Exploring possible futures or reinforcing the status-quo? The use of model-based scenarios in the Swiss energy industry

Lukas Braunreiter, Christina Marchand, Yann Blumer
{"title":"Exploring possible futures or reinforcing the status-quo? The use of model-based scenarios in the Swiss energy industry","authors":"Lukas Braunreiter,&nbsp;Christina Marchand,&nbsp;Yann Blumer","doi":"10.1016/j.rset.2023.100046","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Energy scenarios are often claimed to support decision-makers involved in the energy transition. However, an empirical understanding of how decision makers select, interpret, and use energy scenarios is largely missing. This study examined how high-level public utility executives in the energy sector, a key target audience of energy scenarios, perceive and interact with energy scenarios. Based on interviews with representatives of 20 Swiss utilities, we show that the use of scenarios is rarely part of a formalized process aimed at assisting decision-making processes. Instead, the selection of scenarios is often contingent on users’ perceptions of their legitimacy, credibility, and salience. While utility executives could rely on a wide variety of scenarios published by academic, corporate, and non-governmental organizations, they often focus on a limited set. Given the complexity of contemporary energy scenarios, which are often based on sophisticated energy system models, familiarity with publishing organizations and reporting styles is an important selection heuristic for users. This stands in contrast to the purpose and of stated key motivation of considering a broad range of plausible futures and their associated trade-offs. Our results suggest that to evaluate the impact of energy scenarios, social-scientific research also needs to consider user groups that are neither involved in participative modeling activities, nor collaborating with scenario developers in any other form. The usefulness of energy scenarios in these contexts and particularly their capacity to contribute to integrative deliberations on plausible and desirable energy futures is highly relevant, yet largely unknown.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":101071,"journal":{"name":"Renewable and Sustainable Energy Transition","volume":"3 ","pages":"Article 100046"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Renewable and Sustainable Energy Transition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667095X23000028","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Energy scenarios are often claimed to support decision-makers involved in the energy transition. However, an empirical understanding of how decision makers select, interpret, and use energy scenarios is largely missing. This study examined how high-level public utility executives in the energy sector, a key target audience of energy scenarios, perceive and interact with energy scenarios. Based on interviews with representatives of 20 Swiss utilities, we show that the use of scenarios is rarely part of a formalized process aimed at assisting decision-making processes. Instead, the selection of scenarios is often contingent on users’ perceptions of their legitimacy, credibility, and salience. While utility executives could rely on a wide variety of scenarios published by academic, corporate, and non-governmental organizations, they often focus on a limited set. Given the complexity of contemporary energy scenarios, which are often based on sophisticated energy system models, familiarity with publishing organizations and reporting styles is an important selection heuristic for users. This stands in contrast to the purpose and of stated key motivation of considering a broad range of plausible futures and their associated trade-offs. Our results suggest that to evaluate the impact of energy scenarios, social-scientific research also needs to consider user groups that are neither involved in participative modeling activities, nor collaborating with scenario developers in any other form. The usefulness of energy scenarios in these contexts and particularly their capacity to contribute to integrative deliberations on plausible and desirable energy futures is highly relevant, yet largely unknown.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
探索可能的未来还是巩固现状?基于模型的情景在瑞士能源行业的使用
能源情景通常被认为支持参与能源转型的决策者。然而,对决策者如何选择、解释和使用能源情景的实证理解在很大程度上是缺失的。这项研究考察了能源部门的高级公用事业高管(能源场景的关键目标受众)如何感知能源场景并与之互动。根据对20家瑞士公用事业公司代表的采访,我们发现,情景的使用很少是旨在协助决策过程的正式过程的一部分。相反,场景的选择往往取决于用户对其合法性、可信度和显著性的看法。虽然公用事业公司高管可以依赖学术、企业和非政府组织发布的各种场景,但他们通常只关注有限的场景。鉴于当代能源场景的复杂性,通常基于复杂的能源系统模型,熟悉出版组织和报告风格是用户的一个重要选择启发。这与考虑广泛的合理未来及其相关权衡的目的和所述关键动机形成了鲜明对比。我们的研究结果表明,为了评估能源场景的影响,社会科学研究还需要考虑既没有参与参与建模活动,也没有以任何其他形式与场景开发人员合作的用户群体。能源情景在这些背景下的有用性,特别是它们有助于对合理和可取的能源未来进行综合审议的能力,是非常相关的,但在很大程度上是未知的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Spatial heterogeneity in deployment and upscaling of wind power in Swedish municipalities Corrigendum to “Is there a case for a coal moratorium in Indonesia? Power sector optimization modeling of low-carbon strategies” [Renewable and Sustainable Energy Transition (2024) 100074] Driving sustainable energy transition: Understanding residential rooftop solar photovoltaic adoption in Malaysia through a behavioural analysis Replacing fossil fuel-based power plants with renewables to meet Iran's environmental commitments in the electricity sector Just energy transition in coal regions: Innovative framework for assessing territorial just transition plans
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1