政策进程分析:纳米比亚电力市场改革中的宣传联盟

IF 7.9 2区 工程技术 Q1 ENERGY & FUELS Energy Strategy Reviews Pub Date : 2024-09-01 DOI:10.1016/j.esr.2024.101534
Andreas Tangeni Ndapuka, Tom Wanjekeche, Matheus M. Kanime
{"title":"政策进程分析:纳米比亚电力市场改革中的宣传联盟","authors":"Andreas Tangeni Ndapuka,&nbsp;Tom Wanjekeche,&nbsp;Matheus M. Kanime","doi":"10.1016/j.esr.2024.101534","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study explores the policy process in the Namibian Electricity Supply Industry in relation to the development of the Modified Single Buyer market model. The research employs the Advocacy Coalition Framework as a theoretical framework wherein actors within a policy subsystem are conceptualized as forming advocacy coalitions based on shared beliefs and engaging in coordinated efforts over time to influence policy direction. The analysis has uncovered the existence of two prominent coalitions: the progressive coalition is advocating for market liberalisation, while the conservative coalition is seeking to preserve the status quo and resist the adoption of the new electricity market model. The study concludes that powerful actors in the Electricity Supply Industry, although equipped with enormous economic resources and strong political ties, could not prevent the regulator from implementing comprehensive changes in the electricity sector. However, the conservative coalition has managed to negotiate for a phased implementation of the policy to ensure minimal disruption in the industry and to guarantee the security of the electricity supply in the long run. The phased implementation also allows sufficient time for this coalition to realign their business strategies within the new regulation policy and maintain their status as relevant and critical actors.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11546,"journal":{"name":"Energy Strategy Reviews","volume":"55 ","pages":"Article 101534"},"PeriodicalIF":7.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Policy process analysis: Advocacy coalitions in the Namibian electricity market reform\",\"authors\":\"Andreas Tangeni Ndapuka,&nbsp;Tom Wanjekeche,&nbsp;Matheus M. Kanime\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.esr.2024.101534\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>This study explores the policy process in the Namibian Electricity Supply Industry in relation to the development of the Modified Single Buyer market model. The research employs the Advocacy Coalition Framework as a theoretical framework wherein actors within a policy subsystem are conceptualized as forming advocacy coalitions based on shared beliefs and engaging in coordinated efforts over time to influence policy direction. The analysis has uncovered the existence of two prominent coalitions: the progressive coalition is advocating for market liberalisation, while the conservative coalition is seeking to preserve the status quo and resist the adoption of the new electricity market model. The study concludes that powerful actors in the Electricity Supply Industry, although equipped with enormous economic resources and strong political ties, could not prevent the regulator from implementing comprehensive changes in the electricity sector. However, the conservative coalition has managed to negotiate for a phased implementation of the policy to ensure minimal disruption in the industry and to guarantee the security of the electricity supply in the long run. The phased implementation also allows sufficient time for this coalition to realign their business strategies within the new regulation policy and maintain their status as relevant and critical actors.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11546,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Energy Strategy Reviews\",\"volume\":\"55 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101534\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Energy Strategy Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211467X24002438\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENERGY & FUELS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Energy Strategy Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211467X24002438","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENERGY & FUELS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究探讨了纳米比亚电力供应行业与经修改的单一买方市场模式发展相关的政策过程。研究采用了 "倡导联盟框架 "作为理论框架,将政策子系统中的行动者概念化为在共同信念的基础上形成倡导联盟,并随着时间的推移做出协调努力,以影响政策方向。分析发现存在两个突出的联盟:进步联盟主张市场自由化,而保守联盟则寻求维持现状,抵制采用新的电力市场模式。研究得出结论,电力供应行业的强势参与者虽然拥有巨大的经济资源和强大的政治关系,但却无法阻止监管机构在电力行业实施全面改革。不过,保守派联盟还是通过谈判分阶段实施了该政策,以确保将行业混乱降至最低,并从长远角度保障电力供应安全。分阶段实施还为该联盟留出了充足的时间,以便在新的监管政策范围内重新调整其业务战略,并保持其作为相关重要行为者的地位。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Policy process analysis: Advocacy coalitions in the Namibian electricity market reform
This study explores the policy process in the Namibian Electricity Supply Industry in relation to the development of the Modified Single Buyer market model. The research employs the Advocacy Coalition Framework as a theoretical framework wherein actors within a policy subsystem are conceptualized as forming advocacy coalitions based on shared beliefs and engaging in coordinated efforts over time to influence policy direction. The analysis has uncovered the existence of two prominent coalitions: the progressive coalition is advocating for market liberalisation, while the conservative coalition is seeking to preserve the status quo and resist the adoption of the new electricity market model. The study concludes that powerful actors in the Electricity Supply Industry, although equipped with enormous economic resources and strong political ties, could not prevent the regulator from implementing comprehensive changes in the electricity sector. However, the conservative coalition has managed to negotiate for a phased implementation of the policy to ensure minimal disruption in the industry and to guarantee the security of the electricity supply in the long run. The phased implementation also allows sufficient time for this coalition to realign their business strategies within the new regulation policy and maintain their status as relevant and critical actors.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Energy Strategy Reviews
Energy Strategy Reviews Energy-Energy (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
12.80
自引率
4.90%
发文量
167
审稿时长
40 weeks
期刊介绍: Energy Strategy Reviews is a gold open access journal that provides authoritative content on strategic decision-making and vision-sharing related to society''s energy needs. Energy Strategy Reviews publishes: • Analyses • Methodologies • Case Studies • Reviews And by invitation: • Report Reviews • Viewpoints
期刊最新文献
An EnergyPlan analysis of electricity decarbonization in the CEMAC region Have configuration effects driven the coordinated enhancement of green energy system development in China and “Belt and Road” countries?–A qualitative comparative analysis based on panel data Survey of technologies, techniques, and applications for big data analytics in smart energy hub Evaluating the advancement of sustainable development objectives in recently industrialized nations by tying gold prices, fossil fuel prices, and energy use Pathways to innovation: How city pilots leverage digital technology to reduce carbon emissions
×
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