Local energy transitions; methods, models

0 downloads 0 Views 171KB Size Report
Local energy transitions; methods, models, challenges and opportunities. Sujeetha Selvakkumaran & Erik O. Ahlgren. Chalmers University of Technology1. 1.
Local energy transitions; methods, models, challenges and opportunities Sujeetha Selvakkumaran & Erik O. Ahlgren Chalmers University of Technology 1

1. Rationale for studying local energy transitions While the field of energy transitions is considered important, there is growing evidence that local energy transitions are a crucial sub-set of energy transitions [1]–[4]. The fundamental characteristic of local energy transition is the local energy landscape is essentially changed. In countries with a tradition of devolution of authority and/or agency in energy related decisions to the local community councils or municipalities, local energy transitions become complex societal issues, with multitude of actors and different spatial and temporal scales [5]–[7].

2. Objectives The field of energy transitions is new and the field of local energy transitions newer still. If local energy transitions are to be studied in order to help meaningful replication and propagation, the unique characteristics of local energy transitions need to be identified, captured and analysed. Thus, the objective of this study is to critically assess the methods and models which have been used in local energy transitions research, and to identify the challenges encountered in representing local energy transitions and the opportunities it gives for further development of the local energy transitions field.

3. Methodological framework Step 1 Literatures dealing with local level energy transitions between the years 2011 to 2017 are systematically selected from the Scopus database. The search strings are “local” in Title, Abstract, Keywords AND “energy transitions” in Title, Abstract, Keywords. The search results were refined further by filtering for language and journal articles, and for the years 2011 to 2017. Then in the ensuing list of search results of 344 articles weeding out the still remaining unsuitable research papers resulted in 18 papers remaining. These 18 papers are selected for this study 2.

Step 2 Two different frameworks are adopted and combined from recent works on energy transitions (20112017) to assess the literature of local energy transitions. Initially, the literature is categorized as to what 1 2

This study is part of an Interreg funded project on the theme of “Co-creating local green transitions”. Not all 18 papers are referenced in this abstract.

purpose it serves, a la 1) understanding transition 2) providing case-specific policy advice and 3) facilitating stake-holder perspective/participation, as suggested by [8].

Step 3 At the end of the categorization in Step 2, the method and/or model used in the work is evaluated for its treatment of three key aspects of energy transitions as given by [9]; 1) techno-economic detail 2) explicit actor heterogeneity and 3) transition pathway dynamics.

Local energy transitions literature

Evaluation of the purpose served by the study

•Key divsion of whether the literature proposes/uses a method or a model

Analysis of the method/model as given by [9]

Fig. 1. The framework used to assess the literatures studied on local energy transitions A distinction between methods and models are made in this study. Methods are defined as frameworks or concepts which are useful in analysing energy transitions. On the other hand, a model is defined as a representation of energy transition and its components which can be manipulated by inputs and processes to give useful outputs.

4. Preliminary findings On a comparative basis, the literature having the theme of local energy transitions as its central question is remarkably smaller than that with the theme of only energy transitions (almost 20 times smaller within the same period).

A majority of the literatures used methods to analyse energy transitions (14 out of 18), and models in local energy transitions literature was surprisingly under-used. While there is ample evidence of the use of models in general energy transitions studies (see [9]), the use of models for local energy transitions studies is not prevalent. In terms of methods, Multi-Level Perspective [10], [11] and Strategic Niche Management [3], [12] are the most used frameworks. Of the models used, System Dynamics simulation models [13], [14] are used to mainly provide case-specific policy advice, while the Agent Based Model [15] is used to also understand the energy transition. A majority of the studies using methods (as opposed to models) do so to understand specific aspects of energy transitions and use qualitative research method such as interviews and case studies exploration. Most of the frameworks used in the studies cannot take into account techno-economic details nor pathway dynamics. Most of them are also ex-post studies, assessing and theorising historical local transitions.

5. Discussions and further work There is wide consensus on the complexity involved in studying local energy transitions where most authors emphasise on the need to acknowledge multiple actor interactions [4], power and governance structures [16], the network effects [2], the spatial proximity effects [12], cultural effects on human decisions [5], the role of intermediaries to exert control [17] and learning and knowledge creation [12]. On the other hand, most of the studies emphasizing on the complexity of local energy transitions are pushing against a deterministic model and actively pursuing an actor/network centred method, but they are incapable of doing ex-ante analysis of the transition, and neither inform about the technoeconomic nature nor the varied pathway dynamics that would ensue. While authors agree that there is room for a variety of methodologies and typologies, we also argue that ex-ante techno-economic and pathway analysis is essential, while also addressing the actor complexity concerns addressed in most studies.

References [1]

F. G. N. Li, S. Pye, and N. Strachan, “Regional winners and losers in future UK energy system transitions,” Energy Strateg. Rev., vol. 13–14, pp. 11–31, 2016.

[2]

J. Mattes, A. Huber, and J. Koehrsen, “Energy transitions in small-scale regions - What we can learn from a regional innovation systems perspective,” Energy Policy, vol. 78, pp. 255–264, 2015.

[3]

G. Seyfang, S. Hielscher, T. Hargreaves, M. Martiskainen, and A. Smith, “A grassroots sustainable energy niche? Reflections on community energy in the UK,” Environ. Innov. Soc. Transitions, vol.

13, pp. 21–44, 2014. [4]

T. Van Der Schoor, H. Van Lente, B. Scholtens, and A. Peine, “Challenging obduracy: How local communities transform the energy system,” Energy Res. Soc. Sci., vol. 13, pp. 94–105, 2016.

[5]

M. Sarrica, S. Brondi, P. Cottone, and B. M. Mazzara, “One, no one, one hundred thousand energy transitions in Europe: The quest for a cultural approach,” Energy Res. Soc. Sci., vol. 13, pp. 1–14, 2016.

[6]

H. Busch and K. McCormick, “Local power: exploring the motivations of mayors and key success factors for local municipalities to go 100% renewable energy,” Energy. Sustain. Soc., vol. 4, no. 1, p. 5, 2014.

[7]

J. A. M. Hufen and J. F. M. Koppenjan, “Local renewable energy cooperatives: revolution in disguise?,” Energy. Sustain. Soc., vol. 5, no. 1, p. 18, 2015.

[8]

G. Holtz et al., “Prospects of modelling societal transitions: Position paper of an emerging community,” Environ. Innov. Soc. Transitions, vol. 17, pp. 41–58, 2015.

[9]

F. G. N. Li, E. Trutnevyte, and N. Strachan, “A review of socio-technical energy transition (STET) models,” Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change, vol. 100, pp. 290–305, 2015.

[10]

M. Fallde and M. Eklund, “Towards a sustainable socio-technical system of biogas for transport: The case of the city of Link??ping in Sweden,” J. Clean. Prod., vol. 98, pp. 17–28, 2015.

[11]

S. Fudge, M. Peters, and B. Woodman, “Local authorities as niche actors: The case of energy governance in the UK,” Environ. Innov. Soc. Transitions, vol. 18, pp. 1–17, 2016.

[12]

L. Coenen, R. Raven, and G. Verbong, “Local niche experimentation in energy transitions: A theoretical and empirical exploration of proximity advantages and disadvantages,” Technol. Soc., vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 295–302, 2010.

[13]

M. Kubli and S. Ulli-Beer, “Decentralisation dynamics in energy systems: A generic simulation of network effects,” Energy Res. Soc. Sci., vol. 13, pp. 71–83, 2016.

[14]

M. Ruth, O. Özgün, J. Wachsmuth, and S. Gößling-Reisemann, “Dynamics of energy transitions under changing socioeconomic, technological and climate conditions in Northwest Germany,” Ecol. Econ., vol. 111, pp. 29–47, 2015.

[15]

J. Busch, K. Roelich, C. S. E. Bale, and C. Knoeri, “Scaling up local energy infrastructure; An agentbased model of the emergence of district heating networks,” Energy Policy, vol. 100, no. October

2016, pp. 170–180, 2017. [16]

A. Schreuer, “The establishment of citizen power plants in Austria: A process of empowerment?,” Energy Res. Soc. Sci., vol. 13, pp. 126–135, 2016.

[17]

J. Beermann and K. Tews, “Decentralised laboratories in the German energy transition. Why local renewable energy initiatives must reinvent themselves,” J. Clean. Prod., pp. 1–10, 2016.