Responsible Innovation in Energy Projects: Values in the Design of Technologies, Institutions and Stakeholder Interactions

Projects that deal with unconventional ways to produce, store, or transport energy often give rise to resistance by local communities. The value-laden basis of such resistance is often ignored by decision makers. This chapter operationalizes the concept of Responsible Innovation by using and adapting the approach of value sensitive design. This approach holds that the variety of stakeholders’ values might be taken as a point of departure for the (re)design of a technological system in such a way that divergent values can be accommodated. The scope of value sensitive design can be extended beyond the technology, however. Values are also embedded in the institutional context and in the processes of interaction between stakeholders. Hence, the prevention of controversies over conflicting values may be pursued by redesigning the institutional context, and by taking the dynamics of stakeholder interaction explicitly into account.

[1]  Noëmi Manders-Huits,et al.  What Values in Design? The Challenge of Incorporating Moral Values into Design , 2010, Sci. Eng. Ethics.

[2]  L. Winner.  DO ARTIFACTS HAVE (cid:1) POLITICS? , 2022 .

[3]  Jeroen van den Hoven,et al.  ICT and Value Sensitive Design , 2006, The Information Society.

[4]  Brian Wynne,et al.  Misunderstood misunderstanding: social identities and public uptake of science , 1992 .

[5]  S. Fast.  Social Acceptance of Renewable Energy: Trends, Concepts, and Geographies , 2013 .

[6]  Ronald H. Coase,et al.  The New Institutional Economics , 1998 .

[7]  Eefje Cuppen,et al.  Responsible innovation as an endorsement of public values: the need for interdisciplinary research , 2014 .

[8]  Brian Wynne,et al.  Public uptake of science: a case for institutional reflexivity , 1993 .

[9]  Maarten Wolsink,et al.  Invalid theory impedes our understanding: A critique on the persistence of the language of NIMBY , 2006 .

[10]  Patrick Devine-Wright,et al.  Renewable Energy and the Public : From NIMBY to Participation , 2011 .

[11]  Batya Friedman,et al.  New directions: a value-sensitive design approach to augmented reality , 2000, DARE '00.

[12]  Gordon Walker,et al.  Renewable energy and the public , 1995 .

[13]  David Infield,et al.  Symmetries, expectations, dynamics and contexts: a framework for understanding public engagement with renewable energy projects , 2010 .

[14]  John F. Kennedy,et al.  Design for Values in Nuclear Technology , 2015 .

[15]  Colin Eden,et al.  The Stakeholder/Collaborator Strategy Workshop , 1996 .

[16]  David M. Konisky,et al.  Values, Conflict, and Trust in Participatory Environmental Planning , 2000 .

[17]  Joseph Dorfman,et al.  Institutional Economics , 2023 .

[18]  Rolf Wüstenhagen,et al.  Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept , 2007 .

[19]  R. Coase,et al.  The Problem of Social Cost , 1960, The Journal of Law and Economics.

[20]  Sabine Roeser,et al.  Nuclear Energy, Risk, and Emotions , 2011 .

[21]  B. Arts,et al.  A short history of Dutch forest policy: the 'de-institutionalisation' of a policy arrangement. , 2009 .

[22]  S. Brunsting,et al.  What happened in Barendrecht?! Case study on the planned onshore carbon dioxide storage in Barendrecht, the Netherlands , 2010 .

[23]  Kate Burningham,et al.  Renewable Energy and Sociotechnical Change: Imagined Subjectivities of ‘the Public’ and Their Implications , 2010 .

[24]  P. Verbeek,et al.  Materializing Morality , 2006 .

[25]  Jeroen van den Hoven,et al.  Moral Methodology and Information Technology , 2009 .

[26]  J. Groenewegen,et al.  Public values in the energy sector: economic perspectives , 2009 .

[27]  Ann Rudinow Sætnan,et al.  On gender and things: Reflections on an exhibition on gendered artifacts , 2002 .

[28]  Ibo van de Poel,et al.  Values in Engineering Design , 2009 .

[29]  Jeroen van den Hoven,et al.  Handbook of Ethics, Values, and Technological Design , 2015 .

[30]  D. Bell,et al.  The ‘Social Gap’ in Wind Farm Siting Decisions: Explanations and Policy Responses , 2005 .

[31]  Ibo van de Poel,et al.  Translating Values into Design Requirements , 2013 .

[32]  B. Broekhans,et al.  Flood risk management in the Netherlands after the 1953 flood: a competition between the public value(s) of water , 2015 .

[33]  Maarten Wolsink,et al.  Wind power and the NIMBY-myth: institutional capacity and the limited significance of public support , 2000 .

[34]  G. Ellis,et al.  Many ways to say ‘no’, different ways to say ‘yes’: Applying Q-Methodology to understand public acceptance of wind farm proposals , 2007 .

[35]  B. Wynne,et al.  Creating Public Alienation: Expert Cultures of Risk and Ethics on GMOs , 2001, Science as culture.

[36]  Jon D. Miller.  Misunderstanding science? The public reconstruction of science and technology , 1998 .