Socio-Political Evaluation of Energy Deployment (SPEED): An integrated research framework analyzing energy technology deployment

Abstract Stabilizing atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases to reduce the risks of climate change requires a major transition in society's energy infrastructure; yet despite a growing sense of urgency, deployment of alternative emerging energy technologies has been slow and uncertain. This paper proposes a systematic, interdisciplinary framework for the integrated analysis of regulatory, legal, political, economic, and social factors that influence energy technology deployment decisions at the state level to enhance awareness of the interconnections and enable improved energy policy and planning and accelerated change in society's energy infrastructure. This framework, Socio-Political Evaluation of Energy Deployment, (SPEED), integrates analysis of laws, regulations, institutions and policy actors as well as varying regional perceptions and levels of awareness about the risks and benefits of emerging energy technologies to facilitate improved understanding of the complex interconnected components of state energy systems. While this framework has been developed with U.S. states as a model, the SPEED framework is generalizable to other countries with different sub-national structures. We present three research methods that could be applied within the SPEED framework that could be particularly helpful in understanding the integrated socio-political influences on energy technology deployment: (1) policy review and analysis, (2) media analysis, and (3) focus groups and structured interviews with key stakeholders. By integrating the fields of technology diffusion, environmental policy, comparative analysis of states, and risk perception, future empirical research conducted within this SPEED framework will improve understanding of the interconnected socio-political influences on energy technology deployment to enable energy modelers, policy-makers, energy professionals, state planners and other stakeholders to develop and implement more effective strategies to accelerate the deployment of emerging energy technologies.

[1]  Clair Gough,et al.  Carbon Capture and its Storage: An Integrated Assessment , 2006 .

[2]  Denise Scheberle,et al.  Federalism and Environmental Policy: Trust and the Politics of Implementation , 1997 .

[3]  K. Green,et al.  System Innovation and the Transition to Sustainability: Theory, Evidence and Policy , 2005 .

[4]  Virginia Gray,et al.  Innovation in the States: A Diffusion Study , 1973, American Political Science Review.

[5]  Maryam Dilmaghani,et al.  Challenges to a climate stabilizing energy future , 2007 .

[6]  Koleman S. Strumpf,et al.  Does Government Decentralization Increase Policy Innovation? , 1999 .

[7]  A. Farrell,et al.  ENERGY INFRASTRUCTURE AND SECURITY , 2004 .

[8]  Jeremy Firestone,et al.  The Offshore Wind Power Debate: Views from Cape Cod , 2005 .

[9]  R. Garud,et al.  Bricolage versus breakthrough: distributed and embedded agency in technology entrepreneurship , 2003 .

[10]  Jennie C. Stephens,et al.  Growing interest in carbon capture and storage (CCS) for climate change mitigation , 2006 .

[11]  R. Kahn.  Siting Struggles: The Unique Challenge of Permitting Renewable Energy Power Plants , 2000 .

[12]  P. Gustafson.  Gender Differences in Risk Perception: Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives , 1998, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[13]  P. Slovic.  Trust, Emotion, Sex, Politics, and Science: Surveying the Risk‐Assessment Battlefield , 1999, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[14]  Clinton J. Andrews.  Diffusion Pathways for Electricity Deregulation , 2000 .

[15]  W. Clinton.  State of the Union Address , 2003 .

[16]  John P. Holdren,et al.  The Energy Innovation Imperative: Addressing Oil Dependence, Climate Change, and Other 21st Century Energy Challenges , 2006, Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization.

[17]  B. Metz.  IPCC special report on carbon dioxide capture and storage , 2005 .

[18]  Ragnar E. Löfstedt,et al.  Facility Siting : Risk, Power and Identity in Land Use Planning , 2004 .

[19]  Daniel L. Millimet.  Assessing the Empirical Impact of Environmental Federalism , 2003 .

[20]  Eugene A. Rosa,et al.  Cognitive Representation of Risk Perceptions , 1991 .

[21]  Sangjoon Ka,et al.  Ideology and Professionalism , 2002 .

[22]  D. Snow,et al.  Frame alignment processes, micromobilization, and movement participation. , 1986 .

[23]  Andrew Miller,et al.  Energy Revolution: policies for a sustainable future , 2003 .

[24]  Max S. Baucus.  National Council of State Legislators , 1988 .

[25]  R P Barke,et al.  Politics and scientific expertise: scientists, risk perception, and nuclear waste policy. , 1993, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[26]  M. V. Asselt,et al.  More evolution than revolution: transition management in public policy , 2001 .

[27]  H. Herzog,et al.  American exceptionalism? Similarities and differences in national attitudes toward energy policy and global warming. , 2006, Environmental science & technology.

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

[29]  P. Burstein,et al.  The Impact of Political Parties, Interest Groups, and Social Movement Organizations on Public Policy: Some Recent Evidence and Theoretical Concerns , 2002 .

[30]  Raul P. Lejano,et al.  Rationality as Social Justice and the Spatial-Distributional Analysis of Risk , 2002 .

[31]  A. Prades,et al.  The structure of risk perception: A comparative study , 2000 .

[32]  Thomas J. Misa,et al.  Constructive Technology Assessment: A New Paradigm for Managing Technology in Society , 1995 .

[33]  Anthony A Leiserowitz,et al.  American Risk Perceptions: Is Climate Change Dangerous? , 2005, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[34]  Kirsten H. Engel.  State Environmental Standard-Setting: Is There a "Race" and is it "to the Bottom"? , 1997 .

[35]  Barry Bozeman,et al.  Technology transfer and public policy: a review of research and theory , 2000 .

[36]  R. Smits,et al.  The rise of systemic instruments in innovation policy , 2004 .

[37]  Barry G. Rabe,et al.  Race to the Top: The Expanding Role of U.S State Renewable Portfolio Standards , 2010 .

[38]  J. Sawin,et al.  The role of government in the development and diffusion of renewable energy technologies: Wind power in the United States, California, Denmark and Germany, 1970--2000 , 2001 .

[39]  Tadeusz Tyszka,et al.  Risk perception in Poland: A comparison with three other countries , 1991 .

[40]  Halina Szejnwald Brown,et al.  Bounded Socio-Technical Experiments (BSTEs): Higher Order Learning for Transitions Towards Sustainable Mobility , 2004 .

[41]  Lee Wilkins,et al.  Risky Business: Communicating Issues of Science, Risk, and Public Policy, Lee Wilkins and Philip Patterson, 1991. Greenwood Press, Westport Press, Westport, CT. 256 pages. ISBN: 0-313-26601-8. $42.95 , 1991 .

[42]  David G. Victor,et al.  A Madisonian Approach to Climate Policy , 2005, Science.

[43]  B. Langer,et al.  The Practice of Everyday Life , 2019, Forms of Thinking in Leopardi’s Zibaldone.

[44]  Susan Owens,et al.  Siting, sustainable development and social priorities , 2004 .

[45]  E. Guba,et al.  Lincoln, Yvonna, and Egon Guba, "Postpositivism and the Naturalist Paradigm," pp. 14-46 in Yvonna Lincoln and Egon Guba, Naturalistic Inquiry . Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1985.* , 1985 .

[46]  O. Davidson,et al.  Climate change 2001 : mitigation , 2001 .

[47]  Nebojsa Nakicenovic,et al.  Technological change and the environment , 2002 .

[48]  Clinton J. Andrews.  Electricity and federalism: Understanding regional diversity , 1994 .

[49]  S. Julio Friedmann,et al.  Out of the Energy Box , 2004 .

[50]  E. Rogers,et al.  Diffusion of innovations , 1964, Encyclopedia of Sport Management.

[51]  L. Toledo-Pereyra.  Trust , 2006, Mediation Behaviour.

[52]  C. K. Mertz,et al.  Gender, race, and perceived risk: The 'white male' effect , 2000 .

[53]  Jorge Bateira.  45th Congress of the European Regional Science Association , 2005 .

[54]  Arik Levinson,et al.  Environmental Regulatory Competition: A Status Report and Some New Evidence , 2003, National Tax Journal.

[55]  Halina Szejnwald Brown,et al.  Bounded socio-technical experiments as agents of systemic change: The case of a zero-energy residential building , 2008 .

[56]  Jack N. Barkenbus,et al.  Federal Energy Policy Paradigms and State Energy Roles , 1982 .

[57]  Patrik Söderholm,et al.  Wind power development in Sweden: Global policies and local obstacles , 2007 .

[58]  Rosemary O'Leary,et al.  Intergovernmental Relations and Federalism in Environmental Management and Policy: The Role of the Courts , 1997 .

[59]  Bob van der Zwaan,et al.  The Case for Carbon Capture and Storage , 2005 .

[60]  David W Keith,et al.  Regulating the ultimate sink: managing the risks of geologic CO2 storage. , 2003, Environmental science & technology.

[61]  Staffan Jacobsson,et al.  The diffusion of renewable energy technology: an analytical framework and key issues for research , 2000 .

[62]  Naseo,et al.  NASEO State Outreach Events (Final Report)[National Association of State Energy Officials] , 2001 .

[63]  Atul K. Jain,et al.  Stability: Energy for a Greenhouse Planet Advanced Technology Paths to Global Climate , 2008 .

[64]  Jamil Khan,et al.  Wind power planning in three Swedish municipalities , 2003 .

[65]  Roger E. Kasperson,et al.  Power to the People: How the Coming Energy Revolution Will Transform an Industry, Change Our Lives, and Maybe Even Save the Planet , 2003 .

[66]  Maarten Wolsink,et al.  Entanglement of Interests and Motives: Assumptions behind the NIMBY-theory on Facility Siting , 1994 .

[67]  D. Kammen,et al.  U.S. energy research and development: Declining investment, increasing need, and the feasibility of expansion , 2007 .

[68]  Eleanor Singer,et al.  Reporting Hazards: Their Benefits and Costs , 1987 .

[69]  A. Rip,et al.  The past and future of constructive technology assessment , 1997 .

[70]  Jay S. Kaufman.  It Ain't Necessarily So: How Media Make and Unmake the Scientific Picture of Reality. David Murray, Joel Schwartz and S Robert Lichter. New York: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2001, pp.249, US$24.95. ISBN: 0-742-51095-6. , 2002 .

[71]  Robert S. Lichter,et al.  It Ain't Necessarily So: How the Media Make and Unmake the Scientific Picture of Reality , 2001 .

[72]  J. Tester,et al.  Sustainable Energy: Choosing Among Options , 2005 .

[73]  Jim Igoe,et al.  The End of Oil: On the Edge of a Perilous New World , 2005 .

[74]  Hans Mohr.  TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT IN THEORY AND PRACTICE , 1999 .

[75]  M. J. Quadrel,et al.  Risk perception and communication , 2008 .

[76]  J. Schot,et al.  Regime shifts to sustainability through processes of niche formation : the approach of strategic niche management , 1998 .

[77]  S Pacala,et al.  Stabilization Wedges: Solving the Climate Problem for the Next 50 Years with Current Technologies , 2004, Science.

[78]  J. Hertin,et al.  Socio-economic futures in climate change impact assessment: using scenarios as ‘learning machines’ , 2002 .

[79]  Åsa Boholm,et al.  Comparative studies of risk perception: a review of twenty years of research , 1998 .

[80]  K. Neuhoff.  Large-Scale Deployment of Renewables for Electricity Generation , 2005 .

[81]  R. Kemp,et al.  Transition management as a model for managing processes of co-evolution towards sustainable development , 2007 .

[82]  Thomas J. Misa,et al.  Managing technology in society: the approach of constructive technology assessment , 1997 .

[83]  Antonio Soria,et al.  Technical change dynamics: evidence from the emerging renewable energy technologies , 2001 .

[84]  Daniel L. Millimet,et al.  Strategic Interaction and the Determination of Environmental Policy across U.S. States , 2002 .

[85]  Halina Szejnwald Brown,et al.  Learning for Sustainability Transition through Bounded Socio-technical Experiments in Personal Mobility , 2003, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

[86]  W. Kempton,et al.  Public opinion about large offshore wind power: Underlying factors , 2007 .

[87]  Patrick Devine-Wright,et al.  Beyond NIMBYism: towards an integrated framework for understanding public perceptions of wind energy , 2005 .

[88]  Thomas R. Lindlof.  Qualitative Communication Research Methods , 1994 .

[89]  R. Kemp,et al.  Governance for Sustainability Through Transition Management , 2003 .

[90]  Arie Rip.  Science & Technology Studies and Constructive Technology Assessment. Keynote speech tot EASST Conference, Budapest, 28-31 August 1994 , 1994 .

[91]  Sjoberg.  Factors in risk perception , 2000, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[92]  Daniel L. Millimet,et al.  Effects of Environmental Regulations on Manufacturing Plant Births: Evidence from a Propensity Score Matching Estimator , 2003, Review of Economics and Statistics.

[93]  Joseph Romm,et al.  The hype about hydrogen , 2006, IEEE Engineering Management Review.

[94]  Mark Jaccard,et al.  Sustainable Fossil Fuels: The Unusual Suspect in the Quest for Clean and Enduring Energy , 2001 .

[95]  Victoria Wykes,et al.  Thinking global , 2000, BMJ.

[96]  Thomas Edward Curry.  Public awareness of carbon capture and storage : a survey of attitudes toward climate change mitigation , 2004 .

[97]  Barbara Wejnert.  Integrating models of diffusion of innovations: a Conceptual Framework. , 2002 .

[98]  E. Ringquist,et al.  Environmental Protection at the State Level: Politics and Progress in Controlling Pollution , 1993 .

[99]  Paul Denholm,et al.  Emissions and energy efficiency assessment of baseload wind energy systems. , 2005, Environmental science & technology.