IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v69y2014icp154-164.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do African and European energy stakeholders agree on key energy drivers in Africa? Using Q methodology to understand perceptions on energy access debates

Author

Listed:
  • Matinga, Margaret N.
  • Pinedo-Pascua, Irene
  • Vervaeke, Jonathan
  • Monforti-Ferrario, Fabio
  • Szabó, Sándor

Abstract

This paper uses Q methodology to reveal stakeholder perceptions on how best to address energy issues in Africa. We sampled a group of stakeholders involved in various energy sub-sectors to uncover perspectives on how to achieve and promote access to modern energy, energy efficiency and renewable energy in Africa, whether the perceptions could be correlated to educational or geographical background and implications such patterns could have on policies and current dialogues.

Suggested Citation

  • Matinga, Margaret N. & Pinedo-Pascua, Irene & Vervaeke, Jonathan & Monforti-Ferrario, Fabio & Szabó, Sándor, 2014. "Do African and European energy stakeholders agree on key energy drivers in Africa? Using Q methodology to understand perceptions on energy access debates," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 154-164.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:69:y:2014:i:c:p:154-164
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.12.041
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421513013050
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Komendantova, Nadejda & Patt, Anthony & Barras, Lucile & Battaglini, Antonella, 2012. "Perception of risks in renewable energy projects: The case of concentrated solar power in North Africa," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 103-109.
    2. Cuppen, Eefje & Breukers, Sylvia & Hisschemöller, Matthijs & Bergsma, Emmy, 2010. "Q methodology to select participants for a stakeholder dialogue on energy options from biomass in the Netherlands," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 579-591, January.
    3. Geraint Ellis & John Barry & Clive Robinson, 2007. "Many ways to say 'no', different ways to say 'yes': Applying Q-Methodology to understand public acceptance of wind farm proposals," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(4), pages 517-551.
    4. Ben B. Davies & Ian D. Hodge, 2006. "Farmers' Preferences for New Environmental Policy Instruments: Determining the Acceptability of Cross Compliance for Biodiversity Benefits," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(3), pages 393-414.
    5. Matinga, Margaret Njirambo & Annegarn, Harold J., 2013. "Paradoxical impacts of electricity on life in a rural South African village," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 295-302.
    6. Maarten Wolsink & Sylvia Breukers, 2010. "Contrasting the core beliefs regarding the effective implementation of wind power. An international study of stakeholder perspectives," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 53(5), pages 535-558.
    7. Ahmed, Shenaz & Bryant, Louise D. & Tizro, Zahra & Shickle, Darren, 2012. "Interpretations of informed choice in antenatal screening: A cross-cultural, Q-methodology study," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 74(7), pages 997-1004.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Stakeholder perceptions; Q methodology; AFRETEP;

    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:enepol:v:69:y:2014:i:c:p:154-164. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.