This report reviews the scholarly literature and case study data regarding the role of public sector agencies in accelerating technological innovation. The aim is to inform heat decarbonisation policy discussions in Scotland, and the developing plans for a Scottish ‘low-carbon heat hub’.
The report is split into three main sections: design principles for innovation agencies; types of innovation agencies; and specific activities of innovation agencies.
Themes and conclusions
Persistent issues relevant to the Scottish policy discussion surrounding innovation agencies and energy sector transition heat decarbonisation are:
- The limits of general classification: the importance of tailoring an innovation agency to meet the particular policy goals, and the strengths and weaknesses of a given region.
- The need for a system-wide approach: while the design and function of a specific agency is important, it is vital to consider their complementary role within a wider innovation system
- The tension between autonomy and embeddedness: the need to consider the effect that close linkages between innovation agencies and public and private sectors can have on institutional autonomy, and the impact this can have on the balance between urgent policy implementation goals and more emergent and perhaps radical long-term innovations.
This report reviews the scholarly literature and case study data regarding the role of public sector agencies in accelerating technological innovation. The aim is to inform heat decarbonisation policy discussions in Scotland, and the developing plans for a Scottish ‘low-carbon heat hub’.
The report is split into three main sections: design principles for innovation agencies; types of innovation agencies; and specific activities of innovation agencies.
Themes and conclusions
Persistent issues relevant to the Scottish policy discussion surrounding innovation agencies and energy sector transition heat decarbonisation are:
- The limits of general classification: the importance of tailoring an innovation agency to meet the particular policy goals, and the strengths and weaknesses of a given region.
- The need for a system-wide approach: while the design and function of a specific agency is important, it is vital to consider their complementary role within a wider innovation system
- The tension between autonomy and embeddedness: the need to consider the effect that close linkages between innovation agencies and public and private sectors can have on institutional autonomy, and the impact this can have on the balance between urgent policy implementation goals and more emergent and perhaps radical long-term innovations.
In order to achieve Scotland’s net-zero target, a low-carbon heating system will be required in virtually every property in Scotland by 2045. This is a significant policy and technological challenge.
This report seeks to inform the design of policy for the phase-out of fossil fuel heating by reviewing relevant historical and ongoing experiences of technology phase-out policy, and, by extension, phase-in, in the energy sector.
The case studies reviewed include natural gas grids, personal transport, electricity supply, electricity metering, transport biofuels and condensing boilers.
Key findings
- Major infrastructure transitions, such as gas grid repurposing, necessarily rely on an area-based approach rather than individual decision-making. Transitions in off-grid heating, by contrast, may involve individual household decision-making at the point of replacement.
- As is being seen in the transport sector, some phase-outs are driven by proactive supply side policies and international market competition. Close collaboration between government and businesses were also seen.
- Hybrid technologies, such as hybrid gas and electric heat pumps, are appealing ways of ameliorating the effects of phase-out because they offer less disruptive and perhaps more affordable solutions.
- A number of cases reviewed highlight the importance of how policy decisions are justified and communicated, suggesting careful attention as to how heat decarbonisation policy is developed and presented.
European countries vary greatly in terms of how residential buildings are heated. These differences, built up over decades, reflect national resource endowments, economic resources and technical infrastructures. They also reflect different governance approaches and policy choices.
In this report, we review the heating technologies and heat policies of nine European countries: the UK (with a focus on Scotland), the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, France, Germany and Ireland). We assess how government policy has been used to change the way heat has been delivered, and current approaches to policy-driven heat decarbonisation. We set out in detail the policy instruments – financial incentives, regulations and tax structures – that are used to drive countries toward zero-carbon heating. Where available, we also present information on how each country is developing policies and targets for the decarbonisation of heating.
This look at the recent revolutionary turn in energy policy and research, by CXC energy lead Mark Winskel and Michael Kattirtzi, was first published by UKERC
Policy revolution
There’s been a revolutionary turn in energy policy and research circles. Organisations such as the Energy Systems Catapult, the Energy Institute, and consultancy firms such as PwC have all suggested that the UK energy system is facing a sweeping energy revolution. As part of its wider industrial strategy, the UK Government now channels much of its energy innovation spending under a ‘Prospering from the Energy Revolution’ programme, including an academic-led Energy Revolution Research Consortium.
While there’s an exciting and important role for research working at the cutting edge of change, it might also be worth questioning the inevitability of a wholesale energy revolution. For many, the defining issue in energy policy, and policy-driven research, is how to rapidly decarbonise while providing secure and affordable energy for all, and reaping maximum social and economic benefit along the way. Whether change is best achieved by revolution or reform is an open question, to be decided on an issue-by-issue basis using the evidence at hand.
Clouded judgement?
Studies of the history of technology suggest that revolutionary change is a common way of thinking about the future. The Danish Science and Technology Studies scholar Kasper Schiølin recently referred to ‘future essentialisms’ that sanction certain modes of change while discouraging others. That sanctioning effect is why some researchers and advisors might be wary of signing-up to a sweeping energy revolution prospectus. Upfront overarching commitments – to either revolution or reform – may cloud independent judgement on the best way forwards.
Is a revolutionary vision common?
To find out whether a revolutionary vision of the UK’s energy future is widely shared among experts, we carried out a large online survey of UK energy academics and stakeholders. We discussed some of our findings in an earlier UKERC post and research briefing. In a newly published paper in Energy Policy (part of an upcoming Special Issue from UKERC researchers) we look more closely at expert responses to the energy revolution proposition.
The results suggest that most academics and stakeholders aren’t committed energy revolutionaries. We found widespread recognition of the growing importance of digitalisation and decentralisation in the energy sector, seen in the rise of ‘smart and local’ energy systems. At the same time, many existing technologies and organisations – adapted to the transition challenge – are also expected to play important roles. Large scale technologies and networks are seen as key contributors to the transition, as are some rather mundane innovations, such as improved buildings fabric.
System change, a mix of disruption and repurposing
Under one-fifth of our survey respondents showed a strong commitment to a wholesale energy revolution. Most saw energy system change as involving a mix of disruption and repurposing, and many highlighted complementarities between established and emerging solutions, such as the way large scale infrastructure can offer resilience for local systems. Interestingly, these views were held by the majority of both academic and non-academic respondents, and across the many different disciplinary groups we surveyed.
Transition over revolution
Despite the revolutionary turn in energy policy and research, our survey suggests that most experts are pragmatic problem solvers. For most, transition rather than revolution is the defining issue in energy policy and research.
The new journal paper is available to download from here. It can be cited as: Winskel, M., Kattirtzi, M., 2020. Transitions, disruptions and revolutions: Expert views on prospects for a smart and local energy revolution in the UK. Energy Policy 147, 111815, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2020.111815
In addition to the expression of thanks in the Acknowledgements section of the article, the authors wish to thank two anonymous referees for their detailed comments and suggestions on an earlier version.
The way we generate, distribute and consume energy is changing, and many observers anticipate accelerated changes ahead. These transformations are being driven by a combination of policy and regulatory pressures, rapid movements in the cost and performance of some energy technologies, and shifting patterns of consumption and behaviour.
This UKERC/CXC report presents results from a detailed survey exploring the differing views. It finds agreement that large scale renewables, buildings refurbishment and electric vehicles will play a major role in the UK energy system transition – but much less agreement in other areas, such as the role of behaviour change and modal shift in the transport sector, and the likely path for decarbonising buildings heat supply.