nach oben

Erschienen in:

2013 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

Forecasting the Adoption of Emerging Energy Technologies: Managing Climate Change, Governance and Evolving Social Values

verfasst von : Tugrul Daim, Kelly Cowan, Wayne Wakeland, Hosein Fallah, Patricia Holahan

Erschienen in: Climate Change Governance

Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

With the link between fossil fuel use and climate change now almost universally accepted, tackling greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) has become a subject of great social urgency and technological challenge. A variety of models exist, or are under development, for analyzing the role of more sustainable systems, such as renewable energy technologies, in mitigating climate change. However, the direct cost of these technologies is generally higher than that of fossil fuel systems. Methods are needed to more fully account for external factors, societal impacts, and social values associated with fossil fuels versus sustainable energy systems. This paper presents a conceptual model targeted at informing energy policy in order to bring about improvements to inform the management of energy resources so that they can be optimized for climate change. This would then yield a set of governance actions. The model builds on Linstone’s multiple perspectives: technical, organizational, and personal, by attempting to forecast technology development along these perspectives. Thus, factors enabling faster and better adoption by consumers, and faster and more efficient development by organizations are evaluated by taking the potential technological improvements into account.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Vorheriges Kapitel Local Climate Governance and the Role of Cooperatives

Nächstes Kapitel Climate Change Issues and Malaysian Initiatives

Using full life cycle analysis, most forms of power generation are responsible for some amount of energy expenditure, such as fossil fuels used in the creation of parts or components of the system. The PV manufacturing process, for example, typically emits an amount of carbon equivalent to about 25 g of CO₂ per kilowatt hour of electricity produced (25 gCO₂/kWh). By contrast, coal emits about 950 gCO₂/kWh.

Abraham, B. P., & Moitra, S. D. (2001). Innovation assessment through patent analysis. Technovation, 21(4), 245–252.CrossRef

Agrawala, S., Broad, K., & Guston, D. H. (2001). Integrating Climate Forecasts and Societal Decision Making: Challenges to an Emergent Boundary Organization. Science, Technology and Human Values, 26, 454–477.CrossRef

Ajzen, I. (1991). The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.CrossRef

Ashton, W., & Sen, R. (1988). Using patent information in technology business planning-II. Research Technology Management, 32, 36–42.

Astrand, K., & Neij, L. (2006). An assessment of governmental wind power programmes in Sweden – using a systems approach. Energy Policy, 34(3), 277–296.CrossRef

Baird, B. F. (1989). Managerial decisions under uncertainty: an introduction to the analysis of decision making. New York: Wiley.

Banta, D. (2003). The development of health technology assessment. Health Policy, 63(2), 121–132.CrossRef

Basberg, B. (1987). Patents and the measurement of technological change: A survey of the literature. Research Policy, 16(2–4), 131–141.CrossRef

Bass, F. M. (2004). Comments on “A New Product Growth for Model Consumer Durables”. Management Science, 50(12), 1833–1840.CrossRef

Bengisu, M., & Nekhili, R. (2006). Forecasting emerging technologies with the aid of science and technology databases. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 73(7), 835–844.CrossRef

Blankinship, S. (2006). Technology Makes Demand Response a Viable Asset Option. Retrieved from: http://www.power-eng.com/articles/print/volume-110/issue-8/dg-update/technology-makes-demand-response-a-viable-asset-option.html [Accessed: 28 February 2012].

Brinn, M. (2003). Investigation of forward citation count as a patent analysis method. Systems and Information Engineering Design Symposium.

Brooks, H. (1976). Technology Assessment in Retrospect. Science, Technology and Human Values, 17, 17–29.CrossRef

Carrillo, M., & González, J. M. (2002). A New Approach to Modeling Sigmoidal Curves. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 69(3), 233–241.CrossRef

Clemencon, R. (2008). The Bali Road Map: A First Step on a Difficult Journey to a Post-Kyoto Protocol Agreement. Journal of Environment and Development, 17(1), 70–94.CrossRef

Coates, J. F. (1973). Interdisciplinary considerations in sponsoring technology assessments. In M. J. Cetron & B. Bartocha (Eds.), Technology assessment in a dynamic environment (pp. 109–120). New York: Gordon & Breach.

Coates, J. F. (2001). A 21st Century Agenda for Technology Assessment. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 67(2–3), 303–308.CrossRef

Coates, J. F., & Fabian, T. (1982). Technology Assessment in Industry: A Counter Productive Myth? Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 22(3–4), 331–341.CrossRef

Coates, V., Farooque, M., Klavans, R., Lapid, K., Linstone, H. A., Pistorius, C., et al. (2001). On the Future of Technological Forecasting. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 67(1), 1–17.CrossRef

Daim, T. U., Rueda, G., Martin, H., & Gerdsri, P. (2006). Forecasting emerging technologies: Use of bibliometrics and patent analysis. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 73(8), 981–1012.CrossRef

Davis, F. D. (1985). A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: theory and results. PhD Thesis. Cambridge: M.I.T. Press.

Ek, K. (2005). Public and private attitudes towards “green” electricity: the case of Swedish wind power. Energy Policy, 33(13), 1677–1689.CrossRef

van den Ende, J., Mulder, K., Knot, M., Moors, E., & Vergragt, P. (1998). Traditional and Modern Technology Assessment: Toward a Toolkit. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 58(1/2), 5–21.CrossRef

Energy Information Administration (2008). Annual Energy Outlook 2008 with Projections to 2030. Retrieved from: http://www.eia.gov/oiaf/aeo/pdf/0383%282008%29.pdf [Accessed: 28 February 2012].

Figueira, J., Greco, S., & Ehrgott, M. (2005). Multiple criteria decision analysis: State of the art surveys. New York: Springer Science & Business Media.

Fishbein, M., Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, Mass., Addison-Wesley Pub. Co.

Forrester, J. W. (1961). Industrial dynamics. Cambridge: M.I.T. Press.

Genus, A. (2006). Rethinking constructive technology assessment as democratic, reflective, discourse. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 73(1), 13–26.CrossRef

Gerdsri, P., & Kocaoglu, D. F. (2007). Technology policy instrument (TPI): A decision model for evaluating emerging technologies for national technology policy—research framework. Portland: International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology.

Grin, J., & van de Graaf, H. (1996). Technology assessment as learning. Science, Technology and Human Values, 21(1), 72–99.CrossRef

Grundmann, R. (2006). Ozone and climate: Scientific consensus and leadership. Science, Technology and Human Values, 31(1), 73–101.CrossRef

Guston, D. H., & Sarewitz, D. (2002). Real-time technology assessment. Technology in Society, 24(1–2), 93–109.CrossRef

Harmon, R. R., & Cowan, K. R. (2009). A multiple perspectives view of the market case for green energy. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 76(1), 204–213.CrossRef

Herrick, C., & Sarewitz, D. (2000). Ex Post evaluation: A more effective role for scientific assessments in environmental policy. Science, Technology and Human Values, 25, 309–331.CrossRef

Hildebrandt, M., & Gutwirth, S. (2008). Public proof in courts and Jury trials: Relevant for pTA Citizens’ Juries? Science, Technology and Human Values, 33(5), 582–604.CrossRef

Ingle, A., Hammond, R., & Nguyen, M. (2009). System dynamics team project for Wayne Wakeland. Portland: Portland State University.

Kabir, C., Sharif, M. N., & Adulbhan, P. (1981). System dynamics modeling for forecasting technological substitution. Computers and Industrial Engineering, 5(1), 7–21.CrossRef

Kiefer, D.M. (1973). Technology assessment: A Layman’s overview in technology assessment. In: Cetron, M.J., Bartocha, B. (eds.). Technology assessment in a dynamic environment (pp. 3–34) New York: Gordon & Breach.

Kostoff, R. N., Toothman, D. R., Eberhart, H. J., & Humenik, J. A. (2001). Text mining using database tomography and bibliometrics: A review. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 68(3), 223–253.CrossRef

Kwon, T. H., & Zmud, . (1987). Unifying the fragmented models of information systems implementation. In R. J. Boland & R. A. Hirschheim (Eds.), Critical issues in information systems research. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Lengwiler, M. (2008). Participatory approaches in science and technology: Historical origins and current practices in critical perspective. Science, Technology and Human Values, 33(2), 186–200.CrossRef

Linstone, H. A. (1984). Multiple perspectives for decision making: Bridging the gap between analysis and action. New York/North-Holland: Elsevier.

Linstone, H. A. (1999). Decision making for technology executives using multiple perspectives to improved performance. Boston/London: Artech House.

Linstone, H. A., University, Portland State, & Institute, Futures Research. (1981). The Multiple perspective concept, with applications to technology assessment and other decision areas. Portland: Futures Research Institute.

Liu, S. J., & Shyu, J. (1997). Strategic planning for technology development with patent analysis. International Journal of Technology Management, 13(5/6), 661–680.CrossRef

Marris, C., Joly, P. B., & Rip, A. (2008). Interactive technology assessment in the real world: Dual dynamics in an iTA exercise on genetically modified vines. Science, Technology and Human Values, 33(1), 813–836.CrossRef

Martino, J. P. (1983). Technological forecasting for decision making. New York/Amsterdam: Elsevier.

McDaid, D. (2003). Co-ordinating health technology assessment in Canada: A European perspective. Health Policy, 63(2), 205–213.CrossRef

Menz, F. C. (2005). Green electricity policies in the United States: Case study. Energy Policy, 33(18), 2398–2410.CrossRef

Menz, F. C., & Vachon, S. (2006). The effectiveness of different policy regimes for promoting wind power: Experiences from the states. Energy policy, 34(14), 1786.CrossRef

Millett, S. M., & Honton, E. J. (1991). A manager’s guide to technology forecasting and strategy analysis methods. Columbus, Ohio: Battelle Press.

Morris, S., DeYong, C., Wu, Z., Salman, S., & Yemenu, D. (2002). Diva: A visualization system for exploring document databases for technology forecasting. Computers and Industrial Engineering, 43(4), 841–862.CrossRef

Norton, M. (2000). Introductory concepts in information science. Medford: Information Today.

Palm, E., & Hansson, S. O. (2006). The case for ethical technology assessment (eTA). Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 73(5), 543–558.CrossRef

Pilkington, A. (2003). Technology commercialisation: Patent Portfolio alignment and the fuel cell. Portland International Conference on Management Engineering and Technology (PICMET’03).

Pilkington, A., Teichert, T. (2005). Conceptualizing the Field of Technology Management. Portland International Conference on Management Engineering and Technology (PICMET’05).

Porter, A. L. (1991). Forecasting and management of technology. New York: Wiley.

Porter, A. (2003). Mining PICMET: 1997–2003 papers help track you management of technology developments. Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET’03).

Porter, A., Watts, R. (2003). TI-Mining conference proceedings for corporate technology knowledge management. Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET’03).

Porter, A., Watts, R. (2005). Using the PICMET Abstracts, 1997–2005, in VantagePoint Reader on Your Conference CD: Tutorial. Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET’05).

Richey, J. M., & Grinnell, M. (2004). Evolution of Roadmapping at Motorola. Research technology management, 47(2), 37.

Rogers, E. M. (1962). Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press.

Rogers, E. M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press.

Roy, B. (1968). Classement et choix en présence de points de vue multiples (la méthode ELECTRE). Revue d’Informatique et de Recherche Opérationelle (RIRO), 2(8), 57–75.

Schot, J. W. (1992). Constructive technology assessment and technology dynamics: The case of clean technologies. Science, Technology and Human Values, 17(1), 36–56.CrossRef

Shackley, S., & Wynne, B. (1996). Representing uncertainty in global climate change science and policy: Boundary-ordering devices and authority. Science, Technology and Human Values, 21(3), 275–302.CrossRef

Shrader-Frechette, K. S. (1980). Technology assessment as applied philosophy of science. Science, Technology and Human Values, 33(33), 33–50.CrossRef

Simon, H. A. (1976). Administrative behavior: A study of decision-making processes in administrative organization. New York: Free Press.

Simon, H. A. (1991). Organizations and Markets. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5(2), 25–44.CrossRef

Stadler, M., Kranzl, L., Huber, C., Haas, R., & Tsioliaridou, E. (2007). Policy strategies and paths to promote sustainable energy systems—The dynamic Invert simulation tool. Energy policy, 35(1), 597–608.CrossRef

Sterman, J. (2000). Business dynamics: Systems thinking and modeling for a complex world. Boston: Irwin/McGraw-Hill.

Stirling, A. (2008). “Opening up” and “closing down”: Power, participation, and pluralism in the social appraisal of technology. Science, Technology and Human Values, 33(2), 262–294.CrossRef

United States Department of Energy (2005). Carbon sequestration: Technology Roadmap and Program Plan 2005. Retrieved from: http://www.fe.doe.gov/programs/sequestration/publications/programplans/2005/sequestrseque_roadmap_2005.pdf [Accessed: 28 February 2012].

Vachon, S., & Menz, F. C. (2006). The role of social, political, and economic interests in promoting state green electricity policies. Environmental Science and Policy, 9(7–8), 652–662.CrossRef

van Rooijen, S. N., & van Wees, M. T. (2006). Green electricity policies in the Netherlands: An analysis of policy decisions. Energy Policy, 34(1), 60–71.CrossRef

Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., et al. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 27, 425–478.

Wakeland, W. (2006). WebCT system dynamics course material. Portland: Portland State University.

Wang, P., Cockburn, I. M., & Puterman, M. L. (1998). Analysis of patent data—a mixed-poisson-regression-model approach. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, 16(1), 27–41.

Warr, B., & Ayres, R. (2006). REXS: A forecasting model for assessing the impact of natural resource consumption and technological change on economic growth. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 17(3), 329–378.CrossRef

Watanabe, C., Tsuji, Y. S., & Griffy-Brown, C. (2001). Patent statistics: deciphering a ‘real’ versus a ‘pseudo’ proxy of innovation. Technovation, 21(12), 783–790.CrossRef

Watts, R. J., & Porter, A. L. (1997). Innovation forecasting. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 56(1), 25–48.CrossRef

Young, P. (1993). Technological growth curves: A competition of forecasting models. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 44(4), 375–389.CrossRef

Titel: Forecasting the Adoption of Emerging Energy Technologies: Managing Climate Change, Governance and Evolving Social Values
verfasst von: Tugrul Daim
Kelly Cowan
Wayne Wakeland
Hosein Fallah
Patricia Holahan
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Buch: Climate Change Governance
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-29830-1

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-642-29831-8

Copyright-Jahr: 2013
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29831-8_8

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Premium Partner