IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/rensus/v82y2018ip2p1913-1921.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Electric (dis) connections: Comparative review of smart grid news coverage in the United States and Canada

Author

Listed:
  • Mallett, Alexandra
  • Stephens, Jennie C.
  • Wilson, Elizabeth J.
  • Langheim, Ria
  • Reiber, Ryan
  • Peterson, Tarla Rai

Abstract

The term smart grid (SG) has been widely used in both the United States (U.S.) and Canada to represent multiple visions and configurations of electricity system change. In both countries policies, programs, and initiatives have emerged to promote technological and social changes associated with SG, and different patterns of SG implementation and governance are apparent at local, regional, and national levels. This paper reports on a comparative analysis of SG media content in nationally-circulating newspapers in the U.S. and Canada to explore patterns of SG conversations in the two countries. Media reporting about SG provides a valuable lens that reflects public discourse and also contributes to setting the public agenda by shaping public opinion and framing key issues. Despite similarities in terms of policy, program design, and SG deployment strategies, several prominent differences between the two countries emerge in public conversations. Firstly, Canadian SG newspaper content focuses more on implementation and describing people's experiences with smart meters, while the U.S. content focuses more on commercial opportunities with more reference to private sector actors and various technological components beyond smart meters. Secondly, although media coverage in both countries frequently highlights technological and economic benefits of SG, positive SG framing is more frequent in the U.S. newspapers than in the Canadian ones. Negative SG portrayals, including cultural, political and health and safety risks, are more frequently mentioned in the Canadian newspapers. These differing SG framings could be due to national level cultural differences. In the U.S, considered to be more of an individualistic society, there is more emphasis on business opportunities, being entrepreneurial, and more private sector involvement in the electricity sector. By contrast, in Canada, public authorities, more prominent in the electricity market than in the U.S., play a key role in smart grid deployment. Furthermore, in Canada, considered to have more social support structures for individuals and communities, there was more emphasis on the experiences of people. This suggests that cultural differences at the national level be a further contextual lens helpful to policy makers and technology proponents as they embark upon energy system change initiatives.

Suggested Citation

  • Mallett, Alexandra & Stephens, Jennie C. & Wilson, Elizabeth J. & Langheim, Ria & Reiber, Ryan & Peterson, Tarla Rai, 2018. "Electric (dis) connections: Comparative review of smart grid news coverage in the United States and Canada," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 82(P2), pages 1913-1921.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:82:y:2018:i:p2:p:1913-1921
    DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2017.06.017
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032117309577
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.rser.2017.06.017?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 search for a different version of it.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Weiss, Daniel & Nemeczek, Fabian, 2021. "A text-based monitoring tool for the legitimacy and guidance of technological innovation systems," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).

    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:rensus:v:82:y:2018:i:p2:p:1913-1921. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/600126/description#description .

    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.