IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v9y2016i3p125-d64325.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public Engagement in Energy Research

Author

Listed:
  • Jako Jellema

    (Science & Society Group, Energy and Sustainability Research Institute Groningen, University of Groningen, Nijenborgh 4, 9747 AG Groningen, The Netherlands)

  • Henk A. J. Mulder

    (Science & Society Group, Energy and Sustainability Research Institute Groningen, University of Groningen, Nijenborgh 4, 9747 AG Groningen, The Netherlands)

Abstract

Public Engagement in Research is a key element in “Responsible Research and Innovation”; a cross-cutting issue in current European research funding. Public engagement can advance energy R&D, by delivering results that are more in-line with society’s views and demands; and collaboration also unlocks societal skills and knowledge. This paper structures the ways to look at engagement, and gives some pointers on how to implement it in energy R&D, with various levels of intensity. The publics to engage with can be citizens, future users, affected persons, but also organisations that represent them. We have selected methods and tools that showcase a broad range of types of engagement that have been applied in The Netherlands or the UK. The cases are grouped based on the role of the researcher in the engagement process. These roles relate to discussing with, consulting, involving, collaborating with and supporting the various publics. This study shows that there is a diversity of tools and methods already available—open to variation, combinations and further development- that facilitate the participation of society in energy research. Not only for democratic reasons, but also for instrumental benefits in creating innovations to help solve the Grand Societal Challenge of the energy transition.

Suggested Citation

  • Jako Jellema & Henk A. J. Mulder, 2016. "Public Engagement in Energy Research," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-19, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:9:y:2016:i:3:p:125-:d:64325
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/9/3/125/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/9/3/125/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    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. Sam Preston & Muhammad Usman Mazhar & Richard Bull, 2020. "Citizen Engagement for Co-Creating Low Carbon Smart Cities: Practical Lessons from Nottingham City Council in the UK," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-21, December.
    2. Costanza Saletti & Mirko Morini & Agostino Gambarotta, 2020. "The Status of Research and Innovation on Heating and Cooling Networks as Smart Energy Systems within Horizon 2020," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-27, June.
    3. World Bank, 2020. "Global Economic Prospects, June 2020," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 33748.
    4. Yan, Xiaohe & Gu, Chenghong & Li, Furong & Xiang, Yue, 2018. "Network pricing for customer-operated energy storage in distribution networks," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 283-292.
    5. Yu, Hyun Jin Julie, 2017. "Virtuous cycle of solar photovoltaic development in new regions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 1357-1366.
    6. Bayer, Benjamin, 2018. "Experience with auctions for wind power in Brazil," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P2), pages 2644-2658.
    7. Oliva H., Sebastian, 2017. "Residential energy efficiency and distributed generation - Natural partners or competition?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 932-940.
    8. Zandri Koekemoer, 2019. "Gender and financial well-being of South African investors," Proceedings of Economics and Finance Conferences 9511448, International Institute of Social and Economic Sciences.
    9. Simon Hirzel & Tim Hettesheimer & Peter Viebahn & Manfred Fischedick, 2018. "A Decision Support System for Public Funding of Experimental Development in Energy Research," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-18, May.
    10. Kerr, Sandy & Johnson, Kate & Weir, Stephanie, 2017. "Understanding community benefit payments from renewable energy development," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 202-211.
    11. Sherry, Emma & Schulenkorf, Nico & Seal, Emma & Nicholson, Matthew & Hoye, Russell, 2017. "Sport-for-development: Inclusive, reflexive, and meaningful research in low- and middle-income settings," Sport Management Review, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 69-80.
    12. Dreyer, Mallory, 2021. "Malaysia: Pengurusan Danaharta Nasional Berhad," Journal of Financial Crises, Yale Program on Financial Stability (YPFS), vol. 3(2), pages 450-484, April.
    13. Campana, Pietro Elia & Quan, Steven Jige & Robbio, Federico Ignacio & Lundblad, Anders & Zhang, Yang & Ma, Tao & Karlsson, Björn & Yan, Jinyue, 2017. "Optimization of a residential district with special consideration on energy and water reliability," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 194(C), pages 751-764.
    14. Melikoglu, Mehmet, 2017. "Vision 2023: Status quo and future of biomass and coal for sustainable energy generation in Turkey," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 800-808.
    15. Mukherjee, Shilpi & Dhingra, Tarun & Sengupta, Anirban, 2017. "Status of Electricity Act, 2003: A systematic review of literature," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 237-248.
    16. Weimer-Jehle, Wolfgang & Buchgeister, Jens & Hauser, Wolfgang & Kosow, Hannah & Naegler, Tobias & Poganietz, Witold-Roger & Pregger, Thomas & Prehofer, Sigrid & von Recklinghausen, Andreas & Schippl, , 2016. "Context scenarios and their usage for the construction of socio-technical energy scenarios," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 956-970.
    17. Jiqing Liu & Gui Zhang & Xiaojing Lv & Jiayu Li, 2022. "Discovering the Landscape and Evolution of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI): Science Mapping Based on Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-32, July.

    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. Setiawan, Andri D. & Cuppen, Eefje, 2013. "Stakeholder perspectives on carbon capture and storage in Indonesia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1188-1199.
    2. Baudry, Gino & Delrue, Florian & Legrand, Jack & Pruvost, Jérémy & Vallée, Thomas, 2017. "The challenge of measuring biofuel sustainability: A stakeholder-driven approach applied to the French case," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 933-947.
    3. Antonio Lopolito & Edgardo Sica, 2022. "Designing Policy Mixes to Address the World’s Worst Devastation of a Rural Landscape Caused by Xylella Epidemic," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-14, May.
    4. 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.
    5. Marleen Kraaij-Dirkzwager & Joost Van der Ree & Erik Lebret, 2017. "Rapid Assessment of Stakeholder Concerns about Public Health. An Introduction to a Fast and Inexpensive Approach Applied on Health Concerns about Intensive Animal Production Systems," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-16, December.
    6. Venus, Terese E. & Strauss, Felix & Venus, Thomas J. & Sauer, Johannes, 2021. "Understanding stakeholder preferences for future biogas development in Germany," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    7. Meryem Abdi & Rachid Chaib & Ion Verzea, 2020. "Contribution to the Assessment of the Quality of Life at Work: a Case Study," International Journal of Behavior Studies in Organizations, EUROKD, vol. 4, pages 27-37.
    8. León-Vielma, J.E. & Ramos-Real, F.J. & Hernández Hernández, J.F. & Rodríguez-Brito, María Gracia, 2023. "An integrative strategy for Venezuela's electricity sector (VES), from an analysis of stakeholder perspectives," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    9. van Exel, Job & Baker, Rachel & Mason, Helen & Donaldson, Cam & Brouwer, Werner, 2015. "Public views on principles for health care priority setting: Findings of a European cross-country study using Q methodology," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 128-137.
    10. Rachel Baker & John Wildman & Helen Mason & Cam Donaldson, 2014. "Q‐Ing For Health—A New Approach To Eliciting The Public'S Views On Health Care Resource Allocation," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(3), pages 283-297, March.
    11. E.O. Marfo & L. Chen & H. Xuhua & H.A. Antwi & E. Yiranbon, 2015. "Corporate Social Responsibility: Driving Dynamics on Firm’s Profitability in Ghana," International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, vol. 5(3), pages 116-132, July.
    12. Behnam Taebi, 2017. "Bridging the Gap between Social Acceptance and Ethical Acceptability," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(10), pages 1817-1827, October.
    13. Roos, Andreas, 2024. "Renewing the Subterranean Energy Regime? How Petroculture Obscures the Materiality of Deep Geothermal Energy Technology in Sweden," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 219(C).
    14. de Wildt, Tristan E. & Chappin, Emile J.L. & van de Kaa, Geerten & Herder, Paulien M., 2018. "A comprehensive approach to reviewing latent topics addressed by literature across multiple disciplines," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 228(C), pages 2111-2128.
    15. Jarl Kampen & Peter Tamás, 2014. "Overly ambitious: contributions and current status of Q methodology," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 48(6), pages 3109-3126, November.
    16. Díaz, Paula & Adler, Carolina & Patt, Anthony, 2017. "Do stakeholders’ perspectives on renewable energy infrastructure pose a risk to energy policy implementation? A case of a hydropower plant in Switzerland," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 21-28.
    17. Huaranca, Laura Liliana & Iribarnegaray, Martín Alejandro & Albesa, Federico & Volante, José Norberto & Brannstrom, Christian & Seghezzo, Lucas, 2019. "Social Perspectives on Deforestation, Land Use Change, and Economic Development in an Expanding Agricultural Frontier in Northern Argentina," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 1-1.
    18. Späth, Leonhard, 2018. "Large-scale photovoltaics? Yes please, but not like this! Insights on different perspectives underlying the trade-off between land use and renewable electricity development," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 429-437.
    19. Nhem, Sareth & Lee, Young Jin, 2019. "Using Q methodology to investigate the views of local experts on the sustainability of community-based forestry in Oddar Meanchey province, Cambodia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 1-1.
    20. Maria Schultz & Thomas Hahn & Claudia Ituarte-Lima & Niclas Hällström, 2018. "Deliberative multi-actor dialogues as opportunities for transformative social learning and conflict resolution in international environmental negotiations," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 18(5), pages 671-688, October.

    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:gam:jeners:v:9:y:2016:i:3:p:125-:d:64325. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.