IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v183y2021ics0921800921000240.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Greening the Saskatchewan grid: A case study in deliberative energy modelling

Author

Listed:
  • Dolter, Brett

Abstract

This paper presents a case study of deliberative energy modelling focused on the future of electricity in Saskatchewan, Canada. Participants included representatives from the provincial electricity utility and from environmental organizations. These diverse social actors participated in defining the desired scope and output of the model, providing data and insights that were incorporated into the model, and conducting extended peer review of modelling assumptions and design. Participants then attended a face-to-face workshop to co-create scenarios for Saskatchewan's electricity future using an interactive version of the electricity futures model. The interactive model served as a platform for discussing the social, environmental, and economic impacts of competing scenarios. Post-workshop analysis indicates that the deliberative energy modelling process contributed to participant learning, increased trust and communication amongst participants, reinforced the idea that wind energy could play a greater role in the Saskatchewan electricity system, and contributed to an increased focus on deliberative engagement at the Saskatchewan electricity utility SaskPower. The process did not, however, lead to consensus on the proportion of electricity that could be provided by renewable energy in Saskatchewan.

Suggested Citation

  • Dolter, Brett, 2021. "Greening the Saskatchewan grid: A case study in deliberative energy modelling," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:183:y:2021:i:c:s0921800921000240
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.106966
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800921000240
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.106966?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bent Erik Bakken, 2019. "Energy transition dynamics: Does participatory modelling contribute to alignment among differing future world views?," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(2), pages 184-196, March.
    2. Garmendia, Eneko & Stagl, Sigrid, 2010. "Public participation for sustainability and social learning: Concepts and lessons from three case studies in Europe," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 1712-1722, June.
    3. Munda, Giuseppe, 2004. "Social multi-criteria evaluation: Methodological foundations and operational consequences," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 158(3), pages 662-677, November.
    4. Richards, Garrett & Noble, Bram & Belcher, Ken, 2012. "Barriers to renewable energy development: A case study of large-scale wind energy in Saskatchewan, Canada," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 691-698.
    5. Christos Zografos & Richard B. Howarth, 2010. "Deliberative Ecological Economics for Sustainability Governance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 2(11), pages 1-19, October.
    6. Sovacool, Benjamin K., 2009. "Rejecting renewables: The socio-technical impediments to renewable electricity in the United States," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(11), pages 4500-4513, November.
    7. Dolter, Brett D. & Boucher, Martin, 2018. "Solar energy justice: A case-study analysis of Saskatchewan, Canada," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 225(C), pages 221-232.
    8. Krystyna Stave & Michael Dwyer & Marcia Turner, 2019. "Exploring the value of participatory system dynamics in two paired field studies of stakeholder engagement in sustainability discussions," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(2), pages 156-179, March.
    9. Michael B. Wironen & Robert V. Bartlett & Jon D. Erickson, 2019. "Deliberation and the Promise of a Deeply Democratic Sustainability Transition," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-18, February.
    10. Dolter, Brett & Rivers, Nicholas, 2018. "The cost of decarbonizing the Canadian electricity system," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 135-148.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. J. Christopher Proctor, 2023. "Expanding the possible: exploring the role for heterodox economics in integrated climate-economy modeling," Review of Evolutionary Political Economy, Springer, vol. 4(3), pages 537-557, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Itziar Barinaga-Rementeria & Artitzar Erauskin-Tolosa & Pedro José Lozano & Itxaro Latasa, 2019. "Individual and Social Preferences in Participatory Multi-Criteria Evaluation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-18, October.
    2. Allain, Sandrine & Plumecocq, Gaël & Leenhardt, Delphine, 2017. "How Do Multi-criteria Assessments Address Landscape-level Problems? A Review of Studies and Practices," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 282-295.
    3. Andonegi, Aitor & Garmendia, Eneko & Aldezabal, Arantza, 2021. "Social multi-criteria evaluation for managing biodiversity conservation conflicts," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    4. Ricciardi, Francesca & De Bernardi, Paola & Cantino, Valter, 2020. "System dynamics modeling as a circular process: The smart commons approach to impact management," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    5. Brian Witt, 2019. "Evaluating the Effects of a Minimalist Deliberative Framework on the Willingness to Participate in a Payment for Ecosystem Services Program," Resources, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-26, June.
    6. Mercer, Nicholas & Sabau, Gabriela & Klinke, Andreas, 2017. "“Wind energy is not an issue for government”: Barriers to wind energy development in Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 673-683.
    7. Iker Etxano & Itziar Barinaga-Rementeria & Oihana Garcia, 2018. "Conflicting Values in Rural Planning: A Multifunctionality Approach through Social Multi-Criteria Evaluation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-29, May.
    8. Eneko Garmendia & Gonzalo Gamboa, 2012. "Weighting social preferences in participatory multi-criteria evaluations: a case study on sustainable natural resource management," Working Papers 2012-06, BC3.
    9. Walker, Chad & Stephenson, Laura & Baxter, Jamie, 2018. "“His main platform is ‘stop the turbines’ ”: Political discourse, partisanship and local responses to wind energy in Canada," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 670-681.
    10. Saarikoski, Heli & Mustajoki, Jyri & Hjerppe, Turo & Aapala, Kaisu, 2019. "Participatory multi-criteria decision analysis in valuing peatland ecosystem services—Trade-offs related to peat extraction vs. pristine peatlands in Southern Finland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 17-28.
    11. Saarikoski, Heli & Mustajoki, Jyri & Barton, David N. & Geneletti, Davide & Langemeyer, Johannes & Gomez-Baggethun, Erik & Marttunen, Mika & Antunes, Paula & Keune, Hans & Santos, Rui, 2016. "Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis and Cost-Benefit Analysis: Comparing alternative frameworks for integrated valuation of ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PB), pages 238-249.
    12. Allain, Sandrine & Salliou, Nicolas, 2022. "Making differences legible: Incommensurability as a vehicle for sustainable landscape management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    13. Garmendia, Eneko & Gamboa, Gonzalo, 2012. "Weighting social preferences in participatory multi-criteria evaluations: A case study on sustainable natural resource management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 110-120.
    14. Dotti, Nicola Francesco, 2018. "Knowledge that matters for the ‘survival of unfittest’: The case of the new Brussels' rail junction," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 131-140.
    15. Zyadin, Anas & Halder, Pradipta & Kähkönen, Tanja & Puhakka, Antero, 2014. "Challenges to renewable energy: A bulletin of perceptions from international academic arena," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 82-88.
    16. Andrea Saltelli, 2007. "Composite Indicators between Analysis and Advocacy," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 81(1), pages 65-77, March.
    17. Rachele Corticelli & Margherita Pazzini & Cecilia Mazzoli & Claudio Lantieri & Annarita Ferrante & Valeria Vignali, 2022. "Urban Regeneration and Soft Mobility: The Case Study of the Rimini Canal Port in Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-27, November.
    18. Munda, Giuseppe, 2009. "A conflict analysis approach for illuminating distributional issues in sustainability policy," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 194(1), pages 307-322, April.
    19. Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Drupady, Ira Martina, 2011. "Examining the Small Renewable Energy Power (SREP) Program in Malaysia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(11), pages 7244-7256.
    20. Cinelli, Marco & Kadziński, Miłosz & Gonzalez, Michael & Słowiński, Roman, 2020. "How to support the application of multiple criteria decision analysis? Let us start with a comprehensive taxonomy," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:183:y:2021:i:c:s0921800921000240. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.