Energy policy research in the consumer interest

1983 ◽  
Vol 3 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 193-201 ◽  
Author(s):  
Burkhard Strümpel
Energies ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 72 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaoling Wang ◽  
Jatin Nathwani ◽  
Chunyou Wu

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ramit Debnath ◽  
Sarah darby ◽  
Ronita Bardhan ◽  
Kamiar Mohaddes ◽  
Minna Sunikka-Blank

Text-based data sources like narratives and stories have become increasingly popular as critical insight generator in energy research and social science. However, their implications in policy application usually remain superficial and fail to fully exploit state-of-the-art resources which digital era holds for text analysis. This paper illustrates the potential of deep-narrative analysis in energy policy research using text analysis tools from the cutting-edge domain of computational social sciences, notably topic modelling. We argue that a nested application of topic modelling and grounded theory in narrative analysis promises advances in areas where manual-coding driven narrative analysis has traditionally struggled with directionality biases, scaling, systematisation and repeatability. The nested application of the topic model and the grounded theory goes beyond the frequentist approach of narrative analysis and introduces insight generation capabilities based on the probability distribution of words and topics in a text corpus. In this manner, our proposed methodology deconstructs the corpus and enables the analyst to answer research questions based on the foundational element of the text data structure. We verify the theoretical and epistemological fit of the proposed nested methodology through a meta-analysis of a state-of-the-art bibliographic database on energy policy and computational social science. We find that the nested application contributes to the literature gap on the need for multidisciplinary polyvalence methodologies that can systematically include qualitative evidence into policymaking.


2020 ◽  
Vol 69 ◽  
pp. 101704 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ramit Debnath ◽  
Sarah Darby ◽  
Ronita Bardhan ◽  
Kamiar Mohaddes ◽  
Minna Sunikka-Blank

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (Supplement_4) ◽  
Author(s):  
C MacDougall ◽  
T Delany-Crowe ◽  
F Baum ◽  
M Fisher ◽  
M McGreevy

Abstract Background Intersectoral action on social determinants of health to reduce health inequities requires policy research beyond the usual social and human services. We ask how Australian energy policy affects health equity. Methods Document analysis and policy case studies on how goals, objectives and strategies of all Australian energy policies address equity. Results Energy policy affects health via risk from unreliable energy; difficult transitions to renewables; disproportionate effects on poorer people faced with high energy bills versus other basics; ecological degradation; cost pressures on businesses and governments; job losses and policy paralysis about renewable energy and climate change. Policy features subsidies for the disadvantaged; privatisation and artificial markets; differing geographical distribution of resources and high level political conflict about whether it can deliver on 3, or only 2, of the ’energy trilemma’ of reliability, affordability and ecological sustainability. Mining, industrial and political interests, powerful enough to orchestrate the downfall of Australian prime ministers, actively close policy links between health, climate change and energy. Bridging energy and health policy requires political support for market solutions involving renewables; community generation of renewable energy; solutions for rural and remote areas; and global treaties. Intergenerational equity is a strong policy lever. Conclusions Health in All Policies approaches can creatively engage with the language and concepts of energy policy via the daily conditions of living, inequity and climate change. When it is difficult to engage, researchers can connect with non-government organisations who bridge sectors through simultaneous advocacy for equitable health, climate and energy policies. Key messages Powerful interests burn bridges between health equity and energy policy. Local and global policy levers harmonising terminology differences build bridges between energy, climate change and health equity.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document