Search results

This paper aims to: first, it studies expert opinions about the future of clean, decentralized energy technology in Australia; second, develop an interpretive and participatory foresighting methodology for a forthcoming study.

This paper reports a forecasting study about the future of clean energy. Driven mostly by economics and changing carbon policies, the energy sector is currently moving from fossil fuels to a variety of cleaner technologies. Energy experts have several incommensurate interpretations of how this change will happen. This paper describes the first phase of an ongoing study that foresight clean energy futures in Australia. By building on a participatory method in a scientific expert community, it describes the path from technological presumptions into four parallel yet interconnected scenarios. The paper also explores the social drivers behind these scenarios.

First, energy experts in Australia classify futures into four main scenarios: abundant, where energy will be mostly produced by solar cells; traded, where the future of energy lies in virtual power plants and microgrids; circular, which targets Australia’s NetZero goals through biomaterials, carbon capture and new powerful; secure, which secures the country’s energy supply through coal and nuclear energy. Second, they locate policy as the most important form of wildcards. The policy is multilayered from local to US politics and falls outside the scope of forecasting.

The most important limitations of the study are: first, its reliance on scientific and technological experts, which guarantees its scientific validity but may underrepresent the social drivers of energy; second, this study is a methodological pilot of a larger study that will target industrial, commercial and local drivers; third, its focus on Australia, where politics, the size of the country and climate shape the uptake of clean energy in specific ways, most notably in the case of rapid uptake of solar energy.

The main practical implications of the paper are its broad focus on clean energy futures and its participatory foresighting approach, which can be repeated in other studies.

The main social implication of the study is that it clearly shows that a technological perspective is necessary but not sufficient in understanding the future of clean energy. The paper also shows that local drivers importantly mold the future and should be taken into account in future studies and policy.

This paper makes two contributions. First, it organizes several technologies into four scenarios that clarify Australia’s clean energy futures better than a piecemeal study would do. Second, it developed and piloted an interpretive participatory methodology for studying futures by building on references from design research. This methodology will be used in subsequent studies.

The paper systematically examines the capacity building needs of energy and climate stakeholders in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). It looks at conditions and opportunities for improvements in institutional, organisational, technological, innovation and financing capacities. This paper provides a guide to concrete capacity building programs and implementations to accelerate the implementation of National Determined Contributions (NDCs) and low-carbon energy transition in the ASEAN region.

This paper proposes a comprehensive capacity-building framework, drawing on transition management theory and the interactive systems framework for capacity building. The assessment is based on interviews with representatives of the ministry responsible for energy policy and the ministry responsible for climate policy in each ASEAN country, as well as a survey among a broader set of Southeast Asian energy and climate experts from academia, think tanks and international development partners.

The paper identifies the priority areas for capacity building for each ASEAN country and the region as a whole. Each country has a unique set of needs and priorities. At the regional level, the widest capacity gaps were observed in institutional capacity, technical capacity, human resources capacity, financing capacity and the capacity to develop policy and legislation. Specific gaps for capacity building are discussed in delivering strategic areas of energy transition, such as electrification of transportation, development of the green supply chain, deploying renewable energy, energy efficiency, strengthening finance and investment and reducing dependencies on fossil fuels.

This paper helps fill the gap for detailed capacity needs analysis and facilitates long-term plans/strategies and their implementation. The insights help to increase ASEAN energy and climate stakeholders’ understanding of the interaction between energy and climate, therefore enhanced capability in developing more effective action maps and intervention points in achieving NDCs and sustainable development goals.