Exploring the role of phase-out policies for low-carbon energy transitions: The case of the German Energiewende

Energy Research and Social Science

Volumn 33, Issue , 2017, Pages 128-137

  Rogge, Karoline S ^a,b   Johnstone, Phil ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SUSSEX   (United Kingdom)

^b FRAUNHOFER INSTITUTE FOR SYSTEMS AND INNOVATION RESEARCH ISI   (Germany)

Author keywords

Creative destruction; Credibility; Discontinuation destabilization policy; Energy transition; Nuclear power; Policy mix; Renewable energy

Indexed keywords

EID: 85034629043     PISSN: 22146296     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.erss.2017.10.004     Document Type: Article

References (107)

1. UNFCCC, Paris Agreement. 2015 (Paris).
2. Johnstone, N., Hascic, I., Popp, D., Renewable energy policies and technological innovation: evidence based on patent counts. Environ. Resour. Econ. 45 (2011), 133–155.
3. Popp, D., Innovation and climate policy. Annu. Rev. Resour. Econ. 2 (2010), 275–298, 10.1146/annurev.resource.012809.103929.
4. Foxon, T.J., Pearson, P.J.G., Towards improved policy processes for promoting innovation in renewable electricity technologies in the UK. Energy Policy 35 (2007), 1539–1550, 10.1016/j.enpol.2006.04.009.
5. Schleich, J., Walz, R., Ragwitz, M., Effects of policies on patenting in wind-power technologies. Energy Policy. 108 (2017), 684–695, 10.1016/j.enpol.2017.06.043.
6. Rogge, K.S., Reichardt, K., Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: an extended concept and framework for analysis. Res. Policy 45 (2016), 1620–1635, 10.1016/j.respol.2016.04.004.
7. Taylor, M., Beyond technology-push and demand-pull: lessons from California's solar policy. Energy Econ. 30 (2008), 2829–2854, 10.1016/j.eneco.2008.06.004.
8. Cantner, U., Graf, H., Herrmann, J., Kalthaus, M., Inventor networks in renewable energies: the influence of the policy mix in Germany. Res. Policy 45 (2016), 1165–1184, 10.1016/j.respol.2016.03.005.
9. Weber, K.M., Rohracher, H., Legitimizing research, technology and innovation policies for transformative change. Res. Policy. 41 (2012), 1037–1047, 10.1016/j.respol.2011.10.015.
10. Kivimaa, P., Kern, F., Creative destruction or mere niche support? Innovation policy mixes for sustainability transitions. Res. Policy 45 (2016), 205–217, 10.1016/j.respol.2015.09.008.
11. Smith, A., Raven, R., What is protective space? Reconsidering niches in transitions to sustainability. Res. Policy 41 (2012), 1025–1036, 10.1016/j.respol.2011.12.012.
12. Markard, J., Raven, R., Truffer, B., Sustainability transitions: an emerging field of research and its prospects. Res. Policy 41 (2012), 955–967, 10.1016/j.respol.2012.02.013.
13. Turnheim, B., Geels, F.W., The destabilisation of existing regimes: confronting a multi-dimensional framework with a case study of the British coal industry (1913–1967). Res. Policy 42 (2013), 1749–1767, 10.1016/j.respol.2013.04.009.
14. Turnheim, B., Geels, F.W., Regime destabilisation as the flipside of energy transitions: lessons from the history of the British coal industry (1913–1997). Energy Policy 50 (2012), 35–49, 10.1016/j.enpol.2012.04.060.
15. Longen, J., Hoffmann, S., Weyer, J., Governance of Discontinuation als neue Perspektive der sozialwissenschaftlichen TA. Bogner, A., Decker, M., Sotoudeh, M., (eds.) Responsible Innov. Neue Impuls. Für Die Tech., 2015, 121–130 (Nomos – edition sigma, Baden Baden).
16. Stegmaier, P., Kuhlmann, S., Visser, V.R., The discontinuation of socio-technical systems as a governance problem. Borras, S., Edler, J., (eds.) Gov. Socio-Technical Syst., 2014, Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, 111–131, 10.4337/9781784710194.00015.
17. Johnstone, P., Stirling, A., Comparing Nuclear Power Trajectories in Germany And the UK: From “regimes” to “democracies” in Sociotechnical Transitions and Discontinuities SPRU Work. Pap. Ser. 18. 2015, 1–86.
18. Geels, F.W., Regime resistance against low-carbon transitions: introducing politics and power into the multi-level perspective. Theory Cult. Soc. 31 (2014), 21–40, 10.1177/0263276414531627.
19. Hess, D.J., The politics of niche-regime conflicts: distributed solar energy in the United States. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 19 (2015), 42–50, 10.1016/j.eist.2015.09.002.
20. Unruh, G.C., Escaping carbon lock-in. Energy Policy 30 (2002), 317–325, 10.1016/S0301-4215(01)00098-2.
21. World Nuclear News, Korea's Nuclear Phase-out Policy Takes Shape. 2017, World Nucl. News http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/NP-Koreas-nuclear-phase-out-policy-takes-shape-1906174.html (Accessed 12/09/2017).
22. World Nuclear Association, Country Profiles. 2017, World Nucl. Assoc. http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/country-profiles/ (Accessed 12/09/2017).
23. Bromley, P.S., Extraordinary interventions: toward a framework for rapid transition and deep emission reductions in the energy space. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 22 (2016), 165–171, 10.1016/j.erss.2016.08.018.
24. BEIS, Coal generation in Great Britain: The pathway to a low-carbon future, consultation document. 2016 London.
25. Tomesco, F., Quebec Plans Coal Phase-Outby 2030 in Move to Curb Emissions. 2016 Bloomberg.
26. Nelsen, A., Dutch parliament votes to close down country's coal industry, Guard. Online. 2016 https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/sep/23/dutch-parliament-votes-to-close-down-countrys-coal-industry (Accessed 12/09/2017).
27. Staufenberg, J., Norway to 'completely ban petrol powered cars by 2025', Indep. 2016 http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/norway-to-ban-the-sale-of-all-fossil-fuel-based-cars-by-2025-and-replace-with-electric-vehicles-a7065616.html (Accessed 12/09/2017).
28. Strunz, S., The German energy transition as a regime shift. Ecol. Econ. 100 (2014), 150–158, 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.01.019.
29. Energiewende, Agora, 12 Insights on Germany's Energiewende. 2013 Berlin.
30. Matthes, F.C., Energy transition in Germany: a case study on a policy-driven structural change of the energy system. Evol. Institutional Econ. Rev., 2017, 10.1007/s40844-016-0066-x.
31. Morris, C., Pehnt, M., Energy Transition The German Energiewende. 2014 Berlin.
32. BMWi, BMU, Energiekonzept für eine umweltschonende, zuverlässige und bezahlbare Energieversorgung. 2010 Germany.
33. BMWi, Gesetzeskarte für das Energieversorgungssystem: Karte zentraler Strategien, Gesetze und Verordnungen. 2016 Berlin.
34. Edberg, K., Tarasova, E., Phasing out or phasing in: framing the role of nuclear power in the Swedish energy transition. Energy Res Soc. Sci. 13 (2016), 170–179, 10.1016/j.erss.2015.12.008.
35. Bruninx, K., Madzharov, D., Delarue, E., D'haeseleer, W., Impact of the German nuclear phase-out on Europe's electricity generation—A comprehensive study. Energy Policy 60 (2013), 251–261, 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.05.026.
36. Glomsrød, S., Wei, T., Mideksa, T., Samset, B.H., Energy market impacts of nuclear power phase-out policies. Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Chang. 20 (2014), 1511–1527, 10.1007/s11027-014-9558-3.
37. Resch, G., Liebmann, L., Lamprecht, M., Haas, R., Pause, F., Kahles, M., Phase Out of Nuclear Power in Europe – From Vision to Reality. 2014 Vienna.
38. Bretschger, L., Zhang, L., Nuclear Phase-out Under Stringent Climate Policies: A Dynamic Macroeconomic Analysis. Energy J. 38 (2017), 167–195, 10.5547/01956574.38.1.lbre.
39. Guidolin, M., Guseo, R., The German energy transition: Modeling competition and substitution between nuclear power and Renewable Energy Technologies. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 60 (2016), 1498–1504, 10.1016/j.rser.2016.03.022.
40. Malischek, R., Trüby, J., The future of nuclear power in France: an analysis of the costs of phasing-out. Energy 116 (2016), 908–921, 10.1016/j.energy.2016.10.008.
41. Pavitt, K., Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory. Res. Policy 13 (1984), 343–373, 10.1016/0048-7333(84)90018-0.
42. Rogge, K.S., Schleich, J., Do Policy Mix Characteristics Matter for Low-carbon Innovation? A Survey-based Exploration for Renewable Power Generation Technologies in Germany, SPRU Work Pap. Ser. 19. 2017.
43. Rogge, K.S., Dütschke, E., Exploring perceptions of the credibility of policy mixes: the case of German manufacturers of renewable power generation technologies, SPRU Work Pap. Ser. 23. 2017.
44. Rice, M.P., O'Connor, G.C., Peters, L.S., Morone, J.G., Managing discontinuous innovation. Res. Technol. Manag. 41 (1998), 7–59.
45. Linton, J.D., Forecasting the market diffusion of disruptive and discontinuous innovation. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag. 49 (2002), 365–374, 10.1109/TEM.2002.806723.
46. Schumpeter, J., Capitalism, Socialism, Democracy. 1942, Harper and Brothers, New York.
47. Anderson, P., Tushman, M.L., Technological Discontinuities and Dominant Designs: A Cyclical Model of Technological Change. Adm. Sci. Q. 35 (1990), 604–633.
48. deLeon, P., Public Policy Termination: An End and a Beginning. Policy Anal. 4 (1978), 369–392.
49. Jordan, A., Bauer, M.W., Green-Pedersen, C., Policy dismantling. J. Eur. Public Policy 20 (2013), 795–805, 10.1080/13501763.2013.771092.
50. Levain, A., Joly, P.-B., Barbier, M., Cardon, V., Dedieu, F., Pellissier, F., Continuous discontinuation – the DDT ban revisited. Int Sustain. Transitions Conf., SPRU, University of Sussex, Brighton, 2015.
51. Kemp, R., Schot, J., Hoogma, R., Regime shifts to sustainability through processes of niche formation: the approach of strategic niche management. Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag. 10 (1998), 175–198, 10.1080/09537329808524310.
52. Schot, J., Geels, F.W., Strategic niche management and sustainable innovation journeys: theory, findings, research agenda, and policy. Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag. 20 (2008), 537–554, 10.1080/09537320802292651.
53. Smith, A., Translating Sustainabilities between Green Niches and Socio-Technical Regimes. Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag. 19 (2007), 427–450, 10.1080/09537320701403334.
54. Lawhon, M., Murphy, J.T., Socio-technical regimes and sustainability transitions: insights from political ecology. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 36 (2012), 354–378, 10.1177/0309132511427960.
55. Klitkou, A., Bolwig, S., Hansen, T., Wessberg, N., The role of lock-in mechanisms in transition processes: the case of energy for road transport. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 16 (2015), 22–37, 10.1016/j.eist.2015.07.005.
56. Arthur, W., Increasing Returns and Path Dependence in the Economy. 1994, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MI, 10.3998/mpub.10029.
57. Smink, M.M., Hekkert, M.P., Negro, S.O., Keeping sustainable innovation on a leash? Exploring incumbents’ institutional strategies. Bus. Strategy Environ. 24 (2015), 86–101, 10.1002/bse.1808.
58. Wesseling, J.H., Niesten, E.M.M.I., Faber, J., Hekkert, M.P., Business Strategies of Incumbents in the Market for Electric Vehicles: Opportunities and Incentives for Sustainable Innovation. Bus. Strategy Environ. 24 (2015), 518–531, 10.1002/bse.1834.
59. Augenstein, K., Palzkill, A., The Dilemma of Incumbents in Sustainability Transitions: A Narrative Approach. Adm. Sci., 6, 2016, 1, 10.3390/admsci6010001.
60. Lauber, V., Sarasini, S., The responses of incumbent utilities to the challenge of renewable energy. Sandén, B., (eds.) Syst. Perspect. Renew. Power, 2014, Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg, 138–148.
61. Schmidt, T.S., Schneider, M., Rogge, K.S., Schuetz, M.J.A., Hoffmann, V.H., The effects of climate policy on the rate and direction of innovation: a survey of the EU ETS and the electricity sector. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 2 (2012), 23–48, 10.1016/j.eist.2011.12.002.
62. Rogge, K.S., Reviewing the evidence on the innovation impact of the EU Emission Trading System. Weishaar, S., (eds.) Res. Handb. Emiss. Trading, 2016, Edward Elgar Publishing, 161–194, 10.4337/9781784710620.00017.
63. Fischer, C., Newell, R.G., Environmental and technology policies for climate mitigation. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 55 (2008), 142–162.
64. Foxon, T., Pearson, P., Overcoming barriers to innovation and diffusion of cleaner technologies: some features of a sustainable innovation policy regime. J. Clean. Prod. 16 (2008), S148–S161, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2007.10.011.
65. Reichardt, K., Rogge, K., How the policy mix impacts innovation: findings from company case studies on offshore wind in Germany. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 18 (2016), 62–81, 10.1016/j.eist.2015.08.001.
66. Jacobsson, S., Lauber, V., The politics and policy of energy system transformation—explaining the German diffusion of renewable energy technology. Energy Policy 34 (2006), 256–276, 10.1016/j.enpol.2004.08.029.
67. Wieczorek, A.J., Hekkert, M.P., Systemic instruments for systemic innovation problems: a framework for policy makers and innovation scholars. Sci. Public Policy 39 (2012), 74–87, 10.1093/scipol/scr008.
68. Jacobsson, S., Bergek, A., Innovation system analyses and sustainability transitions: contributions and suggestions for research. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 1 (2011), 41–57, 10.1016/j.eist.2011.04.006.
69. Raven, R., Kern, F., Smith, A., Jacobsson, S., Verhees, B., The politics of innovation spaces for low-carbon energy. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 18 (2016), 101–110, 10.1016/j.eist.2015.06.008.
70. Reddy, S., Painuly, J.P., Diffusion of renewable energy technologies—barriers and stakeholders’ perspectives. Renew. Energy 29 (2004), 1431–1447, 10.1016/j.renene.2003.12.003.
71. Tenggren, S., Wangel, J., Nilsson, M., Nykvist, B., Transmission transitions: barriers, drivers, and institutional governance implications of Nordic transmission grid development. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 19 (2016), 148–157, 10.1016/j.erss.2016.06.004.
72. DECC, New Direction for UK Energy Policy. 2016, Dep. Energy Clim. Chang.
73. Muttitt, G., McKinnon, H., Stockman, L., Kretzmann, S., Scott, A., Turnbull, D., The Sky's the Limit: Why the Paris Climate Goals Require a Managed Decline of Fossil Fuel Production. 2016, Oil Change International, Washington.
74. BMWi, Germany's New Energy Policy: Heading towards 2050 with Secure, Affordable, and Environmentally Friendly Energy. 2012 Berlin.
75. Renn, O., Marshall, J.P., Coal, nuclear and renewable energy policies in Germany: from the 1950 to the Energiewende. Energy Policy 99 (2016), 224–232, 10.1016/j.enpol.2016.05.004.
76. Rehner, R., McCauley, D., Security, justice and the energy crossroads: assessing the implications of the nuclear phase-out in Germany. Energy Policy 88 (2016), 289–298, 10.1016/j.enpol.2015.10.038.
77. Cherp, A., Vinichenko, V., Jewell, J., Suzuki, M., Antal, M., Comparing electricity transitions: a historical analysis of nuclear, wind and solar power in Germany and Japan. Energy Policy. 101 (2016), 612–628, 10.1016/j.enpol.2016.10.044.
78. Hermwille, L., The role of narratives in socio-technical transitions – Fukushima and the energy regimes of Japan, Germany, and the United Kingdom. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 11 (2016), 237–246, 10.1016/j.erss.2015.11.001.
79. Hoppmann, J., Huenteler, J., Girod, B., Compulsive policy-making – the evolution of the German feed-in tariff system for solar photovoltaic power. Res. Policy 43 (2014), 1422–1441, 10.1016/j.respol.2014.01.014.
80. Quitzow, R., Dynamics of a policy-driven market: the co-evolution of technological innovation systems for solar photovoltaics in China and Germany. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 17 (2015), 126–148, 10.1016/j.eist.2014.12.002.
81. Lauber, V., Jacobsson, S., The politics and economics of constructing, contesting and restricting socio-political space for renewables – the German Renewable Energy Act. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 18 (2016), 147–163, 10.1016/j.eist.2015.06.005.
82. Reichardt, K., Negro, S.O., Rogge, K.S., Hekkert, M.P., Analyzing interdependencies between policy mixes and technological innovation systems: the case of offshore wind in Germany. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 106 (2016), 11–21, 10.1016/j.techfore.2016.01.029.
83. Bruns, E., Ohlhorst, D., Wenzel, B., Köppel, J., Renewable Energies in Germany's Electricity Market. 2011, Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, 10.1007/978-90-481-9905-1.
84. Pegels, A., Lütkenhorst, W., Is Germany׳s energy transition a case of successful green industrial policy? Contrasting wind and solar PV. Energy Policy 74 (2014), 522–534, 10.1016/j.enpol.2014.06.031.
85. Sühlsen, K., Hisschemöller, M., Lobbying the Energiewende. Assessing the effectiveness of strategies to promote the renewable energy business in Germany. Energy Policy 69 (2014), 316–325, 10.1016/j.enpol.2014.02.018.
86. BMWi, Energiedaten: Ausgewählte Grafiken. 2014 Berlin.
87. BMWi, Renewable Energy Sources in Figures: National and International Development, 2015. 2016 Berlin.
88. DIW, Kohle und Klimaschutz. 2014 Berlin.
89. Energiewende, Agora, The German Energiewende and Its Climate Paradox. An Analysis of Power Sector Trends for Renewables, Coal, Gas, Nuclear Power and CO2 Emissions, 2010–2030. 2014 Berlin.
90. Rogge, K.S., Innovation activities of renewable power generation technology providers in Germany: GRETCHEN Survey 2014-Descriptive results. 2015 http://www.projekt-gretchen.de/Rogge 2015 GRETCHEN_survey_results.pdf (Accessed 7/7/2017).
91. Horbach, J., Determinants of environmental innovation—new evidence from German panel data sources. Res. Policy 37 (2008), 163–173, 10.1016/j.respol.2007.08.006.
92. del Río González, P., The empirical analysis of the determinants for environmental technological change: a research agenda. Ecol. Econ. 68 (2009), 861–878, 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.07.004.
93. Peters, M., Schneider, M., Griesshaber, T., Hoffmann, V.H., The impact of technology-push and demand-pull policies on technical change – does the locus of policies matter?. Res. Policy 41 (2012), 1296–1308, 10.1016/j.respol.2012.02.004.
94. Hoppmann, J., Peters, M., Schneider, M., Hoffmann, V.H., The two faces of market support. Res. Policy 42 (2013), 989–1003, 10.1016/j.respol.2013.01.002.
95. Verbruggen, A., Laes, E., Lemmens, S., Assessment of the actual sustainability of nuclear fission power. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 32 (2014), 16–28, 10.1016/j.rser.2014.01.008.
96. Ramana, M.V., Nuclear policy responses to Fukushima: exit, voice, and loyalty. Bull. At. Sci. 69 (2013), 66–76, 10.1177/0096340213477995.
97. Cox, E., Johnstone, P., Stirling, A., Understanding the Intensity of UK Policy Commitments to Nuclear Power SPRU Work. Pap. Ser. 16. 2016, 1–93.
98. World Nuclear Association, Nuclear Power in Taiwan. 2016, World Nucl Assoc. Ctry. Profiles.
99. Cuff, M., Europe's leaders must set coal phase-out dates to hit climate targets, says Greenpeace. Bus. Green., 2015.
100. Ćetković, S., Buzogány, A., Varieties of capitalism and clean energy transitions in the European Union: when renewable energy hits different economic logics. Clim. Policy 16 (2016), 642–657, 10.1080/14693062.2015.1135778.
101. Energiewende, Agora, Elf Eckpunkte für einen Kohlekonsens: Konzept zur schrittweisen Dekarbonisierung des deutschen Stromsektors (Kurzfassung). 2016 Berlin.
102. Bui, S., Cardona, A., Lamine, C., Cerf, M., Sustainability transitions: insights on processes of niche-regime interaction and regime reconfiguration in agri-food systems. J. Rural Stud. 48 (2016), 92–103, 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2016.10.003.
103. Raven, R., Kern, F., Smith, A., Jacobsson, S., Verhees, B., The politics of innovation spaces for low-carbon energy. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 18 (2015), 101–110, 10.1016/j.eist.2015.06.008.
104. Geels, F.W., Kern, F., Fuchs, G., Hinderer, N., Kungl, G., Mylan, J., Neukirch, M., Wassermann, S., The enactment of socio-technical transition pathways: a reformulated typology and a comparative multi-level analysis of the German and UK low-carbon electricity transitions (1990–2014). Res. Policy 45 (2016), 896–913, 10.1016/j.respol.2016.01.015.
105. Stegmaier, P., Kuhlmann, S., Discontinuation governance as a neglected dimension in STI studies. 2013 EU – SPRI Forum Conf., Madrid, 2013.
106. BDEW, BDEW-Energiemonitor 2016: Das Meinungsbild der Bevölkerung. 2016, BDEW, Berlin.
107. Doblinger, C., Dowling, M., Helm, R., An institutional perspective of public policy and network effects in the renewable energy industry: enablers or disablers of entrepreneurial behaviour and innovation?. Entrep. Reg. Dev. 28 (2016), 126–156, 10.1080/08985626.2015.1109004.