Search

The political aspects that influence international energy supply agreements are analyzed by focusing on European countries.

The back cover of Barnes' book informs us that it examines the potential for development of Indonesia's energy resources. There is no introductory chapter. The central theme of the book [...]

Byline: Aad F. Correlje, John P.M. Groenewegen An overview is provided of public values from main perspectives constituting economic science, while examining how these perspectives deal with energy policy. Neoclassical and New Institutional Economics conceive governance and regulation as outcomes of cost minimising actors that operate in well defined environments. Public values are an issue in the case of externalities, public goods and natural monopolies. Original Institutional Economics makes the framework of analysis multi-disciplinary, an analysis of the shared mental maps, learning, and the distribution of power via institutions. The actions of actors are driven by individual motivation and embedded in a technical and social, economic environment.

The introduction of new energy technologies may lead to public resistance and contestation. It is often argued that this phenomenon is caused by an inadequate inclusion of relevant public values in the design of technology. In this paper we examine the applicability of the value sensitive design (VSD) approach. While VSD was primarily introduced for incorporating values in technological design, our focus in this paper is expanded towards the design of the institutions surrounding these technologies, as well as the design of stakeholder participation. One important methodological challenge of VSD is to identify the relevant values related to new technological developments. In this paper, we argue that the public debate can form a rich source from which to retrieve the values at stake. To demonstrate this, we have examined the arguments used in the public debate regarding the exploration and exploitation of shale gas in the Netherlands. We identified two important sets of the underlying values, namely substantive and procedural values. This paper concludes with two key findings. Firstly, contrary to what is often suggested in the literature, both proponents and opponents seem to endorse the same values. Secondly, contestation seems to arise in the precise operationalization of these values among the different stakeholders. In other words, contestation in the Dutch shale gas debate does not arise from inter-value conflict but rather from intra-value conflicts. This multi-interpretability should be incorporated in VSD processes.