Chibeles-Martins, Nelson & Moniz, Antonio B., 2019. "A review of multi-criteria decision making approaches for evaluating energy storage systems for grid applications," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 516-534.

    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:rensus:v:143:y:2021:i:c:s1364032121002288. 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/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/600126/description#description .

    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.