sciencewise energy infrastructure webinar

Managed by Ricardo-AEA on behalf of the Department for Business Innovation and Skills (BIS)www.sciencewise-erc.org.uk 1

SCIENCEWISE WEBINARPublic views on Energy Infrastructure

Ingrid Prikken, Sciencewise Researcher

Edward Andersson, Sciencewise Programme Manager

Dr Karen Parkhill, Bangor University2

Managed by Ricardo-AEA on behalf of the Department for Business Innovation and Skills (BIS)www.sciencewise-erc.org.uk

Agenda

• Introducing Sciencewise

• Why Social Intelligence?

• Public views on energy infrastructure:

findings, drivers and trends

• Public values, attitudes and acceptability about transforming the UK energy system (UKERC)

• Public dialogue in practice

• DECC 2050 Pathways

• Gaps in current knowledge about Social Intelligence

3

Managed by Ricardo-AEA on behalf of the Department for Business Innovation and Skills (BIS)www.sciencewise-erc.org.uk 4

Introducing Sciencewise

Sciencewise Expert Resource Centre for Public Dialogue in Science and Technology

Funded by the Department for Business Innovation and Skills (BIS)

It aims to help policy makers commission

and use public dialogue to inform policy decisions in emerging areas of science and technology

Launched in 2008

To help improve policy-making in science and technology through the use of public dialogue and engagement


Sciencewise Support

Sciencewise can help you with:

1.Newsletter

2.Social Intelligence & Research

3.Training and Mentoring

4.Dialogue Specialists

5.Project funding and support

5


Why gather Social Intelligence? (1)

• Providing insights into the current understanding of the views of the public on key emerging areas of science and technology - George Osborne’s

‘Great 8 Technologies for Growth’

1. The Big Data Revolution

2. Synthetic biology

3. Regenerative medicine

4. Energy storage

5. Advanced materials

6. Robotics and autonomous systems

7. Commercial applications of space

8. Use of animals in testing experiments

6


Why gather Social Intelligence? (2)

• Creating information which will assist policy makers to develop better policy by taking into account the views of the public

• Stimulating further discussion and consideration of the views of the public by policy makers.

• These are living documents, which will be updated on a regular basis as new evidence of public views emerges.

• Comments on our reports welcome.

7

Q&A

8


Public Views Energy Infrastructure

Summarizes public views on the topic of energy infrastructure over the last 20 years

•Focus on national infrastructure and supply side

•Report:

http://www.sciencewise-erc.org.uk/cms/assets/Uploads/Energy-Infrastructure-SI-paperFINAL.pdf

• Have your say on the co-ment website: https://sciencewise.co-ment.com/text/lVFVdSdG2H9/view/

9




https://sciencewise.co-ment.com/text/lVFVdSdG2H9/view/




Policy context

• UK legally binding target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by at least 80% by 2050

• Draft Energy Bill, includes plans to ensure ongoing security of supply

• A particular focus on renewables, nuclear, and ‘Government pipeline and storage systems’.

• Planning consent was granted for a new nuclear plant at Hinkley in Somerset, and 2013 budget included a focus on investment in extracting shale gas

• Energy and its storage as one of the ‘eight great technologies’

.

10


National and local importance

• Focus of the review is on national views on ‘the technology’ rather than ‘whether the technology should be built here’

• Energy infrastructure requires very localised developments to tackle an issue of national importance

Leads to key questions such as:

• How do members of the public form their views about energy infrastructure?

• How do members of the public make decisions about trade-offs and priorities?

11


Views on specific technologies and infrastructure• Support for future systems of renewable energy

supply is consistent. Public support for large scale wind power consistently positive

• Nuclear energy tends to polarise opinion; support for nuclear on its own generally low, but higher when considered as part of a mix

• Public support for moving away from hydrocarbon dependency. Levels of support for fossil fuels similar to nuclear, but levels of opposition lower

• Limited social intelligence available about shale gas (fracking)

• Low awareness, less certain views and limited support for ‘new technologies’

12


Views on energy storage

• New area to the public

• Limited empirical evidence

• Value in investigating public attitudes experimentally, perhaps through comparative investigation (e.g. underground water vs. gas storage)

• Experience linked to perceived risk, perception of appropriate scale, proximity to population

• Less to do with purpose of technology, more to do with attributes and associations

13


“Most of the UK public are aware that climate change and energy security are serious problems and that we need to make substantial changes to our energy systems.”

Source: ‘Public Attitudes, Understanding, and Engagement in relation to Low-Carbon Energy: A selective review of academic and non-academic literatures’ ( RCUK, 2011)

14


Public views on energy infrastructure shaped by:

• Local context and specific views on impacts or benefits

• Other contextual factors ranging from the micro to the macro

• Wider imperatives such as the for security of supply, independence of supply, lower environmental impact and affordability

15


Drivers, context and trade-offs

• Attitudes vary under different circumstances

• Individuals play multiple roles in relation to energy

• Public views don’t form a single public consciousness

• Energy use tends to be taken for granted

• Perception of risk in relation to energy infrastructure is complex

• Unclear how and to what degree the public make direct trade-offs between personal and national issues

16


Trends

• Energy security has emerged recently as key driver for preferences and choices

• Preferences have remained relatively consistent in recent times

• Lack of clarity as to whether familiarity with specific technologies engenders higher degree of acceptance on a national level

17

Transforming the UK Energy System: Public Values, Attitudes and Acceptability - Synthesis ReportKaren Parkhill, Christina Demski, Catherine Butler, Alexa Spence and Nick Pidgeon

[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Project Background Multiple long-term national policy goals bring

imperatives to transform the energy system• Climate change, Energy security, Affordability, Environment

Publics deeply implicated in change

Social dimensions often ‘missing’ from scenarios

Project Overview

Scenarios• Scenario Adaptation, Expert

Consultation & Material Development

•Conducted Jan-June 2011

Qualitative•Deliberating Energy System

Scenarios & Trade-offs•Conducted June – Oct 2011

Quantitative•National (GB) Survey: Attitudes

toward Whole Energy System Transformations

•Conducted online 2-12th 2012 August

Click to add titleSynthesis Analysis

• Not a summary of workshops or survey reports

• Consistency and divergences between datasets examined carefully

• Synthesis: best explains the data as a whole, & provides a coherent account of public responses to energy system change

Click to add titlePublic Vision

The public vision of the future energy system is one that contributes to a broader vision of a

sustainable future

strong commitment to renewable forms of energy production

and a corresponding shift away from fossil

fuels.

overall improvement in energy efficiency and reductions in energy demand.

Click to add titleSolar Energy - example

“RENEWABLE”“CLEAN”

“FAIR”“JUST”

It’s not about the technology, it’s about the values

Click to add titleThe importance of values

1) Explaining what UNDERLIES preferences and acceptability

2) Understanding responses and insights into why they might change (and how)

3) Predicting future responses to changes and energy system development

It is essential that social policies are created which are responsive to citizens’ values.

Click to add titleWhat we mean by values

Values are guiding principles for people, groups and other social entities

‘Social’ value system Cultural resources

Public VALUESReducing the use of finite resources

Reducing overall levels of energy

use

Environmental protection

Naturalness and Nature

Avoiding waste

Efficient

Capturing opportunities

Availability and Affordability

Reliability

Safety

Autonomy and Freedom

Choice and Control

Social Justice

Fairness, Honesty &

Transparency

Long-term trajectories

Interconnected

Improvement and quality

Click to add titleEfficient and not Wasteful

Avoiding waste and waste products, being more efficient and capturing opportunities

Click to add titleEnvironment and Nature

A system that uses and produces energy in an environmentally conscious way and does not

unnecessarily interfere with or harm nature

Click to add titleSecure and Stable

Ensuring access to energy services both in terms of availability and affordability. A system that is reliable and safe in the production and delivery of energy services.

Click to add titleAutonomy and Power

Being mindful of the importance of autonomy and freedom at national and personal levels.

Click to add titleJust and Fair

Being mindful of implications for people’s abilities to live healthy lives; a system that is fair and inclusive, where actors are honest and transparent.

- Social, environmental, financial impacts- Vulnerable groups

- Intra- and intergenerational justice

Social JusticeFair distribution of cost and benefits

Click to add titleProcess and Change

Thinking in terms of long-term trajectories, interconnections; and ensuring changes represent improvement in terms of socio-technical advances and quality of life

Public VALUESReducing the use of finite resources

Reducing overall levels of energy

use

Environmental protection

Naturalness and Nature

Avoiding waste

Efficient

Capturing opportunities

Availability and Affordability

Reliability

Safety

Autonomy and Freedom

Choice and Control

Social Justice

Fairness, Honesty &

Transparency

Long-term trajectories

Interconnected

Improvement and quality

We stipulate that acceptability of any particular aspect of energy system

transformations will, in part, be conditional upon how well it fits with

the value-system.

Importance of long-term trajectories commensurate

with these values

Situating Values

Values relate to how publics think the world SHOULD be...

But publics recognise that how the world IS could be different

Pragmatism: world views, social experiences & context

Click to add titleExample of Pragmatism: Change

Change is viewed as a slow process

Energy system change and the major

infrastructural changes implied are perceived

as likely to require very long development

trajectories.

Click to add titleKey Messages

Public acceptability may only be achieved if it is rooted, in a significant way, in the described value system.

Meaningful public acceptability

Publics are unlikely to settle for a form of change that does not show signs of commitment to the longer-term trajectories commensurate

with these values.

Pursuing energy system changes in ways that are in keeping with longer-term trajectories aligned with public values can form the

basis of a social contract for change.

Values and above apply as much to the PROCESS of achieving energy system change as it does the end system

Click to add titleProject Reports Butler, C., Parkhill, K.A. & Pidgeon N.F.

Parkhill, K., Demski, C., Butler, C., Spence, A. and Pidgeon, N.F (July 2013) Transforming the UK Energy System: Public Values, Attitudes and Acceptability - Synthesis Report. Cardiff University and UK Energy Research Centre.

Available from http://www.ukerc.ac.uk/support/Transforming+the+UK+Energy+System

Demski, C., Spence, A.& Pidgeon N.F.

[email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

[email protected] [email protected]

http://www.ukerc.ac.uk/support/Transforming+the+UK+Energy+System

http://www.ukerc.ac.uk/support/Transforming+the+UK+Energy+System






Deliberative Workshops: Approach

Introducing reasons for whole energy system change• Presentation• Short surveys & Discussion

Creating a scenario in small groups• DECC My2050 web tool & extra components omitted from tool• Guided discussion to prompt conditions, trade-offs, agreements,

disagreements to form basis of social contracts.

Reflecting on scenarios: Scenario narratives - “BAU”, “Mixing it up” & “Low carbon living”• Small group discussions of each• Reflections on My2050 discussions to amend social contracts


Drivers for public dialogue

• Trust

• Governance

• New perspectives

• Socially acceptable solutions

• Ownership

• Prevent contestation

• Trade-offs

41


Considerations

• Clear objectives and framing

• Incredible number of interlinked issues

• Difficult to get at imagined futures

• Adequate design and careful planning

• Patience and openness

• Publics

42


DECC 2050 Pathways

In 2011 the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) ran a three-strand public engagement programme on how the UK should meet its legally binding greenhouse gas emissions reduction target of 80% by 2050

Methods:

• An advisory youth panel

• Three local deliberative dialogues, using the 2050 Pathways Calculator

• A serious games interface, My2050

The programme was jointly funded by DECC and Sciencewise-ERC

43


The deliberative workshops

• Designed around the use of the 2050 Pathways Calculator

• Engaged community leaders in discussion about ‘pathways’ to achieving the 2050 target

• Incorporated plenary explanatory sessions

• Use of the calculator and small group discussion on specific themes

• Interaction with experts

44


Key findings from the process

• People learned more about some of the less well-known technologies

• They did not necessarily change their views or behaviour about more well-known technologies

• Participants’ approaches seemed to be driven by what we should be doing, what seemed achievable and what was thought to be desirable.

• Nuclear technology, wind, electrification and bio-energy tended to be the technologies that evoked the strongest, and often negative, reaction and, as such, were often excluded.

• The absence of cost data meant some felt it was difficult to make an informed decision on the best strategy to pursue

• Not all participants bought into the 80% target, and others struggled to develop a pathway that hit the target.

46


Impact on participants

• They realised the scale of the challenge and understood more about what achieving the 80% target would entail, and its impact on public life and society.

• They learned more about the energy debate in general and the range of options available to meet the 2050 target.

• Some people said they would use the 2050 pathways calculator with their own communities.

Discussion: why public dialogue?

1 .What are the benefits?

2. What are the risks/challenges?

3. What are the risks of not engaging the public?


“...a new approach to engagement is necessary if Government is to foster deliberate transformative innovation.”

Source: Transforming the UK’s Energy: policies for the 2020 renewables target and beyond, University of Sussex for Friends of the Earth

49


Gaps in the current knowledge on public views• Limited evidence on public views in relation to less-

developed or emerging technologies (fracking, energy storage, biomass, nuclear fusion)

• Lack of clarity on whether increased public knowledge increases acceptability

• Questions on whether views about specific technologies change over time, and the reasons why this might occur

• Public views sought in isolation of views of other stakeholders e.g. policy makers and experts

• Scope for encouraging members of the public to think about trade-offs and a joint demand- and supply led approach

• Nature of engagement tended to be limited to polls and consultations – 2 dimensional snapshots

50


Linking things up... Engagement activities traditionally focussed on overall views about specific infrastructure projects or national strategies - less focus on linking things up

If energy is going to be something done with communities, rather than to communities, then look at gaps from two angles:

1. Engaging the wider public with energy options, deliberate constraints and trade offs regarding national energy mix

2. Stress the importance of early ‘upstream’ dialogue, both concerning national energy infrastructure policy and the potential local impacts.

...Start asking questions like “How do we all ensure our energy needs are met as a nation” and “What would you be prepared to change/to accept”

Rather than “we want to put this wind farm or power line near you, what do you think”...

51


A few thoughts regarding local engagement:

• Local level seems key interface between citizens, government and businesses

• Partnerships – community groups and organisations are playing a crucial role

• Innovation in public engagement vs. risk averseness

• Focus on economic development, budgets cuts – affects capacity and will to engage

• How to connect what’s happening at the grassroots with what (local) governments are doing?

• Current national policy on energy security and fuel poverty, energy efficiency (Green Deal, ECO). Relatively top down – perhaps little space for public engagement?

52

Reflections


Upcoming webinars and events

Sciencewise Community of Practice Meeting Sep 2013

Thursday, 19 September 2013 from 12:00 to 15:00 (BST), London, United Kingdom

This face to face event will explore the changing landscape of open policy making and will explore issues such as open data, localism, transparency and complexity. This face to face event in the BIS Conference Centre is open to all Civil Servants across Government. http://sciencewisecopsep13.eventbrite.co.uk/

54

http://sciencewisecopsep13.eventbrite.co.uk/

Thank you!

sciencewise energy infrastructure webinar

Technology

business innovation

public stimulating

public form

mix public support

infrastructure support

use of public dialogue

new evidence of public

national views