Public Input Provision, Tax Base Mobility, and External Ownership

This article investigates the distortionary impacts of tax base mobility and external ownership on public input provision. Regional governments compete for mobile tax bases (e.g., business capital). The impact of regional public policy partially accrues to non-residents because immobile factors (e.g., business land) are subject to external ownership. This article derives an optimal rule for regional public input provision that illustrates how these two distortionary impacts depend on the nature of production functions. The impact of external ownership is particularly complex. To explore this impact in detail, the case of production functions with constant elasticity of substitution is examined. Public inputs with different productivity impacts yield fairly different implications of external ownership for inefficient public input provision.

The value of ‘between-election’ political participation: Do parliamentary e-petitions matter to political elites?

Responding to the crisis of democracy, legislatures worldwide are developing new participatory mechanisms to promote parliamentary engagement and provide additional opportunities for citizens to influence policymaking. Yet despite the prevalence of such initiatives, little is known about whether political elites are receptive to public input. This article addresses this important gap, presenting original research that examines the e-petition system in the United Kingdom’s national legislature. It demonstrates significant apathy – on occasion, antipathy – on the part of Westminster’s elected MPs. In particular, it reveals concerns that parliamentary e-petitions risk undermining the relationship between MPs and their constituents; inundating the parliamentary agenda with immediate, but not necessarily important, issues; and exacerbating misunderstandings of the parliamentary process. More broadly, political elites remain sceptical about the capacity of parliamentary e-petitions to address the democratic divide, with a widespread sense that e-petitions often amplify the voices of those who already shout the loudest.

Public engagement can change your research, but how can it change your research institution? ICES Case Study

This article explores the approach that ICES (formerly the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences)uses to encourage public engagement at both the research study and corporate level. ICES is anindependent not-for-profit research institute in the province of Ontario, Canada. This article wasco-written by ICES’ public engagement team and four members of the ICES Public AdvisoryCouncil (PAC). As part of the process of writing this article PAC members provided theirreflections on why they got involved, what worked well and the limitations and challenges of ICES’approach. ICES described the development of its public engagement strategy to inform how the institutionwould capture and incorporate the values of Ontarians in ICES activities and research. ICES provideddetails on two key elements of its strategy: the formation of a PAC to advise its leadership, andthe creation of resources and supports to encourage researchers to incorporate public engagementin their projects. PAC members and ICES provided perspectives on what impact they perceive as a result ofthe public engagement strategy. PAC members expressed that ICES has demonstrated listening toand using their input, but it is too early to evaluate if their feedback has changed the way ICESconducts its work. ICES discussed the challenges and successes in building and implementing thepublic engagement strategy, including recruiting a diverse council, aligning with public prioritiesand creating a culture of engagement. As a result of public input, ICES has restructured theway the institution explains its privacy and cybersecurity approach to build trust and confidence.ICES has also seen an increase in researchers using public engagement resources, and early datasuggests that in 2019 about 20% of scientists included some form of public engagement in theirprojects. ICES’ journey to public engagement resulted in important changes to processes and activitiesat the institution, but there is much more that needs to be done. PAC members advocate thatpublic members should be engaged in health data research and hope that public input will bea core element in health data research in the future. ICES will continue its efforts to addresspublic priorities and will seek to further evaluate the impact of public engagement across theorganisation.

California's Vision for Reaching Zero-Carbon Emissions

<div>In "The 100 Percent Clean Energy Act of 2018" the California legislature set a target of 100\% of California's electricity generated from renewable and zero-carbon sources by 2045. </div><div>The California Public Utility Commission (CPUC) and other state entities now have the task of planning to meet that target. </div><div>The California Energy Commission (CEC) has sponsored multiple studies and sought public input on the pathways that they are exploring. </div><div>A key result of that planning process is a Reference System Portfolio (RSP) based on existing and planned electricity generating capabilities, and modeled grid build out to meet the planned targets by 2045 at the lowest cost. </div><div>Although this RSP has been discussed by the CEC in a public forum, to our knowledge, it has not been presented to the photovoltaic community.</div><div>Here we document the CEC’s current RSP, with emphasis on understanding their expectations for build out of solar as well as the associated need for storage and curtailment.</div>

California's Vision for Reaching Zero-Carbon Emissions

<div>In "The 100 Percent Clean Energy Act of 2018" the California legislature set a target of 100\% of California's electricity generated from renewable and zero-carbon sources by 2045. </div><div>The California Public Utility Commission (CPUC) and other state entities now have the task of planning to meet that target. </div><div>The California Energy Commission (CEC) has sponsored multiple studies and sought public input on the pathways that they are exploring. </div><div>A key result of that planning process is a Reference System Portfolio (RSP) based on existing and planned electricity generating capabilities, and modeled grid build out to meet the planned targets by 2045 at the lowest cost. </div><div>Although this RSP has been discussed by the CEC in a public forum, to our knowledge, it has not been presented to the photovoltaic community.</div><div>Here we document the CEC’s current RSP, with emphasis on understanding their expectations for build out of solar as well as the associated need for storage and curtailment.</div>

California's Vision for Reaching Zero-Carbon Emissions

<div>In "The 100 Percent Clean Energy Act of 2018" the California legislature set a target of 100\% of California's electricity generated from renewable and zero-carbon sources by 2045. </div><div>The California Public Utility Commission (CPUC) and other state entities now have the task of planning to meet that target. </div><div>The California Energy Commission (CEC) has sponsored multiple studies and sought public input on the pathways that they are exploring. </div><div>A key result of that planning process is a Reference System Portfolio (RSP) based on existing and planned electricity generating capabilities, and modeled grid build out to meet the planned targets by 2045 at the lowest cost. </div><div>Although this RSP has been discussed by the CEC in a public forum, to our knowledge, it has not been presented to the photovoltaic community.</div><div>Here we document the CEC’s current RSP, with emphasis on understanding their expectations for build out of solar as well as the associated need for storage and curtailment.</div>