ESTEEM: Managing societal acceptance in new energy projects. A toolbox method for project managers

Technological Forecasting and Social Change

Volumn 76, Issue 7, 2009, Pages 963-977

  Raven, Rob P J M ^a,b   Jolivet, Eric ^c   Mourik, Ruth M ^b   Feenstra, Ynke C F J ^b  

^a EINDHOVEN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

^b TNO   (Netherlands)

^c UNIVERSITÉ DE TOULOUSE   (France)

Author keywords

CCS; ESTEEM; Participatory technology assessment; Social acceptance of technology

Indexed keywords

A-CARBON; CCS; ENERGY PROJECT; ESTEEM; GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOOD; MAD COW CRISIS; NETHERLANDS; NEW ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES; PARTICIPATORY PROCESS; PARTICIPATORY TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; PROJECT MANAGERS; PROJECT PROMOTERS; PROJECT STAKEHOLDERS; PUBLIC IMAGE; PUBLIC PARTICIPATION; REFLECTIVE PRACTICES; SOCIAL ACCEPTANCE OF TECHNOLOGY; TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENTS;

PROJECT MANAGEMENT; TECHNOLOGICAL FORECASTING;

TECHNOLOGY;

CARBON SEQUESTRATION; ENERGY MARKET; EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; LOCAL PARTICIPATION; MANAGEMENT PRACTICE; PARTICIPATORY APPROACH; PLANNING METHOD; PROJECT MANAGEMENT; STAKEHOLDER; TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT;

BENELUX; EURASIA; EUROPE; NETHERLANDS; WESTERN EUROPE;

EID: 67651175879     PISSN: 00401625     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2009.02.005     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. EurObsev, and ER. State of renewable energies in Europe, Directorate-general for Energy and Transport, EC (2007)
2. REN21. Renewables 2007 Global Status Report (2008), Worldwatch Institute, Paris and Washington
3. COM. 848 final, renewable energy road map. Renewable energies in the 21st century: building a more sustainable future, Brussels: European Commission, 2006 (2006)
4. COM. 545, Action plan for energy efficiency: realising the potential, Brussels: European Commission, 2006 (2006)
5. European Commission. A vision for zero emission fossil fuel power plants. Brussels: Report by the Zero Emission Fossil Fuel Power Plants Technology Platform (2006)
6. Heiskanen E. Factors influencing the societal acceptance of new energy technologies: meta-analysis of recent European projects, CreateAcceptance final report of WP 2 (2007)
7. Verbong G.P.J., Geels F.W., and Raven R.P.J.M. Multi-niche analysis of dynamics and policies. Dutch renewable energy innovation journeys (1970-2006): hype-cycles, closed networks and technology focused learning. Technol. Anal. Strategic Manag. vol. 20 (5) (2008) 555-573
8. Deuten J.J., Rip A., and Jelsma J.J. Societal embedding and production creation management. Technol. Anal. Strategic Manag. vol. 9 (2) (1997) 131-148
9. In: Bauer M. (Ed). Resistance to New Technology (1995), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
10. Irwin A. Citizen science. A Study of People, Expertise and Sustainable Development, Routledge (1995)
11. In: Irwin A., and Wynne B. (Eds). Misunderstanding science. The Public Reconstruction Of Science And Technology (1996), Cambridge University press, Cambridge
12. Rip A., Misa T.J., and Schot J.W. Constructive technology assessment: a new paradigm for managing technology in society. In: Rip A., Misa T.J., and Schot J.W. (Eds). Managing Technology in Society (1995), Pinter, London and New York 1-12
13. Schot J.W. Towards new forms of participatory technology development. Technol. Anal. Strategic Manag. vol 13 (1) (2001) 39-52
14. Schot J.W., and Rip A. The past and the future of Constructive Technology Assessment. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change vol. 54 (2) (1997) 251-268
15. van Eijndhoven J.C.M. Technology Assessment: product or process. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change vol. 54 (2) (1997) 269-286
16. Grin J., and Hoppe R. Towards a comparative framework for learning from experiences with interactive technology assessment. Ind. Environ. Crisis Q. vol. 9 (1) (1995) 99-120
17. van Merkerk R.O., and Smits R.E.H.M. Tailoring CTA for emerging technologies. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change vol. 75 (3) (2008) 312-333
18. Joss S. Danish consensus conferences as a model of Participatory Technology Assessment: an impact study of consensus conferences on Danish parliament and Danish public debate. Sci. Public Policy vol. 25 (1) (1998) 2-22
19. Callon M., Lascoume P., and Barthes Y. Agir dans un monde incertain. Essai sur la démocratie technique, Le Seuil (2001)
20. Reber B. Technologies et débat démocratique en Europe. De la participation à l'évaluation pluraliste. Revue Française de Sciences Politiques vol. 55 (5-6) (2005) 811-833
21. Hommels A., Peters P., and Bijker W. Techno therapy or nurtured niches? Technology studies and the evaluation of radical innovations. Research Policy vol. 36 (7) (2007) 1088-1099
22. E. Jolivet, P. Laredo, E. Shove, Managing breakthrough innovations: theoretical implications from and for the sociology of science and technology, Paper presented at the ASEAT Annual Conference, Knowledge, Economics and social changes: new challenges to innovation studies. Manchester, April 7-9, 2003.
23. Kets A., and Mourik R.M. Inbedding van innovaties. Over de waarschijnlijkheid van toekomstbeelden. Arena vol. 9 (2003) 148-150
24. Kemp R., Schot J.W., and Hoogma R. Regime shifts to sustainability through processes of niche formation: the approach of strategic niche management. Technol. Anal. Strategic Manag. vol. 10 (2) (1998) 175-196
25. R.P.J.M. Raven, Strategic Niche Management for Biomass, Ph D Thesis, Eindhoven University of Technology, 2005.
26. Kemp R., and Rotmans J. Managing the transition to sustainable mobility. In: Elzen B., Geels F.W., and Green K. (Eds). System Innovation and the Transition to Sustainability (2004), Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd., Cheltenham, UK 137-167
27. van de Kerkhof M., and Wieczorek A. Learning and stakeholder participation in transition processes towards sustainability: methodological considerations. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change vol. 72 (6) (2005) 733-747
28. Poti B., et al. An overview of the gaps in the Socrobust tool and proposals on how to integrate this missing information in WP3, CreateAcceptance final report of WP 1 part II (2007)
29. R.P.J.M. Raven, R.M. Mourik, C.F.J. Feenstra, E. Heiskanen, Modulating societal acceptance in new energy projects. Towards an intervention methodology, in: Energy, forthcoming.
30. Jolivet E., et al. ESTEEM manual, CreateAcceptance final report of WP3 (2008)
31. Brohmann B. Report on the use of the ESTEEM tool and recommendations for improvements, CreateAcceptance final report of WP4: D10 (2008)
32. Schön D. The reflective practitioner. How professionals think in action (1983), Basic Books, New York
33. Rip A. Assessing the impacts of innovation: new development in technology assessment. In: OECD (Ed). Social Sciences and innovation, OECD Proceedings (2001) 197-213
34. Laredo P., Rip A., Jolivet E., and Shove E. SocRobust, management tools and a management framework for assessing the potential long-term S&T options to become embedded in society, Final Report; Project SOE 1981126 of the TSER Programme of the European Commission (2002)