Embedding Social Values in the Design of Offshore Wind Energy Systems Presentation Competition and...
If you can't read please download the document
Embedding Social Values in the Design of Offshore Wind Energy Systems Presentation Competition and Regulation in Network Industries Brussels, 22 November
Embedding Social Values in the Design of Offshore Wind Energy
Systems Presentation Competition and Regulation in Network
Industries Brussels, 22 November 2013 Rolf Knneke Economics of
Infrastructures
Slide 2
Research problem How to systematically embed social values in
the technical and institutional design of offshore wind energy
systems in order to facilitate its social acceptance?
Slide 3
Research Approach: Towards a Value Sensitive Design Identify
social values associated to different forms of acceptance Identify
different technological and institutional designs of offshore
energy systems Identify embedded values vis--vis the different
technical and institutional designs Analyze value conflicts Analyze
different technical and institutional designs that would meet
social values: value sensitive design
Slide 4
Forms of social acceptance Social values in offshore wind
Socio-political Sustainable, reliable, affordable Market Costs,
efficiency, competitiveness Community Health & safety Impact on
living environment Use of natural resources Use of space Adapted
from Wstenhagen et al 2007
Slide 5
Institutional design Examples of ideal types: Energy as a
public utility Energy as a commodity Offshore energy as a public
property Different values can be attributed to different
institutional designs (Williamson 1998)
Slide 6
Values embedded in institutions Williamson 1998
Slide 7
Technological design Ideal types: Stand-alone wind parks: least
technical complexity Super grid: high degree of interconnectivity
(scale) Synergy: high degree of convergence (scope) Different
values can be attributed to different technical designs
Slide 8
Value conflict type 1: Embedded value conflicts within T or I
Value conflicts embedded in the institutional or technological
design. Examples: Technology: Off shore wind is sustainable but not
reliable (intermittency) Institutions: Need for centralized
monitoring & control, whereas there might be preferences for
decentralized governance.
Slide 9
Value conflict type 2: Incoherent values between T and I T and
I support different values that might be conflicting. Example:
Offshore wind requires significant space which might conflict with
existing institutional arrangements (inherited rights of use:
Fishing ground, oil & gas exploration)
Slide 10
Value conflict type 3: Conflicts between different forms of
acceptance Socio-political acceptance might conflict with market
acceptance of community acceptance (and vice versa). Example: High
degree of socio-political acceptance (sustainability), but low
market acceptance (high costs), and low community acceptance
(health hazards of new to build transmission lines)
Slide 11
Value conflict type 4: Conflicting focus on social acceptance I
and T are designed towards the resolution of different forms of
social acceptance. Example: Technical system is optimized in order
to support sustainability (socio-political acceptance) whereas the
institutional arrangements are in support of low cost energy supply
(market acceptance)
Slide 12
Towards a value sensitive design of offshore energy systems How
to resolve possible value conflicts? What institutional and
technological designs serve what values? Trade-offs,
complementarities, dilemmas? How to derive at value robust designs?
Need for context specific research & analysis
Slide 13
Conclusions Challenging effort to include values into the
design of energy systems Differences compared to traditional
studies on social acceptance: Ex ante approach Much broader than
only community acceptance Design oriented rather than process
oriented
