Policy entry points for facilitating a transition towards a low-carbon electricity future
Muyi YANG, Deepak SHARMA, Xunpeng SHI
Policy entry points for facilitating a transition towards a low-carbon electricity future
This study extends the ambit of the debate on electricity transition by specifically identifying possible policy entry points through which transformative and enduring changes can be made in the electricity and socio–economic systems to facilitate the transition process. Guided by the “essence” of the multi-level perspective — a prominent framework for the study of energy transition, four such entry points have been identified: 1) destabilising the dominant, fossil fuel-based electricity regime to create room for renewable technologies to break through; 2) reconfiguring the electricity regime, which encompasses technology, short-term operational practices and long-term planning processes, to improve flexibility for accommodating large outputs from variable renewable sources whilst maintaining supply security; 3) addressing the impact of coal power phase-out on coal mining regions in terms of economic development and jobs; and 4) facilitating a shift in transition governance towards a learning-based, reflexive process. Specific areas for policy interventions within each of these entry points have also been discussed in the paper.
electricity transition / multi-level perspective / policy entry points
[1] |
AndersonJ J ( 2007). The Territorial Imperative: Pluralism, Corporatism and Economic Crisis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
|
[2] |
Bakker,S ( 2014). Actor rationales in sustainability transitions: Interests and expectations regarding electric vehicle recharging. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 13: 60– 74
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[3] |
Baldinelli,A Barelli,L Bidini,G Discepoli,G ( 2020). Economics of innovative high capacity-to-power energy storage technologies pointing at 100% renewable micro-grids. Journal of Energy Storage, 28: 101198
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[4] |
BalintP J StewartR E DesaiA WaltersL C ( 2011). Wicked Environmental Problems: Managing Uncertainty and Conflict. Washington, D.C.: Island Press
|
[5] |
Bohnsack,R Pinkse,J Waelpoel,A ( 2016). The institutional evolution process of the global solar industry: The role of public and private actors in creating institutional shifts. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 20: 16– 32
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[6] |
Boons,F Lüdeke-Freund,F ( 2013). Business models for sustainable innovation: State-of-the-art and steps towards a research agenda. Journal of Cleaner Production, 45: 9– 19
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[7] |
Child,M Kemfert,C Bogdanov,D Breyer,C ( 2019). Flexible electricity generation, grid exchange and storage for the transition to a 100% renewable energy system in Europe. Renewable Energy, 139: 80– 101
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[8] |
ChristensenC M ( 1997). The Innovator’s Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press
|
[9] |
Cruz,M R M Fitiwi,D Z Santos,S F Catalão,J P S ( 2018). A comprehensive survey of flexibility options for supporting the low-carbon energy future. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 97: 338– 353
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[10] |
Davies,C S ( 1984). Dark inner landscapes: The South Wales coalfield. Landscape Journal, 3( 1): 36– 44
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[11] |
de SchutterO LenobleJ ( 2010). Reflexive Governance: Redefining the Public Interest in a Pluralistic World. Oxford: Hart Publishing
|
[12] |
Deller,S C Tsai,T H Marcouiller,D W English,D B K ( 2001). The role of amenities and quality of life in rural economic growth. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 83( 2): 352– 365
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[13] |
Dijk,M Wells,P Kemp,R ( 2016). Will the momentum of the electric car last? Testing a hypothesis on disruptive innovation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 105: 77– 88
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[14] |
DiMaggio,P J Powell,W W ( 1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48( 2): 147– 160
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[15] |
Dosi,G Nelson,R R ( 1994). An introduction to evolutionary theories in economics. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 4( 3): 153– 172
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[16] |
Ela,E Milligan,M Bloom,A Botterud,A Townsend,A Levin,T Frew,B A ( 2016). Wholesale electricity market design with increasing levels of renewable generation: Incentivizing flexibility in system operations. Electricity Journal, 29( 4): 51– 60
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[17] |
ElliottL ( 2016). The legacy of leaving old industrial Britain to rot is becoming clear. The Guardian Online
|
[18] |
Ember
|
[19] |
FodenM FothergillS GoreT ( 2014). The state of the coalfields: Economic and social conditions in the former mining communities of England, Scotland and Wales. Technical Report
|
[20] |
Funtowicz,S O Ravetz,J R ( 1993). Science for the post-normal age. Futures, 25( 7): 739– 755
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[21] |
FurnaroA HerpichP BrauersH OeiP Y KemfertC LookW ( 2021). German just transition: A review of public policies to assist German coal communities in transition. Technical Report. Washington, D.C.: Resources for the Future
|
[22] |
Geels,F W ( 2002). Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: A multi-level perspective and a case-study. Research Policy, 31( 8–9): 1257– 1274
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[23] |
GeelsF W ( 2005). Technological Transitions and System Innovations: A Co-Evolutionary and Socio–Technical Analysis. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing
|
[24] |
Geels,F W ( 2018). Low-carbon transition via system reconfiguration? A socio–technical whole system analysis of passenger mobility in Great Britain (1990–2016). Energy Research & Social Science, 46: 86– 102
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[25] |
GeelsF W SchotJ W (2010). The dynamics of transitions: A socio–technical perspective. In: Grin J, Rotmans J, Schot J W, Geels F W, Loorbach D, eds. Transitions to Sustainable Development: New Directions in the Study of Long Term Transformative Change. New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, 9– 101
|
[26] |
Gong,H Wang,B Liang,H Luo,Z Cao,Y ( 2021). Strategic analysis of China’s geothermal energy industry. Frontiers of Engineering Management, 8( 3): 390– 401
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[27] |
Green,R J ( 2008). Electricity wholesale markets: Designs now and in a low-carbon future. The Energy Journal, 29( SI2): 95– 124
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[28] |
Haggerty,J H Haggerty,M N Roemer,K Rose,J ( 2018). Planning for the local impacts of coal facility closure: Emerging strategies in the US West. Resources Policy, 57: 69– 80
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[29] |
HaneyM ShkaratanM ( 2003). Mine closure and its impact on the community: Five years after mine closure in Romania, Russia, and Ukraine. Policy Research Working Paper
|
[30] |
He,G Lin, J Zhang,Y Zhang,W Larangeira,G Zhang,C Peng,W Liu,M Yang,F ( 2020). Enabling a rapid and just transition away from coal in China. One Earth, 3( 2): 187– 194
CrossRef
Pubmed
Google scholar
|
[31] |
Henriot,A Glachant,J M ( 2013). Melting-pots and salad bowls: The current debate on electricity market design for integration of intermittent RES. Utilities Policy, 27: 57– 64
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[32] |
Hibbard,M Lurie,S ( 2013). The new natural resource economy: Environment and economy in transitional rural communities. Society & Natural Resources, 26( 7): 827– 844
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[33] |
HoganW W (2010). Electricity wholesale market design in a low-carbon future. In: Moselle B, Padilla J, Schmalensee R, eds. Harnessing Renewable Energy in Electric Power Systems. New York: Routledge, 113– 136
|
[34] |
Hu,J Harmsen, R Crijns-Graus,W Worrell,E van den Broek,M ( 2018). Identifying barriers to large-scale integration of variable renewable electricity into the electricity market: A literature review of market design. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 81: 2181– 2195
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[35] |
IEA
|
[36] |
IEA(2021a). Net Zero by 2050: A Roadmap for the Global Energy Sector
|
[37] |
IEA
|
[38] |
IPCC(2018). Mitigation pathways compatible with 1.5°C in the context of sustainable development. In: Global Warming of 1.5°C: IPCC Special Report on Impacts of Global Warming of 1.5°C above Pre-industrial Levels in Context of Strengthening Response to Climate Change, Sustainable Development, and Efforts to Eradicate Poverty. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 93– 174
|
[39] |
IRENA
|
[40] |
IRENA
|
[41] |
Johnstone,P Hielscher,S ( 2017). Phasing out coal, sustaining coal communities? Living with technological decline in sustainability pathways. Extractive Industries and Society, 4( 3): 457– 461
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[42] |
JonesL E ( 2017). Renewable Energy Integration: Practical Management of Variability, Uncertainty, and Flexibility in Power Grids. 2nd ed. London: Academic Press
|
[43] |
Just,S Weber,C ( 2015). Strategic behavior in the German balancing energy mechanism: Incentives, evidence, costs and solutions. Journal of Regulatory Economics, 48( 2): 218– 243
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[44] |
Kanger,L Sovacool,B K Noorkõiv,M ( 2020). Six policy intervention points for sustainability transitions: A conceptual framework and a systematic literature review. Research Policy, 49( 7): 104072
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[45] |
Kapetanovic,T Buchholz,B M Buchholz,B Buehner,V ( 2008). Provision of ancillary services by dispersed generation and demand side response: Needs, barriers and solutions. Elektrotechnik und Informationstechnik, 125( 12): 452– 459
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[46] |
Kelly,E C Bliss,J C ( 2009). Healthy forests, healthy communities: An emerging paradigm for natural resource-dependent communities?. Society & Natural Resources, 22( 6): 519– 537
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[47] |
Kern,F Smith,A Shaw,C Raven,R Verhees,B ( 2014). From laggard to leader: Explaining offshore wind developments in the UK. Energy Policy, 69: 635– 646
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[48] |
Ketterer,J C ( 2014). The impact of wind power generation on the electricity price in Germany. Energy Economics, 44: 270– 280
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[49] |
Kivimaa,P Kern,F ( 2016). Creative destruction or mere niche support? Innovation policy mixes for sustainability transitions. Research Policy, 45( 1): 205– 217
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[50] |
Klima,K Apt,J Bandi,M Happy,P Loutan,C Young,R ( 2018). Geographic smoothing of solar photovoltaic electric power production in the Western USA. Journal of Renewable and Sustainable Energy, 10( 5): 053504
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[51] |
Kozlova,M Overland,I ( 2021). Combining capacity mechanisms and renewable energy support: A review of the international experience. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 155: 111878
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[52] |
Kungl,G Geels,F W ( 2018). Sequence and alignment of external pressures in industry destabilisation: Understanding the downfall of incumbent utilities in the German energy transition (1998–2015). Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 26: 78– 100
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[53] |
LaBelleM HorwitchM (2013). The breakout of energy innovation: Accelerating to a new low carbon energy system. In: Goldthau A, ed. The Handbook of Global Energy Policy. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 113– 126
|
[54] |
Lauber,V Jacobsson,S ( 2016). The politics and economics of constructing, contesting and restricting socio–political space for renewables: The German Renewable Energy Act. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 18: 147– 163
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[55] |
Loorbach,D van Bakel,J C Whiteman,G Rotmans,J ( 2010). Business strategies for transitions towards sustainable systems. Business Strategy and the Environment, 19( 2): 133– 146
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[56] |
Lu,B Blakers, A Stocks,M Do,T N ( 2021). Low-cost, low-emission 100% renewable electricity in Southeast Asia supported by pumped hydro storage. Energy, 236: 121387
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[57] |
Lund,P D Lindgren,J Mikkola,J Salpakari,J ( 2015). Review of energy system flexibility measures to enable high levels of variable renewable electricity. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 45: 785– 807
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[58] |
MacDonald,A E Clack,C T M Alexander,A Dunbar,A Wilczak,J Xie,Y ( 2016). Future cost-competitive electricity systems and their impact on US CO2 emissions. Nature Climate Change, 6( 5): 526– 531
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[59] |
Markard,J ( 2018). The next phase of the energy transition and its implications for research and policy. Nature Energy, 3( 8): 628– 633
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[60] |
Markard,J Geels,F W Raven,R ( 2020). Challenges in the acceleration of sustainability transitions. Environmental Research Letters, 15( 8): 081001
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[61] |
Markard,J Hoffmann,V H ( 2016). Analysis of complementarities: Framework and examples from the energy transition. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 111: 63– 75
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[62] |
Marley,B J ( 2016). The coal crisis in Appalachia: Agrarian transformation, commodity frontiers and the geographies of capital. Journal of Agrarian Change, 16( 2): 225– 254
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[63] |
Mayer,A ( 2018). A just transition for coal miners? Community identity and support from local policy actors. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 28: 1– 13
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[64] |
McGranahan,D A ( 2008). Landscape influence on recent rural migration in the US. Landscape and Urban Planning, 85( 3–4): 228– 240
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[65] |
McMeekin,A Geels,F W Hodson,M ( 2019). Mapping the winds of whole system reconfiguration: Analysing low-carbon transformations across production, distribution and consumption in the UK electricity system (1990–2016). Research Policy, 48( 5): 1216– 1231
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[66] |
Meadowcroft,J ( 2009). What about the politics? Sustainable development, transition management, and long term energy transitions. Policy Sciences, 42( 4): 323– 340
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[67] |
Murphy,R ( 2012). Sustainability: A wicked problem. Sociologica, 2:
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[68] |
Newbery,D Pollitt,M G Ritz,R A Strielkowski,W ( 2018). Market design for a high-renewables European electricity system. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 91: 695– 707
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[69] |
Nicolosi,M ( 2010). Wind power integration and power system flexibility: An empirical analysis of extreme events in Germany under the new negative price regime. Energy Policy, 38( 11): 7257– 7268
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[70] |
NikolakakisT ChatopadhyayD ( 2015). Integrating variable renewable energy into power system operations. Live Wire, 2015/38. Washington, D.C.: World Bank
|
[71] |
Oei,P Y Brauers,H Herpich,P ( 2020). Lessons from Germany’s hard coal mining phase-out: Policies and transition from 1950 to 2018. Climate Policy, 20( 8): 963– 979
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[72] |
Pleßmann,G Erdmann,M Hlusiak,M Breyer,C ( 2014). Global energy storage demand for a 100% renewable electricity supply. Energy Procedia, 46: 22– 31
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[73] |
Ren,M Branstetter,L G Kovak,B K Erian Armanios,D Yuan,J ( 2021). Why has China overinvested in coal power?. The Energy Journal, 42( 2): 113– 134
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[74] |
RieszJ MilliganM (2019). Designing electricity markets for a high penetration of variable renewables. In: Lund P D, Byrne J, Haas R, Flynn D, eds. Advances in Energy Systems: The Large-scale Renewable Energy Integration Challenge. West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons Ltd., 479– 489
|
[75] |
RipA Kemp R (1998). Technological change. In: Rayner S, Malone E L, eds. Human Choice and Climate Change. Columbus, OH: Battelle Press, 327– 399
|
[76] |
Rotmans,J Kemp,R van Asselt,M ( 2001). More evolution than revolution: Transition management in public policy. Foresight, 3( 1): 15– 31
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[77] |
SartorO ( 2018). Implementing coal transitions: Insights from case studies of major coal-consuming economies. A summary report of the coal transitions project. London: IDDRI and Climate Strategies
|
[78] |
Schot,J ( 1998). The usefulness of evolutionary models for explaining innovation: The case of the Netherlands in the nineteenth century. History and Technology, 14( 3): 173– 200
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[79] |
SebaT ( 2014). Clean Disruption of Energy and Transportation. Kindle eBook
|
[80] |
Smink,M M Hekkert,M P Negro,S O ( 2015). Keeping sustainable innovation on a leash? Exploring incumbents’ institutional strategies. Business Strategy and the Environment, 24( 2): 86– 101
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[81] |
Smith,A Kern,F Raven,R Verhees,B ( 2014). Spaces for sustainable innovation: Solar photovoltaic electricity in the UK. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 81: 115– 130
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[82] |
Söder,L Lund,P D Koduvere,H Bolkesjø,T F Rossebø,G H Rosenlund-Soysal,E Skytte,K Katz,J Blumberga,D ( 2018). A review of demand side flexibility potential in Northern Europe. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 91: 654– 664
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[83] |
Sol,J van der Wal,M M Beers,P J Wals,A E J ( 2018). Reframing the future: The role of reflexivity in governance networks in sustainability transitions. Environmental Education Research, 24( 9): 1383– 1405
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[84] |
Sun,L Huang,Y Meng,L ( 2009). Development dilemma and path choice of coal worker villages from the perspectives of sustainability. Procedia Earth and Planetary Science, 1( 1): 1777– 1782
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[85] |
Susur,E Karakaya,E ( 2021). A reflexive perspective for sustainability assumptions in transition studies. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 39: 34– 54
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[86] |
Taylor,B Hufford,M Bilbrey,K ( 2017). A green new deal for Appalachia: Economic transition, coal reclamation costs, bottom-up policymaking. Journal of Appalachian Studies, 23( 1): 8– 28
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[87] |
Turnheim,B Geels,F W ( 2013). The destabilisation of existing regimes: Confronting a multi-dimensional framework with a case study of the British coal industry (1913–1967). Research Policy, 42( 10): 1749– 1767
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[88] |
Tushman,M L Anderson,P ( 1986). Technological discontinuities and organizational environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31( 3): 439– 465
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[89] |
ValkenburgG GraccevaF (2016). Towards governance of energy security. In: Lombardi P, Grünig M, eds. Low-Carbon Energy Security from an European Perspective. London: Academic Press, 207– 229
|
[90] |
Wang,P Yang,M Mamaril,K Shi,X Cheng,B Zhao,D ( 2021). Explaining the slow progress of coal phase-out: The case of Guangdong–Hong Kong–Macao Greater Bay Region. Energy Policy, 155: 112331
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[91] |
Wang,Z ( 2021). Current status and prospects of reliability systems engineering in China. Frontiers of Engineering Management, 8( 4): 492– 502
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[92] |
Winkler,R Field,D R Luloff,A Krannich,R Williams,T ( 2007). Social landscapes of the inter-mountain west: A comparison of old west and new west communities. Rural Sociology, 72( 3): 478– 501
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[93] |
Winterton,J ( 1993). The end of a way of life: Coal communities since the 1984–1985 Miners’ Strike. Work, Employment and Society, 7( 1): 135– 146
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[94] |
Yang,J Zhang,W Zhao,D Zhao,C Yuan,J ( 2022). What can China learn from the UK’s transition to a low-carbon power sector? A multi-level perspective. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 179: 106127
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[95] |
YangM ShiX ( 2022). China’s path to decarbonisation
|
[96] |
YorkshirePost ( 2016). Approval sought for new jobs plan at Kellingley Colliery site
|
[97] |
Zhang,H Zhang,X Yuan,J ( 2020). Coal power in China: A multi-level perspective review. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, 9( 6): e386
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
[98] |
Zhou,D Ding,H Wang,Q Su,B ( 2021). Literature review on renewable energy development and China’s roadmap. Frontiers of Engineering Management, 8( 2): 212– 222
CrossRef
Google scholar
|
/
〈 | 〉 |