Elsevier

Energy Policy

Volume 55, April 2013, Pages 602-616
Energy Policy

The application of contrast explanation to energy policy research: UK nuclear energy policy 2002–2012

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.12.046Get rights and content

Abstract

This paper advances the application of the methodology, contrast explanation, to energy policy research. Research in energy policy is complex and often involves inter-disciplinary work, which traditional economic methodologies fail to capture. Consequently, the more encompassing methodology of contrast explanation is assessed and its use in other social science disciplines explored in brief. It is then applied to an energy policy research topic—in this case, nuclear energy policy research in the UK. Contrast explanation facilitates research into policy and decision-making processes in energy studies and offers an alternative to the traditional economic methods used in energy research. Further, contrast explanation is extended by the addition of contested and uncontested hypotheses analyses. This research focuses on the methods employed to deliver the new nuclear programme of the UK government. In order to achieve a sustainable nuclear energy policy three issues are of major importance: (1) law, policy and development; (2) public administration; and (3) project management. Further, the research identifies that policy in the area remains to be resolved, in particular at an institutional and legal level. However, contrary to the literature, in some areas, the research identifies a change of course as the UK concentrates on delivering a long-term policy for the nuclear energy sector and the overall energy sector.

Highlights

► Energy policy research is interdisciplinary and needs additional methodological approaches. ► New method of contrast explanation advanced for energy policy research. ► This methodology is based on dialectical learning which examines conflict between sources of data. ► Research example used here is of UK nuclear energy policy. ► Major issues in UK nuclear energy policy are planning law, public administration, and project management.

Introduction

This research examines the application of contrast explanation to energy policy research. Contrast explanation is one of a number of emergent approaches to the study of the economy. These alternative approaches do not use the formal – often closed-form – models that contemporary mainstream academic economists rely upon, and they are receiving growing attention (Pratten, 2004). Contrast explanation is not a new methodological approach in social science research, but it is an uncommon approach for energy economics and policy research.

However, academic journals in the latter areas have long since recognised weaknesses in traditional methodologies employed and have advocated the use of new approaches. For example, within Energy Policy itself for some time there has been a call for new approaches. Kouris (1980) identified that energy policy analysis based on mathematical models has clear limits. This he stated is because economic sectors and in particular the energy sector is in a constant state of change. Further, Kouris (1980) stated there is an overreliance on the model and what it means, when there should be more of a focus on the reaction of consumers and firms when a given event happens. Freedman et al. (1983) in a similar fashion state that energy models have clear weaknesses due to their non-consideration of the changing external environment, inadequate theoretical underpinnings, and that they in essence track data only, rather than adjustments in human behaviour. A central argument of theirs is that questions evolve faster than models, and that models cannot answer policy questions of current interest. Lee et al. (1990) are also critical of the static models employed in energy policy, and state that there is a need for research to capture the varied events that occur in the world and not just situations where there exist apparent stable conditions. Dyner (2000) supports this viewpoint by citing the many failures in predictions – which used traditional modelling techniques – by economists and engineers over the liberalisation process of the electricity sector. It should be noted that traditional formal modelling techniques have a role in energy research, but their dominance needs to be questioned and judgement made on whether they have delivered (which is not the aim of this paper). There is space for methods and theories from other areas of applied economics and social sciences in energy policy research. This paper provides an alternative method for energy policy analysis in particular where policy formulation and its effects are concerned.

Research in energy policy is complex and often involves inter-disciplinary work, which traditional economic methodologies fail to capture. Contrast explanation is more encompassing and is a methodology used to explore the factors shaping the outcomes of events. A research methodology based on contrast explanation is developed and applied to a research topic—in this case, UK nuclear energy policy from 2002 to 2012. The research methodology developed involves tabulating research hypotheses, developing contrast points, and conducting qualitative research before those contrast points where there is significant conflict being explored in detail, with the latter analysis becoming the product of the research.

This research aims to develop the literature in the domain of nuclear new build. It aims to identify and clarify through the use of contrast explanation those aspects of the legal, economic, and political requirements of the United Kingdom that affect prospects for nuclear new build but which, so far, have not been well understood by experts. The UK is embarking on an ambitious nuclear energy programme, the largest planned in Europe, and as such its nuclear energy policy may hold vital lessons for other countries intending to begin a new or similar nuclear power programme.

Research into new build nuclear energy is growing as a result of its increasing popularity as a secure low-carbon energy supplier and the importance placed on energy security (Cameron, 2007). Indeed, statistics from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) (2010) and the World Nuclear Association (2010) state that 65 countries have expressed interest in building nuclear power plants and 36 countries are actively pursuing nuclear power programs. Recent studies into nuclear energy policy have called for more research in the area, for example: the IAEA (2010) has expressed the need for more studies to be completed in nuclear energy policy, highlighting the need for country-specific studies; and Pope (2008) stated that the nuclear sector is in need of more research, particularly on nuclear new build processes and policy. The Royal Academy of Engineering (RAE) produced a report in 2010, entitled Nuclear Lessons Learned, also noting the dearth in the literature on recent nuclear new build processes.

The study of nuclear energy policy is interdisciplinary, and hence its research contributions are interdisciplinary. This is evident in that research articles on nuclear energy policy are not confined to a few select journals but are published in philosophy, sociology, psychology, law, economics, management, science, engineering, and physics journals. The research presented here draws on several disciplines in the social sciences and as such provides lessons beyond nuclear energy policy and in particular concerning legal development, public administration, and project management in the UK.

Interviews are at the core of the research methodology employed, as with other in-depth studies on nuclear new build (see, Jasper, 1990, Hecht, 1998, Hecht, 2009, Pope, 2008, Royal Academy of Engineering, 2010). The research data gathered are comprised of 24 interviews. Other studies on nuclear energy policy also use interviews (see Stoler, 1985, Morone and Woodhouse, 1989, Perin, 2005). It is notable, however, that these latter studies and others (Goodman and Andes, 1985, Campbell, 1988, Nohrstedt, 2008, Royal Academy of Engineering, 2010) draw lessons from their assessment of nuclear energy policy, a similar objective to this research. The focus of the research is on the time period from 2002 to (April 30th) 2012 and as such this research on the UK includes some of the initial effects of the nuclear energy incident at Fukushima in Japan in March 2011. It should be noted, however, that not all of the effects from Fukushima have materialised yet, and some only become evident after further time. The research also reflects the thinking prior to the effects of the RWE, EoN and Centrica announcements in March and April 2012.

Section snippets

Methodology

The research methodology used here is contrast explanation. Lawson (2009) describes contrast explanation as

rather than seeking to explain some outcome x, the goal is to explain some contrast ‘x rather than y’ and to do so in conditions where we might have expected the contrasted outcomes to be the same, because, as far as we could discern, they shared the same causal history. The approach thus turns on explaining differences in outcomes, but differences that, from the point of view of existing

Background to UK electricity sector

The UK electricity industry is about to undergo a major transformation. It is set for a major investment with a government White Paper in 2011 on electricity (entitled Planning our Electric Future: will be referred to as the ‘2011 White Paper’ hereafter) suggesting that a £110 billion investment is required by 2020. This is more than double the planned current rate of investment (as of 2012). The 2011 White Paper also states that within the next decade a quarter (around 20 GW) of existing

Research hypothesis

The main research question was: what are the key conditions for planned nuclear new build to occur in the UK? This same question had been posed by government agencies during the course of this thesis, and thus makes this paper highly topical in public discourse in the UK. Five key themes were identified in the literature. These themes also represent the codes used to analyse the interviews, which were (1) law, legal change and planning law; (2) public administration; (3) project management; (4)

Planning law difficulties are different for nuclear energy projects

The judgement of interviewees is assessed in Chart 1 below. This chart analyses whether interviewees were proponents (positive) or critics (negative) of the researcher's hypothesis. For a hypothesis to be further analysed, the hypothesis must be a ‘contested’ hypothesis, which is where there is less than a majority of 75 percent of respondents either for, or against. If it is more than 75 percent then the hypothesis will not be considered as contested and thus not further analysed, with this

Conclusion

This paper has focused on the decade from 2002 to 2012 and how nuclear energy policy has developed over that time in the UK. The research centres on the conditions for planned nuclear new build to occur in the UK. The methodology used is contrast explanation, which involves the formulation of hypotheses, and 12 were generated for this research. Contrast explanation identifies the key policy issues and highlights better than other methods what these key issues are and how they change. The

Acknowledgements

The author is most grateful to all those that have provided insights and advice including in particular Dr. William J. Nuttall, and Angus Johnston, and others who proved invaluable in their assistance Olivia Comsa, Simon Taylor, Tony Lawson, Professor Andrew Gamble, Graham Howes, Tim Bellis, Chris Eaglen and all interviewees who are listed in the Appendix. The opinions expressed in this paper are not necessarily shared by all those that have provided assistance, and all responsibility for

References (109)

  • G. Kouris

    Limits to Energy Policy Analysis—a reply to Weinberg

    Energy Policy

    (1980)
  • G. MacKerron

    Nuclear power and the characteristics of ‘ordinariness’—the case of UK energy policy

    Energy Policy

    (2004)
  • D.A. Aaker et al.

    Warmth in advertising: measurement, impact, and sequence effects

    The Journal of Consumer Research

    (1986)
  • American Planning Association. 2005 (April 7). JAPA Article Calls on Planners to Help End Inaccuracies in Public...
  • C. Argyris et al.

    Organisational Learning: A theory of action perspective

    (1978)
  • Aristotle, Ethics: Book...
  • P. Aucoin et al.

    The dialectics of accountability for performance in public management reform

    International Review of Administrative Sciences

    (2000)
  • K. Barker

    Barker Review of Land Use Planning

    (2006)
  • R.J. Bernstein

    The Restructuring of Social and Political Theory

    (1976)
  • BERR, 2008 Meeting the Energy Challenge: A White Paper on Nuclear Power, Department for Business Enterprise and...
  • Bircham, Dyson, Bell (BDB), 2009. LLP. A Practical Guide to National Infrastructure Projects. Butterworths:...
  • British Energy (BE), 2011. Sizewell B. Available from: 〈http://www.british-energy.com/pagetemplate.php?pid=96〉 (Last...
  • S. Breyer

    Vermont Yankee and the courts' role in the nuclear energy controversy

    Harvard Law Review

    (1978)
  • Cabinet Office, July 2009. The Road to 2010: Addressing the nuclear question in the twenty first century, Cm...
  • P.D. Cameron

    The revival of nuclear power: an analysis of the legal implications

    Journal of Environmental Law

    (2007)
  • J.L. Campbell

    Collapse of an Industry: Nuclear Power and the Contradictions of US Policy

    (1988)
  • J.M. Carlson

    Subjective ideological similarity between candidates and supporters: a study of party elites

    Political Psychology

    (1990)
  • M. Clarke et al.

    Judicial review in the energy sector: the England and Wales perspective

    International Energy Law Review

    (2011)
  • CLG, 2007. Planning for a Sustainable Future White paper. Department of Communities and Local Government (The...
  • Climate Change Act, 2008. Chapter 27 (The Stationary Office,...
  • CO, 2002. The Energy Review, Cabinet Office Performance and Innovation Unit (The Stationary Office,...
  • Commons Energy and Climate Change Committee (CECCC)

    Third report on the revised draft National Policy Statement on energy

    Journal of Planning and Environment Law

    (2011)
  • Conservative Party, 2010. Open Source Planning: Green Paper 2010 Policy Green Paper no. 14. Available online:...
  • D. Corbey

    Dialectical functionalism: stagnation as a booster of European integration

    International Organization

    (1995)
  • DECC, 2011b. Digest of United Kingdom Energy Statistics 2011. Available from: 〈www.decc.gov.uk〉 (Last accessed March...
  • DECC, 2007. Energy White Paper on Energy 2007. Meeting the Energy Challenge, Department of Energy and Climate Change...
  • DECC, 2011a. Planning our electric future: a white paper for secure, affordable and low-carbon electricity, Department...
  • DECC, 2011c. UK country profile analysis and data. Available from: 〈www.decc.gov.uk〉 (Last Accessed Dec...
  • DECC, 2012. Charles Hendry Comment on Horizon Nuclear Power. Available from:...
  • Department for Trade and Industry, July 2002. Managing the Nuclear Legacy—A strategy for...
  • S. Doherty

    Heathrow's Terminal 5: History in the Making

    (2008)
  • P. Downward et al.

    Reintroduction as mixed methods triangulation in economics research: reorienting economics into social science

    Cambridge Journal of Economics

    (2007)
  • A. Drolet

    Inherent rule variability in consumer choice: changing rules for change's sake

    The Journal of Consumer Research

    (2002)
  • DTI, 2003. Energy White Paper: Our Energy Future—Creating a Low Carbon Economy, Department of Trade and Industry (The...
  • DTI, 2006. The Energy Challenge: Energy Review Report 2006, Department of Trade and Industry (The Stationary Office,...
  • I. Dyner

    Energy modelling platforms for policy and strategy support

    Journal of the Operational Research Society

    (2000)
  • R. Eddington

    The Eddington Transport Study

    (2006)
  • Energy Act, 2008. Chapter 32 (The Stationary Office,...
  • Europa, 2005. C52/2003 Aid in Favour of British Energy Plc—Decision on 22.09.04. Available from:...
  • E. Ferlie et al.

    The Oxford Handbook of Public Management

    (2005)
  • Financial Times (FT), 2012. Centrica concerned at state aid for N-plants. Financial Times, May 27th 2012 (Parker, A)....
  • Flyvbjerg, B., COWI, 2004. Procedures for dealing with optimism bias in transport planning: guidance document. London:...
  • B. Flyvbjerg et al.

    Delusion and deception in large infrastructure projects: two models for explaining and preventing executive disaster

    California Management Review

    (2009)
  • B. Flyvjberg

    Managing major projects

  • V.S. Folkes et al.

    When to say when: effects of supply on usage

    The Journal of Consumer Research

    (1993)
  • D. Freedman et al.

    On energy policy models

    Journal of Business and Economic Statistics

    (1983)
  • M.R. Goodman et al.

    The politics of regulatory reform and the future direction of nuclear energy policy

    Review of Policy Research

    (1985)
  • Grekos, M. Legislation and policy. Environmental Law Review, ELR 12, 1 (50) 1 March...
  • Haye, H., 2012. Keynote Speaker at the Nuclear Now: 23 February 2012, Commonwealth Club,...
  • G. Hecht

    The Radiance of France: Nuclear Power and National Identity after World War II

    (1998)
  • Cited by (13)

    • Attributing responsibility for energy justice: A case study of the Hinkley Point Nuclear Complex

      2017, Energy Policy
      Citation Excerpt :

      Despite extensive ground preparation and the commencement of construction work, there is currently no indication of when construction might be completed, and the project is running behind time and over cost. This research used interviews as the core method, in line with other studies on nuclear new build (see Heffron, 2013; Jasper, 1990; Hecht, 1998, 2009; RAE 2010) and nuclear energy policy (Stoler, 1985; Morone and Woodhouse, 1989; Perin, 2005; Rehner and McCauley 2016). The sample of interview participants comprised members of the NGO and policy elite, reflecting the study's primary focus on energy justice as a mode of policy critique.

    • A review of energy systems models in the UK: Prevalent usage and categorisation

      2016, Applied Energy
      Citation Excerpt :

      Direct uncertainties are discussed in [68,69] in relation to energy decarbonisation targets. Naturally, within this field there are a multitude of papers which discuss the design, assessment and impact of energy policy [70–78]. There are also publications which discuss the complexity of energy systems and possible modelling approaches [11,79], the importance of modelling to policy [80] and baseline “Business as Un-Usual” calculation [81].

    • Energy justice: A conceptual review

      2016, Energy Research and Social Science
    • Achieving sustainable supply chains through energy justice

      2014, Applied Energy
      Citation Excerpt :

      However, objections can contribute to rectifying injustices and should not always be considered as detrimental to a project in terms of contributing to delay. In some cases, they can restore a sense of equity within a project; Greenpeace contributions to the consultation processes for the 2008 White Paper, Nuclear Power actually identified areas of clarification and helped create a fairer and more robust final White Paper at the end of the process [5]. Secondly, energy justice requires the use of equitable procedures that engage all stakeholders in a non-discriminatory way [2,6].

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text