IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jscscx/v6y2017i4p127-d115820.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Feed-in Tariff Pricing and Social Burden in Japan: Evaluating International Learning through a Policy Transfer Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Yugo Tanaka

    (Graduate School of Advanced Integrated Studies in human survivability, Kyoto University, 1 Nakaadachi-cho, Yoshida, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8306, Japan)

  • Andrew Chapman

    (International Institute for Carbon-Neutral Energy Research, Kyushu University, 744 Motooka, Nishi-ku, Fukuoka 819-0395, Japan)

  • Shigeki Sakurai

    (Graduate School of Advanced Integrated Studies in human survivability, Kyoto University, 1 Nakaadachi-cho, Yoshida, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8306, Japan)

  • Tetsuo Tezuka

    (Graduate School of Energy Science, Kyoto University, Yoshida-honmachi, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8501, Japan)

Abstract

Feed-in tariff (FiT) policy approaches for renewable energy (RE) deployment are employed in many nations around the world. Although FiTs are considered effective in boosting RE deployment, the issue of increasing energy bills and social burden is an often-reported negative impact of their use. The FiT has been employed in Japan since 2012, following after many developed countries, and, as was experienced in other nations, led to a social burden imparted on society significantly higher than initial government estimates. Although policy decision making does not necessarily reflect international policy experience, it is still prudent to ask how international policy experiences of social burden increase were considered within the Japanese approach. In this research, we analyzed the transfer process by adapting a conventional model to develop more objective observations than was previously possible, by setting a benchmark for evaluation based on prior international experiences. We identified two streams of policy transfer, each led by different actors; the government and representatives of the National Diet of Japan (Diet). Both actors were exposed to the same experiences, however the interpretation, application to policy development and priority settings employed were vastly different. Although the framework can only assess policy learning processes, we have found that the government undertook a reasonable and rational process toward learning, while, on the other hand, the modified bill developed by the Diet members did not thoroughly derive learnings in the same way, due to cognitive and political reasons, and specifically, the issue of limiting social burden was not addressed.

Suggested Citation

  • Yugo Tanaka & Andrew Chapman & Shigeki Sakurai & Tetsuo Tezuka, 2017. "Feed-in Tariff Pricing and Social Burden in Japan: Evaluating International Learning through a Policy Transfer Approach," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-16, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:6:y:2017:i:4:p:127-:d:115820
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/6/4/127/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/6/4/127/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jacobsson, Staffan & Lauber, Volkmar, 2006. "The politics and policy of energy system transformation--explaining the German diffusion of renewable energy technology," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 256-276, February.
    2. Hoppmann, Joern & Huenteler, Joern & Girod, Bastien, 2014. "Compulsive policy-making—The evolution of the German feed-in tariff system for solar photovoltaic power," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(8), pages 1422-1441.
    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. Idiano D’Adamo, 2018. "The Profitability of Residential Photovoltaic Systems. A New Scheme of Subsidies Based on the Price of CO 2 in a Developed PV Market," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 7(9), pages 1-21, August.
    2. Junlakarn, Siripha & Kittner, Noah & Tongsopit, Sopitsuda & Saelim, Supawan, 2021. "A cross-country comparison of compensation mechanisms for distributed photovoltaics in the Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    3. Youhyun Lee & Inseok Seo, 2019. "Sustainability of a Policy Instrument: Rethinking the Renewable Portfolio Standard in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-19, May.
    4. Ghoname Abdullah & Hidekazu Nishimura, 2021. "Techno-Economic Performance Analysis of a 40.1 kWp Grid-Connected Photovoltaic (GCPV) System after Eight Years of Energy Generation: A Case Study for Tochigi, Japan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-19, July.
    5. Dahlke, Steven & Sterling, John & Meehan, Colin, 2019. "Policy and market drivers for advancing clean energy," OSF Preprints hsbry, Center for Open Science.
    6. Ahl, A. & Yarime, M. & Goto, M. & Chopra, Shauhrat S. & Kumar, Nallapaneni Manoj. & Tanaka, K. & Sagawa, D., 2020. "Exploring blockchain for the energy transition: Opportunities and challenges based on a case study in Japan," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    7. Poshnath, Aravind & Rismanchi, Behzad & Rajabifard, Abbas, 2023. "Adoption of Renewable Energy Systems in common properties of multi-owned buildings: Introduction of ‘Energy Entitlement’," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    8. Si-Ying Tan & Araz Taeihagh & Kritika Sha, 2021. "How Transboundary Learning Occurs: Case Study of the ASEAN Smart Cities Network (ASCN)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-19, June.

    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. Geels, Frank W. & Kern, Florian & Fuchs, Gerhard & Hinderer, Nele & Kungl, Gregor & Mylan, Josephine & Neukirch, Mario & Wassermann, Sandra, 2016. "The enactment of socio-technical transition pathways: A reformulated typology and a comparative multi-level analysis of the German and UK low-carbon electricity transitions (1990–2014)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 896-913.
    2. Frank, Alejandro Germán & Gerstlberger, Wolfgang & Paslauski, Carolline Amaral & Lerman, Laura Visintainer & Ayala, Néstor Fabián, 2018. "The contribution of innovation policy criteria to the development of local renewable energy systems," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 353-365.
    3. Kriechbaum, Michael & Posch, Alfred & Hauswiesner, Angelika, 2021. "Hype cycles during socio-technical transitions: The dynamics of collective expectations about renewable energy in Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    4. Andreas Welling, 2017. "Green Finance: Recent developments, characteristics and important actors," FEMM Working Papers 170002, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Faculty of Economics and Management.
    5. Edmondson, Duncan L. & Kern, Florian & Rogge, Karoline S., 2019. "The co-evolution of policy mixes and socio-technical systems: Towards a conceptual framework of policy mix feedback in sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    6. Strupeit, Lars, 2017. "An innovation system perspective on the drivers of soft cost reduction for photovoltaic deployment: The case of Germany," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 273-286.
    7. Schmidt, Tobias S. & Battke, Benedikt & Grosspietsch, David & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2016. "Do deployment policies pick technologies by (not) picking applications?—A simulation of investment decisions in technologies with multiple applications," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(10), pages 1965-1983.
    8. Karakaya, Emrah & Nuur, Cali & Hidalgo, Antonio, 2016. "Business model challenge: Lessons from a local solar company," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 1026-1035.
    9. Herrmann, J.K. & Savin, I., 2017. "Optimal policy identification: Insights from the German electricity market," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 71-90.
    10. Sinsel, Simon R. & Markard, Jochen & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2020. "How deployment policies affect innovation in complementary technologies—evidence from the German energy transition," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    11. Rogge, Karoline S. & Reichardt, Kristin, 2016. "Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: An extended concept and framework for analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 1620-1635.
    12. Strunz, Sebastian & Gawel, Erik & Lehmann, Paul, 2016. "The political economy of renewable energy policies in Germany and the EU," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 33-41.
    13. Bento, Nuno & Fontes, Margarida, 2019. "Emergence of floating offshore wind energy: Technology and industry," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 66-82.
    14. Matthew Lockwood, 2022. "Policy feedback and institutional context in energy transitions," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 55(3), pages 487-507, September.
    15. Cantner, Uwe & Graf, Holger & Herrmann, Johannes & Kalthaus, Martin, 2016. "Inventor networks in renewable energies: The influence of the policy mix in Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 1165-1184.
    16. Kungl, Gregor & Geels, Frank W., 2016. "The destabilisation of the German electricity industry (1998-2015): Application and extension of a multi-dimensional framework," Research Contributions to Organizational Sociology and Innovation Studies, SOI Discussion Papers 2016-02, University of Stuttgart, Institute for Social Sciences, Department of Organizational Sociology and Innovation Studies.
    17. Marcel Bednarz & Tom Broekel, 2020. "Pulled or pushed? The spatial diffusion of wind energy between local demand and supply," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 29(4), pages 893-916.
    18. Stern, Nicholas, 2018. "Public economics as if time matters: Climate change and the dynamics of policy," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 4-17.
    19. Kyriakopoulos, Grigorios L. & Arabatzis, Garyfallos & Tsialis, Panagiotis & Ioannou, Konstantinos, 2018. "Electricity consumption and RES plants in Greece: Typologies of regional units," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 134-144.
    20. Reichardt, Kristin & Rogge, Karoline S. & Negro, Simona, 2015. "Unpacking the policy processes for addressing systemic problems: The case of the technological innovation system of offshore wind in Germany," Working Papers "Sustainability and Innovation" S2/2015, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).

    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:gam:jscscx:v:6:y:2017:i:4:p:127-:d:115820. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.